WiseMan999
Chieftain
Hi all, I thought I'd share the idea that kept me awake for two hours last night - after all, I'm only supposed to be doing revision for my exam Wednesday 
. The addictive qualities of Civilization are something we can all agree on however so I'll get to my point.
I don't particularly like the global happiness in CiV, I much preferred the implementation in CIV. However rather than harp on about my dislikes I thought I'd suggest the alternative that occured to me. Basically, a merging of the two systems. Individual cities have happiness and unhappiness much like in Civ IV, but this contributes to a global happiness like in CiV depending upon how big the city is compared to the Empire's population- I'm not sure whether this should be compared in population points or actual population.
Example (population points): A size 22 city has 25 happiness and 23 unhappiness from overcrowding and one building. There are 4 cities in the Empire including this one: a size 12, a size 8 and a size 15 city.
22/(12+8+15+22) = 22/57*100 = 38.5964912%
0.385964912*25 = 9.64912281 [rounded to 2dp] = 9.65 happiness contributed to empire from city
0.385964912*23 = 8.87719298 [rounded to 2dp] = 8.88 unhappiness contributed to empire from city
Obviously if this were implemented then there needs to be some way for unhappiness to rise and spread through mismanagement otherwise global happiness would almost always be positive. Therefore I think that when unhappiness in a city exceeds happiness two things happen.
1) Much like Religion is advertised in G&K unhappy cities spread it around - exerting pressure on nearby cities and thereby adding unhappiness to those cities as well. This would be modified for distance, whether or not there's a road/railroad connection, by how much the unhappy city is unhappy and the respective populations of each city. For example I imagine it would be easier for large unhappy cities to add unhappiness to smaller cities nearby because it has a much greater population. This would mean that unhappiness in one city is not an isolated problem and must be dealt with.
2) While a city is unhappy there is a chance that an event happens that raises unhappiness. To be honest I'm not sure about this but it would really make unhappy cities a problem. The chances of this happening rise dramatically the more unhappiness > happiness in a city, so if it's only one over then the chance is very small but if it is 3 higher then the chance of an event happening increase by quite a bit.
Golden Ages would still be tied to global happiness, and if global happiness goes below 0 then you still receive penalties - however those cities that are unhappy receive greater penalties than those that are happy.
I don't know if this idea would work or be at all balanced, so I thought I'd subject it to review by Civfanatics. So... comments, thoughts, suggestions?
EDIT: Also is it just me or does that happy face feel like staring into the soulless depths of a psychopath's eyes?
. The addictive qualities of Civilization are something we can all agree on however so I'll get to my point.I don't particularly like the global happiness in CiV, I much preferred the implementation in CIV. However rather than harp on about my dislikes I thought I'd suggest the alternative that occured to me. Basically, a merging of the two systems. Individual cities have happiness and unhappiness much like in Civ IV, but this contributes to a global happiness like in CiV depending upon how big the city is compared to the Empire's population- I'm not sure whether this should be compared in population points or actual population.
Example (population points): A size 22 city has 25 happiness and 23 unhappiness from overcrowding and one building. There are 4 cities in the Empire including this one: a size 12, a size 8 and a size 15 city.
22/(12+8+15+22) = 22/57*100 = 38.5964912%
0.385964912*25 = 9.64912281 [rounded to 2dp] = 9.65 happiness contributed to empire from city
0.385964912*23 = 8.87719298 [rounded to 2dp] = 8.88 unhappiness contributed to empire from city
Obviously if this were implemented then there needs to be some way for unhappiness to rise and spread through mismanagement otherwise global happiness would almost always be positive. Therefore I think that when unhappiness in a city exceeds happiness two things happen.
1) Much like Religion is advertised in G&K unhappy cities spread it around - exerting pressure on nearby cities and thereby adding unhappiness to those cities as well. This would be modified for distance, whether or not there's a road/railroad connection, by how much the unhappy city is unhappy and the respective populations of each city. For example I imagine it would be easier for large unhappy cities to add unhappiness to smaller cities nearby because it has a much greater population. This would mean that unhappiness in one city is not an isolated problem and must be dealt with.
2) While a city is unhappy there is a chance that an event happens that raises unhappiness. To be honest I'm not sure about this but it would really make unhappy cities a problem. The chances of this happening rise dramatically the more unhappiness > happiness in a city, so if it's only one over then the chance is very small but if it is 3 higher then the chance of an event happening increase by quite a bit.
Golden Ages would still be tied to global happiness, and if global happiness goes below 0 then you still receive penalties - however those cities that are unhappy receive greater penalties than those that are happy.
I don't know if this idea would work or be at all balanced, so I thought I'd subject it to review by Civfanatics. So... comments, thoughts, suggestions?
EDIT: Also is it just me or does that happy face feel like staring into the soulless depths of a psychopath's eyes?
