jtb1127
Deity
I think events are fun additions to gameplay so they should be turned on.
Huts/Events Poll
- Thread starter Gwynnja
- Start date
The events vary in their impact - it would be nice if you could choose different groups of them to enable/disable.
Quests: yes please. Occasional diplo shake-ups: OK why not. Random improvement/building destruction just meaning extra micromanagement to repair and therefore giving the AIs an advantage because sometimes I can't be bothered: Yawn, but if you insist. Disastrous events turning many turns of careful play into an insta-loss: Me check "no events" box.
Quests: yes please. Occasional diplo shake-ups: OK why not. Random improvement/building destruction just meaning extra micromanagement to repair and therefore giving the AIs an advantage because sometimes I can't be bothered: Yawn, but if you insist. Disastrous events turning many turns of careful play into an insta-loss: Me check "no events" box.
jtb1127
Deity
sudden events seems to alter history in reality so why not in this game? That is just my logic.
AJ11
Emperor
You can do this, you know. There is a file called EventTriggerInfo.xml. If you put the probability to 0, it is out of the game for good.
I allways play without events/huts.
I understand perfecly why some people play with them on and I respect that.
I would have apreciated if firaxis would have made the hall of fame available only to games without huts/events, and made the default choice OFF, not the other way around.
And also, I would like to enjoy this game, and hold my opinions in this matter, without beeing called a psycopathic communist.
I understand perfecly why some people play with them on and I respect that.
I would have apreciated if firaxis would have made the hall of fame available only to games without huts/events, and made the default choice OFF, not the other way around.
And also, I would like to enjoy this game, and hold my opinions in this matter, without beeing called a psycopathic communist.
Good tip, thanks!
Psyringe
Scout
Well - I agree with your statement that (1) feels more realistic, which is one of the reasons why I enjoy this style of play more. But, personally, I see no reason to not recognize and respect approach (2) as a valid method of strategizing as well.
You're presenting the argument that (2) is not good strategizing because it doesn't reflect real life enough. But why should "reflecting reality" be a necessary component of strategizing? By your argument, the people who (for example) analyze chess openings wouldn't be strategizing at all, because there really isn't much in chess openings that reflects reality.
Again, I see no reason to look down on either of the two approaches I mentioned. Personally, I strongly favor the first one for Civ games, because it makes them more enjoyable for me. But that doesn't mean I can't respect the other one as equally valid.
Dr.Null
forIhavetastedthesushi
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 597
This is exactly what I did. Remove the barbarian uprising events and remove the Bermuda triangle event, and I think the rest are not game-breaking.
Any advice on this front? Am I missing a terrible fun-ruiner?
I always play with huts and events on.
On standard BtS I played on immortal, but on my own mod I play on emperor (because the AI is significantly smarter in the mod).
In my opinion, huts and events are bad for balance, but good for gameplay. With random events and huts turned off, I find that I basically just stick to the same cookie-cutter strategies every game; but with events on, I find the games are a bit more dynamic.
Obviously some events are better designed than others, but on the whole I think they are a good part of the game.
On standard BtS I played on immortal, but on my own mod I play on emperor (because the AI is significantly smarter in the mod).
In my opinion, huts and events are bad for balance, but good for gameplay. With random events and huts turned off, I find that I basically just stick to the same cookie-cutter strategies every game; but with events on, I find the games are a bit more dynamic.
Obviously some events are better designed than others, but on the whole I think they are a good part of the game.
Somewhat surprisingly, in all my years of playing this game, I have never once been materially damaged by the Vedic Aryans. Maybe one day I'll lose a game because of them and then I'll be able to cry about unfair random events are...
NeverSurrender
Warlord
Monarch / Emperor
Events on (they are fun!)
Huts off (they are too unbalancing) A friend once got Iron Working and Metal Casting from huts... needless to say, he won the game.
Tech Trading off (just... no!)
Events on (they are fun!)
Huts off (they are too unbalancing) A friend once got Iron Working and Metal Casting from huts... needless to say, he won the game.
Tech Trading off (just... no!)
Emperor player here, huts always off since as someone pointed out at higher difficulty it favors AI more as they are more likely to get them, also I think that you actually have less chance to have the best huts (free tech, money) than you have at lower difficulty levels? (not sure, been playing with huts off for a long time now)
Events is a different story IMHO. If I see huts more like a way to generally help the AI, events can favor you or the AI. I see it more like randomness that will sometimes help you, and sometimes not, just like other things (map, barbs, important early fight outcomes). Since I'm mostly playing single player games for fun I don't mind having them on, they add some flavour. It's good to have them off for forum games though, so people can really compare their strategies.
Events is a different story IMHO. If I see huts more like a way to generally help the AI, events can favor you or the AI. I see it more like randomness that will sometimes help you, and sometimes not, just like other things (map, barbs, important early fight outcomes). Since I'm mostly playing single player games for fun I don't mind having them on, they add some flavour. It's good to have them off for forum games though, so people can really compare their strategies.
Yeah but huts favor the AI more randomly
. I think huts radomness is not a big deal compared to events though.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
Emperor player, I too turn huts off but events on. I don't like having to explore to find huts, I'd rather take my time with exploring later. So to not be at a disadvantage I just turn them off. Plus an early tech is generally much more beneficial than any event. Events are just some flavor. The only super game changing ones are usually the barbarians and possibly the health tests one and maybe a diplomacy one if you're in a sticky situation there.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
Tech pop from a hut is not materially stronger than:
1. Global +3 diplo with all known civs
2. Golden age without great person expenditure (there are multiple events with differing conditions that can give you one too). Golden ages are worth somewhere between 100's to 1000's of outputs (late game, 10000's). No tech in a given timeframe can compare to a no or low-investment GA...
3. Tower shields giving early melee cover.
4. Yes...global permanent health boost...
5. Plane crash event x50
Just to name a few. Sometimes slave revolts can actually cost more beakers than a basic worker tech pop grants, in that you are losing 8-15
(up to 20 
) per turn and all the food/hammers, or the food/hammers from losing a pop + cost of growth + delayed expansion timings etc.Huts are their own animal but pretty obviously terrible for competition too...
Tortfeasor
Chieftain
Prince player and a recent convert to huts/events off. I've finally gotten fed up with calculating that I have just enough gold to make it to a tech that's going to get me more trade routes, be massive trade bait, generally make my life a lot easier. Only with two or three turns left I'll get a slave revolt/mine collapse/banditry/forest fire that turns the whole plan into a pipe dream. Yes I miss the occasional free golden age or other benefit but on the whole I feel events have just become a ball and chain around my game.
Verarde
Pondering Wearing A Hat
Noble, but soon to move up to Prince. I keep 'em on, as huts and events really make civ4 more fun, at least for me. The feeling of, "Hey, an indigenous people! What will they give me?" is cool.
civvver
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,855
Tech pop from a hut is not materially stronger than:
1. Global +3 diplo with all known civs
2. Golden age without great person expenditure (there are multiple events with differing conditions that can give you one too). Golden ages are worth somewhere between 100's to 1000's of outputs (late game, 10000's). No tech in a given timeframe can compare to a no or low-investment GA...
3. Tower shields giving early melee cover.
4. Yes...global permanent health boost...
5. Plane crash event x50
Just to name a few. Sometimes slave revolts can actually cost more beakers than a basic worker tech pop grants, in that you are losing 8-15
Huts are their own animal but pretty obviously terrible for competition too...
Golden ages are indeed incredibly powerful, I milk them myself, but I almost never get one from a random event quest. Tower shields is really bad if the one AI you are targeting gets them, but again it is rare. I think an AI popping techs from a hut is much more likely than either of those conditions. Anyway, it really comes down to laziness for me, I don't like to explore for huts so I turn them off.
