Health Overhaul [IMPLEMENTED]

[ConjurerDragon]

I do not like Tobacco to cause negative health in the game.

Sure - nowadays we have, after a really, really long struggle and a decade of scientific proof of smoking being the cause of lung cancer, very strict regulations on Tobacco and we know that it is unhealthy.

However back then?
It was a source of ready wealth, a cash crop, even a currency in a huge swath of 13 colonies and the economic staple of Virginia.. It was a symbol of peace - offering and smoking a peace pipe is a staple of novels dating back to Karl May and Winnetou or even Leatherstocking Tales.Wilhelm Busch describes his characters with a pipe in hand (e.g. in Max and Moritz) describing a timehonoured hobby and not an obvious lethal risk.

Life back then was hard - if you lost most of your teeth before becoming 30 you would not notice that Tobacco would turn them yellow (especially if Tea had already turned them black or green).

Lung or other forms of cancer would at that time either not be diagnosed at all or would become lethal only at a time where the average person was already beyond the average life expectancy at around 40.

People back then were surrounded by death even in their earliest years - not by Tobacco, but by child mortality rates
https://www.plimoth.org/sites/defau...glish people,of 30 could expect to live to 59.
2% of all life births would die at the first day, 12% of all children would die in their first year. Life was frail and only much later after the industrial revolution survivial rates skyrocketed.

So - yes Tobacco might be slightly unhealthy if consumed - however who cares about unhealthines that is exported to Europe? It would not be Tobacco, but only a tiny fraction, the local consumption of Tobacco, that would appear in the game and that even "A counterblaste to Tobacco", written in 1604 by the english King himself could not stop, nor even slow down as it had become an established pastime.

Should we be in need for negative health issues then I suggest Syphillis. Make all harbour cities suffer - 1 health for every ship that docks at their port and had been to sea for more than a month...

 

[raystuttgart]

"I don't want to build that because even though there will be no material change in my input ..."

So why should you build such a building then if you are not going to use it and thus have a material change in your output?
So for me this is "not gamey" - because it actually makes the player think a bit before he constructs building without care.

Your personal taste is simply different than mine.
But as I said, it is not going to be my personal taste alone if this is going to become part of WTP.

Then I give it to team and supporters to test it and then we decide together.
If team and supporters do not like it, it will not become part of WTP.

 

[raystuttgart]

I do not like Tobacco to cause negative health in the game.

Agreed, Tobacco House is a bad example and should probalby not cause "negative Health".

What about those?

(Tanning, Dying, Distilling, ... all of these production places / jobs were really unhealthy.)

----

But guys, we are discussing now about "actually balancing a system".
I am talking at the moment about "implementing a system" that "allows certain balancing".

I do not even know yet what I will actually balance.
I simply can not know yet before I have tested.

Why is everybody going crazy about balancing details before the system even exists?
I will need to test and balances this later and balancing is easy to change later also after release.

 

[Tugboatspotter]

I suggest just leave out the buildings negative effects.

There is plenty else to work with and everyone will be happy.

 

[modmod]

But what is the issue with having a temporary negative Health modifier?

Minor ones.
1. Hard to count with temporary which are cannot be foreseen/ hard to plan to.
2. For me the health system is about "general health" of the colony/ colonists, not some turn to turn constant changing simulation. So in that sense the fix. modifiers (as the ones which affect health constantly/ on long term) from terrains/ features/ buildings are better than the temporary ones.
3. A turn depending on game speed can last up to a year - but there are hardly foggy weather or sandstorm which last for long to cause long term health effects.

So not a big issue, simply not fit into much along with the fix ones.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Minor ones.
1. Hard to count with temporary which are cannot be foreseen/ hard to plan to.
2. For me the health system is about "general health" of the colony/ colonists, not some turn to turn constant changing simulation. So in that sense the fix. modifiers from terrains/ features/ buildings are better than the temporary ones.
3. A turn depending on game speed can last up to a year - but there are hardly foggy weather or sandstorm which last for long to cause long term health effects.

So not a big issue, simply not fit into much along with the fix ones.

Volcanic eruptions!?The Krakatoa eruption might have cause a year of no summer.

 

[raystuttgart]

So in that sense the fix. modifiers from terrains/ features/ buildings are better than the temporary ones.

I have no problem to having "Fog" (on Lakes / Coast) and "Sandstorms" (on Desert) fixed.
Actually that could even be easily explained as "Fog Area" / "Sandstorm Area".

 

[modmod]

Volcanic eruptions!?

That is a fine idea for an unique event - if that possible.
A nearby vulcano sure can affect long terrm health (or grain production, etc... -> ok that for different topics).

 

[raystuttgart]

Volcanic eruptions!

Ah, good that you remind me !!!
I also need to consider Volcanos and Tornados.
(They are in the game as well - I had completely forgotten.)

 

[raystuttgart]

That is a fine idea for an unique event

Already exists.
(Tornados as well.)

Volcanos and Tornados are implemented as Events.
Fog and Sandstorms could be implemented as Events as well.

 

[modmod]

I have no problem to having "Fog" (on Lakes / Coast) and "Sandstorms" (on Desert) fixed.
Actually that could even be easily explained as "Fog Area" / "Sandstorm Area".

Sounds realistic for flavor.
Foggy lakes (foggy London ) or a frequent sandstorm in a large desert in a plot or two.

 

[raystuttgart]

I suggest just leave out the buildings negative effects.

Well ok, seems like everybody is afraid of that ...

So agreed I will not configure it as default in WTP core mod.
(Only as absolute exception if immersion really requires.)

The XML of Buildings already allows to do it though.
So anybody who would like more of that, can simply configure it in his private version.

-----

By the way:
You can achieve much more with me if you explain by real arguments.
I react allergic to terms like "punishment", "gamey", "force the player" ... because that is all just personal taste discussion.

 

[Guynemer]

When I say punish, I think you are misunderstanding that I am referring to a specific context.

I think investing in infrastructure should always be good, but with this proposal it introduces a 'gamey' consideration that "I don't want to build that because even though there will be no material change in my output - my health will be decreased simply because I built it"

More simply put, why are these industries having a negative effect on health? Population should be the driving force behind unhealthiness, and advanced infrastructure should, if anything, be a positive force.

I strongly disagree.

Not only does having certain buildings have a negative effect on health make sense in a historial/realism context, but tough choices make for better gameplay.

I will make two suggestions:

1. Goods that are produced by buildings that give a malus to health (rum, leather, dyery, what have you) should probably have their base value bumped up a bit relative to other goods that aren't produced by such buildings.

2. Since there are going to be a lot more factors going into determining colony health under this new system, the health range should probably be significantly expanded from the current range (-25 to +10). Maybe a doubling (-50 to +20). The effect on production probably doesn't need to change much at all, keep it -25% to +10%.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

I strongly disagree.

Not only does having certain buildings have a negative effect on health make sense in a historial/realism context, but tough choices make for better gameplay.

The historic choice would have been to move that industry to the outskirts of town in their own alley. Just as in most cities with an intact medieval core we have alleys for every guild of work finely divided and the most stinking ones like tanners/leatherworkers who worked with stuff like urine and worse far from housing.

Which means that the same industry would just be there as before, just concentrated in one alley.

I will make two suggestions:

1. Goods that are produced by buildings that give a malus to health (rum, leather, dyery, what have you) should probably have their base value bumped up a bit relative to other goods that aren't produced by such buildings.

So they earn more than before only to be deducted the same amount for health, resulting in the same result but with a lot of overhead?

2. Since there are going to be a lot more factors going into determining colony health under this new system, the health range should probably be significantly expanded from the current range (-25 to +10). Maybe a doubling (-50 to +20). The effect on production probably doesn't need to change much at all, keep it -25% to +10%.

While ingame certainly possible please remember that we are talking about the age of sail. No diesel ships, not even steamengines yet shipping against the wind in any weather. Perishable goods (e.g. bananas) might be nowadays a staple of exotic food that is almost normal in most western countries and a symbol of vitamins and health - but that is the result of cooling and transport under protective gas to prevent ripening until reaching it´s destination.
Don´t make me have to lift tons of bananas on a regular basis from South America to New England to counteract the coal lungs of Miners because apples and village wells are not enough as those have to take care of sailors syphillis and overpopulation penalties in cities that - compared to nowadays metropols - are better villages in size.

 

[Elirector]

Well ok, seems like everybody is afraid of that ...

So agreed I will not configure it as default in WTP core mod.
(Only as absolute exception if immersion really requires.)

The XML of Buildings already allows to do it though.
So anybody who would like more of that, can simply configure it in his private version.

-----

By the way:
You can achieve much more with me if you explain by real arguments.
I react allergic to terms like "punishment", "gamey", "force the player" ... because that is all just personal taste discussion.

What about the idea to make buildings impact health only if some workers are assigned to work there? Turning off rum production for a few months to reduce smog/let distillers rest sounds realistic enough.

 

[raystuttgart]

What about the idea to make buildings impact health only if some workers are assigned to work there?

Too much effort, bad for performance, hard to teach AI and hard to visualize. --> Please forget all that complex stuff.
Guys, as I told I will keep this simple for players to understand, easy to teach AI, little effort to implement, performant and streamlined for UI.

 

[Tugboatspotter]

I strongly disagree.

Not only does having certain buildings have a negative effect on health make sense in a historial/realism context

It doesn't. Not yet anyway.

Living in Increasingly close proximity with bad sanitation was the main driving force behind poor health.

Some WTP industries can without doubt be harmful to health and the environment on a larger scale, but it is unlikely to be much of a factor in the 17th century.

 

[Guynemer]

On the contrary, rum distilleries in particular were breeding grounds for mosquitoes, in addition to the nature of the work itself being extremely dangerous.

 

[Tugboatspotter]

On the contrary, rum distilleries in particular were breeding grounds for mosquitoes, in addition to the nature of the work itself being extremely dangerous.

Mosquitoes is covered by marshes being unhealthy.

Lumberjacks also do dangerous work - should that add unhealthiness to a city as well?

 

[raystuttgart]

Lumberjacks also do dangerous work - should that add unhealthiness to a city as well?

That is already covered by the "Terrain" itself. (My Enviroment checks.)
(Thus I will not do anything with Professions.)

• Job Environment for Plot Professions: Terrain (in City Radius) --> Some positive, some negative
  
• Job Environment for Building Professions: Building (in City) --> Some positive, some negative

But guys, I will use it carefully, try to balance well and as reasonable for immersion.
(There will be a few Buildings causing negative Health - just like there are now a few Buildings causing positive Health as well.)

Did you see my small sentence here about "immersion"?

Never said nor promissed that I would not give any Buildings any negative Health effects at all ...
Just said: It will not be the "default".

So agreed I will not configure it as default in WTP core mod.
(Only as absolute exception if immersion really requires.)

----

Please have some trust. Let yourselves get surprised in Release 3.1.
Not a single one of my features has yet completely ruined balancing or gameplay, right?