Big Problem - Unbalanced random events

[Teraswaerto]

I've found that with order 3 they are rare even with the common setting. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Anyway, I do think something should be done to make luck a better choice, maybe making the catastrophic events misfortune only.

[Truper]

I've found that with order 3, random events rare, that I get hardly any events at all. So what's "normal"? One event every 30 turns or so?

To me, the real problem with the scales as currently set up is that order is the only one with a serious effect on income. Since order 3 is therefore mandatory, you might as well mine misfortune for the points.

My preference would be to have order, productivity, and growth all have the same effect on cash - that way there might actually be variety in the scales that people chose to maximize.

[Raen]

Originally posted by Truper:
I've found that with order 3, random events rare, that I get hardly any events at all. So what's "normal"? One event every 30 turns or so?

I find they happen more often than once every 30 turns...more like once every 15 or so. And that would be "rare" in my mind.

But there's really no need for us to argue about it. If they would simply put in a "very rare" or even an "off" switch for events, we could all choose whatever we liked.

Many games with random evenets allow you to turn them off entirely since it's pretty well-known that there is a sizeable chunk of gamers who detest them.

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by Sammual:
I would like to see the larger bad random events limited to Misfortune 3 and scale them down from there. I don't like losseing 1/4 of my capitals population on turn 3 with luck 1.

Yeah, I suggested something like that in another thread - a luck system that would classify all events as major and minor, and yield an overall probability like this:

ML=major lucky event
SL=small lucky event
SU=small unlucky event
MU=major unlucky event

Luck scale values and overall event probabilities (assuming an event occurs):

Luck..ML...SL....|....SU...MU
+3......40....40....|....18....02
+2......32....39....|....26....05
+1......24....36....|....32....08
+0......15....35....|....35....15
-1.......08....32....|....36....24
-2.......05....26....|....39....32
-3.......02....18....|....40....40

So with +1 luck, only 8% of the events would by major unlucky events.

I agree that if I spend 40 points on Luck 1, I want a major reduction in barbarian invasions and vineman uprisings... but I don't really expect that to suddenly make me immune to bad weather, for example=)

-Cherry

[Gandalf Parker]

I know that river provinces affect floods. And season changes affect tornados. But most of the ones people complain about seem to be the ones where a group decides to "remove your oppressive rule" or something like that. These arent affected by scales or game settings as much as by your actions apparently. High taxes, blood hunts, pillaging, Im not sure what but it appears that people bring these onto themselves by pushing too hard and too fast.

[Keir Maxwell]

I virtually never see random events with order 3, misfortune 3, rare events. That being the case the only drawback of misfortune is on my chance of getting hero's.

My complaint is with turmoil/luck races and how that pans out - pretty badly in my tests. So yes the bad events do seem rather devestating.

Cheers

Keir

[Chris Byler]

It looks like there's pretty broad consensus that at least the mass-kill events (flood, emigration, probably others) should be restricted to misfortune provinces only (or should be very rare without misfortune).

Really, how many places have catastrophic flooding every year? The Nile valley and...? And the annual Nile floods didn't kill 1/4 of the population of Egypt every year, either. The only disasters I can think of with that kind of kill rate are major volcanic eruptions (Thera, Vesuvius, Krakatoa), which are once in several centuries for the whole world. Hurricanes don't kill 1/4 the population of Florida (or India). Maybe 1/10.

Now, I don't think that disasters should be eliminated from the game entirely, or even that a disaster every few years (note a year is 12 turns!) is unreasonable - for a strong misfortune scale. A God with a fortune dominion shouldn't have his people troubled with constant floods, earthquakes, barbarian incursions, gangs of troll heroes, etc. - or what use is his divine power over fortune?

So what kind of random events should be able to occur (occasionally) in a forune dominion? Poor harvests (temporary decrease in tax or supply), brigand activity, vandalism (costs gold to repair), increased unrest, superstition (decreased dominion), desertion of some normal (non-[pretender | prophet | mindless | magic | demon | undead]) troops in the province (the chance of an individual unit deserting could be based on morale), etc. One-time or temporary bad events, not permanent cripplers.

Also, there need to be more good events with better effects than the current "small amount of gold or gems". The site creation events are a nice start, but if there is a mass emigration event, why isn't there a mass immigration event, for example? Celebrants of the faith could build you a free temple. An independent mage (of some type that would normally only be recruited in a particular site, e.g. metal orders) could offer you his services.

Turmoil/luck dominions usually result in more effect from bad events than from good ones, even though there are more good events. In order to be balanced against neutral scales (given the income reduction of turmoil), turmoil/luck needs to have events be a net benefit (since luck has hardly any benefits aside from events - crossbreeding and heroes are it, IIRC). Also, misfortune needs to not be neutralized by order; it wasn't allowed in Dom I, why was that changed?

I'd just like to see the order and luck scales balanced to a point that most races could reasonably choose most combinations of those scales. It wouldn't be too bad if (as in Dom I) order/luck was usually a waste of points and turmoil/misfortune was horribly crippling but other combinations worked OK for their point costs.

Maybe order/turmoil shouldn't affect event frequency at all, but only allow/disallow certain events (volunteers for the militia or increased tax revenues would be more common in order, increased unrest, vandalism and rebellions in turmoil). Order is powerful enough for its income benefits. Anyway, I don't think an orderly population is going to be much use against a catastrophic flood.