Exactly, that's why we're keeping it fresh by adding new interesting options to choose from!
Or do you not like interesting choices either?
- 27
- 3
- 1
Comet sighted event..
- Thread starter Sandmann
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Exactly, that's why we're keeping it fresh by adding new interesting options to choose from!
Or do you not like interesting choices either?
Frankly, I think that the entire event system should tend towards being removed (that is to say, it should gradually be replaced by more specific systems).
- 6
- 1
I would like the new choice to be -2 stab.
For when I have -2/3 stab already and I don't care!
For when I have -2/3 stab already and I don't care!
- 3
I'm sure the whole many events for comets thing will eventually get old and be replaced... in EU5. Don't quote me on this!
(*fastforward 6 years* in EU5 dev diary):
"We are proud to present over 50 dynamic options for losing a stability point in Comet Sighted!"
- 2
I think the event system should be made to be more transparent and customizable.
A UI screen that lists all possible events for each type of pulse with the requirements and chances for them to happen, and the modifiers for those chances. So we don't have to dig through the damn defines.
Then you add some player interaction to the event system, like being able to disable or reduce the chance of a limited number of bad events, or boost the chances of some good events. Limited by some number of new "event points", or paid for with monarch points.
That way it becomes less frustrating and a little more controllable. It should still be pretty random but with some input from the player so he can play the odds.
- 3
- 1
I thought of that as well, but I think that the number of events possible might make such interface hard to display.
I would love if the comet sighting was truly a global event, where if one country has it. EVERYONE has it as well (or at least everyone on the same continent).
- 2
There are two things I hate about events. After the first few times you've read them your choice is no longer based on what you would do but what is the best game option.
For example, I'd like the ability for nobility to be bought but unless I'm at +3, the stab boost in all but extreme cases is a far better option. Though I like to think as a joke that 'nobility cannot be bought because it doesn't exist
'. What are you, a communist?
Many events are like this which does not increase choice or variety. It's just glance at the text/whatever pick the no brainer option, whether it's what you as a ruler would do realistically or not. Some you do have to think about em either from a gameplay stand point of an immersion one but it's rare.
The other thing is the fact you can get similar or even the exact same event multiple times within a short period. Events are supposed to somewhat represent the goings on in your empire that simply can't be represented in a suitable fashion but when these events basically contradict one another or it's as if a previous event never happened it even further removes the point in caring about these events. Most events (though sure not all) are just there, they don't really have soul or anything both from a game play and an immersion stand point.
For example, I'd like the ability for nobility to be bought but unless I'm at +3, the stab boost in all but extreme cases is a far better option. Though I like to think as a joke that 'nobility cannot be bought because it doesn't exist
'. What are you, a communist?Many events are like this which does not increase choice or variety. It's just glance at the text/whatever pick the no brainer option, whether it's what you as a ruler would do realistically or not. Some you do have to think about em either from a gameplay stand point of an immersion one but it's rare.
The other thing is the fact you can get similar or even the exact same event multiple times within a short period. Events are supposed to somewhat represent the goings on in your empire that simply can't be represented in a suitable fashion but when these events basically contradict one another or it's as if a previous event never happened it even further removes the point in caring about these events. Most events (though sure not all) are just there, they don't really have soul or anything both from a game play and an immersion stand point.
- 3
- 1
I concur. A subsystem for comet sightings should be TOP PRIORITY for the next DLC. It's frankly ridiculous that they've relied on the dumb old event system to represent them for this long.
- 5
- 1
Instead, I am more concerned about the rework of the stability system to make it more interesting. Improving stability simply by spending adm power is not fun at all.
- 1
Hehe glad to see some older fans are still sticking around
On topic: I agree with some of the guys here that the pulse event system feels really outdated today - after all it has been around (though slightly changed) since EU2. As someone here said, I don't actually read any of the event descriptions, I just mouse over the outcomes and chose the most logical one. Actually most of the events I no longer even mouse over, because I have seen them SO many times that I know already what outcome I want to choose.
- 4
Sure if i was playing eu once every 2 months the joke would be fresh and funny, unfortunatly i get the comet often enough that its about as fresh as a herring left in sun for 3 weeks.(and as appetizing)
Events are, generally speaking, bad. They are something you learn to live with as a player, but they never really add to the enjoyment of the game. My first EU experience was in EU3, and I save-scummed every single bad event for the entire campaign just because of how annoying it was to be slammed with random effects like that for no discernible reason. I stopped doing this, but only because doing that much save-reloading was killing my desire to continue playing at all.
Specifically in EU4, events have the following design problems:
1. Many events are conditional upon doing things like having certain religions or idea groups. Because event lists are hidden, that makes many consequences of your decisions unknown and invisible until you have memorized the events or if you are cross-referencing master event lists on wiki guides. This is the worst kind of guide-dang-it problem.
2. Related to the above, event balance is kind of all over the place. Some events are so powerful that having access to them can influence your decision-making regarding choosing an entire idea group. Others are so painful that if you're not aware of them before you meet their conditions for appearing, you can pretty quickly nosedive your entire campaign (westernizing, over-extension). This just adds more punishment suffered exclusively by beginners, sharpening the learning curve and reducing enjoyment of your first few games.
3. You have no control over the majority of events. They are completely random. You might get several good bonuses back-to-back, or you might get several successive slams so severe it brings your nation to its knees. This is sensible for a simulation, but it's terrible as a game mechanic.
4. Many events, generally speaking, serve as a replacement for a layer or two of gameplay. Models of internal politics, dynasty relations, and most of your infrastructure and even legal system are either extremely shallow or, more commonly, nonexistent. Effects that should come from decisions made within such a layer instead play out randomly through events. Consequence-driven mechanics are the hallmark of strategic gameplay; randomness is the hallmark of gambling games.
5. Events interrupt gameplay. You must immediately stop whatever it is you are doing and deal with what is essentially a pop-up ad that comes with free MP loss / stability hits / year-long income penalties. Even if it gives a bonus, I'd rather it not be there at all; your product might be fantastic for me, but I still don't want you throwing pop-up ads at me!
6. There are many negative events, which can be major fun-killers. It's better to weaken nations in general and have only positive events than have the current baseline with both positive and negative events. The Civilization designers discovered this when they tried to add periods of decline to Civ. It playtested very poorly. They inverted the mechanic to Golden Ages, which playtested very well, and now it's a staple of the series.
Essentially, everything that events model should be replaced by a system that I as a player must seek out and interact with purposefully, and the resulting effects should be consequences of my decisions. Off the top of my head I can envision skeletal structures for three or four fairly simple management systems that would eliminate some 90% or so of the events in the game. I'm quite confident the pros at Paradox can do the same, but they must first decide that events are in fact a poor system that could use a total replacement.
Specifically in EU4, events have the following design problems:
1. Many events are conditional upon doing things like having certain religions or idea groups. Because event lists are hidden, that makes many consequences of your decisions unknown and invisible until you have memorized the events or if you are cross-referencing master event lists on wiki guides. This is the worst kind of guide-dang-it problem.
2. Related to the above, event balance is kind of all over the place. Some events are so powerful that having access to them can influence your decision-making regarding choosing an entire idea group. Others are so painful that if you're not aware of them before you meet their conditions for appearing, you can pretty quickly nosedive your entire campaign (westernizing, over-extension). This just adds more punishment suffered exclusively by beginners, sharpening the learning curve and reducing enjoyment of your first few games.
3. You have no control over the majority of events. They are completely random. You might get several good bonuses back-to-back, or you might get several successive slams so severe it brings your nation to its knees. This is sensible for a simulation, but it's terrible as a game mechanic.
4. Many events, generally speaking, serve as a replacement for a layer or two of gameplay. Models of internal politics, dynasty relations, and most of your infrastructure and even legal system are either extremely shallow or, more commonly, nonexistent. Effects that should come from decisions made within such a layer instead play out randomly through events. Consequence-driven mechanics are the hallmark of strategic gameplay; randomness is the hallmark of gambling games.
5. Events interrupt gameplay. You must immediately stop whatever it is you are doing and deal with what is essentially a pop-up ad that comes with free MP loss / stability hits / year-long income penalties. Even if it gives a bonus, I'd rather it not be there at all; your product might be fantastic for me, but I still don't want you throwing pop-up ads at me!
6. There are many negative events, which can be major fun-killers. It's better to weaken nations in general and have only positive events than have the current baseline with both positive and negative events. The Civilization designers discovered this when they tried to add periods of decline to Civ. It playtested very poorly. They inverted the mechanic to Golden Ages, which playtested very well, and now it's a staple of the series.
Essentially, everything that events model should be replaced by a system that I as a player must seek out and interact with purposefully, and the resulting effects should be consequences of my decisions. Off the top of my head I can envision skeletal structures for three or four fairly simple management systems that would eliminate some 90% or so of the events in the game. I'm quite confident the pros at Paradox can do the same, but they must first decide that events are in fact a poor system that could use a total replacement.
- 6
- 6
- 1
"With all the meteor activity in this system, it's going to be difficult to spot approaching ships."
- 1
This is where ck2 has a nice touch. Sure the predictivility of eu4 is useful in these cases but it leads to this situation and basically boredom or frustration with some events. I'd like a few events with % chance outcomes to make me stop and read and add a spice of variety in some otherwise mundane choices.Hehe glad to see some older fans are still sticking around
On topic: I agree with some of the guys here that the pulse event system feels really outdated today - after all it has been around (though slightly changed) since EU2. As someone here said, I don't actually read any of the event descriptions, I just mouse over the outcomes and chose the most logical one. Actually most of the events I no longer even mouse over, because I have seen them SO many times that I know already what outcome I want to choose.
If events are having such a large effect on you that you feel the need to dig through event files so as to dodge them you should probably consider refining your play style first.
- 1
Agreed, although this could be mostly solved by adding a list of available events somewhere in the UI. Kind of like Civ games have the Civilopedia, there needs to be more information about the game directly available. The events could be grouped in "can happen", "can happen if you do something" (grouped by things you need to do) and "shouldn't happen to you" (e.g. dynastic events when you're a Republic).
Agreed. I think roughly the worst you should get is -1 stab and the best you should get is +1 stab (or maybe a choice between +1 stab and something way less good for when you're sitting at 3 stab, but even in that case I'd like the stab bonus to have a cost).
An exception can be made for country specific unique events, because those are interesting, and can be part of the country balance. They just need to be clearly visible from the start. I found it frustrating on my first Venice play to choose to restrict the Ten only to see that unless I paid more (I think -1 stab), I would lose the benefit of the restriction without gaining the benefict of strengthening the Ten.
Not such a bad thing. If events were more balanced, at least. If the game is too predictable it might be stale. And I'll take five comets every day over a regency.
I don't think more variables to play with make this more beginner friendly. Consider how complicated trade is currently.
Also, these sort of things would probably have to be modelled on a per-country, or at least per tech group basis. It can be done more easily by event than by making entirely separate systems for each of them, some of which would necessarily end up quite gimmicky (think Buddhism...).
I think you should have at least the ability to minimize events while you're dealing with them.
Also, events should pause the game and not allow you to unpause until you deal with the event (but still let you minimize it to look at your empire before you make a decision). Although the rebellion events would then basically mean you can't ever reduce the maintenance of your troops.
Negative events can be interesting as long as they present an interesting choice. I like having a choice of damnations (although not too painful: I want to get a challenge, not a 50-year setback). I agree that "-1 stab, no options" is a lot more frustrating. Especially when there is no comet joke.
I'm new to this game, but my impression of this forum seems to be that developpers actually listen to players, so maybe there's hope?
I like this, but only if the new island is the exact size and shape of the sea tile it replaces.
