the earhtquakes are just really annoying aint they?

stupid suggestion

i really had to hold back not to post a sarcastic reply...

We should add ciclones and storms while we are at it

we have drought so no need to have more food loss events.

Why is it a stupid suggestion?

Does it really even add any more depth to the game? The only thing i see it doing is making me tech the wrong amount because i didnt realise an earthquake happened.

It adds a depth, you need to look more carefully now :p

*looks more carefully*

eq should have chance to blow up some of our missiles, that'd would be great.

Not really

Silos are made capable to stand bomb drops and your run of the mild storms, tornado, quakes... A huge earthquake would disable the launch instalations at best.

Chaos, I like your faith in our infrastructure design, however the nuclear power plants in Japan were also built to resist earthquakes and you see how that turned out. The Japan earthquake actually has us re-examining the basis of plate techtonics as we didn't believe such a large earthquake could occur. The earth's crust had a 2m realignment and the axis had a detectable 'permanent' shift. Whatever we can design, nature can destroy.

Thinking about this, you could expand this part of the game some. People can pay double construction costs to build earthquake-resistant buildings, which would not be subject to destruction in an earthquake or at least at a reduced rate.

Well yeah, but the failure in Japan was that the generators were in a stupid place. It wasn't something unforeseeable.

id support no earth quakes

why is "c.r.a.p." in the title and what does it stand for?

the solution Mapleson brings forward sounds like a difficult mechanic to add and it would make the building process more difficult/confusing.

but as a longtime player, I'd like to have that option if it was balanced properly :p

i'd support getting rid of earthquakes and all the other random events. they're mostly just an annoyance and don't provide any strategy

Agree with Bakku

theres no consistency and losing a couple of hundred buildings takes like 3-4 turns to rebuild


cant we get a vote site or something for some of these Bug stuffs :)

most i have lost on this set has been 248 or 268 so 2 turns rebuild due 120bpt.

Earthquakes hurt big people with low bpt more. i landtraded to fifty k with sixty bpt and one random earthquake meant roughly half a days lost growth

EQ destroying missiles is cool.

I agree, get rid of them. They detract from the rest of the game

today i lost 367 buildings on 80bpt country.

while i dislike eqs those bring more randomness to game.

i suggest adding bonus which prevents random things (earthquakes, food/oil booms/opposite, indy boom/opposite, etc) to happen.

Again

Change EQs to this

EQ already have a % of possible damage they can do.

So based in this change the message to

Tornado destroy's xx buildings
Hurricane
Flood
EQ
Meteor

The argument is that these random events (taxes, droughts, earthquakes, strikes) don't add any value or strategy to the game at all.

We used to build 1 building of each type of land to spread out earthquake damage in the past, that at least had arguable "strategy value", but now this is gone too. There is no inherent value of it remaining other than to "oh a drought, ok, lets move on", since you cannot do anything about it.

Pray the game gods?

There isn't much a country can do to deter natural disasters either...

Maybe we can add a new technology called dissaster responce, with reduces the damage done by random events by a great % :)

Let's say all EQ destroy 8% of the land and 2% of the CS, disaster technology can reduce that to 1.6% of total land and 0.4% of CS.