AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent - Page 66

JLS · #**651** September 12th, 2003, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alneyan:
If I understand correctly, your question JLS is whether to include good events or not. If you include good events, the Lucky trait will decrease the chance for these events to also happen right? Or the Lucky trait/Fates Shrines are only working against bad events?

Alneyan,

As the AIC event file is now, we play with both Good events and Bad events; possibilities.

I believe that PTF has now proved that Lucky and Cursed does in fact work, from a previous patch.

With the fact that Lucky works as a trait now and that, Good events will defeat the purpose of Lucky because; Lucky only reduces the Event percentage and not actually, reduce any certain class of an event action.

The pulse of the AIC Players is that they like Both Good and Bad events in the mix.

I feel both cannot exist any longer, so they will have to choose, with Good Events to remain in the mix, Cursed must be removed and lucky reduced as an improbable Multiplayer choice.

The fate of the Fate shrines use of CBEC is based on that above decision as well.

Fyron · #**652** September 12th, 2003, 02:19 AM

Simply rename Lucky and Cursed so they no longer have any connotations of luck. Just make it so the new "lucky" means fewer events, the new "cursed" means more events. They need not be dependant upon good and bad chances and all.

Alneyan · #**653** September 12th, 2003, 05:54 PM

Yes, that was what I believed JLS, but I hoped I was wrong this time.

As for the Fate Shrine, you could also suppress its ability to reduce the chances for events, or even maybe give two facilities, one with this ability and the other one without (possibly linking the first one with Lucky)? That way, the player would have the choice to reduce or not the chances of both good and bad events.

For the Lucky and Cursed traits, I would say change the descriptions like Fyron said and perhaps decrease the costs of these traits. From what I saw in the events file, there are more bad events than good ones, so Lucky is still a bit positive, but not as useful as it was when there were only bad events. Lucky would then be quite similar to Emotionless, as this trait would be both an advantage and an annoyance.

In short, I would rather see the good events remain in the game than removing them to leave Lucky, Cursed and the Fate Shrines like they work in the vanilla game. My two organics worth.

mottlee · #**654** September 12th, 2003, 07:32 PM

How about the fate = good thing to happen (if it can be done)

Alneyan · #**655** September 12th, 2003, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mottlee:
How about the fate = good thing to happen (if it can be done)

JLS said you cannot "reduce any certain class of an event action." so I gather this cannot be done. However, I am no modder so who I am to speak about the feasibility of such things.

IF this could be done, then the best would be obviously: Lucky improves the odds for a good event, Cursed increases the odds to have a bad event, as QBrigid wrote. But given how the event file and the ability one looks like, I would say you cannot do such things. I hope I am wrong though.

PsychoTechFreak · #**656** September 12th, 2003, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alneyan:
I hope I am wrong though.

I'm afraid you're not. There is no flag for good/bad in the event sets.

JLS · #**657** September 13th, 2003, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Simply rename Lucky and Cursed so they no longer have any connotations of luck. Just make it so the new "lucky" means fewer events, the new "cursed" means more events. They need not be dependant upon good and bad chances and all.

Excellent

JLS · #**658** September 13th, 2003, 02:41 AM

[quote]Originally posted by Alneyan:

Quote:

As for the Fate Shrine, you could also suppress its ability to reduce the chances for events, or even maybe give two facilities, one with this ability and the other one without (possibly linking the first one with Lucky)? That way, the player would have the choice to reduce or not the chances of both good and bad events.

This is doable

Quote:

For the Lucky and Cursed traits, I would say change the descriptions like Fyron said and perhaps decrease the costs of these traits. From what I saw in the events file, there are more bad events than good ones, so Lucky is still a bit positive, but not as useful as it was when there were only bad events. Lucky would then be quite similar to Emotionless, as this trait would be both an advantage and an annoyance.

Outstanding point Alneyan, and easy to do, we just make sure there are more Bad then Good in the mix.

What would you recommend 2 to 1?

Quote:

In short, I would rather see the good events remain in the game than removing them to leave Lucky, Cursed and the Fate Shrines like they work in the vanilla game. My two organics worth.

It looks like some good compromises to me, which may keep every won happy�

Sounds like a Win + Win to me

JLS · #**659** September 13th, 2003, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

quote:
Originally posted by Alneyan:
I hope I am wrong though.

I'm afraid you're not. There is no flag for good/bad in the event sets.

Good point PTF, maybe se5

JLS · #**660** September 13th, 2003, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mottlee:
How about the fate = good thing to happen (if it can be done)

As PTF pointed out this cannot be done, their are no flags.

However, I am sure we can come up with a worthy action/ability to replace CBEC for the Fate shrine

What are your thoughts, Mottlee?

[ September 13, 2003, 02:00: Message edited by: JLS ]