Happiness Balance Discussion
- Thread starter Gazebo
- Start date
Beta incoming shortly. Get pumped!
tu_79
Deity
I'd like to suggest an ui change.
I'd like to see, at once, what will be the net effect of growing in the city.
Right now, I can see that my cities have 6 happiness sources (I have to sum them up) and because there are only 5 people in the city, total happiness is 5.
Then, I can see that the effect of growing will add 1 illiteracy and remove 1 distress, and total unhappiness is 5, exactly the same as the city size.
So, all these things taken into account, I can say that growing is going to increase net happiness.
What I'd like to see is the tooltip giving me the direct effect on net happiness. Will it increase, decrease or remain the same upon growth? I actually don't really care if I'm gaining poverty or losing distress, I want the net simple value to help me make a faster decision.
I'd like to see, at once, what will be the net effect of growing in the city.
Right now, I can see that my cities have 6 happiness sources (I have to sum them up) and because there are only 5 people in the city, total happiness is 5.
Then, I can see that the effect of growing will add 1 illiteracy and remove 1 distress, and total unhappiness is 5, exactly the same as the city size.
So, all these things taken into account, I can say that growing is going to increase net happiness.
What I'd like to see is the tooltip giving me the direct effect on net happiness. Will it increase, decrease or remain the same upon growth? I actually don't really care if I'm gaining poverty or losing distress, I want the net simple value to help me make a faster decision.
Txurce
Deity
I agree this would help. But don't you also want to see how to address the coming unhappiness (ie, build a distress building)?
tu_79
Deity
I already know it. You have current needs explained in the tooltip.
We have to face two major decisions,
What to build to improve happiness, and
Whether to grow.
For the first one we need to know where is unhappiness in the city coming from. For the second one we need to how net happiness is going to change upon growth.
Txurce
Deity
I thought you were saying you were literally saying you "don't really care if I'm gaining poverty or losing distress." Now I understand.
It says this right now in the UI.
tu_79
Deity
What it says it's
'On a new citizen, the city will gain:
Distress: 2
Illiteracy: -1'
Anyone looking at this would think that unhappiness will increase in net. But then you also have to look at happiness tooltip. It may say:
'Happiness 4
Empire: 3
Luxuries: 1
Handicap: 1'
3+1+1 is not 4, so I guess that actual happiness sources are 5, but it is limited to 4 due to city size. Therefore, if I let the city grow, I would gain 1 unhappiness source, but also 1 happiness source, making growth neutral.
This is not clear. Just let me know the net happiness the city will gain on growth.
Current UI tells you the happiness and unhappiness changes on growth. Not just unhappiness.
tu_79
Deity
Had to restart. Now it shows.
Yes. It says now how much happiness it will gain on growth in the happiness tooltip, and how much unhappiness it will gain on growth in the unhappiness tooltip. Could we have the net happiness gain shown in the city banner briefing?
Edit. Here:
It does, at least in my current working version. Don't know when I added it though.
tu_79
Deity
Could you post an image of how it should work? It migth be something related to Improved City View mod.
tu_79
Deity
Nope. I just founded a new city to test this. In the happiness tooltip it says, with growth, happiness will increase by 1, but in the banner only unhappiness is shown.
FaarmAnimal
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2019
- Messages
- 67
Please forgive that this is my first post. I love the mod and thanks to Gazebo and everyone else who has made it so amazing.
I like that the happiness model has moved to a local model, but I feel that it should move even more towards simplicity.
My suggestions:
Eliminate the median system and needs (distress, poverty etc) entirely because:
1) It has the appearance of complexity, yet in reality it is poor game design by being both obscure and shallow. local city population is perfectly adequate as a method for producing unhappiness. It is simple and works well with the integer based model.
2) Food, production, science, culture and faith should all be a means to an end. They already have value and they don't need to have any bearing on happiness.
I would also suggest scrapping local happiness for local happiness resources. It makes no sense since people gain happiness from the resource NOT the act of producing it.
I like that the happiness model has moved to a local model, but I feel that it should move even more towards simplicity.
My suggestions:
Eliminate the median system and needs (distress, poverty etc) entirely because:
1) It has the appearance of complexity, yet in reality it is poor game design by being both obscure and shallow. local city population is perfectly adequate as a method for producing unhappiness. It is simple and works well with the integer based model.
2) Food, production, science, culture and faith should all be a means to an end. They already have value and they don't need to have any bearing on happiness.
I would also suggest scrapping local happiness for local happiness resources. It makes no sense since people gain happiness from the resource NOT the act of producing it.
I appreciate the post, but we’re not scrapping the median model. I prefer the granularity and nuance of it.
G
To add more to this. One of the things about the median is it moves over time. A city can never settle on its heels, if left alone, a cities unhappiness will rise over time. That is its greatest appeal, it requires the user to tend to their cities in order to keep things on track. And as G said, it is very granular and nuanced.
Now I have my peeves with that system, but what it fundamentally offers I fully agree with. So if we did drop it, it would have to have a great equivalent that could perform the same functions.
FaarmAnimal
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2019
- Messages
- 67
The unhappiness would rise as the population increases. No nuance required.
The global happiness function can fulfill your other requirements. I would support renaming it to (empire) stability.
Nuance is a positive attribute - your use of the term sounds negative. Having 'happiness' stem from something other than just growth offers granularity, it makes your build order in a city reactive, as opposed to fixed, it allows for things like wars of attrition to matter, and it makes the yields from trade routes, religion, etc. have positive value beyond the yields themselves. Ultimately, that's the biggest draw: it moves empire management out of the realm of 'who can fill up buckets the fastest' and makes it a system in which you have to weigh the values of yields against the needs of your population.
Also, note that, in VP, unhappiness != population. If all of your cities are maxed out on unhappiness relative to their population, you should be worried.
G
FaarmAnimal
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2019
- Messages
- 67
That is certainly a compelling argument Gazebo, however, I'm not sure that I see the kind of dynamism working in practice with regards to the needs mechanic, although I am happy to stand corrected.
Sorry if I sounded negative. I assure you, I am loving the mod and I am merely throwing out a few thoughts.
Sorry if I sounded negative. I assure you, I am loving the mod and I am merely throwing out a few thoughts.
