how happiness should work (and health)

allisinthepass

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
7
So theres been alot of hating on ciV lately. Now i have been a civ player since civ 3 vanilla and naturaly bought ciV expecting great things but also realizing that there would be alot different.

ok so i wont lie that i was somewhat disappointed in some aspects of the game, but i was also very happy with others. So this brings me to my issue with global happiness. Pardon my language, but its :):):):)ing ******ed.

Not the whole concept but more the way its applied. So every time a city grows it get less happy. So by that measure NY would be rioting 24/7. And when u build a Colosseum it affects every other city. Now how does that make sense if i build a theater in NY then LA is more happy...:confused:

Now the way i think it should work is that there should be 2 levels of happiness, a local and empire wide. The empire wide is affected mainly by resources and somewhat by cities and military and the second level should be in cities like civ4. They should be linked together , to many unhappy cities = less happy empire but they should not be the only factors affecting each other. Now this,to me, seem very logical, it is much more realistic and adds a layer of complexity to the game. There could also always be the possibility to select only one, if one chooses too.

Now i think they should bring back health. I know lots of ppl say that its just like happiness but is affected by different aspects. What i would propose is that health should be more important at the beginning of the game and happiness a little less and towards the end game there is more focus on happiness. If u thing back in 2000B.C health was a much greater issue then being happy. i think that would be very interesting to see. health should also be on two levels. So you would have an empire wide average and a city by city. For example if your empire is relatively healthy but you place a city in the desert with no water or food around it, it should thus be more unhealthy.

I think that would add much more complexity to the game and make it more realistic and fun, and i do hope that eventually there is a mod for something like this
 
adds a layer of complexity to the game.

This is exactly what the designers wanted to avoid.

What i would propose is that health should be more important at the beginning of the game and happiness a little less and towards the end game there is more focus on happiness.

This is basically the reverse of civ4.
 
Now this,to me, seem very logical, it is much more realistic and adds a layer of complexity to the game. There could also always be the possibility to select only one, if one chooses too.

I think that would add much more complexity to the game and make it more realistic and fun, and i do hope that eventually there is a mod for something like this

This is exactly what the developers were trying not to do. In their minds, complexity = bad


EDIT: ^Beat me to it
 
This would have been a great idea. No local happiness is silly. Of course, this is just the beta version, maybe they'll improve it in the final release :rolleyes:
 
You could just have normal city-based happiness and then total it all up and provide the aggregate as your 'Empire' happiness, no? That might work.

I too was a huge fan of health. It meant you couldn't Factory up too much and that there was a second limiting factor on growth that you had to worry about (now there's JUST happiness).
 
You could just have normal city-based happiness and then total it all up and provide the aggregate as your 'Empire' happiness, no? That might work.

I too was a huge fan of health. It meant you couldn't Factory up too much and that there was a second limiting factor on growth that you had to worry about (now there's JUST happiness).

Or you could just factory up all the way, and ignore the starvation since you'd still be producing more.
 
Top Bottom