3 times in about 5 years; 2 of them in a row I think. Had I chosen option A (which is objectively a better option but didn't due to roleplaying), I'd suddenly be at plutocracy 4. Maybe the effects should be minimized; -1 aristo instead of -2.How many times did the event fire? Was it in a row?
the event Therion mentiones fires way to frequent ESPECIALLY when around 5 centralization ( once and if i manage to get above 8 centra i rarely get it wich i found odd based on the trigger requierments). best solution is to choose option "b" becouse next coming up random event is usually one that could increase aristocracy if desired( for me in early game = yes).
Same question.which random noble set - assassination one ?
The nobility traditionally favoured a weak royalty and decentralised state, so this event should actually not fire for decentralised states, not the other way round.which random noble set - assassination one ?
just recommend extra triggers
or
event = {
id = 90000069 #Paradox 1073
trigger = {
NOT = { owned = { province = 1614 data = -1 } } #not for the Pope (MUS)
stability = -2
NOT = { countrysize = 4 }
}
random = yes
name = "EVENTNAME_RANDOM069" #Great Noble Family Requests Aid
desc = "EVENTHIST_RANDOM069"
#-#The most powerful of the noble families in the state often had vast wealth but that did not stop them like their monarchs from getting into financial troubles. They too could accumulate debts that escaped their ability to pay. They could at those times come to the monarch to request aid. The monarchs were often receptive since they would usually be related by blood or marriage.
action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME_RANDOM069A" #Deny Aid
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME_RANDOM069B" #Grant Aid
command = { type = treasury value = -25 }
}
}
or
event = {
id = 96000099
trigger = {
NOT = { owned = { province = 1614 data = -1 } } #not for the Pope (MUS)
domestic = { type = aristocracy value = 6 }
}
random = yes
name = "EVENTNAME_RANDOM099" #Treacherous noble arrested
desc = "EVENTHIST_RANDOM099"
#-#A foolish, but wealthy, popular, and high-ranking, noble has been implicated in a treasonous plot. The plot had little chance of success and he pleads for forgiveness, but the evidence against him is strong. How shall we deal with this fool?
action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME_RANDOM099A" #Hang him and confiscate his estate
command = { type = stability value = -3 }
command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = aristocracy value = -2 }
command = { type = treasury value = 100 }
command = { type = revolt which = -1 }
command = { type = revoltrisk value = 2 }
}
action_b = {
name = "ACTIONNAME_RANDOM099B" #Behead him and leave his estate to his heirs
command = { type = stability value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = aristocracy value = -1 }
command = { type = revolt which = -3 }
command = { type = revoltrisk value = 1 }
}
action_c = {
name = "ACTIONNAME_RANDOM099C" #Show mercy - impose a fine and exile
command = { type = stability value = -1 }
command = { type = domestic which = centralization value = -1 }
command = { type = treasury value = 25 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 60 value = 3 }
}
}
this onbe above i would have in the trigger ...........not is CENT is 9
Interesting... I never noticed this. It could be useful for the source code.i noticed the random number freezes in the same spot If you shift to a different application while you are playing .....and you have had a random event already in that year
The nobility traditionally favoured a weak royalty and decentralised state, so this event should actually not fire for decentralised states, not the other way round.
In my opinion, all random events before absolutism (mid 17th century) should be ones that favour decentralisation and aristocracy.
I don't understand the change countrysize -> stability in 90000048. Other events are still linked to countrysize.
With the changes, all countries could be hit if aristocracy over 7 but not if stab maxed out. Why?
Countries with size between 9 and 29 can be hit only if aristocracy >= 8 (unless first event)
Countries with size >= 30 can be hit only if aristocracy >=9 (unless first event).
Why not a single aristocracy >=7 condition in all events without the countrysize -> stab change?
For post #1248, I still have the same question about balance. I thought post #1265 could be the answer without needed modification for events posted in post #1248. Nevertheless Garbon is right in post #1267: couldn't we have the choice to avoid events in post #1265, even at a high cost?
.
This is just my personal opinon but I've always felt that receiving a +STAB event when already at +3 Stability is a waste of random event. I think the random events were created so as to have a random influence on the game, whether positive or negative. An event that does nothing does not affect the gameplay. A better alternative I think would be to have events that grant revoltrisk reduction when at +3 stab. So, a heir to the crown would increase stability by +1, but when at +3 it would give a revoltrisk reduction.
To be honest though, I think at +3 stability there should be a higher chance of receiving negative events. The default stability for large countries in this era was probably +1. +3 implies total order and efficiency which was too often not the case in Europe at that time. Lower stability will affect large countries mostly, since OPM's will go back to +3 soon anyways due to monarch's admin rating. For large countries lower stability means weaker trading, less tax income, higher revolt risk, chance for civil war (when below +1), which I think is fine because it depowers large nations, shifting the balance of power towards smaller nations slightly.
The same should be fo negative events-when at -3 a 'political crisis' does not make much sense, so either it could be replaced with revolt risk increase, investment reduction or treasury reduction. This would cause players to actually take a loan ince in a while which would make the game more challenging.
On an unrelated note the "Saint performs miracle" should be retitled to "Holy person performs miracle". Some people were canonized as saints by the church but only after their death. I doubt saints' contemporaries actually referred to them as 'saints'.
*bump*In post #1265, INF command could be in -3 instead of -1 (i.e. same province as CAV).