Luck/Order scales after 2.06 Patch - Page 4

SurvivalistMerc · #31 January 13th, 2004, 05:09 AM

I actually think that the scales could be made such that the points which they either cost or produce are non-linear.

Turmoil could give more nation points than order costs. And the third order could be made more expensive. I guess that each person has a break-even point for all the scales.

The only thing is that not everyone's break-even point is the same. I like order and misfortune. So if I mod the scales, I might make order cost more, turmoil give more nation points, luck cost less, the heroes more powerful, and misfortune give fewer nation points. Just a thought. I'm not even sure you can mod them in this way.

My feeling is that the scales need not be balanced with respect to one another, only with respect to the total nation points they yeild.

Keir Maxwell · #32 January 13th, 2004, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
I actually think that the scales could be made such that the points which they either cost or produce are non-linear.

I'm not even sure you can mod them in this way.

Don't think so. You can mod the effect of a scale upon the attribute of the game that it presently modifiers - ie reduce order to 5% extra tax.

I will be sticking with the existing scales structure for the War of the Ring mod - there will be enough to get used to without complicating ones understanding of race design and its impacts. I have no objection to mods that alter the existing game balence but I don't want to move that way until I have a far better understanding of dom2 than I presently do. The different but similar relationship to Dom1 have made it quite tricky for me to get a good feel as many dom1 reflexes remain.

Cheers

Keir

Zapmeister · #33 January 13th, 2004, 05:33 AM

I think the main issue, for me, is that the person taking Luck is not significantly luckier than the person taking Misfortune, because of the actual events.

I now agree with whoever-it-was that said that it's the events themselves, rather than the scales, that need the most attention (or words to that effect).

SurvivalistMerc · #34 January 13th, 2004, 05:37 AM

Zapmeister,

I think I was one of the folks who said that a while back. But I am probably not the only one to reach that conclusion.

#35 January 13th, 2004, 05:46 AM

I believe alot of the supposed 'imbalance' could be cleaned up with a reweighting of the luck scale. Or some sort of additive effect with it.

The main complaint, that I can see is the long term detriment of a bad event vs the 'instant gratification' of the good event.

Change the 1/4 population bad event to a single -500 gold, -250 Production event in tune with the corresponding good event and you more than likely wouldn't see it as a target for comparison.

If it's possible, bumping the population cutting event to +2 Luck and below and adding in a one shot -gold -resource event would more than likely calm a bit of the 'bad events are bad' talk.

Truth be told I prefer this way. It balances out some of the Turmoil nations so they are more feasible while not hurting any of the Order gold and making them pay for it with misfortune.

Maybe if some of the events were not so terrain regulated and finding a gold or iron mine in a valley or a barren it might take off some of the edge.

My choice of taking Order/Misfortune has not changed, I am more likely to do so, but I no longer groan at the thought of taking a forced Turmoil theme/nation.

SurvivalistMerc · #36 January 13th, 2004, 04:18 PM

Zen,

My understanding of the 500 gold event is that it is limited to luck +3 or is that not correct?

My least favorite event is actually the barbarian pillage, though it is less devastating than loss of 1/4 or 1/3 population in an unlucky disaster. They are quite common in my territory late in the game. I will sometimes get up to two a turn. I don't mind the knights as much as the barbarians.

The barbarians get to pillage even if they don't win the battle. And they attack civilized areas out of nowhere. It would be nice if (1) no pillaging if they don't win and (2) they can only attack within 2 provinces of (a) an independent province or (b) a province of a nation that has some sort of barbarian theme to it.

All these barbarians coming out of the woodwork in the middle of my order+3 empire in provinces with > 10 provincial defense that have the religious accoutrements of civilization (temples) just doesn't strike me as right. But maybe my imagination is warped in this regard.

Changing that to a knight attack under those circumstances, with no permanent population loss, though they are harder to defeat, would seem more reasonable to me. Knights are civilized. And nobles can rebel and have political disagreements with their overlords.

Arryn · #37 January 13th, 2004, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
My understanding of the 500 gold event is that it is limited to luck +3 or is that not correct?

Playing as R'yleh I received this event on turn 4 at luck+2.

Jasper · #38 January 13th, 2004, 05:29 PM

Does anyone know how the various mages who can avert bad events work? Is there just some sort of percentage such an event is averted if there is a mage in the province? Does it scale with more mages? What are the percentages? Can you tell when misfortune has been averted? etc.

Also, which factions have such mages? I know of at least Midgard, Utgard, and Black Forest.

apoger · #39 January 13th, 2004, 05:45 PM

Two questions involving luck and modding.

#1 Luck scale changes the frequency of events. Right now by 5% per level of scale. I have seen people state that this means that misfortune raises the chances of events and luck supresses. Is this correct? Or is this 5% a positive modifier in both directions? If it isn't a positive modifier in both directions, is there anyway to mod the scale so it can be?

#2 Luck scales currently affect quantity and quality of events. Some players have suggested adding economic modifiers to luck. I'd like to do some experimenting with such ideas (and other scale effects that are non-standard). Is there anyway to do this? Or are we locked into what the scales affect, and only have the ability to wiggle the percentages?

Ok how about a third question that's about mods, but a shard off topic.

#3 The mod tools seems to allow the adjustment of scales via overall numbers that get applied across the board. It has been suggested that it might be good to have the scales ramp up in effect, I.E. instead of Order being a 7% adjustment per level of scale, possibly make it +7% for +1, +12% for +2, and +17 for +3. I am totally unsure if this is a balanced approach, however I want to know if it's even possible to experiment with.

SurvivalistMerc · #40 January 13th, 2004, 06:50 PM

Apoger, I'm not sure, but my belief is that taking any luck scale (in either direction) will increase the frequency of events.

I can't answer your second question.

I like your idea of non-linearity of benefit with the order scale. I find that I take order as much to get rid of those horrible random events as I do to get income out of it. I think I would take order if it were 3% income per tick but -10% random events per tick.

Arryn, that is very good to know. If only the worst events could be limited to very low luck scale as some of the positive events are limited to positive luck scale. Does it come with 250 production points in that province? Or did Zen come up with the 250 production on his own?