Happiness [IMPLEMENTED]
- Thread starter raystuttgart
- Start date
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
Ok, I can remove the boycott impact. 
The game concept "Happiness" does not have only negative modifiers at all.
It has just as many positive modifers as well.
What it does not intend:
It does not intend to be a free goody that will just make the game easier.
It does not intend to be an unfair punishment either.
Simply the "Possibility to gain Happiness" vs. "The Happiness needed" need to be balanced.
The more possibilities we add to get "Yield Happiness", the more we need to add that consumes "Yield Happiness".
The effects that result from "Happiness Rates" are balanced.
But what it will do definitely:
It will add another game mechanic (for City Managemet) to take care off.
By having this additional mechanic to take care off, the game will be more complex and challenging.
I can fully understand and accept that.
-----
Maybe this thread has become too difficult and long to read again.
(I tried to explain and clarify all the details so we modders could imagine and implement.)
But it is actually pretty simple considering gameplay.
(Everything necessary is summarized here.)
Sorry, but I am confused.
The game concept "Happiness" does not have only negative modifiers at all.
It has just as many positive modifers as well.
What it does not intend:
It does not intend to be a free goody that will just make the game easier.
It does not intend to be an unfair punishment either.
Simply the "Possibility to gain Happiness" vs. "The Happiness needed" need to be balanced.
The more possibilities we add to get "Yield Happiness", the more we need to add that consumes "Yield Happiness".
The effects that result from "Happiness Rates" are balanced.
But what it will do definitely:
It will add another game mechanic (for City Managemet) to take care off.
By having this additional mechanic to take care off, the game will be more complex and challenging.
No problem, everybody has a different personal taste.
I can fully understand and accept that.
-----
Maybe this thread has become too difficult and long to read again.
(I tried to explain and clarify all the details so we modders could imagine and implement.)
But it is actually pretty simple considering gameplay.
(Everything necessary is summarized here.)
Last edited:
If I didn't think you guys were open to opinions, I wouldn't give them.
Spend the time on the trade network.
Actually, if it doesn't do one of these two things, I see no point in it. It would just be one more detail to deal with, that had very little impact.
Spend the time on the trade network.
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
It has lots of impact.
It might become one of the most important features in the mod.
It is just neither free goodies nor unfair puishment - it is balanced.
You will simply need to take care of it / use it appropriately.
If you do, you will be rewared reasonably.
If you do not, you will have disadavantages.
It adds more "city management" and it does offer different strategies for that.
If you like "city management", you might like it. If you don't you will probably not.
-----
But again, there is no point in arguing about personal taste.
Some might like it, some might not.
Last edited:
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
No problem, I fully understand that other people have their own personal taste as well.
I am also not trying to convince anybody that "my own personal taste" is better because that would be stupid.
If community majority and team do not want this feature concept, it will not be implemented.
Don't worry.
OzzyKP
Emperor
I think overall I feel the same as with the expanded health mechanic, that it just adds a lot of additional micromanagement for little benefit.
That said, I am still intrigued. I like the suggestion that a barkeep would consume wine/beer/rum and produce happiness. That situates happiness within the standard Colonization mechanics. But I'm also interested in providing more importance for the domestic market. I think if consuming goods produces happiness then you'd have to reduce happiness if goods are desired but not provided.
Also, if we go with happiness then I think priests should produce both crosses & happiness. Faith is a major (the major?) source of happiness and contentment for much of human history. Perhaps it would make churches/priests more important/desirable for the AI which doesn't seem to bother with it.
That said, I am still intrigued. I like the suggestion that a barkeep would consume wine/beer/rum and produce happiness. That situates happiness within the standard Colonization mechanics. But I'm also interested in providing more importance for the domestic market. I think if consuming goods produces happiness then you'd have to reduce happiness if goods are desired but not provided.
Also, if we go with happiness then I think priests should produce both crosses & happiness. Faith is a major (the major?) source of happiness and contentment for much of human history. Perhaps it would make churches/priests more important/desirable for the AI which doesn't seem to bother with it.
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
There are 2 major reasons against it.
A) Tavern already unlocks "Domestic Market Consumption" of Beer / Rum and Wine.
B) The production chain (e.g. Sugar -> Rum -> Happiness) gets too long and makes Happiness (from Profession) too invaluable.
That is one of my main points in the concept.
Sorry but no to this, it will break balancing for early game and maybe even midgame.
Also since "Happiness Rate" will replace "Revolutionary Rate" considering "Productivity Bonus of Professions" we should not have too many negative effects.
Possible.
Still need to think about the impacts concidering balancing because "Profession Preacher" is already really valuable.
But we might try it in an internal test version once the concept gets accepted and implementation really started.
Last edited:
I would think that the negative impact needs to come in heavier from larger cities while having almost no impact on a tiny settlement. So church buildings and other similar ones could provide a small boost that 'takes care' of the needs of a village.
They just need a room to party and a room to pray to feel happy.
However to maintain those big cities you need the domestic market goods and fancy entertainment venues. (And a big cathedral makes them feel a bit happier too)
I like that the tavern unlocks the 'ability to consume alcohol' and then the domestic market 'consumes alcohol and provides happiness' rather than a one for one production of alcohol into happiness. Perhaps a larger establishment could increase the happiness gained by the domestic market, or allow a better return on certain alcohols or diverse consumption of alcohols.
A larger establishment with a better selection of beverages encourages a swankier clientele and an overall greater sense of well being. "I am so fancy I drink wine and beer in a fancy tavern, not some rank dive bar that sells booze, I am so happy I am fancy."
Plus the larger venues providing the greater entertainment opportunities from entertainers is the double bonus. You have the passive from providing produced goods in the city that can consume them and the active profession of entertaining people.
They just need a room to party and a room to pray to feel happy.
However to maintain those big cities you need the domestic market goods and fancy entertainment venues. (And a big cathedral makes them feel a bit happier too)
I like that the tavern unlocks the 'ability to consume alcohol' and then the domestic market 'consumes alcohol and provides happiness' rather than a one for one production of alcohol into happiness. Perhaps a larger establishment could increase the happiness gained by the domestic market, or allow a better return on certain alcohols or diverse consumption of alcohols.
A larger establishment with a better selection of beverages encourages a swankier clientele and an overall greater sense of well being. "I am so fancy I drink wine and beer in a fancy tavern, not some rank dive bar that sells booze, I am so happy I am fancy."
Plus the larger venues providing the greater entertainment opportunities from entertainers is the double bonus. You have the passive from providing produced goods in the city that can consume them and the active profession of entertaining people.
Last edited:
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
This is implemented now.
However the concept has changed:
see here and here
However the concept has changed:
- It has 2 Yields (Happiness and Unhappiness)
- It does not have a specific dedicated Profession (e.g. Entertainer) for producing Happiness
- There are a lot of features / player decisions that generate Happiness or Unhappines
- The feature does not give any production bonusses but influences the effectiveness of many other feature
see here and here
Last edited:
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
Well, I now played a first longer game with the new feature "Happiness vs. Unhappiness".
(Not officially published yet - because it is still in testing and balancing phase.)
It is pretty much as I expected.
And it does have an impact on my gameplay.
A) Positive Happiness balance in small villages (10+) is easy going.
Buiding a few buildings and having some production of Crosses ususally is sufficient to keep a positive Happiness balance.
B) Positive Happiness balance in big cities (50+) is a challenge though.
I need to use almost every possible mechanic to keep Happiness balance positive.
(Treaties with European Nations, Domestic Market Supply, continuous building of further Buildings, all Yields that produce Happiness ...)
Thus my gameplay has changed:
(It actually changed a lot - but for the positive for me.)
1) I am much more careful in accepting tax raises.
I find myself refusing tax raises and accepting boycotts quite often.
2) I started searching other European nations quite early in game.
Thus I can get treaties with them to increase my Happiness a little bit further.
3) I consider starting Wars with another European Nations much more carefully.
I only do it if I can be sure, that my big cities have enough Happiness buffer to not directly risk Unrests.
4) I now really consider in which Cities I have my Slaves.
In small "Agricultural Cities" they usually do not cause problems, but I almost never use them in big "Industrial Cities" anymore.
5) I much more heavily use Domestic Market for my big "Industrial Cities", because otherwise I cannot keep Happiness balance positive there.
Thus I also need to plan my new Cities and focus on different produced goods as needed to get all of them.
6) I now also need to keep more military im my big "Industrial Cities", so they feel protected.
In my old games I usually only had e.g. 1 military units in big cities (50+) that I knew would never be attacked - that does not work anymore.
7) I put much higher focus now on keeping Health, Crosses and Culture at high level in big Cities (50+) - even Education. (To get a little extra Happiness.)
With Bells I had always done so, because Bells were always powerful.
8) The Festivities and Unrest are something I also consider in my strategy.
I feel that it is balanced though.
Summary:
I originally thought the feature would not be too dramatic.
But I realized that it really changed gameplay.
I now have a lot more "strategic consideration" in my gameplay.
(It might be my specific playstyle as "perfectionist" though, since I heavily try to "min-max" everything.)
I like it though.
Remark:
AI seems to handle the feature surprisingly well - it almost always achieved positive Happiness balance.
(In my test games AI however also had no cities that were comparable to my own "mega cities".)
To be honest:
AI plays by a bit easier rules.
(The differences between Human rules and AI rules are relatively minor though.)
But for this feature it is really fair because AI e.g.
(Not officially published yet - because it is still in testing and balancing phase.)
It is pretty much as I expected.
And it does have an impact on my gameplay.
A) Positive Happiness balance in small villages (10+) is easy going.
Buiding a few buildings and having some production of Crosses ususally is sufficient to keep a positive Happiness balance.
B) Positive Happiness balance in big cities (50+) is a challenge though.
I need to use almost every possible mechanic to keep Happiness balance positive.
(Treaties with European Nations, Domestic Market Supply, continuous building of further Buildings, all Yields that produce Happiness ...)
Thus my gameplay has changed:
(It actually changed a lot - but for the positive for me.)
1) I am much more careful in accepting tax raises.
I find myself refusing tax raises and accepting boycotts quite often.
2) I started searching other European nations quite early in game.
Thus I can get treaties with them to increase my Happiness a little bit further.
3) I consider starting Wars with another European Nations much more carefully.
I only do it if I can be sure, that my big cities have enough Happiness buffer to not directly risk Unrests.
4) I now really consider in which Cities I have my Slaves.
In small "Agricultural Cities" they usually do not cause problems, but I almost never use them in big "Industrial Cities" anymore.
5) I much more heavily use Domestic Market for my big "Industrial Cities", because otherwise I cannot keep Happiness balance positive there.
Thus I also need to plan my new Cities and focus on different produced goods as needed to get all of them.
6) I now also need to keep more military im my big "Industrial Cities", so they feel protected.
In my old games I usually only had e.g. 1 military units in big cities (50+) that I knew would never be attacked - that does not work anymore.
7) I put much higher focus now on keeping Health, Crosses and Culture at high level in big Cities (50+) - even Education. (To get a little extra Happiness.)
With Bells I had always done so, because Bells were always powerful.
8) The Festivities and Unrest are something I also consider in my strategy.
I feel that it is balanced though.
Summary:
I originally thought the feature would not be too dramatic.
But I realized that it really changed gameplay.
I now have a lot more "strategic consideration" in my gameplay.
(It might be my specific playstyle as "perfectionist" though, since I heavily try to "min-max" everything.)
I like it though.
Remark:
AI seems to handle the feature surprisingly well - it almost always achieved positive Happiness balance.
(In my test games AI however also had no cities that were comparable to my own "mega cities".)
To be honest:
AI plays by a bit easier rules.
(The differences between Human rules and AI rules are relatively minor though.)
But for this feature it is really fair because AI e.g.
- can not really handle Domestic Market
- would not properly consider to build required Buildings
- is much more often the "victim of Wars" with Human player than the "aggressor"
- ...
Last edited:
Mr. ZorG
WTP team member
Ray, this is a very interesting game mechanics, but it changes the game process a lot. question: is it possible to make this function disabled during configuration (for example, as "without wild animals")?
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
I know.
But that is the reason why it exists.
It is a really bad idea for such a core feature with so many dependencies.
Balancing and gameplay would simply not match anymore.
If we ever build further features on top of it (e.g. Civics) it will be even worse.
It would be like ripping out a carrying wall in the basement which instabilizes the complete building.
And it would be really hard - lots of effort.
(Screens, DLL logic, Pedia, ...)
Big core features like this are a "Yes" or "No" decision - because too much considering gameplay, balancing and further features depends on it ...
There simply is really no good way to make it a "Game Option". (Only features that have no dependencies can easily be made Game Options.)
Currently it is not officially published yet.
So if the team does not want it to be integrated and published it does not need to happen.
At the moment though, all feedback I got was quite positive.
By the way:
It would be completely the same if we ever implement e.g. "Civis" or "Techs" or "Rebalancing of Military System" or ...
All of them are "game changers" as well ...
---------------------
Remark:
However "Happiness vs. Unhappiness" has LOTS of Balancing settings in GlobalDefinesAlt.xml.
(Almost all my features do - so players can adjust them for personal taste.)
It is theoretically possible to almost completely deactivate it there - but it will still be visible in the Screen and the logic in DLL will still calculate things.
You will simply not feel / experience its effects in game anymore and thus do not need to care about the feature anymore ...
Mr. ZorG
WTP team member
I really liked this feature), but maybe someone will not like it. Is it possible to make sure that people do not try to modify GlobalDefinesAlt.hml on their own, but simply uncheck the box "Use the effects of Happiness / Unhappiness" when setting up the game?
I want to clarify everything before I talk about this function in my VK group)
I want to clarify everything before I talk about this function in my VK group)
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
No, because it will still be displayed in Screens and internal logic will still calculate ...
And balancing of the mod will still be made to be played with the feature.
And there will still be e.g. the Traits.
And in the future there might still be features to be built on top of it.
Again:
It can not be done properly as a "Game Option".
Because the game option could not completely deactivate the feature without completely messing up balancing.
Comments on GlobalDefinesAlt.xml:
Spoiler :
Simple Summary:
The feature does not have any simple on-/off- switch and will most likely never have one.
This sounds very good to me - in my experience the domestic market is often neglected as I establish a reliable supply line to Europe.
However, will it be possible to modify the automated trading system so that trade routes can spread the finished goods across cities, rather than just moving all of them from one city to another?
Specialisation of production is still, imo, an ideal and realistic way to set up colonies (produce cigars from the colony with tobacco resource, coats from the fur resource etc). If you need a balance of different goods, then there should be an easier way to get those to each colony.
So if colony A produces cigars and colony B produces coats, you can set a trade route up which ensures that colony A imports coats from B whilst leaving some behind, and vice versa for cigars. That way both colonies meet their domestic needs without having to both produce the same finished goods.
Not sure if that would be possible, or how much work it would be, but it would definitely be useful to help keep happiness high without excessive micro, or losing the specialisation of production.
raystuttgart
Civ4Col Modder
The further improvement of the Automated Trade Route System is a topic of its own.
I can not promise anything for that - definitely nothing that is going to happen soon though.
However it is not especially a topic for "Happiness vs. Unhappiness".
However it is not especially a topic for "Happiness vs. Unhappiness".
This is true. I suppose my core point is:
Domestic demand is important for happiness, but there isn't currently a way to easily and automatically move produced goods around between colonies in a way which satisfies demand.
Therefore, there is a risk that happiness may become a big annoyance to players if specialised cities are always falling into unhappiness and having to be manually supplied with more finished goods through microing wagon trains.
Tugboatspotter
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2019
- Messages
- 278
I think it would make sense to recognize that prostitution was widespread at this time, so instead of entertainers could there be a harlot or madam unit or profession?
Entertainers residing in taverns/saloons doesn't really make much sense, whereas prostitution does, unless you are using 'entertainer' as a synonym for prostitute.
Essentially the inclusion would be no more controversial than the inclusion of slaves. It would just be a representation of the reality of the time.
Entertainers residing in taverns/saloons doesn't really make much sense, whereas prostitution does, unless you are using 'entertainer' as a synonym for prostitute.
Essentially the inclusion would be no more controversial than the inclusion of slaves. It would just be a representation of the reality of the time.
Similar threads
