Are Epidemics going Overboard?

[Liberty Prime]

I just don't get how every other year some disease pops up and infects half my country, and before it even starts to fade, 3 more or so pop up everywhere. I have some counties with slow fever, TB, and consumption at the same time. Is this normal? And even if it is, should it be? I don't like having to lock myself up in my castle for 3/4 of the game just because I don't have thousands of gold to spend on full hospital upgrades for all of my counties, and it probably still wouldn't stop this madness. If it has an effect at all, I have full holdings in most of the counties this is happening in and they are very prosperous, which granted does reduce disease resistance, but I just don't see how -10% disease resistance equates to practically having eternal states of disease. Any tips on how to stop this that aren't that obvious.

[AsuraTheDrunk]

Disease is mostly unavoidable even with a fully upgraded Hospital, the real benefit of hospitals is the protection against depopulation.

That said, after Reaper's due, disease is more or less a non-stop event, it is the middle ages after all.

Also don't always hide in your castle, it comes with alot of drawbacks and while you might wanna do it during a severe sickness, but during minor sicknesses just tough it out and rely on your physician to keep you alive.

[edit]
There are also game rules that can reduce or even eliminate the prolific diseases that come with Reaper's Due

[Taiwan Number One]

They do seem a bit too common. I realize hygiene was basically non-existent in the Middle Ages, but I highly doubt smallpox or slow fever popped up every ohter year.

[Merkatz]

Originally posted by GodOfHeWhoSleepsOnRailroads:

They do seem a bit too common. I realize hygiene was basically non-existent in the Middle Ages, but I highly doubt smallpox or slow fever popped up every ohter year.

This. I like MRs, but lately I haven't played them much because it's dieseases all day everyday. Gets annoying. I don't mind having epidemics, but it seem to happen way too often. Smallpox roles in, and is followed by measels, you get a year of nothing, then consumption shows up. I swear that I've even had overlapping epidemcs.

[Zsrai]

You can turn Diseases down in the Game Rules, and it's still Achievement compatible. You just can't turn them entirely off.

[Liberty Prime]

Hey and don't forget that syphillis is in the game at the year 769 A.D., which is completely ridiculous.

[Merkatz]

Originally posted by butters:

Hey and don't forget that syphillis is in the game at the year 769 A.D., which is completely ridiculous.

Yes, and people 'just contract' it. I've had chaste characters that I know have no secret lovers (I've played them since they were 6) and when they turn 21 (still unmarried) get symptons then full blown 'Great Pox'.

No, their parents didn't have it. Seems like it was put into an RNG list with other dieseases.

[SweatyNeckbeard]

Diseases were common back then. So I feel it's pretty accurate. Life expectancies were short.

The accelerated game time just makes them seem so back to back.

I also think the diseases in game are just another one of those things that make life in the game like real life. Not that we deal with epidemics as much as they do. Unless your in a third world country. It's one of those hardships that come along without warning and you just have to deal with it the best you can. Of course it ruins your plans, but that happens IRL as well. Not everything goes your way according to plan.

I just stick most of them out. The black plague however made me lock myself in my castle to survive. Hospitals do help a lot as long as you spend the considerable amount of money to upgrade them.

[KG]

Standard epidemic settings don't bother me either. You deal with them like people did historically - bury the victims and get on with life.

I'll have to see whether I think the stacking modifiers (coastal + trade route/post + many cities) increase the chance of a plague starting (spreading seems okay) more than I think it should. I haven't really pushed those modifiers as hard as possible (coastal 5-city MR type stuff) since TRD came out. I've come close (India, on a trade route, 3-4 cities) but the stacking might get to be a little much at top end.

[Fredericks of Cursewood]

That new disease "burnt at the stake" is really out of control. It's like every other person has died from it and it only seems to be getting worse. Doctors have found no cure.

[Teralitha]

Disable 'Reapers Due' DLC. One their worst DLC, designed to suck all the fun out of yoru game.

[m.dm]

it seems pretty random to me, some games there is always some epidemic in your kingdom, other games very few epidemics. I've stopped taking mch notice of them.

What i really hate is the really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ event where you are given craven trait because you dont wnat to raise the gates. I mean how the hell is one craven by protecting one's capital city and population from some horrid disease.

[SweatyNeckbeard]

Originally posted by m.dm:

What i really hate is the really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ event where you are given craven trait because you dont wnat to raise the gates. I mean how the hell is one craven by protecting one's capital city and population from some horrid disease.

Because you've locked out all the commoners to save your own noble a$$'s, that's why.

It's a smart move. However the smart choice usually is not the brave choice. Staying away from the fighting during a battle is smart too, but it's not the brave choice.

[KG]

Closing the gates doesn't represent sealing the whole city/county/etc. off - you're just barring the door of your castle or palace. No protection for the peasants.

[m.dm]

Originally posted by Xenophobia:

Originally posted by m.dm:

What i really hate is the really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ event where you are given craven trait because you dont wnat to raise the gates. I mean how the hell is one craven by protecting one's capital city and population from some horrid disease.

Because you've locked out all the commoners to save your own noble a$$'s, that's why.

It's a smart move. However the smart choice usually is not the brave choice. Staying away from the fighting during a battle is smart too, but it's not the brave choice.

That's a good theory but actually plenty of times I have had a king leading troops in battle, only for the craven trait to pop up with the "safer staying at home" event. So in some cases you are screwed no matter what.

[m.dm]

Originally posted by KG:

Closing the gates doesn't represent sealing the whole city/county/etc. off - you're just barring the door of your castle or palace. No protection for the peasants.

then why does the "abandoned commoners" opinion modifier come up after you raised the gates? It makes no sense either you abandoned them by shutting the gates or you did so by closing them.