AGC Event Philosophy

I pretty much share this viewpoint. Perhaps we should start things fresh as you suggested in another thread. What I would like to suggest, is that we have some sort of guidelines which determine what will go into the AGC, versus what wouldn't.

For example, we could have guidelines such as these:

1.) Events must have more than one choice.

2.) The first choice must be the historical one.

3.) The event must be free of spelling and grammatical errors. (They should be reviewed before being included, so we don't have the problem the EEP does of poor Grammar and spelling).

4.) Events should only trigger when the historical circumstances surrounding the event are in place (just as MKJ has just posted).

These are just my ideas.... Would be nice to have something like this in place, to ensure only high quality events are included. Since the EEP focuses on quantity over quality, perhaps we should do the opposite.

Originally posted by Captain Krunch
1.) Events must have more than one choice.

Click to expand...

I find it difficult to agree here, especially combined with MKJ's focus on more complex triggers and alternate versions of events (with which I am in complete agreement). In some cases, all but the
For example, Paradox' event 3895 for Pommern - the choices are to split Pommern between Sweden and Brandenburg, let Brandenburg inherit everything, or stay independent. If Brandenburg doesn't exist (fairly likely) and Sweden doesn't exist (fairly unlikely), only the third choice makes sense.

3.) The event must be free of spelling and grammatical errors. (They should be reviewed before being included, so we don't have the problem the EEP does of poor Grammar and spelling).

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

These are just my ideas.... Would be nice to have something like this in place, to ensure only high quality events are included. Since the EEP focuses on quantity over quality, perhaps we should do the opposite.

Click to expand...

Quality should be paramount, but quantity has its place. I don't think we need to go through and rewrite all of our events (or worse, all of Paradox', too!) just for the sake of having rewritten them, or we'll never have a scenario to distribute. Furthermore, the prospect of getting a significant number of events regardless of whether I'm playing France or Cambodia was one of the EEP's major attractions to me.

I'll suggest a couple more guidelines:

A) Event text should be completely original; if not, it must be credited.

B) All event choices should have at least some chance of being chosen by a human. (I can't find it right now, but I saw an event earlier today that went A: (generally positive stuff); B: 2 years of +3 revolt risk; C: -1 stab, 2 years of +3 revolt risk.)

Originally posted by Mad King James
Isn't assigning a value judgement to a project somewhat nonsensical? Our projects has mature people, immature people, young people, old people. Generalizations such as these aren't a good idea to just toss around.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on that..on the topic I agree with Korath, credit guys who makes original work and always leaves the human player a choice..

Originally posted by Korath
B) All event choices should have at least some chance of being chosen by a human. (I can't find it right now, but I saw an event earlier today that went A: (generally positive stuff); B: 2 years of +3 revolt risk; C: -1 stab, 2 years of +3 revolt risk.)

Click to expand...

Absolutely. This is, IMHO, very important. There are some events that, regardless its historicity, the option to choose for a human player is absolutely easy, because the other 1 or 2 options are absolutely negative. All options should have a positive(s) outcome and a negative(s) one, in order to make harder for a human player to choose and to think about the consequences. The example Korath has posted is very clear: who would choose B or C ???

3.) The event must be free of spelling and grammatical errors. (They should be reviewed before being included, so we don't have the problem the EEP does of poor Grammar and spelling).

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

1.) Events must have more than one choice.

Click to expand...

But what about historical events like, say, an historically recorded epidemy, absolutely out of human control?

I think he meant events with options...The bubonic plague should of course have no choices...

Except, perhaps, different reactions to a plague "just for fun"... the plague will occur no matter what is done, but things could vary depending on how one reacts.

Suppose that a plague comes around and is taken as a sign that you're doing something wrong rather than "just" accepting it - you could perhaps try to counter future plague outbreaks by trying to please God (+narrowmindedness) or try to analyse what went wrong from a scientific viewpoint (+innovativeness).

The plague would happen either way, but the effects on society could vary - perhaps a king would take the opportunity to relieve the taxes on peasants but instead increase them for the nobles (-aristocracy, -serfdom).

Originally posted by Mad King James
Isn't assigning a value judgement to a project somewhat nonsensical? Our projects has mature people, immature people, young people, old people. Generalizations such as these aren't a good idea to just toss around.

Click to expand...

I think what Crook meant (or what I would like to think Crook meant) is that the EEP has been around for 9 months or so already, & as such has gone through a lot of evolutions & changes & has become more developed & refined (mature in the sense of not being young & inexperienced). That's not to imply that the AGC is not mature or will not be - just that it is new & in the early stages.

Originally posted by Mad King James
Isn't assigning a value judgement to a project somewhat nonsensical? Our projects has mature people, immature people, young people, old people. Generalizations such as these aren't a good idea to just toss around.

Click to expand...

What generalizations? EEP went through beta and pretty much 2 releases (at least), AGC is just starting. Who said anything about people?

Originally posted by Korath


B) All event choices should have at least some chance of being chosen by a human. (I can't find it right now, but I saw an event earlier today that went A: (generally positive stuff); B: 2 years of +3 revolt risk; C: -1 stab, 2 years of +3 revolt risk.)

Click to expand...

Let's not make this one completely mandatory. I can think of a few events where the possible results weren't exactly choices, just the playing out of some historical probabilities. If this means that a human-played country is always a bit lucky, that's just the way it goes.

Anyway, I can't see how you could make something like Norway's "End of the Kalmar Union" event balanced. No matter how bad the B choice is, it still beats immediately losing the game.

Originally posted by AlanC9
Let's not make this one completely mandatory.

Click to expand...

Well, no - none of these should be completely mandatory. That's why they're labelled guidelines, not rules. There's nothing wrong with not following a guideline, provided you understand why it's there, and that you violate it for a reason.

(To be clear, the example I was trying to make wasn't A: good stuff, B: bad stuff, C: bad stuff; it was B: bad stuff, C: exactly the same bad stuff as B, but with an additional stability hit.)

One thing that I would like to see included is in the description state what this choice could possibly lead to in the future (i.e., if it will eventually lead Frace to be friends with Austria or enemies with Austria, etc...), as well as state what the historic choice actually was. Some people may take historic hits to follow or veer from following a historic eventual downfall (i.e., take a immediate hit to avoid a prolonged or later suffering). Basically, a lot of events could be based around thinking of the present vs. thinking of the future.

Generally the A choice is the historical path, because the AI countries pick A somewhere in excess of 85% of the time (how much depends on who you ask and how many options there are).

Has anything been decided on the scale of the events?

Should it be on a scale where only country-changing events are included, or should we delve into each time Potemkin enjoyed (the "company" of) his nieces?