New Features @ Civ V homepage

AriochIV said:
As far as we know, Happiness is not tracked at all locally. There's no indicator for it on the city screen, only the global indicator on the top bar of the main screen.
Click to expand...

To quote your site:

"Legalism: Reduces unhappiness from population in the Capital by 50%?"

So if you have a SP that reduces unhapiness in a specific city, why not a building that does the same?

But I still doubt this will be the case. It would be so much more difficult to keep track of the happy-status since the cities again would need to be treated individually. An exception to the capital is easier to live with. Having to check the buildings in a city to see how growth will affect happiness seems tedious.
 
I think what means is that the capital is counted as only having 50% of its actual population when it comes to calculating global unhappiness. Not how I first interpreted it, true, but makes a lot of sense.
 
AriochIV said:
As far as we know, Happiness is not tracked at all locally. There's no indicator for it on the city screen, only the global indicator on the top bar of the main screen.
Click to expand...

Yes, but unhappiness is generated locally :)
If we have a building, which allows city to generate only half unhappiness for its population, there will be some difference where to build it.
 
I was looking at the Civ5 website, and think I may have discovered something new.

If you click on the preorder button you get taken to Take2's purchaising website and next to the game cover you have a list of all the warnings about Civ5's content. These are mild language, mild violence and drug references. Comparing with the same warning on Civ4, only violence appears there.

Does this means that illegal drugs exist in Civ5? Possibly as a resource?
 
Windsor said:
It would be so much more difficult to keep track of the happy-status since the cities again would need to be treated individually.
Click to expand...

You'll not need to track individual city happy status. It's just a matter of decision which building to use for happiness. If you have, for example, circus increasing happiness by 3, it doesn't matter where to build it. If you have building which halves unhappiness for the city, it's the same, but bonus depends on the city where it's built.

I think it would add more deep to decisions. I.e. you have 10-level production city (which grows slowly, but builds fast) and 20-level commerce city. For simple happiness buildings there's no choice - you build them in production city. But for unhappiness reduce you'll need to choose between faster build and larger effect.
 
stealth_nsk said:
You'll not need to track individual city happy status. It's just a matter of decision which building to use for happiness. If you have, for example, circus increasing happiness by 3, it doesn't matter where to build it. If you have building which halves unhappiness for the city, it's the same, but bonus depends on the city where it's built.

I think it would add more deep to decisions. I.e. you have 10-level production city (which grows slowly, but builds fast) and 20-level commerce city. For simple happiness buildings there's no choice - you build them in production city. But for unhappiness reduce you'll need to choose between faster build and larger effect.
Click to expand...

Say you have 20 cities and your happy-cap is +5. Normally each pop is -1 happy. Without city-specific building you just have to figure out which cities those new 5 citizens should go into (isn't this by itself kind of micro intensive???). However if growth in different cities also affects the happy-cap differently then you need to remember/check each individual city to see how growth in that particular city is going to affect global happiness.

"hmm is 2 new citizens in that city with 50% multiplier worth more than 1 new citizen in that city with 70% multiplier? City A needs 3 turns to grow, city B needs 4 turns to grow. City A will then grow again in 14 turns. *calculate*"

When I think about it this way global happiness actually seems like micro hell to me. Adding a bunch of buildings that affect how the city contributes to unhappiness makes it even worse. Yes, depth is added, but at what cost?
 
Ok, I realize I might have gotten happiness all wrong. Is it the happy cap

a) A sort of "per city cap", just that the cap is the same for all cities. So if you have 15:) as a cap, each city has 15:) to use. If above, that city becomes unhappy, or

b) A global cap. So you might have 40:) which you can distribute across the empire. If unhappy the whole empire is unhappy.
 
Windsor said:
b) A global cap. So you might have 40:) which you can distribute across the empire. If unhappy the whole empire is unhappy.
Click to expand...

Clearly this.
 
Windsor said:
When I think about it this way global happiness actually seems like micro hell to me. Adding a bunch of buildings that affect how the city contributes to unhappiness makes it even worse. Yes, depth is added, but at what cost?
Click to expand...

I don't see it this way. With global happiness you have 1 number - turns before your civ go unhappy. Yes, to calculate this number precisely you need to look at a lot of things, but usually you don't have to - "I'm 5 points before unhappiness and some cities are growing fast, I should consider building something".

Compare this to the old system, there you need to do these calculations per city - even without precise calculations you needed to check all cities' state periodically (with Civ4 it's for both happiness and health). Much more micro for me.
 
Windsor said:
Say you have 20 cities and your happy-cap is +5. Normally each pop is -1 happy. Without city-specific building you just have to figure out which cities those new 5 citizens should go into (isn't this by itself kind of micro intensive???). However if growth in different cities also affects the happy-cap differently then you need to remember/check each individual city to see how growth in that particular city is going to affect global happiness.

"hmm is 2 new citizens in that city with 50% multiplier worth more than 1 new citizen in that city with 70% multiplier? City A needs 3 turns to grow, city B needs 4 turns to grow. City A will then grow again in 14 turns. *calculate*"

When I think about it this way global happiness actually seems like micro hell to me. Adding a bunch of buildings that affect how the city contributes to unhappiness makes it even worse. Yes, depth is added, but at what cost?
Click to expand...

Note that excess happiness accumulates points towards a Golden Age, so it is not wasted and it makes sense in the game to make sure you are always comfortably in the happy zone rather than micromanaging to try to stay just in front of the unhappiness boundary.
 
Lord Olleus said:
I was looking at the Civ5 website, and think I may have discovered something new.

If you click on the preorder button you get taken to Take2's purchaising website and next to the game cover you have a list of all the warnings about Civ5's content. These are mild language, mild violence and drug references. Comparing with the same warning on Civ4, only violence appears there.

Does this means that illegal drugs exist in Civ5? Possibly as a resource?
Click to expand...

maybe that's just a generic content (on the conservative side) since the game isn't released yet.

I doubt there will be any mild language. Are we going to get Monty saying the F word? Unlikely.

drugs could be wine or tobacco. But I doubt tobacco will be in the game. I'm sure the content will be further revised after release.
 
Calouste said:
Note that excess happiness accumulates points towards a Golden Age, so it is not wasted and it makes sense in the game to make sure you are always comfortably in the happy zone rather than micromanaging to try to stay just in front of the unhappiness boundary.
Click to expand...

Good point, I forgot about Golden Ages.
 
Lord Olleus said:
I was looking at the Civ5 website, and think I may have discovered something new.

If you click on the preorder button you get taken to Take2's purchaising website and next to the game cover you have a list of all the warnings about Civ5's content. These are mild language, mild violence and drug references. Comparing with the same warning on Civ4, only violence appears there.

Does this means that illegal drugs exist in Civ5? Possibly as a resource?
Click to expand...

According to the 2K forums, it's a reference to the opium trade in the civilopedia:
http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=937456&postcount=14

ESRB Report said:
This is a strategy game in which players manage a nation from a single settlement to a prominent civilization. Players can develop their nation's culture and technology, manage its economic and social infrastructure (e.g., diplomacy, trade), and expand territory through military conquests. Combat with nations is presented from an overhead perspective, and military units are represented by small armies of soldiers on a gridded map. Battles include brief animations of sword fighting, gun fights, and vehicular combat, resulting in icons exploding, collapsing, or disappearing. Nuclear weapons can be developed and detonated over opposing nation's territories. Historically based text includes descriptions of violence (e.g., assassinations, murders, suicides) and a reference to the opium drug trade (e.g., "where they could engage in extremely profitable business including the infamous opium trade.").
Click to expand...
 
A Library, for example, allows one or two citizens to be assigned to work in the building as Scientist specialists.
Click to expand...

That sounds much like Colonization and I wouldn't mind if it was. We've seen the same in games from Paradox.

Perhaps even trade can be more like it is in Colonization i.e. more important and interesting. Obviously workers can improve trading posts. I don't know what that means but hopefully we can see more of trade in Civ 5. I wouldn't mind something like The Europe screen in Colonization. Transporting goods on ships would make trade routes more vulnerable and open for more sea battles.
 
Yes, but the point is that there was no drug 'warning' for Civ4. So either the regulators are getting stricter about those things, Take2 is taking less chances, or there is more representation for drugs in Civ5 than there was in Civ4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

usadefcon1
Changing the Civ V Music
Replies
12
Views
1K
lordrune
lordrune
Blake00
[Col] New fan Colonization recreation project in development announced!
Replies
9
Views
2K
Blake00
Blake00
Gavran
[Fciv] Sim05 - New Longturn Sim game starting in a week
Replies
1
Views
606
Blake00
Blake00
Aurelesk
Unit comparison between Civilization V and VI
Replies
17
Views
2K
Boris Gudenuf
Boris Gudenuf
Blake00
Theocracy (new Civ 1 & 2 like 4X indie game)
Replies
10
Views
3K
GPR
GPR
Top Bottom