Auto-Build, Luxury Resources, and Quality of Life

I have noticed this a lot more in recent versions of C2C, but it seems that there are many luxury resource making buildings in the game that I think are a tad redundant in their function. It is quite nice to have things like “Fireworks Maker”, “Candle Maker”, or “Fish Oil Maker”, but after a while I tend to see these as “+1 maker”, which detracts from the uniqueness and fun of it.

Most of these buildings are Hydro’s, and so I do not want to step on his toes and ask for them all to be removed. There are other compelling reasons to not see these buildings removed however as well. First of all, C2C always prides itself on being the biggest mod, and removing content doesn’t help that. These buildings are also crucial in maintaining the current balance. Also, I think that there is a way to make these buildings useful in another fashion, which is the main point of this post.

This new idea is based on the Quality of Life that your citizens enjoy in your civ. This is based on simple things like how much they have to eat and drink, as well as more abstract things like how much stuff they have. So what I propose to do is have Quality of Life be an invisible (AIAndy said that would be easy to make possible) property that is calculated through complex rules linked to luxury buildings and resources, farms and mines, food surpluses/deficits, and other game factors. I then would suggest that all Luxury resource buildings require certain map resources, and be made to Auto-Build. This would greatly change the game dynamic in what I feel would be a positive manner.

The fact that the property is invisible means that it will feel more organic in-game. You won’t see Quality of Life in a list in the properties tab on the city screen, but it will be there, and you certainly will see its effects. A high Quality of Life means that you will have happier and healthier citizens who will make things faster, while a low Quality of Life means that you will have angry and unhealthy citizens who will want to revolt against you. The twist here compared to other properties is that you won’t be able to do anything directly to affect the Quality of Life. You can only affect it indirectly by getting resources (either by trade or by satisfying the Luxury Resource buildings’ Auto-Build prerequisites), or doing something else ‘good’ for your populace.

Ideally this would be balanced to make it hard to get the good stuff from Quality of Life, and easy to get unhappiness, which is something that isn’t really balanced in the current state of affairs. I would also like to get a handle somehow on what exactly various REV values mean. I know that understanding the system is a pain that we don’t want to go through, but at least finding what constitutes dangerous values are for each REV category would be nice.

The other major benefit I see in this system is that it allows the multiplicity of luxury resources and buildings to be more fun to play with. In this system instead of saying ‘Oh great, another +1 maker” you would have to strategically expand and place cities so that vicinity and bonus requirements (which would hopefully be more unique) are met for different luxuries if you want to be successful. It would also reduce the time spent deciding what to build when you have hundreds of options, as many of those will now come automatically.

What does everyone think about this? I could easily see it getting done this cycle as there is very little new code that is needed (only property visibility OTOH), and most of it is XML stuff for the Property and Hydro's buildings.

Interesting ideas. I was think about this too. Specifically in the Sim City terms of "Land Value" and/or "Mayor Approval". Meaning that all these luxury things make it more appealing. However I am not sure how well it will "jive" with existing properties like , and .

In addition I think some of the other properties should possibly be added such as ...

- Jobs/Workers
- Structural Integrity - Similar to Flammability (Note this is from Pharaoh and not Sim City)
- Education Level - Different from science.
- Electricity - Straight forward power vs consumption.
- Garbage/Sewage - Possibly separate properties. Leads to disease, air and water pollution.

I had few more but these are the main ones that have been floating around in my head ever since Flammability was put in.

Hydromancerx said:

Interesting ideas. I was think about this too. Specifically in the Sim City terms of "Land Value". Meaning that all these luxury things make it more appealing. However I am not sure how well it will "jive" with existing properties like , and .

Click to expand...

It shouldn't be a problem. The only building I'm planning on targeting with this are the ones which are simply +1 or production makers, not other more complex buildings. The Quality of Life property wouldn't really interact under my current plan with GPP or .

I'm not sure about invisible properties. How would their effects manifest? Presumably through property-enabled pseudo-buildings (like crimes or diseases are)? If so the net effect would be things popping in and out of existence with no apparent cause and (more importantly) no way to control them. That would just make them effectively random environmental factors that would ([presumably?) tend to get better as your tech improves. Not sure this is good for gameplay.

Koshling said:

I'm not sure about invisible properties. How would their effects manifest? Presumably through property-enabled pseudo-buildings (like crimes or diseases are)? If so the net effect would be things popping in and out of existence with no apparent cause and (more importantly) no way to control them. That would just make them effectively random environmental factors that would ([presumably?) tend to get better as your tech improves. Not sure this is good for gameplay.

Click to expand...

Same way as current properties. They would function exactly the same as normal properties, they just wouldn't get displayed (and neither would their pesudo-buildings).

As for controlling them it wouldn't be random by any means. The thresholds can (I believe with teh Expression System) be scaled so that they aren't crushing in the Prehistoric Era or useless in the Modern era. There would be some tight balancing there but nothing that we can't figure out with some math.

Bad properties could be invisible properties also, like a minus to health, crime, or unhappiness to buildings. They could only be visible once a certain technology was reached, and in things like wells, only after they were less useful.

Health and unhappiness didn't really factor into the civilization ruling decision making equation until a certain time anyway. You could keep them hidden to encourage people to use the buildings.
It's all about visibility.

You won't not build a well, when the water access is more important than the health issues it brings. The fact that water brings health issues really is noticed until the middle ages, I believe. And even then in degrees.

Not every building should have trade-offs, and the usefulness of different buildings could fluctuate with eras, civics, and tech changes.
Some factors should be hidden until the tech is discovered to be able to peer behind the curtain of OZ.

I don't like the idea of invisible properties. It strikes me as possibly being one more reason a new player might rage-quit. That is, if something they cannot see, and more importantly, cannot affect is ruining their game and they don't know about it, their personal morale will suffer.

I think what Koshling meant by "random factors" is that from the player's perspective they could seem random and probably would until/unless they find out about this property.

Not having the property itself be visible is one thing, but also hiding the buildings seems malicious. At least have them show in the tab with the crimes, housing, etc so that the player can have some clue of what is going on.

Koshling said:

I'm not sure about invisible properties. How would their effects manifest? Presumably through property-enabled pseudo-buildings (like crimes or diseases are)? If so the net effect would be things popping in and out of existence with no apparent cause and (more importantly) no way to control them. That would just make them effectively random environmental factors that would ([presumably?) tend to get better as your tech improves. Not sure this is good for gameplay.

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't think it would be good for a property to be invisible.

Hydromancerx said:

Yeah I don't think it would be good for a property to be invisible.

Click to expand...

OK, I'll conceed that one.

@ls612

I have also been thinking about inverse crime and pollution. Such as bonus "perks" if you get your "crime" and "pollution" into the negative range. Such as "Fresh Air" gives you health and a "Safe City" gives more production, science, health and/or happiness.

This would also mean since cities usually tart out with extremely low pollution that they would be healthier at the start. Possibly simulating the closer relationship to the land.

Hydromancerx said:

@ls612

I have also been thinking about inverse crime and pollution. Such as bonus "perks" if you get your "crime" and "pollution" into the negative range. Such as "Fresh Air" gives you health and a "Safe City" gives more production, science, health and/or happiness.

Click to expand...

That has some potential as auto-built buildings, I'll agree. It may help pay off the investment in anti-crime forces your civ makes.

If we are to implement Quality of Life, that will mean that every Luxury resource maker will need to have some combination of resource, building, civic, vicinity, or other requirement. If you want I can come up with a list (or if you already have one that is fine too).

Feel free to post a list. We can brainstorm as we go. That's what these types of discussions are for.

MagnusIlluminus said:

I don't like the idea of invisible properties. It strikes me as possibly being one more reason a new player might rage-quit. That is, if something they cannot see, and more importantly, cannot affect is ruining their game and they don't know about it, their personal morale will suffer.

Click to expand...

I totally agree with this. It would also be great to have more transparent player awareness about disease/crime etc. Similar to how bad amounts of and are displayed as icons on the city.

Back to the main topic... I don't really agree with the necessity of a luxury of life property personally but if it would cut down on the insane amount of buildings there are by auto building them then I'm am allllllll for it. Personally I'd rather see the buildings trimmed down altogether but whatevs.

Very similar idea to mine people demands that should manifest as autobuildable buildings with negative effects triggered by tech progress. I don't want another property. Even now I don't care about pollution and flammable

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=480331

I don't even remembered that players like it.

Anything that includes auto-building some of the minor buildings is a plus in my book. I hate having 3-4 rows of stuff to build everytime i start a new city

makotech222 said:

Anything that includes auto-building some of the minor buildings is a plus in my book. I hate having 3-4 rows of stuff to build everytime i start a new city

Click to expand...

One of the priorities I think we should concentrate on for v30 is sorting out both the era start (ie what buildings are free in all cities when you start after the prehistoric game) and free at tech (ie what buildings are free in new cities after you get tech X). I think these two things will help a lot with the problem you describe.

Nimek said:

Very similar idea to mine people demands that should manifest as autobuildable buildings with negative effects triggered by tech progress. I don't want another property. Even now I don't care about pollution and flammable

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=480331

I don't even remembered that players like it.

Click to expand...

I had a different take to Nimek but would prefer a demand style "property" something that says this city really needs building X. As long as it does not make the mistake that Civ makes of saying that a luxury is a luxury forever. Sandals may be a luxury in prehistoric times but shoes are mostly a necessity now.

We have a whole heap of hidden properties already in Civ - GDP, life expectancy, literacy to name a few. Do we need more.

Edit I almost had fuel gauge bars for crime etc on the city screen rather than hidden behind a tap on the resource box. I even had one tipping point worked out for crime - "any crime is fine but you must get it below 75 before you get currency or your economy will suffer".

Dancing Hoskuld said:

One of the priorities I think we should concentrate on for v30 is sorting out both the era start (ie what buildings are free in all cities when you start after the prehistoric game) and free at tech (ie what buildings are free in new cities after you get tech X). I think these two things will help a lot with the problem you describe.

Click to expand...

I also want to have some more Guilds and add Franchises and/or Unions for Industrial/Modern national wonders that give free buildings to every city. I also need to work out some other buildings to obsolete older ones (ex. Sail Factory to replace the Sail Weaver).

I like the idea, but I'd like to suggest that rather than being tied purely to tech/resources, auto-buildings are also tied heavily to city size.

I would also like to suggest that tribes/settlers require a minimum city size to build, and reduce the population when they are completed.

My idea with this is that it will lower the emphasis on expanding as quickly as you possibly can (to the point where the map is usually close to full by the end of the prehistoric). As it stands, the faster you expand, the more money you make, and the faster you research.

Under my suggestion, when you build a tribe/settler, you will have to give up a bunch of nice auto-buildings, and your tech rate (and possibly other nice bonuses given by auto-buildings) will suffer until the city recovers. As the game goes on, and cities grow faster, this becomes less of an issue, so people will still want to expand, just maybe not as fast.

HTAPAWASO said:

I like the idea, but I'd like to suggest that rather than being tied purely to tech/resources, auto-buildings are also tied heavily to city size.

I would also like to suggest that tribes/settlers require a minimum city size to build, and reduce the population when they are completed.

My idea with this is that it will lower the emphasis on expanding as quickly as you possibly can (to the point where the map is usually close to full by the end of the prehistoric). As it stands, the faster you expand, the more money you make, and the faster you research.

Under my suggestion, when you build a tribe/settler, you will have to give up a bunch of nice auto-buildings, and your tech rate (and possibly other nice bonuses given by auto-buildings) will suffer until the city recovers. As the game goes on, and cities grow faster, this becomes less of an issue, so people will still want to expand, just maybe not as fast.

Click to expand...

Disagree, not needed. We already have several forms of this. And type and size of map plus # of starting players All influence this too.

JosEPh

I posted this in the balance thread earlier today before reading this thread along with my thoughts on slaves and slave market.
~
The mod should consider further extending the 'auto-building' of a lot more buildings. Similar to the housing line and such? On that point, i'm still of the opinion that there are too many small buildings with small benefits, I know this is a tired argument from a long time past but as more and more buildings get added so too does the need for a bit of a clean out become more needed. Perhaps rather than simply removing some of the buildings, could they just become gateway buildings instead? As in they are prerequisite buildings for certain buildings but don't actually give any benefit apart from allowing the construction of the said building. +1 +1 buildings don't add anything to the gameplay apart from putting additional strain on balance, thats my humble opinion.