Should there be more random events in Civ?

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I like the idea, but such events should not be completely random in my opinion. Complete randomness would make a mechanic that you cannot prepare to and hence it is not possible to improve your gameplay with respect to such a mechanic. Optimizing your play is one of the key sources of fun in the Civ series, and I would not want to see it harmed.

Instead, I would gladly welcome gameplay related randomness. More precisely, these could be called Risks. A Risk would realize randomly, however, the probability and the severity of the risks is based on your actions. A few clarifying examples:
-Civil uprising risk: Probability and severity increases by negative amenities and occupied cities. The risk can be decreased with certain buildings.
-Natural disaster risk: Probability and severity is based on city location, i.e., warm areas would have higher risk. Active volcanoes would be visible, and these could have more, e.g., wheat and rice than usual due to fertility and to impose reward for taking a risk settling near the volcano.
-Disease risk: Risk increases with increasing population. In earlier eras, it can be reduced by having (multiple) sources of water, fresh or salty. In later eras, the risk can be reduced with infrastructure (neighborhood, hospitals, etc.)

This is exactly how I'd like to see it implemented. As long as the potential risks were made clear, events of this nature would make for some interesting choices that would add real colour to the game world.

 

[bbbt]

They already have semi-random events called 'barbarians'.

I agree that completely random events are a big thumbs down from me. I.e. a 'natural disaster' that appears randomly and say damages some districts, so then you have to spend some time repairing the districts. No thanks, adds nothing interesting to gameplay.

A plague mechanic that appears and spreads through trade routes and open borders and you have to work with other civs to quarantine it and stop it from spreading - something like that could be more interesting. I'm sure Ed Beach has played pandemic

One positive about random events is they could be used on single-player to make higher difficulties more challenging - i.e. instead of just boosting the AI's bonuses, the human player could have higher chances of negative events on higher levels. I think that still might be more annoying than fun for a lot of people though.

 

[jozef57]

I think random events would add some nice flavor, and not just in scenarios. I didn't like the random volcanos, tornadoes, etc since a lot of them simply ripped up your improvements with no ability to react to them. However, if a choice was added to react to them that could be great (i.e. Scientists are divided on the risk of the volcano exploding. Start the evacuation now, reducing your gold income in that area, but not risking death, or continue your valuable work on trade goods to develop an alliance with the neighboring civilization, but risking death and destruction from the volcano if it *does* erupt?)

Similarly, the quests they had in Civ IV random events were quite excellent, and really put a great twist on strategizing in the game. I think random events could and should be reintroduced to VI, albeit with the option to turn them off.

yes that would be great, super idear

 

[Mathalamus]

there shoudl be random events. any modern strategy game worth its name should have random events. i do not understand peoples complaints regarding them. it shoudl be built into the game itself, with no option to turn it off.

honestly, paradox games are far, far, better for including them, and civ4 still beats out 5 and 6, for including them.