1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

=) =(

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by YourDeath/TSAR, Dec 21, 2010.

  1. YourDeath/TSAR

    YourDeath/TSAR Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    warsaw, poland, EU
    :mad: :D


    the biggest problem in my opinion in civ 5 is happyness.
    the biggest problem in my opinion about happyness is the hapyness per city.
    it should be the opposite, the more cities you have, the happier your people must be.
    here are some historical examples:
    when napoleon conquered europe, the french loved him, they didnt hate him
    when the roman empire was at its largest, the romans where very happy, not angry.

    summary, i dont understand why your people become unhappy when you have loads of cities.
    :sad:
     
  2. attackfighter

    attackfighter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,010
    Location:
    Intellectual Elite HQ
    Larger empires would likely encompass more religious, ethnic, nationalist and political groups, and since empires in the civ series are represented as being very centralized there is little chance that the empires would be able to satisfy the wants of all those groups.

    As for your examples, the larger the Roman and French empires grew the more dissenters and rebellions they encountered. Rome and Paris were happy, but the majority of their lands didn't emphasize with foreign rule and so they dissented. Look at contemporary large empires, such as Russia and China, they struggle with many different rebellious groups such as the Uighurs, Chechens and Tibetans.

    Things like luxury resources and stadiums in a way represent how prosperous the people are, and the more prosperous the society the more apathetic they are, as the USA shows us.
     
  3. MadRat

    MadRat Cheese Raider

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Under the sink
    But do these low level resistances actually impact the production, wealth and happiness on these countries on a global scale? Are people in Moscow and Beijing so up in angst about these issues that they stop having kids, stage strikes and generally whine and moan about it and require massive stadiums, waterparks and adult movie theatres to alleviate their concern??

    Rat
     
  4. 19Mellon73

    19Mellon73 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    23
    Location:
    OS
    They should have called it stability.

    Aaaand should have added a citywide happiness.
    It's hard to balance the whole game with just one mechanic.

    I'm sure they thought otherwise...:lol:
     
  5. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    What about the non-French populations his empire comprised as the result of his conquests? Once they were under the French flag, they had to be counted in any evaluation of overall French happiness.

    Local happiness, global stability. I like that idea.
     
  6. southpw11

    southpw11 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    75
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area, IL
    Overall I like the game...but I'm not a huge fan of happiness being such a driving force in Civ5. I guess overall I disagree with the concept of a civilization game forcing players to keep a smaller number of cities and population because if the imposed happiness limitation (limited happiness resources), but unlimited unhappiness. I'm not a die hard civ player or mathematician like some posters here though.
     
  7. Stilgar08

    Stilgar08 Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,497
    Location:
    Zeven, Germany (Lower Saxony ;)
    agreed - AND @OP: Beware of ICS! :p
     
  8. attackfighter

    attackfighter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,010
    Location:
    Intellectual Elite HQ
    As far as I know the effects of unhappiness in civ 5 are:
    your army is 50% less effective
    population growth is slowed 75%

    Army can be explained as your dissenting citizens collaborating with the enemy and leaking intel; your troops becoming disenfranchised with your cause and thus losing morale; factory workers in rebellious areas sabotaging military equipment; foreign powers lending support to your invaders as they view your regime's domestic affairs with distaste.

    Population decline can be explained by emmigration; lack of immigration; breakdown of supply structures as rebellious areas can no longer be depended upon to supply food; terrorist acts; government incompetance in regards to handling dissent and regular planning at the same time; men drawn away from their families to temporarily police rebellious regions.

    You just have to use your imagination, and it's not like the "every city's an island" model didn't have it's flaws either.
     
  9. hardcore_gamer

    hardcore_gamer King

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    672
    But did unhappiness in Poland cause riots in Paris?

    No.

    Don't give me the "everything in Civ 5 is an abstraction and doesn't have to be realistic" excuse. It doesn't make the system's obvious flaws magically go away.

    Don't get me wrong, I actually like the idea of a global happiness system, its just that I think it could have been implemented a whole lot better.
     
  10. eric_

    eric_ Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,725
    Location:
    Riverdale, MD
    I'd have to a) think it needs excusing and b) care enough to provide you with an excuse before such a demand would be necessary.

    I don't think it's a system flaw. In fact, the only revolts I've had so far spawned outside a city that I captured from another empire. Even if that weren't the case and the revolts popped up outside my capital, I'd be fine with it.
     
  11. MadRat

    MadRat Cheese Raider

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Under the sink
    It must be more than that when a city before the unhappiness hit expects a new citizen in 5 turns becomes 73 turns after the hit?

    Still the question remains - why would folks in Paris be annoyed by thw conquest of Warsaw and be made happier by building a stadium in Timbuktu?

    The whole happiness system is just total a$$.

    Rat
     
  12. CHEESE!

    CHEESE! On a long nostalgia trip

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,221
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm :lol:ing.
     
  13. Roghar

    Roghar Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    284
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    geez people, this isn't SimCity. The happiness mechanic captures all of the difficulties in managing a larger and more populous empire. Do we really need separate mechanics for all of the elements that make that up? Are you trying to say that historically big empires aren't harder to manage and keep together than small ones? Even in the corporate world, the bigger the company, the more needs to be put in place to keep it cohesive and functioning.0

    The game doesn't force us to smaller and fewer cities, it just imposes a cost of doing so. That cost trades off against increase wealth, culture and science generation, resource access and increased production. It's not impossible to grow big and stay happy, you just need to prioritise happiness buildings, wonders and social policies.
     
  14. YourDeath/TSAR

    YourDeath/TSAR Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    warsaw, poland, EU
    when rome and france (examples) half of the counquered people where happy (poland loved napoleon). it also didnt affect production in its capitals. i like the regional happiness thingy ;)
     
  15. blind biker

    blind biker King

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    609
    As I was saying in another thread:


    I think it bears repeating: if you conquer a city, that should have no effect whatsoever on the happiness in other cities.
     
  16. blind biker

    blind biker King

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    609
    Agreed. Whoever thought this up, must be either contarted, or had some kind of deep and long-lasting brainfart. One of those brainfarts that legends are made of. :eekdance:
     
  17. shanodin

    shanodin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    84
    Location:
    Lancaster, UK
    Oh look, this has become another 'CiV should just be CIV' again thread.

    Seriously though, the global happiness thing is a decent mechanic. Cities give you more unhappiness than building a Colosseum gives you happiness because people are more unhappy about being conquered than they are happy about some new amenities. I like the new system!
     
  18. vincentz

    vincentz Programmer

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    3,556
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denmark
    Actually I disagree. Conquering a city should actually have a positive effect on population : " Hey we won! We captured the city and expanded out empire. We are the greatest! etc" Maybe this effect could be tones down with WW (war weariness) with some civics..... Wait....mmm.... civ5... oh never mind.

    New words every day.... Contarded.... doesnt really have such a negative ring to it though.
     
  19. blind biker

    blind biker King

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    609
    We're in agreement, actually. Check post #15 in this thread.


    I misspelled it, sorry. It's contarded.

    As in, the Civ V happiness system is utterly contarded.
     
  20. blind biker

    blind biker King

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    609
    Apart from the fact that your post doesn't support the global happiness in any way, why would people from the conquering cities be unhappy?
     

Share This Page