|
|
|
 |

November 25th, 2003, 11:17 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Crystal Tokyo
Posts: 2,453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
I agree...I could also do without the disasters designed to disquise those province-harming spells.
|
Ah, that's right. Sunray_be, some of your work might be in vain if it is impossible to discriminate between real and fake disasters. Some, like knights, vinemen, and earthquakes are always luck... but others, like floods, are also major and cannot be distinguished.
|

November 25th, 2003, 11:31 PM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 483
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
quote: Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
I agree...I could also do without the disasters designed to disquise those province-harming spells.
|
Ah, that's right. Sunray_be, some of your work might be in vain if it is impossible to discriminate between real and fake disasters. Some, like knights, vinemen, and earthquakes are always luck... but others, like floods, are also major and cannot be distinguished. Not if you play all the races at the same time through hotseat. The only thing you have to remember then is how many spells did you cast yourself. 
|

November 25th, 2003, 11:58 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,013
Thanks: 17
Thanked 25 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
[QB] ywl,
I agree...I could also do without the disasters designed to disquise those province-harming spells.
|
Then you would know that someone was out to get you though, which isn't necessarily a good thing. It removes a lot of the espionage aspect.
|

November 26th, 2003, 11:07 AM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nuts-Land, counting them.
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by Sunray_be:
After almost 300 turns of tests (common events), it seems to me that the frequency of "disastrous" events should be balanced. A disaster means big (thus irreparable) loss of pop : floods, restless people, plagues, famines, etc, I'm not counting the minor events like hailstorms, or the provinces lost to rebels, knights, etc
To sum up :
- Order 0 & Luck 0 = 36 events in 82 turns. 20 good events (I've been lucky) but 5 disasters.
- Order-3 & Luck +3 = 88 events in 82 turns. 61 good events (including the 1500 gold, for a total of 3245 gp bonuses). But still 7 big disasters!
- Order+3 & Luck-3 = 6 events in 123 turns. Only minor effects.
Is that logical to get *more* disasters with max luck ? IMHO Illwinter should limit the frequency of those major events, something like 2 possible disasters with Luck+1, 1 with Luck+2 et 0 with Luck+3. As it is, the Luck/Disorder combo seems a poor choice (on average, 40 gp/turn dont compensate for disasters and 30% tax losses).
Cheers
|
how many provinces did you control for the tests? I think you should own at least 10 so to get the max number of possibles events coming. This can change the whole thing if you get 150 events in 75 turns compared to one a turn roughly (but 20% will be bad anyway - which is too much)
__________________
Currently playing: Dominions III, Civilization IV, Ageod American Civil War.
|

November 26th, 2003, 12:57 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 194
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
I would like to see the Disasters toned down a bit for every level of Luck you have.
Sammual
|

November 26th, 2003, 04:32 PM
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
how many provinces did you control for the tests? I think you should own at least 10 so to get the max number of possibles events coming. This can change the whole thing if you get 150 events in 75 turns compared to one a turn roughly (but 20% will be bad anyway - which is too much)
|
I was playing hotseat, only Ulm vs Pythium (to avoid heat/cold effects). I opened only the Ulm turns, so Pythium was totally passive. No spells, no fake disasters...
The test was based on 10 provinces indeed (turn 1 = capital, turn 2 = 4 provinces, turn 3 = 8 provinces, turn 4 = 10 provinces). I've *never* seen more than 2 events/t. BTW.
Dominion was 10 candles to maximize its influence.
By "disaster" I mean big pop loss, no knights, no revolt, not event hailstorms.
To be perfect (I realized too late) I should have made a scenario to remove all magic sites. It is not impossible that one of the test was distorted by a Doom Cloud or something like that...
Could someone confirm/invalidate my tests ?
Cheers
|

November 26th, 2003, 09:54 PM
|
|
Re: Petition to change LUCK\\ORDER Scales
Quote:
Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
If you are up for more tests, I'd suggest Order 0 & Luck +3, and Order 0 & Luck -3, to see if the base event frequency changes. I'd do it but I'm lazy.
|
Did it:
Order 0 and Luck +3 = 43 events / 80 turns, 9 bad (1 flood) and 34 good events (1500 gold event among others).
Order +3 and Luck 0 = 8 events / 80 turns, 3 bad (still 1 flood !) and 5 good (1 hero even with luck 0).
Any thought ?
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|