Random Events in BtS

[thadian]

first, i lose all my buildings to a hurricane. then i whip my theater back and it is destroyed by a fire, and once i chop my barracks - a spy kills it. then i am hit with attila the hun.

i hate random events because as per Murphys Law - you will always get shafted.

 

[azzaman333]

I think there is a difference between barbarians and events. With barbarians, there is a considerable element of skill in dealing with them. You can allocate resources to fogbusting and so reduce or eliminate the threat. Or you can use the barbarians to 'train' your units to give them promotions. That element of skill doesn't seem to be there with (most) random events.

The skill is keeping that small treasury of gold in case you get hit. Almost every event has minimal effect if you have the cash in the bank to avoid the worst effects. And the best events need the money to fully exploit them.

I really do think the hurricane event should be removed though. You have no choice but to lose two buildings. Significant effect, and nothing can be done to minimize it short of not having buildings in the city.

 

[kcd_swede]

The skill is keeping that small treasury of gold in case you get hit. Almost every event has minimal effect if you have the cash in the bank to avoid the worst effects. And the best events need the money to fully exploit them.

I really do think the hurricane event should be removed though. You have no choice but to lose two buildings. Significant effect, and nothing can be done to minimize it short of not having buildings in the city.

Real life is like that too... if you build New Orleans on a coastal floodplain, Katrina is a question of when rather than if.

 

[Harok]

I've always been strongly against random events and even goody huts because all they do is make it harder to compare games. But I understand I'm in the minority so I just simply skip the BotMs that have random events unless they have a map type or set up I find really interesting.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

First of all, it was not truly my intention to derail the thread, so thanks for moving it . I've been having (probably thyroid related as I'm already on replacement for it, I'm getting blood tested) sleep issues lately, and my maturity does depend to an extent on whether the # of hours I'm awake consecutively is > or < 24.

I also didn't know the extent it's been touched on in past BOTM's, obviously we're up to 14 now. It's likely that events (both positive and negative) have already affected several medals. I hate this element because it's un-necessary. Not enough to avoid playing the game, but I certainly disagree with their inclusion.

I agree on the barbs not being comparable. Barbs are a more dynamic presence than events. They spawn at a known rate, held constant for everyone. However, unlike events, they occur in every start that gets them to some extent (meaning they can be prepared for) and preparing for them is quite optimal. Preparing for some random events is literally impossible, for others it would it would slow you by so much that someone who didn't would be ahead of you. That's a large price to pay for something with a very low chance of occurrence. What's more, in this format some events can give players such a leg up that competing with them @ equal skill is impossible.

I do understand that the RNG factors into every game, I really do. However, for competition purposes, I see no reason to include things that unlevel the playing field. Especially things that are *so* easily removed from being a factor.

 

[Skallagrim]

I just got BtS (playing vanilla till now), and I think the events are really an amusing part of the game.

Certainly I understand your criticism of it beeing an random element, but I kinda agree with Mundungu that the AIs choice in tech and wonder normally have a larger impact on gameplay. I.e. getting wonders (... in the extreme, failing a CS slingshot on a level you normally succeed on, has a MAJOR impact, almost ruins the game ... but other wonders can also have big impact), "trade tech opportunities" (can easily make the difference of 5-15 turns, sometimes the AI invent "perfect techs for you", others not AT ALL), could be founding a religion or I think most of us know that sometimes those combat percentages can play a funny trick on you.

My point is only that, although *direct* things like events or a goody hut tech feels *unfair*, other stuff that doesnt affect you that directly will often in the end play a much larger role. And thats kinda part of the game ...

I like the random element, spices up the game. The good players still win more games in the long run (just check the listings)... Sure I enjoy game with no event and no goodie huts ect too, but when you think about it, its a lot of stuff thats random already...

Btw, the "fairest" game would be "No huts/events/barbs + start on solo island + no tech trading mad ... and if possible ... no wonders crazyeye or religion founding (or any free great person/tech from techs)" ... which would, in my opinion, also be the most *boring* game ever...


Thats my 2 cents

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I hate both barbarians and random events, and they certainly make me less inclined to play XOTMs. BOTM13 was an absolute blast though - and lookie there, no REs and no barbies!

FWIW, I disabled random events in BOTM 13 as a special case because I thought they'd be potentially too game-breaking in an always-war game. (Scenarios like, a player losing a mine on their only copper/iron source just as the AI stacks are approaching, crossed my mind). At the time I had no idea of the interest/controversy that that one-off decision would lead to

 

[Skallagrim]

Another random stuff I forgot to mention is which great person will spawn, although ... i know... that can be pretty much controlled, u tend to have at least National Epic in your best GP city, and if that alone spawn 3 great artists in a row, it can sometimes feel heartbreaking

 

[kcd_swede]

FWIW, I disabled random events in BOTM 13 as a special case because I thought they'd be potentially too game-breaking in an always-war game. (Scenarios like, a player losing a mine on their only copper/iron source just as the AI stacks are approaching, crossed my mind). At the time I had no idea of the interest/controversy that that one-off decision would lead to

It never crossed you mind to eliminate that possibility by providing 2 metal resources, did it?

 

[kcd_swede]

FWIW, I disabled random events in BOTM 13 as a special case because I thought they'd be potentially too game-breaking in an always-war game. (Scenarios like, a player losing a mine on their only copper/iron source just as the AI stacks are approaching, crossed my mind). At the time I had no idea of the interest/controversy that that one-off decision would lead to

It never crossed you mind to eliminate that possibility by ............, did it?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It never crossed you mind to eliminate that possibility by providing 2 metal resources, did it?

As I recall, there were not just 2, but lots of metal resources spread across that map!

 

[Niklas]

And quite easily accessible too.

 

[jesusin]

Speaking as an individual player here, not as a staff member:

- I love RE in my private games played for fun, they are a fun factor
- I hate RE in my private games played to try out a new strategy
- I hate RE in BOTM games, because this is a competition and it gets distorted

In the cases I hate them, I am in rage with the positive ones, more than with the negative ones.

I disagree you can control/prepare against them. How can you control Slave Revolt? How can you avoid getting a free GArtist in a cultural game?

 

[Conquistador 63]

I like goody huts. I like playing with barbs on (except when playing for HOF - I may be crazy but I'm not dumb). I like random events. I like CIV RNG. And I like even more when all of the random factors are on so it is more likely that good luck in one aspect can be outweighted by bad luck in another one.

And also I would like that those who say XOTM medals or awards were decided by pure luck could present proof of what they're saying, cause I just don't buy this story.

 

[Ronnie1]

Speaking as an individual player here, not as a staff member:

- I love RE in my private games played for fun, they are a fun factor
- I hate RE in my private games played to try out a new strategy
- I hate RE in BOTM games, because this is a competition and it gets distorted

In the cases I hate them, I am in rage with the positive ones, more than with the negative ones.

I disagree you can control/prepare against them. How can you control Slave Revolt? How can you avoid getting a free GArtist in a cultural game?

I completely agree with what he said!

 

[Skurn]

Speaking as an individual player here, not as a staff member:

- I love RE in my private games played for fun, they are a fun factor
- I hate RE in my private games played to try out a new strategy
- I hate RE in BOTM games, because this is a competition and it gets distorted

In the cases I hate them, I am in rage with the positive ones, more than with the negative ones.

I disagree you can control/prepare against them. How can you control Slave Revolt? How can you avoid getting a free GArtist in a cultural game?

Exactly my opinion.

Random events are a nice addition to the game, I like them when I play below or above my skill level.
But for competitions, I'd leave them out. Same thing with goody huts, I'd rather have everybody start with 50g (including AI).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

My reading of the balance of comments on this thread is that there are sufficient people both for and against random events to justify running some, but not all, BtS games, without random events, so I guess I'll start doing that in future.

 

[kcd_swede]

Exactly my opinion.

Random events are a nice addition to the game, I like them when I play below or above my skill level.
But for competitions, I'd leave them out. Same thing with goody huts, I'd rather have everybody start with 50g (including AI).

Perhaps if I ever get to the point where I play competetively in these competitions, I will feel the same about RE's.

@DS: May I suggest that you consider making inclusion of RE's somehwhat level dependant? The competetive players probably dominate the submissions at high levels (Emperor and above) and might appreciate reducing the random factors as much as possible in these games. Lower level players (Prince and below) and duffers like myself can enjoy RE's in those games where the competitive players will be easily able to overcome any setbacks/advantages with minimal affect on their games. Just a thought.

 

[Niklas]

@DS: May I suggest that you consider making inclusion of RE's somehwhat level dependant? The competetive players probably dominate the submissions at high levels (Emperor and above) and might appreciate reducing the random factors as much as possible in these games.

I agree with this completely. Though I'm sure there are some quite strong players that won't, like Conquistador 63 who posted above.

 

[da_Vinci]

My reading of the balance of comments on this thread is that there are sufficient people both for and against random events to justify running some, but not all, BtS games, without random events, so I guess I'll start doing that in future.

Does this mean that the inclusion of random events, will itself be ... uh ... a random event?

dV