Global Armageddon: "fun" for Everyone

[MagisterCultuum]

Actually, now that I think of it last time I used pPlot.changePlotCounter(-100) whereas this time I used pPlot.changePlotCounter(pPlot.getPlotCounter() * -1), which is what Sanctify uses. Maybe it isn't set up to have a lower cap at 0 like it has an upper cap at 100, so the plot counter can become negative and not be checked like ti usually would be.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

a victory condition tied to armageddon would definitely be great. I think it should need completion of the ritual+AC100. the ritual itself would have a much lower AC prereq though, so that you can start building it way before AC reaches 100. it's not really AC100 that triggers the win, but the Armageddon event. if you complete the ritual AFTER Armageddon happened, you win anyway.

 

[zup]

Armageddon should be everybody loses event. Not an instant loss but should the Infernals still live and have anything resembling an army, they should get enough time to wipe out or conquer the rest of the world.

Specifics:
1. bring every city in the world to single digit population. If that's not enough, just bring them to 1.
2. A huge chance for every improvement to be destroyed.
3. Make hell spread everywhere, for the rest of the game. Armageddon should have permanent effects too.
4. Significantly speed up hell terrain spread. If they don't have life adepts, sucks to be them.
5. Lock AC at 100, for the rest of the game. You failed to prevent the Armageddon, now live with it. Also nice for stigmata units.

Comments?

And yes, you guessed it, I want Armageddon to be a game ending event.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Armageddon should be everybody loses event.

I disagree. Armageddon should be a Shaeim win event. Their purpose is to destroy the world. This should be a Victory condition for the Shaeim.

If the Shaeim are not in the game, then it can be an Infernal win, but if both are present, I say it should be the Shaeim, in multiplayer, and whoever is the human player in single player.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

a Sheaim victory condition would be too specific. same for an AV specific one. an Evil specific victory condition is fine though, seeing as neutral/good god the altar.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

No, no, this is not correct. The other civs that are evil are not trying to destroy the world. They are trying to rule it, using evil means. Only the Shaeim and Infernals are trying to destroy it. AV is a religion, it has nothing to do with the civilization goals. The Bannor adopting AV, would still try to conquer the world. Not destroy it!

 

[Antheanian]

I really like what Zup suggest. Very nasty event when you hit 100, and lock the counter at 100. Armaggedon happened. No way of reverting it anymore. Also, I really think that hell terrain should spread to the entire world at this point. Too late, good civs! You are doomed!

But I would not add a special victory condition for the Sheaim alone or even for a specific religion. This is too specific and favors a civ versus others. If a victory like this is added for the sheaim, a special victory condition would need to be developped for every other civ, which is too much... Same thing for a religion-tied victory condition.

If you are playing the Sheaim, you already have an advantage when the AC is high. If the AC is locked at 100, you have many creatures spawning in your cities, and your ennemy is broken and weak. The Sheaim have it easy for a conquest or domination victory at this point. Why add another winning condition for them?

(Please note, before firing at me, that I haven't played the Sheaim yet. But this look like the way to go for me!)

 

[Thunder_Gr]

I proposed a Shaeim victory instead of an all lose condition. They do not all lose on Armageddon. Someone wins. The one that wants the destruction of the world. This one is the Shaeim.

If you give them diplomatic handicaps with the other civs tied to the AC counter, you will get something like what happens when a player starts building the ToM. Everyone will declare war on them. Remember that raizing an AV city reduces AC. So if you combine that with an AI prone to raze AV cities on this occasion, you get the balance you need for one civ having a specific victory condition.

Also, I will quote Kael's worlds that it is not neccessary to have a counterfeature for every feature. So, giving a Civ specific victory condition on one civ, does not imply you have to give all of them.

P.S. My favorite civ is the Amurites. So, what I say has nothing to do with me liking Shaeim, but with what I feel to make more sense...

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Specifics:
1. bring every city in the world to single digit population. If that's not enough, just bring them to 1.
2. A huge chance for every improvement to be destroyed.
3. Make hell spread everywhere, for the rest of the game. Armageddon should have permanent effects too.
4. Significantly speed up hell terrain spread. If they don't have life adepts, sucks to be them.
5. Lock AC at 100, for the rest of the game. You failed to prevent the Armageddon, now live with it. Also nice for stigmata units.

Comments?

I agree with these, and like them very much. I would also add:
6)Give every living unit a chance to die each turn

 

[MaxAstro]

No, no, this is not correct. The other civs that are evil are not trying to destroy the world. They are trying to rule it, using evil means. Only the Shaeim and Infernals are trying to destroy it. AV is a religion, it has nothing to do with the civilization goals. The Bannor adopting AV, would still try to conquer the world. Not destroy it!

Actually not true. Anyone worshiping Ashen Veil is following the religion's ultimate goals of bringing about the Armageddon. The Sheaim are more dedicated to it than the others, but by definition all AV followers want to cause the Armageddon.

But you are right that most non-AV evil civs just want to rule the world, not destroy it. Some don't even really want that; I don't think the Balseraphs want to rule the world, they just want to do whatever they please with their portion of it.

EDIT: Also, I have always felt that the Armageddon should at least spread hell terrain to every tile, and that at about AC95 Good civs should lose their hell terrain immunity. Maybe just non-Order good civs, dunno.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Actually not true. Anyone worshiping Ashen Veil is following the religion's ultimate goals of bringing about the Armageddon.

The worshippers of a religion may want whatever they like. A leader of a civ adopts a religion opting on its benefits not its ultimate goal. In addition most civilizations can have many religions in their cities and change the state religion as often as they like(following the 10 turn limit, of course). The Shaeim is the only civ attempting to destroy the world, whether they chose to follow Ashen Veil or Order. The leaders of the Shaeim have this ultimate goal. This is what I am saying.

 

[Giga-Gigan]

I would have to disagree, by no means does worshiping the Ashen Veil necessitate that you want to bring about the end times, supporting or helping bringing them around sure, but not want. I could think of dozens of situations where Joe Everyman would turn to worshiping the Veil that do include a desire to bring around Armageddon. It seems to me that many of the followers of the Ashen Veil may have little idea about greater repercussions of their faith.

 

[Keeper_GFA]

It seems to me that many of the followers of the Ashen Veil may have little idea about greater repercussions of their faith.

Which is why they shouldn't win with Armageddon. That should be their moment of, "OMG, what have I done?!" The Sheaim on the other hand want Armageddon, regardless of what religion they allow their citizens to follow.

 

[civ_king]

100AC+worldbreak+birthright regained+worldbreak=game over

 

[Giga-Gigan]

Good point Keeper GFA, however I have been debating with you, not against you. It is my opinion that if there is to be a Armageddon victory then it should a Sheaim and Infernal exclusive.
I don't think it would be overpowering for them because well there are other routes to victory for the other civs. If your playing as them then it is just another route to victory that one can take; if your playing against them then you should keep the counter down.

 

[Methuselah]

I don't think it would be overpowering for them because well there are other routes to victory for the other civs.

The Sheaim can also take those routes, thus do not need an exclusive victory.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

@Methuselah

Please, keep in mind that the Shaeim/Infernal victory is proposed only as opposed to a lose all event at armageddon.

Even if you disagree with giving a civ specific victory condition, you cannot argue that it is unfair for these 2 civs to lose when they actually achieve their purpose of existance!!

 

[Imuratep]

It is unfair for these 2 civs to lose when they actually achieve their purpose of existance!!

This single civilization please. The Infernals don't suffer any penalties from any AC event except if they are so successful that the Barbarians turn against them, then the Horsemen attack them (But this should be no problem if you're so successful).

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Oh, yes. You are right. I got a bit confused there. The Shaeim is the one we are actually arguing about, since the Infernals were already the proposed winners by zup, when introducing the ideas.

 

[Giga-Gigan]

Still the point is valid. It just seems wrong that the Sheaim spread Armageddon only to having to win by a conquest, cultural or some such victory. Besides I would like to see the end flash movie for the Armageddon victory.