The growth penalty is a flat percentage hit to your food surplus, which equates to the same percentage hit to your growth rate. It ends up feeling very intuitive. Therefore happiness by itself won't cause starvation, but it really hurts the growth rate of all of your cities. The first "unhappy" level is far more than a 20% hit. You really want to keep your citizens !
Somehow I knew it would be something like this. I feel like I'm starting to see the patterns and design ideology the game is using. I bet that starvation also doesn't ever occur somehow. Perhaps lack of food causes unhappiness or something, which slows the growth of other cities. (/wild speculation)
Heck, I'll even be so bold as to suggest that running out of money doesn't randomly destroy your buildings, but has some other obviously bad, but less frustratingly negative effect.
I bet that starvation also doesn't ever occur somehow. Perhaps lack of food causes unhappiness or something, which slows the growth of other cities. (/wild speculation)
Heck, I'll even be so bold as to suggest that running out of money doesn't randomly destroy your buildings, but has some other obviously bad, but less frustratingly negative effect.
Starvation does indeed still exist, but you are correct about running out of money having a different effect. When the gold article comes out on Monday it'll detail what that is
Starvation does indeed still exist, but you are correct about running out of money having a different effect. When the gold article comes out on Monday it'll detail what that is
Building maintenance will lead to more micromanagement to handle an aspect with negative vibes. "Can I afford this building in the long run.... Let me get my City spreadshead to calculate...".
It makes the highly abstracted (and often unfathomable) Civ4 City maintenance cost more explicit, but I don't like it either.
Don't forget that in Civ 5 happines is global, so there still be the tempation of building the collosseum in that small city...
True, good point. But it's also yet another example of how making Happiness global breaks down in terms of intuitive expectations... now we're building a Colloseum in an empty city to increase happiness elsewhere in the empire.Don't forget that in Civ 5 happines is global, so there still be the tempation of building the collosseum in that small city...
True, good point. But it's also yet another example of how making Happiness global breaks down in terms of intuitive expectations... now we're building a Colloseum in an empty city to increase happiness elsewhere in the empire.
Like so many other details of the global Happiness system, it's got a pretty high "WTF" factor.
A modern example like Disneyland doesn't work very well in ancient eras when communication and travel were virtually nonexistent. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, tourism did not exist; the vast majority of people lived and died within a few miles of where they were born. A collosseum in ancient times was a structure for local entertainment.I'm pretty sure people in Boston, or New York, or Washington D.C. are affected by the +happiness bonus that Disneyland, constructed in Anaheim, grants.