Big Problem - Unbalanced random events

Raen · #1 November 23rd, 2003, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
I dont see such a "broad consensus". Most of us seem to say its working as it is. If you dont want events then dont ask for events.

Who asked for events? With Order +1 and events at *rare*, I'm still getting at least a brigand lair a year. Sometimes I'll get an event every month....at "rare," that just seems to me absurd.

IMO you shouldn't have to set a scale at 3 to have events actually be rare....that's presumably what the setting is for.

Again, I see nothing wrong with introducing an additional setting. Those of you happy with the way things are don't have to use it.

apoger · #2 November 23rd, 2003, 01:28 AM

>It bothers me that there is a default setting that everyone feels compulsed to use, but I'm not yet sure what should be done and what effects we wish to avoid and what to add.

Trying to fidget the system might be difficult from your perspective. I suggest doing work on mod tools. Given a chance the players will create mods galore. These would be put through much more intensive playtesting than you would normally get in house, and if it is poor you get no blame, only credit for releasing the tools. With many well tested mods out there, most players will be satisfied.

There are many disturbingly dedicated players like Gandalf, Saber Cherry, and myself, who will gladly do the work and take the heat... if you get us ANY significant tools to work with.

If we could edit- Scales, Units (including pretenders), Nations, Spells, and Forts, we could produce a beautiful supply of new content. More content would help sell your core game. I don't see any downside.

Kristoffer O · #3 November 23rd, 2003, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by apoger:
>It bothers me that there is a default setting that everyone feels compulsed to use, but I'm not yet sure what should be done and what effects we wish to avoid and what to add.

Trying to fidget the system might be difficult from your perspective. I suggest doing work on mod tools. Given a chance the players will create mods galore. These would be put through much more intensive playtesting than you would normally get in house, and if it is poor you get no blame, only credit for releasing the tools. With many well tested mods out there, most players will be satisfied.

There are many disturbingly dedicated players like Gandalf, Saber Cherry, and myself, who will gladly do the work and take the heat... if you get us ANY significant tools to work with.

If we could edit- Scales, Units (including pretenders), Nations, Spells, and Forts, we could produce a beautiful supply of new content. More content would help sell your core game. I don't see any downside.

There are no downsides and the modding tools exist. They are just not released yet.

As of yet the mod tools are rather simple. For example: Scales can be altered to have higher or lower effects, but unless we reinsert an effect on luck affecting the number of events occuring you will not be able to change that aspect of the events. More moddable variables are of course better, but it might take more work to implement.

The first nation modding beta was finished by JK today.

The tools will now be tested for a while.

apoger · #4 November 23rd, 2003, 01:54 AM

>There are no downsides and the modding tools exist. They are just not released yet.

Excellent!

>The first nation modding beta was finished by JK today. The tools will now be tested for a while.

As always, if you need help testing, let me know, as I'd be glad to help.

Kristoffer O · #5 November 23rd, 2003, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by apoger:
>There are no downsides and the modding tools exist. They are just not released yet.

Excellent!

>The first nation modding beta was finished by JK today. The tools will now be tested for a while.

As always, if you need help testing, let me know, as I'd be glad to help.

I'm sure you are

, but I think our Shrapnel group is supposed to do the testing. Thanks anyway!

Gandalf Parker · #6 November 23rd, 2003, 03:18 AM

Quote:

There are many disturbingly dedicated players like Gandalf, Saber Cherry, and myself, who will gladly do the work and take the heat... if you get us ANY significant tools to work with.

Disturbingly dedicated? heehee.

Actually Ive always been against mods that change how a game plays. Im more in favor of external additions. Exporting more data, more command line switches, adding more commands for .map files, third party software.

[ November 23, 2003, 01:19: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Chazar · #7 March 24th, 2004, 12:41 PM

Umh, I am bringing up an old thread, but what about that:

Include an option that sets luck initially to +3 in a players capitial province, regardless of his dominion scales?

If a player has choosen misfortune, the scale will certainly drop back to it within ~10 turns, but it might protect everybody from severe disasters in their home provinces (only) in the beginning!

I am fine with the random events as they are, but given the importance of your starting province, loosing half of your population, a burned-down lab or a temple swallowed by an earthquake in the first three turns _is_ devastating a multiplayer game - and it still happened to me in V2.08 with Order+3, Luck+0...

Random events for non-home provinces are ok as they are, imho, and they are ok later on when the game is going, but I think that they are not ok within the first few turns in the captial province! It simply ruins a multiplayer game based on strategy.

I know that this point is controversial, hence I am only asking for an option, which might be easy to implement, as it works similar to spells like "WolvenWinter" (Although I have no real ideas about the difficulty of that.)

[ March 24, 2004, 10:44: Message edited by: Chazar ]