Are homeplanets affected by high/catastrophic events?

[PsychoTechFreak]

Longterm test run with 22 systems and 5 home systems is at year 3092.1 now. Still there are only two non-homesystems destroyed, no 1st homeplanets affected by catastrophic events (the event file is without high events).
I am going to continue this until all systems will be destroyed, probably the homesystems are the Last systems standing?

[Fyron]

I ran tests on this stuff many months ago. Conditions can NEVER fall below 0.00. Conditions modifying events, facilities, etc., all add. There is never any multiplication (even in finite resources games). As stated before, conditions are stored in a variable that can only ever range from 0.00 to 1.50. You can never get a number lower or higher than this range. Any event that would drop or raise it out of this range instead drops it to 0 or raises it to 1.50, depending on the nature of the event (same for facilities). Planets with deadly conditions can most certainly be raised, it can just take a while.

About events... it would make sense that the value be divided by 100, so that an event with 20 becomes 0.20. This would effectively subtract 20 from the conditions value. However, it seems that the value instead might be getting divided by 10, which would make it drop the conditions value by 2.0, dropping it to 0.00 no matter what the starting conditions were. If this is the case, it seems like a bug to me.

[Alneyan]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I ran tests on this stuff many months ago. Conditions can NEVER fall below 0.00. Conditions modifying events, facilities, etc., all add. There is never any multiplication (even in finite resources games). As stated before, conditions are stored in a variable that can only ever range from 0.00 to 1.50. You can never get a number lower or higher than this range. Any event that would drop or raise it out of this range instead drops it to 0 or raises it to 1.50, depending on the nature of the event (same for facilities). Planets with deadly conditions can most certainly be raised, it can just take a while.

About events... it would make sense that the value be divided by 100, so that an event with 20 becomes 0.20. This would effectively subtract 20 from the conditions value. However, it seems that the value instead might be getting divided by 10, which would make it drop the conditions value by 2.0, dropping it to 0.00 no matter what the starting conditions were. If this is the case, it seems like a bug to me.

Hmm, I would still believe there is a multiplication, at least for the conditions, the only problem being 0.0 (In such cases, 0.1 *may* be used to calculate the evolution) For instance, the rate to go from 0.0 to 0.3 (The lowest Deadly to the lowest Harsh) is about 40 years (39 years exactly), while you only need 3 years to go from 1.4 to 1.5 So, if it was an addition, there would not be such differences. (An improvement by 0.1 would take the same amount of years, no matter what are the starting conditions)

It is only one example of these situations, as a general rule, the worse the conditions are, the harder it is to improve the conditions. (That does make sense of course) Thanks for the notice about the impossibility to get lower than 0.0, it means you could have improved your planet Oleg, with a lot of patience.

[PsychoTechFreak]

I have found the medium event of the first run:

2417.7 Heavy pollution and poor waste management have causes conditions on Arianna I (homeplanet of Eee) to deteriorate.

It has changed the conditions from mild to deadly in one turn.

EDIT:

Type := Planet - Conditions Change
Severity := Medium
Effect Amount := -20

[ September 17, 2003, 19:27: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

[Alneyan]

Here is the answer JLS gave according to GLV in an e-mail concerning this topic: (The quote is issued from the thread: Deadly Conditions)

In the attachments from his email dated Last Friday 9/12/2003. 4.03 events BETA file the planet condition events are now only two and that is at se4 default -5 low with a +10 good event in high

3.02 was -5 -10 and +10.

I guess JLS knew about this condition already. In his note he says –10 event may be to tough and that +10 event to PC will often bring the planet up to optimal.

And indeed, it was quite a problem as -20 means Deadly condition for all planets, while you have a chance to remain at Harsh level when you are suffering from the same event but with a value of -10.

[oleg]

I.F. Are you really sure it is always addition ?
The tests posted here point to multiplication. And very strongly.

[Fyron]

Running a test... after 2 cycles, a 1.40 planet is still good. If it multiplied, after one cycle you'd get:

1.40 * 1.03 = 1.442
1.442 * 1.03 = 1.48526
1.48526 * 1.03 = 1.5298...

So... it should get to Optimal in 3 cycles if it multiplies, or 4 cycles if it adds.

ROFLMAO! Turn 2404.6: Plasma instability detected in Ahnalt star! Admittedly, there are only 2 systems, one for my planets and the other for neutrals. But, this at least proves that star destroying events don't absolutely favor non-human systems.

Here is my result file:
Conditions Test.txt

It took only 3 cycles for planet 1.40 to hit Optimal, suggesting that it multiplies. Lets look at planet 1.20. It starts at Mild, and needs to hit 1.30 to be Good.

If we assume it adds, you have:
2401.1: 1.20 Mild
2402.1: 1.23 Mild
2403.1: 1.26 Mild
2404.1: 1.29 Mild
2405.1: 1.32 Good

40 turns to get Good.

If we assume it multiplies, you have:
2401.1: 1.20 Mild
2402.1: 1.236 Mild
2403.1: 1.27308 Mild
2404.1: 1.3112724 Good
2405.1: 1.33506105722 Good

30 turns to get Good.

From my results, we have planet 1.20 becoming Good on turn 2404.1. This, combined with planet 1.40, strongly suggest that Conditions modifying facility abilities do indeed multiply instead of add.

[ September 17, 2003, 22:56: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[JLS]

Originally posted by oleg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
Oleg, I will email you the Events beta 4.03 file if you want.

Or just use v3.02

Thanks, I would like to try 4.03 !

---

Oleg, I am at 4.05 now >since with 4.04 beta events A plasma instability has been detected within the star [ my Home System ]. Our scientists predict it will destroy itself in approximately 3 years

Once was one to many for that, so I went again back to the drawing board and reconfigured for another go at the Event Occurrence Percentage tests.
Initially I test play at 50% chance settings
AI Players main CC is at -50 CBEC or more if you wish. Please see Reference.
I will play out and log at least 250 turns.
It looks like; when playing with No warp will give less (big) events early then a standard game.

Even though there is no explicit flag for bad/good events, SE has a rudimentary check whether event is good or bad.
I based it on this observation: Human HomeWorld can be affected by positive events but not negative.

As playing thru as the Primary (human player) >I do concur fully with this observation

Look for Events 4.05 file in your Email tomorrow
Thanks, I do need the help

========
Reference
se4 Abilities/Action (CBEC)
Change Bad Event Chance - System
Value1 = Percentage change in chance for bad event for entire system (+/- percentage).
Value2 =

[ September 18, 2003, 04:23: Message edited by: JLS ]

[JLS]

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
I have found the medium event of the first run:

2417.7 Heavy pollution and poor waste management have causes conditions on Arianna I (homeplanet of Eee) to deteriorate.

It has changed the conditions from mild to deadly in one turn.

EDIT:

Type := Planet - Conditions Change
Severity := Medium
Effect Amount := -20

That Event was a bust

[Fyron]

As playing thru as the Primary (human player) >I do concur fully with this observation

Even though it is wrong? In my Conditions test, my home star went nova, even though there was a different star that it could have hit. There was no favoring of non-human homeworlds at all going on there.