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

happiness (again)

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Tutkarz, Oct 4, 2010.

  1. Niedermayer

    Niedermayer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20
    AND also, Total War is a totally different type of strategy game (as it's name suggests). However, I do feel that the 4X factor in Civ 5 is somehow lacking..
     
  2. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    I have some issues about that, generally I lock the production and dont' need to supervise the city for happiness anymore because i can build a colosseum everywhere....
    At the same time i don't need to use worker to much, because the gain from a mine is worth nothing just the roads to link cities if i have the liberty upgrade and the upgrade on luxuries and resources... the last is spamming trading post...

    And Total War, if you play it without the tactical battle, is more like the streamlined game yuo are after i think, you need to just build some upgrade, select in Empire the tech and build troops, diplomacy is simple and so trading... What else you want? a Civilization total war?;)
     
  3. Niedermayer

    Niedermayer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20
    So that's the way you play Civ 5. Fine with that. I play mine differently.

    Yup a Civ 5 Total War would be cool! Imagine seeing a Tank duking it out with a Spearman in 2010 and in real-time. That would look cool. Alternatively, i can just load up Age of Empires or Rise Of Nations (too bad these franchises are dead).

    I think the war mechanic in Civ 5 is great. And yes you have a point; now that they've streamlined the building bits, there's not much of an adequate replacement for the micromanaging part which is what I think people are having gripes with.
     
  4. Marshall Thomas

    Marshall Thomas King

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    700
    There's already a great mod called The Emigration Mod. It works perfectly.

    You can find it under "mod components."
     
  5. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    Yes you pointed out what's lacking. Because war wasn't my interest in Civ, but in Civ V i have almost nothing to do if not wage war... And i have far better games to do that, as Total War or TOAW, but i understand that someone can miss the flavour os some games ad Age of Empires in wargames... So Civ V is a very good addiction for them...
    But it lacks the deep of better hex games, so i can't enjoy the war side too...

    Thinking of the mirroring of science and culture victory (with similar points to achieve upgrade\tech to a final project), and the diplomatic victory influenced too much from city state votes i have less option to acheive an interesting victory and to change substantially my gameplay...
     
  6. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Your population is unhappy and unable to grow because you can't manage your Civ well enough to cope with your economic problems.

    You shouldn't need to limit your city growth to the point where you're not building farms and granaries. This goes to your inability to produce anything without buying it.

    With the right policies and buildings and such, each city should be about size 10+ or so, - easily enough to need farms and Granaries to grow to size quickly. Such a city would still be happiness-neutral.
     
  7. Ricci

    Ricci Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    Well, this is a first step in city specific happiness!
     
  8. Toady

    Toady Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    73
    What are you talking about?

     
  9. Ricci

    Ricci Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    Ehhhhhhhh.. I don't know what you are trying to pull out with this; razing cities in cIV did generate a lot of unhappiness towards the razing civilization (not barbarian cities of course), together with a negative diplomatic impact, which varied along leader's personality.

    Furthermore, the bigger the city the more it was affected by unhappiness generated from razing.

    Simply untrue. You keep repeating yourself with this false allegation. I think I may know why:

    It has come to my attention after much reading, day after day after day since before the release of V, a certain pattern concerning the players who were either very enthusiastic with the game before release as the ones pretty satisfied after. In many many advocating posts of theirs it was very quite often mentioned that "it's a blessing espionage is out, it didn't do squat" or "how good religion is gone for good, locked alliances for the entire game" ; "health, redundant, useless really." and it goes on with statements like "you could completely ignore health and happiness" ; "there is no need for anything other than cottages".
    Ok, after a while I understood that these detractors of so many game mechanics have never truly learned to play cIV. I say this with utter respect and understanding that many cIV players (who happen to pretty much like ciV) were fond of a simpler civilization, thus trying to grasp a simpler game out of cIV, taking out many features and trying to ignore many others, assessing redundancy to keep it simple, etc. And please, simple is not for a dumber audience, is just a game we are talking about. It is fair for all of these gamers to be expectant and keen of V. [/I]

    edit: found a not at all sudden confirmation of the pattern the next thread I go into after posting this.. ha!!

    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=391075
     
  10. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,150
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    What's untrue. Razing caused massive unhappiness in Civ3 and 4? Where? When?

    As for your wall o text, I'm a Civ fan, I played Civ4 (actually helped beta it and give feedback) and generally like it. But I always had reservations. Civ4 did not evolve in the direction I had hoped it would building out of a quite similar Civ3.

    But this is like asking which child I like more. And I see a lot of potential with Civ5, as opposed to the 18 year old who I know I won't see much of anymore. I pipe up about Civ5 mostly because of the new Sept 2010 accounts from Chieftain posters with exaggerated sense of self importance being melodramatic about the game.

    Civ4 fans needs to learn to let go and stop bringing their baggage and or using Civ4 as their only point of reference then getting annoyed when they're accused of really just wanting Civ4 again. Civ4 AI falls into much of the same pitfalls of Civ5. No reserves, just total war at the beginning. But what Do I see a lot on the forums? "oh Civ5 AI can't wage war after their attack is over" Well duh? I've never seen the AI magically make up a new SOD after I decimated theirs in Civ4 or 3 either . Civ2 fans had the same issues when 3 came out.

    Tank v Spearman was deemed historically unrealistic there game broken
    People thought Corruption was dumb
    No Spies/Food Caravans was a big big point of contention too.
     
  11. Ricci

    Ricci Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    I can't say it did in civ 3 (I believe it didn't in fact) but in civ 4 every time you raze an opponent's city war weariness is accounted to a total (every pair of civs has this independent modifier) which interacts against city population in each city producing unhappiness (if the resulting fraction was enough for a whole unhappy face you got at least that). Killing units in enemy territory produces war weariness, killing units in your territory (thus defending) produces less WW, loosing units in enemy territory produces even more than in your own (I think it is double), loosing a city produces ww and as said razing a city factorizes the most ww between all the above cases. There is a good guide ripped from the code itself about ww in this same forum, which confirmed and precised to me many issues already appreciated when playing the game.

    Haha, I've always thought these were old posters with new accounts trying not to flame their long last names.. ha!! Of course, there is also a bunch of true old gamers who shudder into tears (then came the rage) when they saw theirs so expected game taking such a different direction than previous civs. And there are the whiners as well, thats for sure.

    You have to understand that many gamers (me included) think cIV is spectacular at so many levels, even though I have always noted issues and ways to have it improved, as we all did. Many of these improvements seem to have materialized in V, at least in theory, so having an overall dissapointing game feels like a mayor setback for this brand of players. I had already succumbed my expectations some weeks before release, the later one drops the illusion, the harder the grunting pal.. maybe.

    As a side note, I never had a problem with spearmen vs tank. When it eventually happens it becomes interesting, it falls into the category of a random event actually and I had it happened to me both ways (for & against); it is so improbable to occur in any meaningful/game altering way that even if it does (never any event of the sort altered the overall output of a dispute in any game of mine for instance) I could remember it as an incredible episode to be told for ages.. really. As far as being unrealistic I wouldn't like that, but a tank can very occasionally lose against the same engine that drives it, why wouldn't it do so against spearmen. It is such an eventuality, won't you agree Dex?
     
  12. Osetjka

    Osetjka Gondorian Armor Command

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    71
    Completely agree with Ricci with regards to happiness overall in ciV. I find the concept in general so out of whack that it has very little resemblance to reality. Why is it that my people aren't upset when my units get slaughtered on foreign soil? Why is it that people are rioting when the war is going very well and I'm conquering enemy cities? And as many have pointed out before it simply doesn't make sense that building a circus in one city causes people on a whole different continent happy.

    It's a shame really.. The only way to keep the advance going is to raze most of the cities you conquered - unless you're willing to wait 20+ turns for those courthouses. But hey, if Shafer wants me to be genocidal by design then I guess I'll have to be genocidal. :crazyeye:
     
  13. Surgeon

    Surgeon Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    154
    civ4 had too much micromanagement. far far too much. If global happiness is a way to reduce that I'll learn to work with the system (which is all any Civ game ever is)
     
  14. Tasunke

    Tasunke Crazy Horse

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,800
    Location:
    the 1800s
    meh ... hmm, I wonder how the Victoria or Europa Universalis games are ...
     
  15. polypheus

    polypheus Prince

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    372
    It doesn't make sense when said global rating is called "happiness". It does make sense if you call this new rating system (but still using the same present mechanics) as "Shafer Rating" and call things like circuses "Worldwide Shafer Adder".

    As for why growing bigger or actually winning a war increases Shafer Rating, well it no longer has to make sense since now it is just a totally abstract concept with whatever rules you want to make. :lol:
     
  16. Tasunke

    Tasunke Crazy Horse

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,800
    Location:
    the 1800s
    well ... if you just have global happiness ... then why even have unhappiness at all? Why make it net?

    I guess what I'm saying is ... instead of having population cost 1 unhappiness, just have it cost -1 happiness.

    That way, you only have a happiness rating. It can be positive or negative. The rating essentially becomes the "net" of the previous system.

    I mean, the current system is so simple, I don't see why we shouldn't.


    Unless adding Unhappiness and then subtracting it from happiness is actually easier than simply subtracting from happiness.
     
  17. Humakty

    Humakty Happy Goblin

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    762
    Location:
    CheeseLand, Lyon
    Best would have been to keep city happiness, then calculate a national stability factor (giving + or - % modificators to whatever) from the happiness bonus/malus of cities.

    OT : minimal graphic settings cause eye bleeding and brain damages. Use at your own risks !
     
  18. Tasunke

    Tasunke Crazy Horse

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,800
    Location:
    the 1800s
    Yep ... City Happiness + National Stability factor would have been better.

    With the NSF treating to extra Golden Ages.
     
  19. drachasor

    drachasor The Undying Flame

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    869
    If they had gone with an NSF mechanic they could have had a natural counter to large empires. If you grow and are large (especially if you are taking over enemy civs), then you are going to have a lot of internal issues that need to be dealt with. Maybe some former civs want to rebel from your rule, maybe purely internal factors between cities has a lot of tension and might spark a Civil War, or any number of other smaller internal tensions.

    I think with some clever thought, we could think of a number of factors could play a role in National Stability and also have breakdowns of where each city fits into the national demographic (perhaps some randomness here). Then some playtesting and clever design could help make a mod that puts these into practice and makes a fun game for larger empires where you have to take care of these little fires in your massive empire and too much pressure or upheaval could result in parts of your empire breaking away (like the American Civil War or the fall of the Soviet Union).
     
  20. falconne

    falconne meep

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    204
    Location:
    New Zealand
    In other words, the way Paradox does it. To do this, Civ will need to bring back local happiness and culture (cities having multiple cultures based on influence). It's about time we had a Paradox level complexity mod for Civ.

    Mods for this game will have a hard time not bringing back Civ 4 mechanics as a base for improving the game. This global happiness thing should be the first "streamlining" to be removed.
     

Share This Page