Events in BOTM

[wwassme]

I only want to keep them if I can get them!

What? As the winner of not just one, but two, of the hard to get cow awards, I'd think you would have gotten several "good" random events to pad your score.

p.s. congratulations on your 500th post

 

[whb]

I've had some of these events ... well, I've had two pastures randomly destroyed in two consecutive turns... yet to see the free artist, etc though!

Seriously, if we're getting that itsy about random rolls, the dice rolls in combat in an early rush are much much bigger beer. I think we just have to respect the fact that Civ is poker or backgammon, not chess.

 

[jesusin]

I've had some of these events ... well, I've had two pastures randomly destroyed in two consecutive turns... yet to see the free artist, etc though!

Seriously, if we're getting that itsy about random rolls, the dice rolls in combat in an early rush are much much bigger beer. I think we just have to respect the fact that Civ is poker or backgammon, not chess.

I am against Events. They almost turn Civ not into backgammon, but into "see who gets the biggest card".
Can we disallow popping resources from mines?

Free GA doesn't require ice city.

Slavery revolt doesn't require whipping too much without waiting. It doesn't even require any whipping at all.

 

[BLubmuz]

Usually i left them enabled in my HoF games.
I've seen everything:
- pastures destroyed (and in the early game this can be a serious problem)
- pastures built (and this helps)
- Ice sculputure in tundra city, usually, and if you got enough money the free GA is a good boost
- some nice quest: the libraries one, that gives one more S to your GLB, and this never disappear, the colosseums one, together with SoZ starts a GA, the harbors one, the best reward is the free Nav1 for all your present and future ships, even the holy mountain (i don't remember exactly, but the reward was good)
- the inflaction reduced if you're running free economy (a good boost for SC and time VC)
- the comet fragment, nice for a SC
- 3 AIs destroyed by various barb uprisings in the early game in a non-HoF game (i owned the GW)
and a lot of minor events, usually balancing themselves.

The gold/iron/etc popping from a mine is there since Vanilla.

So, i keep them: usually their benefits are worth the bad ones, and there's some more fun.
Often i got a CR2 Mace defeated by a Sword in a city bombarded to 0: this is civ, remember? i clearly do, playing civ since the Civ II era.

 

[jesusin]

So, i keep them: usually their benefits are worth the bad ones, and there's some more fun.

It is not a question of the overall result, positive or negative.
It is a question of reducing randomness in a competition.

I also keep Events on my HOF and private games and I enjoy them.
IMO, they are not fit for GOTM, though.

 

[BLubmuz]

IMO, they are not fit for GOTM, though.

Since it's a competition, and comparing GotM games is an important side point, i probably agree with this.

I wish remember that ORI made an useful guide to RE, for anyone is interested.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

How are random events different from the semi-random decisions all the AIs make? For example:

1. Competitor A might complete a crucial early wonder in a certain year. Competitor B playing the same GOTM might have been going to finish the same wonder several turns earlier, yet still get beaten to it by an AI because in B's game, one of the AIs chose to build it earlier.
2. Competitor A gets to settle a superb location with gold and floodplains 10 tiles from the start position, that'll make a big difference to the game. Competitor B got there at the same time but in B's game, one of the AI's just beat him to the spot.
3. Competitor A goes to a conquest defeat by an immortal level AI. B won the game after, despite similar power graphs and diplomatic relations at that time, being lucky enough not see the same AI randomly declare war on someone else instead.

Surely if you object to BOTM random events, you'll also object to all those possibilities too....?

 

[Harok]

How are random events different from the semi-random decisions all the AIs make? For example:

1. Competitor A might complete a crucial early wonder in a certain year. Competitor B playing the same GOTM might have been going to finish the same wonder several turns earlier, yet still get beaten to it by an AI because in B's game, one of the AIs chose to build it earlier.
2. Competitor A gets to settle a superb location with gold and floodplains 10 tiles from the start position, that'll make a big difference to the game. Competitor B got there at the same time but in B's game, one of the AI's just beat him to the spot.
3. Competitor A goes to a conquest defeat by an immortal level AI. B won the game after, despite similar power graphs and diplomatic relations at that time, being lucky enough not see the same AI randomly declare war on someone else instead.

Surely if you object to BOTM random events, you'll also object to all those possibilities too....?

If a simple mouse click would make the AI perform the same in every game I would be for that also.

 

[Plinko16]

How are random events different from the semi-random decisions all the AIs make?

...

Surely if you object to BOTM random events, you'll also object to all those possibilities too....?

I don't think that's necessarily logical, the AI's in each person's BOTM game will be the same and follow the same AI scripts and logic. They may act differently - some of it might be due to differences in player-controled causes - such as meet date/location, religion, tech status, relationship, etc. But they are facing the same script, but REs don't work that way.

If everyone would be drawing from the exact same subset of available RE's, then your point would be logically correct - as all would be subject to the same possibilities though each game would still have different outcomes. However, if each game will have different REs in the pool, it is not so.
So, each player will be facing different random possibilities. This would be more akin to have random AI leaders that are determined separately for each player's game, something that doesn't happen in XOTM.
A player who draws the possibility of a Barbarian uprising is at a huge potential disadvantage to one who draws the possibility of a free Golden Age.
Drawing a chance to lose your pastures any turn is a massive disadvantage if someone else does not draw it, if you everyone had a 1% chance every turn it would be fair, but if one has 1% and the other 0, I don't think it is.

Lastly, you have the ability to alter AI behavior - through diplomacy, trade and war to name the most-obvious. But you can barely influence the REs and have no way of knowing what you're up against in any situation.

 

[MarkM]

Plinko16 makes very good points

 

[morpheus11]

If everyone would be drawing from the exact same subset of available RE's, then your point would be logically correct - as all would be subject to the same possibilities though each game would still have different outcomes.

Maybe I don't understand REs but isn't there a set that are available. The program won't be making up things for a Random Event that wasn't programed in the first place. This list might be rather large, but the list would be complete in each game. Or are you saying that everytime a game is loaded whether from a save or a new game different REs are available.

I don't know much about programming but that sounds a lot more complicated than having a large list of random events that is used for every game.

 

[da_Vinci]

Have we had the case yet where a medal or award was decided by a random event? How do we feel about that possibility? And stretching this to the SGOTM, where we have had some very close finishes (the multi-ties in SGOTM 03 comes to mind), seems that a random event could very well decide a BtS SGOTM ... would we be fine with that?

I am surprised that the creation of the save does not lock in a common menu of random events that all players would face. If the game writer hits end turn, then uploaded the save (no units moved), would that lock in the random event menu? If so, maybe we should do that?

If not, what would the poker analogy be? Maybe if you played poker where each player was dealt a hand from their own deck of cards. Now suppose that one deck had all the aces removed, one had all of the deuces removed. There is still the luck of the deal, but that luck is operating on two different universes of possibilities. I have to agree that such a scenario is not very fair.

dV

 

[Ronnie1]

If a simple mouse click would make the AI perform the same in every game I would be for that also.

But that is WHY Civ is so great. The only reason this game has held my interest for the past 10-12 years is the "randomness" that makes re-playability so intriguing. It is a different game every time you load it up, even with the exact same settings.

I think DS's point is well made. All you have do is check the box that says "new random seed on reload" and then replay your games to see the difference!

I am surprised that the creation of the save does not lock in a common menu of random events that all players would face.

I believe this is exactly what does happen, with the exception being the use of the word "could" instead of would. The event is random because it "could" happen, the other possibility of course being "could NOT" happen.

I'm sure (with or without random events), if you put 5-10 or 100 computers in a row, and played the turns exactly the same, it would not take very long for the games to diverge. And once there is a single divergence, there is no possibility that the games could ever be the same again. The RNG is the only factor that is different, as it should be. That is why it is called a "random number generator".

 

[da_Vinci]

But isn't what Plinko16 is refering to the concern that the same save, opened by different players, locks in a different subset of available random events? Are we sure that is the case, or not?

I can live with or without random events in the competition, provided that everyone is "at risk" equally for all of the same random events (or is playing with the same deck, in my poker analogy).

But if one player's game deals from one "deck" of random events, while another player's game is dealing from a different (more severe, or more favorable) deck, then that represents a bias (systematic difference, vs. a random difference) between the two players for that one game, that is constant for that game. I don't think we want bias in the competition. Random variation among players at equal risk is acceptable (at least to me).

dV

 

[LowtherCastle]

If you guys don't like random events, then just play this month's WOTM. Oh wait, there won't be one. Oh well, then just suck it up and take your licks when they come. I like random events. Hurricane destroyed one of my temples while going for Cultural. Big deal.

 

[Ronnie1]

But if one player's game deals from one "deck" of random events, while another player's game is dealing from a different (more severe, or more favorable) deck, then that represents a bias (systematic difference, vs. a random difference) between the two players for that one game, that is constant for that game. I don't think we want bias in the competition. Random variation among players at equal risk is acceptable (at least to me).

I believe the same "set" of events is available for all of the games. Thrallia or 1 of the other Admins would probably know better than me, but that was my understanding. They removed the ones that were determined to be the most unbalancing, and left the rest. Some require certain "circumstances" to be activated, but those factors are determined by the players actions, as they should be.

As LC said, suck it up. I just lost my Granary to a monsoon in the current BOTM. I have to rebuild it before I use the whip again, bummer!

 

[ArcadicGamer]

I see people saying you cannot influence RE's, but to some extent you can! If you want the RE's to pop for free artists, you build theaters nation-wide, and an ice/tundra city. You keep a gold surplus in your bank for these events. Dont want hurricanes? Dont settle coastal cities that need important infastructure. Dont settle next to the peak if you dont want it to erupt.

Yes, the pasture collapsing 2 turns after you build is annoying, specialy turn 30. However in the recent BOTM, i had a total of 2 gems, 2 gold and 1 iron pop. I had about 25 RE's good and bad. By far the most influential ones, were the gems, as i went from near strike at war, to a comfortable tech lead cruising to the starts. The iron allowed me to resume the war, instead of settling a city. (not spoilers. its closed i think anyway). Even the free market inflation event did little to help me.

 

[PutCashIn]

BTW, the RNG uses what as its seed? time?

So we should all start play at 3pm local?

What if the RNG uses dates?

So we should all start play on the 21st of each month?

To jesusin, are you upset coz you only killed a third of your population once befor you got the slave revolt....coz that sounds to me the best time to revolt...befor you go whipping again!

 

[jesusin]

I'm sure (with or without random events), if you put 5-10 or 100 computers in a row, and played the turns exactly the same, it would not take very long for the games to diverge. And once there is a single divergence, there is no possibility that the games could ever be the same again. The RNG is the only factor that is different, as it should be. That is why it is called a "random number generator".

I am sure it doesn't work that way. Once the staff makes the save for us to download, the RNG is not RNG anymore. It is a fixed list of numbers, the same for all of us. The same for every AI.

So, if you make the same moves in the same order in 10 computers, you will get exactly the same game.

 

[jesusin]

But isn't what Plinko16 is refering to the concern that the same save, opened by different players, locks in a different subset of available random events? Are we sure that is the case, or not?

The list of possible events for a game is set at game creation. We all have the same subset.