No Huts / No Events?

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by chadxo, Feb 17, 2011.

  1. chadxo

    chadxo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Why does everyone seem to be play with no huts/ no events? Personally, I think they add a nice touch to the game with one exception;

    I almost never Raze a city because I"m alway worried I'll get the event where armed citizens rush to defend ( or whatever it is). My last game I finally decided to raze a city because it was horrible, my rifles were running Ghandi over. I razed the city a turn or two after he got rifling and all of a sudden 5 rifleman appeared. I was pissed. Is that an event that will go away if I turn it off, or is that just game mechanics?
     
  2. Kid R

    Kid R Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,487
    They add to the unpredictability of the game, hence make it harder. I think lots of players (myself included) are in a permanent battle to master harder and harder difficulty settings, so the last thing you want is for it to be harder than it already is :lol:
     
  3. OKScientist

    OKScientist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    89
    It will go away.
     
  4. huh?

    huh? Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    287
    I don't think it makes it harder. In many cases, I feel that the huts and events make the game easier for the player. Popping BW or a settler from a hut on the first turn is very unbalancing. Watching all of your melee unit get an auotmatic Cover promotion is unbalancing.

    I think many players turn them off to have a consistent game play without the randomness and unbalanced nature of the huts and events.
     
  5. Farm Boy

    Farm Boy The long wait

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Messages:
    20,836
    I rather like events/huts most of the time. Many players here do as well. However, if somebody is going to post a game online huts and events become counterproductive.

    Much of the point of the online game is so that multiple people take a play and share feedback on how their game went to compare the efficacy of different approaches. If in one game the barbarian uprising event eliminates an AI but not in another the online posters might as well be playing two different games entirely.
     
    Oaq likes this.
  6. VoiceOfUnreason

    VoiceOfUnreason Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,663
    Huts: most games you see here will have huts disabled, because the variation makes comparison between games difficult. The contents of the hut are determined by a dice roll that occurs when you "pop" the hut, which means a very small deviation in game can have dramatically different results.

    Example: because you and I happened to take different paths to get to the hut, one of us used up more random numbers than the other. So I pop Bronze Working, while you lose your unit to Large Barbarians. I'm so pro.


    Events: events are just broken.

    They have the same comparison problem as huts; they weren't particularly well tested for balance - which makes them particularly unsuitable for a strategy game.

    Of course, the same folks who rolled out events also rolled out Civ5 - strategy game may not be what they were going for.
     
  7. ABCDPuppies

    ABCDPuppies Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    298
    Comparability is the main issue, not only for online games but for offline. Much of the fun of playing Civ, for me, derives from the feeling that I am getting better and surpassing greater goals -- higher difficulties, faster times. Doing this involves developing sounder strategies, and a knack for executing them, but huts and events can completely skew that.

    Popping early BW from a hut, for example, or getting the melee Cover event, can completely determine whether an early rush succeeds or falls flat. But then if it does succeed, I don't feel like I earned that success. Certainly, I don't feel like it shows the strategy I followed, in terms of tech/build order to be a sound one in any more general sense. All in all it detracts from the feeling of accomplishment/learning, and hence from the fun.

    Admittedly, this is all probably only partly rational: obviously it's just as much a matter of chance whether there is a nice seafood/gold site right by my capital, or just a desert, or if I roll Ramses or Ghandi as a leader vs. [insert your own disfavored, probably Protective, leader here.] I would feel cheap just picking the strongest leader or (a much more extreme case) world-buildering in the gold/food, but I feel fine for the most part if the RNG decides I get it (unless it's just really egregious.)

    In that respect huts/event are no different, really. It's just a matter of what largely arbitrary constraints suit your style, and provide a challenge you find fulfilling. So, to each his or her own.

    One exception to all this is Quests, which for some reason I actually like, and kind of wish could be left in independently of other events. Maybe it's the fact that you actually have to do something to get the reward -- which involves deciding whether or not it will be worth going out of your way to complete the quest -- or the fact that, at least often, the AIs also have the opportunity to compete for the prize. Either way, I think it's a lot better than "oh hey, all your units are magically 25% stronger now, for no reason."
     
    Oaq likes this.
  8. Kid R

    Kid R Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,487
    It doesn't make it easier if the AI gets the free settler and the free techs! Still unbalancing though, and infuriatingly random.

    Combat and the barb spawning mechanics are random, but more or less controllable. Huts might be less irritating if there was more you could do to affect the "yield", over and above just using a warrior or a scout. Like say the more advanced your unit the better the results, then maybe it would make sense to preserve and defend huts from enemies till later in the game. Or if you could sit on the hut for X turns "befriending the natives" to get better eventual results, like spies do if they remain stationary.

    I agree with Puppies about most of the quests - the benefits aren't extreme and they're reasonably balanced with the cost of pursuing them.
     
    Oaq likes this.
  9. Xpl

    Xpl Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    Messages:
    97
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I play a lot of multiplayer with a group of my friends. My main concern is always to turn off huts and random events. I think in the hands of the AI, it's not nearly as unbalanced. Like when someone gets Metal Casting from a hut, builds the colossus even though you were teching your way "properly".

    I also find it annoying if I get given a settler from the first hut, and I'm just sat there not knowing what to do since I had a clear outline to follow for the start.
     
  10. VoiceOfUnreason

    VoiceOfUnreason Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,663
    My belief is that the AI never gets free settlers from huts. This is based on the assumption that the AI is playing at HANDICAP_NOBLE, and that the Goody list for that handicap level doesn't include GOODY_SETTLER.

    The actual settings could be checked in the appropriate XML files; I'm not sure that you can trivially verify which handicap level the AI is actually running at.

    And, since it's been ages since I've investigated hut mechanics, I could be completely wrong.
     
  11. A_Hamster

    A_Hamster Small Furry Animal

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    627
    AFAIK, you are correct. The AI plays at HANDICAP_NOBLE for goody hut generation.

    At one time, I was thinking of editing out GOODY_SETTLER and GOODY_WORKER even at the lower settings since I felt they were too good (even at lower skill levels), but since now I play at Noble, there's no point any more.
     
  12. dalamb

    dalamb Deity

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,160
    Location:
    Kingston, Ontario
    Some people seem to be especially vituperative about how random/horrible/unbalancing huts and events are, but to me the two main reasons for turning them off are:
    • You dislike them, for any reason -- no public rationale needed.
    • You're trying to compare your game with somebody else'. That's why most map series either eliminate them (like most of the xOTMs I've seen) or provide instructions for eliminating them (like the Nobles' Club games on turns when I make the map).
    In personal games, I always leave them on because for me they are fun, and if I get hit by a really nasty event I'll either live with it or back up a few turns. OTOH I'm not improving my skillz as fast as most people seem to, which is likely related to my playing style.
     
  13. coanda

    coanda Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    1,793
    I prefer more determinism in my multi-agent games. I prefer to know that the reason I won or lost is purely because of my own and my opponents decisions, and not because we were closely matched but one of us got a lucky break. I would not be opposed to huts if they just invariably gave the discoverer 40 gold, or some similar small bonus.

    I admit that if the randomness involved is small, inconsequential, and balanced enough, then it can add a little flavor without overly irritating me. But it's an inherent trade-off - how much variety is added versus how often inferior play nevertheless wins. And I happen to come down very much in favor of consistently punishing inferior play and rewarding skilled play, even if it means lower replay value.
     
  14. ABCDPuppies

    ABCDPuppies Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    298
    I'll add one other small point, which is that after a while I began to find looking for huts in the early game an annoying distraction. In the end I'd rather just focus on scouting the land and thinking about my strategy than trying to move where I think the RNG is likely to have placed a hut.
     
  15. Ataxerxes

    Ataxerxes Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,073
    I thought I was the only one who had this issue.:) I agree that turning off huts keeps one from the bad habit of not scouting out the surrounding terrain fully. I always get greedy and my scouting units wind up wandering all over the place. Having huts off keeps me from temptation.

    Events can be fun - of course I haven't run into the Bermuda Triangle yet. However I confess to WBing myself a Tank if I get the Vedic Aryans event to defend myself and then delete the tank.
     
  16. Kesshi

    Kesshi Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,415
    Having your forge burn down 2 turns before you complete the Statue of Liberty is not what I would cal "fun."
     
  17. lymond

    lymond Rise Up! (Phoenix Style!) Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    22,860
    ^^^^exactly

    I honestly tend to have very bad luck with events...very bad. Often stringing together several slave revolts and natural disasters that make me want to bash my monitor violently upon my pc. Then I will get some quest like Holy Mountains which I've never figured out or building a certain amount of some unit or building I don't need en masse in that particular game. This is then followed by another string of several slave revolts and possibly a volcano eruption. To top it off, I've then somehow given a religious or other wise diplo negative slight to some AI I'm try to please for like -3 or so. But wait, just when I thought things could not possibly go any worse, 4 Horse Archers or Axeman magically show up on the edge of a city that otherwise needs few defenders.

    ^^^it may seem like it, but the above paragraph is not much of an exaggeration. That stuff happens almost every time I play with events on. What's the point of it when less than halfway through any game I play with them on I'm asking myself "What the point of it?".

    As for huts, I may play with them on sometimes in personal games, but generally on higher levels they do much more for the AIs who start with 2 scouts, which I've always thought was kinda stupid. Don't you just love when your warrior or scout moves to within 1 tile of a hut only to have some AI scout swoop out of the fog the next turn to grab it and probably got BW for it. So for comparative games on the forum I think they should definitely be left out.
     
  18. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    26,046
    Neither is an instant game over within the first 50 turns, or losing about 20000 :hammers: (no exaggeration) worth of ships, planes, and marines at sea in an instant before or during a war. Neither is being FORCED to declare on a group of civs in a defensive pact...of the two options events are by far worse because of just how broken many of them are.

    But both huts and events carry fake difficulty elements that reward/harm the player independent of his skill; rather sour in a strategy game to stack nonsense like that into it regularly and deliberately.

    In comparison games, events/huts add noise. In games like HoF and XOTM, events are a stain on the competition and it's a total joke that these games can pretend they're legit competitions while deliberately adding more random chance than necessary...or requiring more retries to achieve an optimal result.
     
  19. vornan19

    vornan19 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    Messages:
    99
    Location:
    England
    I turned off Events after only one game. It went something like this: it Bermuda Triangle'd my fleet; burnt down my forge while building Ox Uni; slave revolt in city when Ragnar's stack knocked on the door; Ambassador's indiscretion resulted in a Dow by Alex; and so on. Only one good thing happened, I got the medicine tile(?) - one turn before Cathy culture flipped it.

    There was one quest: find the Holy Mountain. I enjoyed that, right up until it appeared - in the centre of another continent on a huge map.
     
  20. A_Hamster

    A_Hamster Small Furry Animal

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    627
    What is this Bermuda Triangle event that you and TMIT have mentioned? From what little has been said about that event, it sounds like I will want to turn off events forevermore.
     

Share This Page