The most dreadful (random) event?

[JimMorrison]

Honestly, the most breathing room I would think fair at all, is 2 turns, global lack of unlucky events - just to establish the playing field.

Beyond that, no complaints - you bought, or sold the scales - now live with them!

I've said it before, and I still believe it. I would rather be taken out early 9 times out of 10, and win once, than play out 10 mediocre games where I never had the faintest whiff of victory. So if that horrid unluck event happens at the start, then smile, thank everyone, bow out and join another game. No one can actually hate you for being sieged by knights and having your lab burned down.

[Herode]

3 - Horror !! I love bad events, even when I buy Luck
It's for suspense and so on, you know. OK, I confess I mostly play for fun, not for winning (although I also love winning but this seldom happens, maybe by unfair unluck ).

I agree with 2, and strongly !

About 1, I'm dubious. Too many random events => random game.

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Honestly, the most breathing room I would think fair at all, is 2 turns, global lack of unlucky events - just to establish the playing field.

+0.5. Global lack of any event, unlucky or not.

[Jarkko]

Luck would be much more viable if:

1) The cap for number of random events would be higher
2) The generic event for militia would be replaced by events generating national troops (or at least replaced by the event generating fanatics; at least the fanatics are sacred so they don't have lower upkeep and can actually be quite good for a while if you have nice blesses)
3) Luck scale would totally prevent bad events and instead fire only good events for the first N turns of the game, where N = Luck-scale x 2

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by Jarkko

Luck would be much more viable if:

1) The cap for number of random events would be higher
2) The generic event for militia would be replaced by events generating national troops (or at least replaced by the event generating fanatics; at least the fanatics are sacred so they don't have lower upkeep and can actually be quite good for a while if you have nice blesses)
3) Luck scale would totally prevent bad events and instead fire only good events for the first N turns of the game, where N = Luck-scale x 2

1) Would "fix" it alone.
2) Also needs to be done, getting a horde of militia is quite unlucky.
3) < shrug >

[Loren]

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

The problem is edi, as I tried to point out before, is that other people pay the price for *you* taking unluck. I'm not talking scales.

If a player takes misfortune 3.. and gets knocked out of the game on turn 1 - or even in the first year - it unbalances the game for the remaining players.

That's what I've been saying, also.

Not only does it mess the game up for the rest of the players but it actually hurts them worse than it hurts you. You're quickly out and can devote your time to a new one.

[Zeldor]

I am only talking about getting for example 120 unrest on turn2 in your capitol. Order should decrease unrest events. And I am talking about that not in context of misf-luck balance. As I said - not scaling of it + bad events from enemy dom replacing your good ones is a thing that makes it unbalanced.

[Herode]

I don't understand. Why would 90% people take Misf if it is unbalanced, that's what I cant' figure. If Luck is not worth its price and Misf unbalanced, then 95% of the players should take Luck 0, I guess

[JimMorrison]

At first I thought Zeldor was using reverse psychology to argue just for a Luck buff, not a Misf nerf.

What a strange world we live in.


Though Edi, arguing Misf 3 doesn't really work, it's rarely taken. The 80 points from Misf 2 aren't going to offset a knight attack on turn 3, nothing will. But I'm not arguing a point, those who take the Misfortune are taking a calculated risk that with current game mechanics, they are getting a measurably better long term benefit with O3/Mis2, than with T2/L3.

If you can't stomach that risk, then go even scales, no one is holding a gun to your head.

[Zeldor]

JimMorrison:

Like unrest events won't hit you if you take Luck They are just less likely.

I think that Misfortune is bad enough, but Luck is not good enough to use your points on it. Luck0 is not worth 80 points either. Luck should increase chance to get a hero by 2-3% per tick, event limit should be removed and militia events should be replaced by national unit events where it is not done yet.

[Olive]

Originally Posted by Zeldor

JimMorrison:

Like unrest events won't hit you if you take Luck They are just less likely.

I think that Misfortune is bad enough, but Luck is not good enough to use your points on it. Luck0 is not worth 80 points either. Luck should increase chance to get a hero by 2-3% per tick, event limit should be removed and militia events should be replaced by national unit events where it is not done yet.

I don't think luck is that worthless. With high luck, random events can bring you a lot of money, several items, and more important, gems of types you may not get with the usual Order/Misfortune.