New strategy: Ignore happiness

Dunno if this was already suggested, but perhaps, in extreme unhappiness, your border cities start culture flipping. This kills the strategy of depressed conquests (since you're losing at home while you take abroad), prevents a death spiral by having an automatic way back to happiness (or at least less debilitating unhappiness), and keeps flavor - if a city's that angry, they can join another civ instead.

The first issue that comes to mind is a flip-flopping city between two massively unhappy empires, but I don't think the AI runs in deep unhappiness, so it's not an issue there. It might be weird in multiplayer, but if another player sees a civ's cities flipping culture, it's a sign of weakness and a good invitation to conquer/raze them.
 
Why can't it just have the same effect as starvation. No food is same as no happiness in game. Explanation = citizen suicided from depression. Girlfriend left him and he got fired, then this whole war with Rome thing *pull trigger*. One less unhappy face. Soon, your empire will stabilize and you were better off without them.
 
When we are at this...
Is AI using same rules as player regarding this?

I've seen in my game massive AI empires with dozen and dozen of cities, which if I owned would never be able to make happy. Yes, I know there are some bonuses at higher diff. levels, but I think it's only 10% happiness on King. Yet still, if I declare war on them I don't see any combat penalty for their units. Also, they do have more recently found cities, something that would be impossible if they are very unhappy.

Anyway, unhappiness is a factor which is supposed to prevent player from over expanding. Yet, it does not prevent AI to do so, nor it seems they get penalties for doing so.


P.S.
Is there any cheat or way to see happiness rating of other civs?
 
Well more importantly, the AI gets bonuses to production+maintenance, most cities are capable of 'paying for themselves' happiness wise... it just takes time.

And citizens "Starving" would be reasonable too

ie change it so that
Instead of Excess being added to the Food Box, -1 is added to the Food box of every city, every turn. (eventually they start suiciding/emigrating/running away to the circus/becoming barbarian... just not having kids and dying of old age, etc.)
Settlers can't be built.

That would make it a hard cap. (you can go over it for a bit, but eventually the starvation starts.)

I prefer the 'conquered cities stay in resistance but still charge you maintenance' since then the new conquests are the ones that are 'losing productivity'
 
-1 food per city for any unhappiness? That seems a bit harsh, imo.

BTW, the AI does get unhappiness penalties. I've seen Augustus with the -33 listed. That plus artillery is the only reason he couldn't steamroll me like he did everyone else.
 
Louis XXIV said:
-1 food per city for any unhappiness? That seems a bit harsh, imo.

BTW, the AI does get unhappiness penalties. I've seen Augustus with the -33 listed. That plus artillery is the only reason he couldn't steamroll me like he did everyone else.
Click to expand...

It isn't harsh though. Usually you're at a food surplus and you can absorb some unhappiness. This is just a relative cap on expansion. Also, it makes happiness meaningful when negative.
 
Perhaps have unhappy citizens cause rioting which damages tile improvements? The chance of it happening increasing for each unhappy face.
So your trading posts are constantly trashed if you try this strategy, but the penalty isn't too great if you're in neg happiness temporarily or only slightly.
 
Actually, I think I have a better idea.

Make Puppets worthless...
Make them produce 0 Gold, Science, Culture, Happiness, or GPP points, no Gold from Puppet Trade Routes
BUT
Make them not charge Building Maintenance OR Unhappiness (or Social Policy Cost increases)


So that ALL you get with a puppet is the Territory... and That's it.
So Raze... Bonus=none (except enemy loses it), penalty=none
Puppet.... Bonus=Territory, Penalty=Improvement Costs
Annex.... Bonus=Territory+Productivity+Control+Trade Route, Penalty=All Maintenance Costs, Unhappiness


THEN....
-10 Unhappiness=>
no city growth, no settler production... No Annexing allowed

So that way
1. Puppets can't be eaily abused
2. No one can get more than 10 unhappiness (at least not Much More)... it is a hard cap on your production.


And then give Puppet cities a -50% for combat against their original owners. (or some bonus like that... to allow the original owners to return easily) (ie in 2 range of a Puppet city that you originally owned counts as friendly territory)
 
ShaqFu said:
Then what curbs growth?
Click to expand...

The other Civs, like it was in Civ III. You grow too fast you don't have a military and don't have time to build wonders and can't improve your land fast enough so the others civs can come and take your cities. However with cities being as strong as they are early setter spam would be less risky, but you still wouldn't be able to improve your land and after your early expansion you would be stagnant for a while.
 
No the current system is Much Better, it is just Incomplete.

You need to be unable to add productive population at -10 unhappiness.

Simple
Make Puppets unproductive, not adding Unhappiness
Make Annexing unallowed at -10 unhappiness (like City Growth and Settler building)
 
Krikkitone said:
No the current system is Much Better, it is just Incomplete.

You need to be unable to add productive population at -10 unhappiness.

Simple
Make Puppets unproductive, not adding Unhappiness
Make Annexing unallowed at -10 unhappiness (like City Growth and Settler building)
Click to expand...

This doesn't solve buying units and still being able to produce military in your original production cities.
 
WeaselSlapper said:
This doesn't solve buying units and still being able to produce military in your original production cities.
Click to expand...

The puppet cities shouldn't give any Gold/Science/Either.

Essentially reaching the Happy Cap should mean you can't Increase your productive population.

THe Puppets would just be Territory... no Gold to buy units with, no Science to get better techs, no Culture for better SPs, no Great Persons, all of that has to come from your Original/Annexed Cities.
 
Make Puppets worthless...
Make them produce 0 Gold, Science, Culture, Happiness, or GPP points, no Gold from Puppet Trade Routes
Click to expand...
Eh, I think thats a bit too harsh.
There are other less draconian measures.

Find other ways to weaken puppets, and bump up the penalties for negative unhappiness.

Best fix? Put happiness back like it was in civ 4.
Click to expand...
How does that fix anything? That would make the problem worse; no matter how many cities you conquer, your core cities would remain untouched. At least with global happiness going too conquest-mad will degrade your core.
 
WeaselSlapper said:
The other Civs, like it was in Civ III. You grow too fast you don't have a military and don't have time to build wonders and can't improve your land fast enough so the others civs can come and take your cities. However with cities being as strong as they are early setter spam would be less risky, but you still wouldn't be able to improve your land and after your early expansion you would be stagnant for a while.
Click to expand...

So in other words, ICS until someone takes your cities, which is harder now that cities can defend themselves. Given the high cost of Workers over Settlers, it's more efficient to ICS than build improvements at that point - one Settler is worth two worked tiles immediately after settling.

Let's not bring Civ5 into the realm of FreeCiv, please.
 
Krikkitone said:
The puppet cities shouldn't give any Gold/Science/Either.

Essentially reaching the Happy Cap should mean you can't Increase your productive population.

THe Puppets would just be Territory... no Gold to buy units with, no Science to get better techs, no Culture for better SPs, no Great Persons, all of that has to come from your Original/Annexed Cities.
Click to expand...

What i'm saying is the puppets wouldn't be a drain so all the gold and production in your original cities would still allow the buying of units and having puppets just be territory wouldn't hurt a steamrolling military engine at all. In fact the extra land would be a boost because you would gain access or more resources.
 
Um... they need to fix this. A whole part of the game seems to be BETTER LEFT IGNORED.

What do? Add what people do in real life when their happiness is -150 with the government: Revolution (into other civs), Succession (into other civs), Rebellion (City States form) and/or Immigration (Punishing unhappy civs and rewarding prosperous/happy ones).
 
How about making it so any captured city will automatically be razed if you're at or below -10 happiness? This creates the illusion that the conquered population isn't willing to be a part of your empire, so your only choice is to commit genocide.

Considering how lucrative puppet cities are, this is a simple, but incredibly effective fix.

Your own cities will stagnant once you're at -10 unhappiness in the current iteration, so you really only need to worry about conquered cities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
AI Declaring War
Replies
6
Views
572
martindo
M
K
[BNW] I going bankrupt in BC. -25 gold/turn
Replies
5
Views
624
martindo
M
Phosphoraptor
(7-32) New Tenets for Public Works and new projects
2
Replies
32
Views
956
Karlos_BR
Karlos_BR
L
Rise of the Mongols scenario. 50 turn Deity walk through.
Replies
0
Views
2K
lerrocco
L
M
Planting a Great Person
Replies
19
Views
1K
billby
billby
Top Bottom