New Beta Version - April 5th (4/5)

[Adonis VII]

I've played up until Renaissance with Venice on Epic (haven't had time beyond that yet). I feel like the events occurred too often, and a ~30% reduction might feel better. It got to the point where events became somewhat annoying. However, I think part of this is because of getting hit with the same events, 3 floods and 3 mine collapses in Venice for example by medieval, and more event options may help this.

 

[Enginseer]

I think the current problem with events right now is that people hate bad events. Although all events are "given" eventually, there are way too much bad events compared to good events.


Further hypothesis can be seen here.

Spoiler :

As believed by Gazebo, the Event Systems use the PRD system. If no one played Dota 2 or you're not familiar with this concept. It's simple, in a true RNG system all events are independently rolled. In PRD, all events that are not rolled have their chance increased and so on. Since almost all events are rigged at 5% and you have more bad events than good events overall, you will have a huge bad events outcome than good events.

 

[qqqbbb]

Thankfully, there is a statistical formula that will return the probably of an event happening after n trials given p probability of it to occur per trial. But imo this is too simplistic an approach. Events should have a minimum length of time between them: 10 turns for example with 0%, the get assigned a small %: 0.05%,increasing by an amount each turn and eventually hitting a maximum (like 5% each turn). This way, events can be tuned to fire at reasonable rates while still maintaining some sort of randomness to their firing.

+1...

 

[Deadstarre]

yeah. i dont care if bad things are happening to the AI as well i play to enjoy. lots of bad events is just... not fun at all

think of how you feel when you get an ancient ruins and its the god awful +15 xp. thats still a good event technically and it completely sucks. let bad events be along those lines.

 

[glider1]

A "good" event is any event that adds to signal not noise. "Signal" is the set of viable strategies available for us to utilize in the game. If events help create viable strategies they are signal. If they diminish strategies they are noise. Spam is one type of noise. A "bad" event that hurts our civilization is not necessarily bad, it is merely temporarily annoying. A bad event might be good, because it is not just happening to us but to the others. A bad event might help create a strategy.

 

[JFD]

Strategy is not the only value that Events may bring to someone using it, and this should be kept in mind. Also, keep in mind that Gazebo made it clear that Events were not to be a default feature of the CBP, just that it is on by default atm so as to test for errors.

 

[Gazebo]

Keep in mind that the current set of quests is not complete, and the ratio of good/bad quests is not terribly skewed, so if it seems like there are too many bad quests...that's why.

G

 

[Funak]

Keep in mind that the current set of quests is not complete, and the ratio of good/bad quests is not terribly skewed, so if it seems like there are too many bad quests...that's why.

That kinda shows, really .

I've now gotten the battlefield hospital/triage event so many times that I've run out of 'good' options.

 

[Gazebo]

That kinda shows, really .

I've now gotten the battlefield hospital/triage event so many times that I've run out of 'good' options.

This was a test run of the events system, mainly to get feedback on timing and the UI. Now, we need more events. I'll keep adding my own, but if everyone would make one or two...we'd have a ton of events.

G

 

[Funak]

This was a test run of the events system, mainly to get feedback on timing and the UI. Now, we need more events. I'll keep adding my own, but if everyone would make one or two...we'd have a ton of events.

I know people dislike Beyond Earth, but I'm actually really a fan of the event system there (where you choose how to improve buildings), having one of those for like every building in the game wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea. By that I mean global ones, affecting every building of that type, not the local ones affecting just one city (those are fun as well, however)

 

[Gazebo]

I know people dislike Beyond Earth, but I'm actually really a fan of the event system there (where you choose how to improve buildings), having one of those for like every building in the game wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea. By that I mean global ones, affecting every building of that type, not the local ones affecting just one city (those are fun as well, however)

I tried to pick one or two buildings per era for the initial run. There are more buildings, total, in Civ than in BE, so we'd need to be careful about overload.

G

 

[Funak]

I tried to pick one or two buildings per era for the initial run. There are more buildings, total, in Civ than in BE, so we'd need to be careful about overload.

Yeah, you're right. Still, they are fun and they do add a layer of depth to the buildings

 

[Tomice]

I agree that there should be more positive than negative events (60-70%) to avoid that the system gets annoying.

Yeah, you're right. Still, they are fun and they do add a layer of depth to the buildings

I like it in BE (one if the few things I like), but remember that this project is way more complex than BE. We have quite a few multi-purpose buildings already. And SP's let us customize a few buildings as well.
Dogmatically adding yield-boosting quests to every building might be too much. But it might work well to add some spice to currently underused ones.

We shouldn't forget that we are an elitist bunch, not everyone has 1000 hours of game time and longs for ever increasing complexity.

 

[Funak]

We shouldn't forget that we are an elitist bunch, not everyone has 1000 hours of game time and longs for ever increasing complexity.

I don't really see how an event adding +1 culture to all markets would be more complex than an event adding +1 culture to a market in one city, triggering every two turns until you have the culture in all markets.

If anything it would actually be less complex, as it removes the complexity of trying to powergame the exact resources required in every city .

 

[Strigvir]

Events should be rare and "eventful". I strongly dislike by-city events which work on every city. It just turns events into a convoluted stat upgrade, instead of spicing the gameplay. I.e. settling near a mountain shouldn't mean you get a guarantied volcano eruption at some point.

 

[tu_79]

I agree that there should be more positive than negative events (60-70%) to avoid that the system gets annoying.

Human psicology: 66% of unhappiness is tantamount to 100% happiness. So if we play and find 3 bad events and 3 good events, the result is negative. 2 bad events and 3 good events make it balanced in our minds. But actually it isn't balanced. We're such bad logical machines.

Civ V moto seems to be 'always growing', so any event that decreases our yields makes for a completely different game (that somehow nullifies the (i)logical problem of balancing good and bad things). CPP is different, but at least keeps its soul. You say events are going to be supported for other mods, ok, but if it ever makes into CPP, try at least to avoid diminishing events (better have events that replaces yields, turning hammers into gold, or temporary boosts, like during 5 turns units are more expensive/cheaper).

 

[Foch]

Would it be possible to have improvements pillaged, instead of destroyed? I think I have 15 Workers in my current Marathon game, and I'm not sure I'm building improvements as fast as they're being destroyed.

Part of it is that events are way too common, as has already been discussed at length. Just hit Renaissance, got about two dozen cities, and events are happening every single turn. Often more than one at a time.

 

[Wodhann]

Regarding frequency of events, I agree with the overall sentiment, but I also think that it should be a little biased on player score. Players on top should get slightly more bad events than players on the bottom, to compensate a bit for the inherent snowballiness of the game.

 

[Takagi Hiro]

Regarding frequency of events, I agree with the overall sentiment, but I also think that it should be a little biased on player score. Players on top should get slightly more bad events than players on the bottom, to compensate a bit for the inherent snowballiness of the game.

I am relatively in favor of this.

 

[Chrisy15]

Some notes from core CP:

I agree that events happen too often, but this might just be in comparison with Sukri's events: they tended to happen every 25 turns, and so having your first event appear at turn 8 is a bit odd. I also don't like the look of the event window, but this might just be me comparing it to E&D.

The icon for Events' EUI button is missing - DC_ATLAS_45 or something. More importantly, however, the CP is breaking those icons, as well as the diplomacy icons on the right. I only noticed the missing texture because JFD's EUI patches for RTP and CID fix the NotificationPanel. Lua log didn't seem to say anything in particular, but CP: Events is the prime suspect.