Firaxis: Inherited Unhappiness is Ridiculous

[chiefpaco]

Originally posted by Zachriel


Good examples. Now change the word "unhappy" to the phrase "sick and tired." They may be relieved in Afghanistan, but their production is still virtually nil. Maybe with large investments and after a long period of time, things may improve. Production in Afghanistan will not suddenly increase due to their recent liberation.

Try not to let the semantics of the word "happy" throw you from what is really happening. Societies rent by war, murder and oppression take time to recover, even under the best of circumstances.

As strange as the whole concept is, your analysis here is the best I've ever seen. Happiness is one thing, but new conquered territory churning out tanks & Universities the next turn?

I am still not convinced the unhappiness should be compounded over centuries though. Perhaps an alteration of the compounding rule is in order.

 

[SirPleb]

Originally posted by dunk
I've never seen the "oppression" unhappiness last for more than the 40 turns or so which is editable. Maybe since in my only 1.17f game, I've had access to all 8 luxuries.

In my last game I had two cities which I captured (because they contained wonders) which did not recover from the AIs rushing unhappiness for about 270 turns. The earlier one I captured before 1400AD. At 2050 it (and the other captured just a bit later) remained just one unhappy citizen. Allowing for the temple I added and my 8 luxuries, the underlying unhappiness level must I think have been over 400 turns worth. And it wasn't even caused by my attack in one case, it was already size one when I got there. An inter-AI war must have caused it earlier.

The problem is quite severe and has made the raze-and-replace approach even more necessary than it was with 1.16, despite the reduced risk of culture flipping. I no longer capture any cities (instead of just razing them) unless either 1) It has a wonder I want or 2) I can be sure it hasn't been under seige at any time in the game before I reached it.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by BridgeBoy
I "inherited" unhappiness from Zululand people when I took over their capitol of Zimbabwe. Apparently they were Whipped by the Zulu leader prior to my takeover. This happened in about 2500 BC, and I also have exterminated the entire Zulu race.

I agree that this latest fix of the problem has gone to far in the unhappiness direction, but I do see some irony in your note...I mean you did exterminate their race...you expected them to be happy with you?



Bill

 

[Park Ranger]

Originally posted by Zachriel


Try not to let the semantics of the word "happy" throw you from what is really happening. Societies rent by war, murder and oppression take time to recover, even under the best of circumstances.

Especially if the oppression was largely used to defend against that "liberating civ" that has been invading for several turns...

Since the AI only seems to pop rush its cities to size 1 when they're about to lose them (to my civ or anyone else's), I'll swallow the pill and go with Zachriel's interpretation, and just not take the "we cannot forget your cruel oppression" message personally.

Maybe someday Firaxis will get it right, and conquerors who bombed and pillaged, who raised taxes after they moved in, and who took away all the luxuries will find unhappy subjects; while the noble liberators who sacrificed dozens of cavalry so as not to injure any civilians behind the walls, who brought fine wine and silks with them, and who lowered taxes will be greeted with (after initial skepticism wears off) parades and fireworks.

Until the AI can discriminate among conquerors, we'll just all have to suffer the (however misapplied) despotic label. And hope to get those towns quick before the AI knows what is happening...

 

[chiefpaco]

I know advice was banned from this thread, but I'll give some anyway. I just mean to try to help, but see my above post to see why I agree with you already.

Try to do your conquering in the Middle ages. Chances are your opponents will be in a govt that can't rush and drafting hasn't been invented yet.

 

[ArtofWar]

This might sound stupid be maybe you should get bonus happiness for retaking a city from an enemy. The cities population should be ecstatic to be part of it's mother land again. The rest of your population should be happy to be reunited with it's lost city. Also it would give you a reason to want to retake your old cities.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Originally posted by Zachriel

Try not to let the semantics of the word "happy" throw you from what is really happening. Societies rent by war, murder and oppression take time to recover, even under the best of circumstances.

True, but they don't take millenia to recover, especially if they were under a more free government like democracy for example. Generally it wouldn't take more than a generation for the people to become satisfied with the new system, sure, if they were under the old government stories could be passed along over the centuries and history books record the event. The very harsh unhappiness penalties still don't make sense.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Originally posted by SirPleb

1) It has a wonder I want

I mostly raze wonder cities too... it's just too risky if the wonder's been in there say, 20 turns, the culture is likely to be too great for me to hold the city.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by JuicyCivNewbie
True, but they don't take millenia to recover, especially if they were under a more free government like democracy for example. Generally it wouldn't take more than a generation for the people to become satisfied with the new system, sure, if they were under the old government stories could be passed along over the centuries and history books record the event. The very harsh unhappiness penalties still don't make sense.

I've never seen unhappiness last that long, even in a city where almost the entire population was conscripted.



http://www.crowncity.net/civ3/gotm5/

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Originally posted by Zachriel


I've never seen unhappiness last that long, even in a city where almost the entire population was conscripted.

It's not a problem with my own cities really, I pop rush every 40 turns max and usually temples only, if I have a lux except in emergencies - but some AI cities (generally size 1) just never seem to settle down (captured in 1000BC 1000AD they are still unhappy). I usually go for rapid style blitz type conquests if I can so they have little time to pop rush anyway, but the odd city stands out, especially the ones that survive the first few turns, say when it's an out of the way city and I end up one or two units short of capturing it.

 

[Salvor]

This is just my opinion, but I think we have several things going on here, and it's possible that some people are misinterpreting what they observe.

I haven't seen the savegames of everyone who's posted here, and a lot of this is just conjecture so I might be way off, but it appears to me that:

Some people might be seeing unhappiness in cities long after the effects of whipping/drafting have gone away, and without clicking on the unhappy citizens, just assume that the whipping/drafting is the cause.

Some don't think that ill effects should apply at all to a "liberated" city. They're entitled to their opinion, but I personally disagree. There are a couple examples posted above that illustrate that cities don't just pop back to full productivity just because a few conquering heroes ride through the center of town.

Some might not be aware of the cumulative effect of whipping/drafting. For example, if I whip on one turn, the next turn I can expect to have 39 turns to go. If I now draft, I might expect this to get reset to 40. From my experiences, it doesn't seem to work that way. From what I can tell it ADDS 40 turns, for a total of 79. Now imagine if a communist metropolis was beseiged for three turns. Ill effects lasting well over 100 turns are not that hard to believe.

And finally, it seems some people are just put off by the game's choice of words, and don't like being blamed for things they didn't do.


Personally, it's the cumulative thing that bugs me the most. Sure drafting twice is worse than only doing it once, and the effect should be longer, especially to avoid exploits. But there should be some kind of diminishing returns. Like if the first causes 40 turns, the second might add 20 or 30, the third maybe 15, etc.

I also think that 40 turns is too much for one pop-rush or draft. Pop-rushing should be worse than drafting anyway. 30 turns for a pop-rush and 20 for a draft would sit better with me.

Also the effect should be lessened for a conqueror. Sure, there are still ill effects, but if you come in and rebuild the city, investing in it heavily with cash-rushes and maybe adding workers or settlers to the population, as well as improving the surrounding terrain, that should show you care about the people's welfare and should reduce (but not eliminate) the effects.

As for the wording, it could probably be improved, but it doesn't bother me, as I have a good enough imagination to overcome it. Still, to make the game into the polished gem that's expected of this series, it's probably worth the effort to come up with better phrasing.

Anyway, that IMHO would be an improvement. I'm not vain or arrogant enough to demand that Firaxis change the game to suit my personal desires, but I will say that I think it's a good idea and would be one big step towards making this already great game a true classic gem like its predecessors were.

 

[Zachriel]

I haven't seen "unhappiness" last more than 40 turns, and the game is quite playable in this respect in its current incarnation.

But hey, I'm all for improvements in the game. I'm sure the gamemakers peruse these forums looking for suggestions.

 

[BridgeBoy]

Personally, it's the cumulative thing that bugs me the most. Sure drafting twice is worse than only doing it once, and the effect should be longer, especially to avoid exploits. But there should be some kind of diminishing returns. Like if the first causes 40 turns, the second might add 20 or 30, the third maybe 15, etc.

Yeah really, if the effects of whipping/killing people lasted cumulatively based on how many people have been killed, there wouldn't be a productive Jewish person on this planet for eons to come. (The Holocaust)

Especially if the oppression was largely used to defend against that "liberating civ" that has been invading for several turns...

Good Point!

 

[Salvor]

Originally posted by Zachriel
I haven't seen "unhappiness" last more than 40 turns, and the game is quite playable in this respect in its current incarnation.

But hey, I'm all for improvements in the game. I'm sure the gamemakers peruse these forums looking for suggestions.

I agree that the game is quite playable, generally the inherited unhappiness is nothing a temple, cathedral, and marketplace can't fix. I do think, though, that it's a bit excessive, and the game would be better if it were reduced the ways I described above. I'm not holding my breath, and will continue to play and enjoy the game for a long time to come even if Firaxis does nothing.

I have, however, seen ill effects last for more than 40 turns. In the game I'm playing now, there are a couple Indian cities I captured in the early 1400's (I eliminated Ghandi in 1420) that have a draft-dodging hippie or two and it's now 1710. That's at least 59 turns by my reckoning. The cities are quite productive, but less so than they would be if I didn't need to use entertainers to keep them in WLTKD.

 

[BridgeBoy]

I agree that the game is quite playable, generally the inherited unhappiness is nothing a temple, cathedral, and marketplace can't fix.

Well, in my case, that originally started this thread, there is only three people in that town...they have built a temple, there is two military police there, and there has always been five to eight luxuries available to them......I don't see how any more improvements could possibly effect those three people...there is already more happineess/content instruments in place than there are people?

 

[Alc0p0pz]

I've never used the Despot pop rush strategy - don't like it.
(And it took me a while to realise this is how the AI can expand seemingly twice as fast as me on Regent ...)

I never, ever rush population, and never, ever draft citizens.

The AI does both all the bloody time.

In my last game, I conquered France for it's vital terrain (mine was shoddy) with swordsmen around 500 AD. At the end of the industrial age, late 1800s early 1900s, 8% of Joan's old cities were still unhappy because of her using the whip one and half millenia ago. See that? That's bollocks, that is.

btw, I'd say with about 80% certainty that if you disband a city, the AI sees it as destroying that city. So, not only does any unhappiness transfer when disbanding, the AI will also hate you for doing so.

 

[Tassadar]

I dont understand why you want too capture ennemy city with all the problem you got, just raze it, and if you need the location have a settler ready, brand new city without any problem. i think capturing ennemy city is a backside effect of civ 2, but in civ 3 i learn to raze it.

 

[Kilroy]

Could someone clear something up for me?

I'm confused how unhappiness caused by pop-rush/drafting works. Until now I thought that only the unhappiness effects were cumulative, not the time involved. For example, if I pop-rush four citizens into oblivion, I can expect dire consequences for 40 turns, but after those 40 turns ALL the unhappiness is gone. But now people are saying that I'll have unhappiness problem for 160 turns? If this is what is happening, I haven't noticed it. But if that is the way it is done, let me say that is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

 

[cegman]

Mabye you should have a city defence option. You have conscripts that can't move and that after the war they go back into the population. The only problem would be that it can't grow past the number of men you need to add once the war is over

 

[Selous]

Originally posted by cegman
Mabye you should have a city defence option. You have conscripts that can't move and that after the war they go back into the population. The only problem would be that it can't grow past the number of men you need to add once the war is over

i think the description milita would better fit that? ... then u could also have your conscripts to send off to war if that is your thing