Is "We Love the King Day" more of a penalty than a bonus?

Minor Annoyance said:

Yeah, there are times where there is something good that is inconvenient to have at a certain time, but that's not what you said. You said more of a penalty. Implying at least half the time it's bad.

Click to expand...

I don't believe I said this at all:

I will agree with the OP and say that "We Love the King Day" can sometimes be a problem.

Most often, it is an issue when I am planning to conquer additional cities.

Click to expand...

I believe the OP seemed to think it was more of a penalty. I agreed that it can sometimes be a problem (I'm not the OP BTW).

I think it's occasionally a problem in normal games. It comes up a lot more often when you are warmongering with a puppet empire.

Even if you exclusively play building wide empires and are always keeping your cities small, in a given game you're not going to be in WLTKD all that often. If we assume people play tall vs. wide 50/50 and playing tall it's good almost all of the time and wide it's sometimes bad if in the specific situation where you can't control it, then it's still good more often that it's bad.

Click to expand...

I think it's quite easy to get WLTKD. I get it all the time.

You can get it on purpose by allying a city state with that resource or intentionally trade for that resource with an AI.

If you trade the last copy of your luxury to an AI, your cities will sometimes demand it, meaning you get it as soon as the trade deal lapses.

When you have most of the luxuries already, all your cities will want one or two of the same luxuries. When you have all of the luxuries, your cities are perpetually in a WLTKD state.

So if it seems like it's a more of a penalty than a bonus, that is just one of the specific quirks of either they way you play or the circumstances you're been in.

Click to expand...

I think it's normally much more of a bonus than a penalty. I never said it was a penalty more often than a bonus. I do think people are underestimating how problematic it can occasionally be (though I still think it is infrequent).

But there are circumstances (much more common when warmongering or puppeting) when it becomes a real hindrance.

Your results are not typical.

Click to expand...

::shrugs::

I've had to do lots of happiness management with:

- Mongolian Scenario where you have to take out every civilization

- Fall of Rome (Western or Eastern Rome, especially if you take out Barbarian/Sassanid cities)

- Into the Renaissance (with multiple civs), especially if you take over two or more other civs

- GOTM when the favored victory condition is Domination.

Of course I almost never spent a turn in -10 or worse unhappiness, which apparently *is not* typical based on the posts in this thread. Sounds like most people just weather through the storms of massive unhappiness!

EDIT: Also, not being able to control a puppet cities growth is specifically the disadvantage it's supposed to have. So this situation where WLTKD is a disadvantage or anything where a puppet doesn't do what you want it to do is working exactly as intended.

Click to expand...

It is likely true that puppet cities were intentionally designed that way. But that doesn't mean WLTKD can't be a disadvantage in those circumstances. Similarly, Farms are usually a good thing, yet lots of people hate seeing a plethora of Farms near puppet cities.

As another example, France's UA is generally a good thing (obviously) but there may be rare situations where you actually don't want the +2 culture/city a turn. (Say vanilla with no policy saving, where you want to delay your policy picks as long as possible until you hit the Renaissance).

Others complain that the Mayans' UA makes Great Person points largely useless, even though that seems to be an intentional design decision.

Halcyan2 said:

It is likely true that puppet cities were intentionally designed that way. But that doesn't mean WLTKD can't be a disadvantage in those circumstances.

Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. It is a disadvantage, and it is intended that way. Puppet's up side is you don't increase culture cost. The down side is you can't control them. That is the whole game. You make choices with consequences. You chose to capture a city and not to annex it you get run away population/building etc. If you don't like the results choose something else.

Seacrest out.

Minor Annoyance said:

That's what I'm saying. It is a disadvantage, and it is intended that way. Puppet's up side is you don't increase culture cost. The down side is you can't control them. That is the whole game. You make choices with consequences. You chose to capture a city and not to annex it you get run away population/building etc. If you don't like the results choose something else.

Seacrest out.

Click to expand...

And I'm agreeing with you on this particular point, so you can get off your soapbox and nix the condescending tone.