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

Housing: a poor man's health system?

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Horizons, Nov 13, 2016.

  1. Horizons

    Horizons Needing fed again!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,401
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    I did really like the health system in Civ4. This was a mechanic that meant you could have overpopulated, hence unhealthy cities. You could build things like aqueducts, hospitals and a public transport system to increase health in a city and allow it to grow again.

    Housing works like a restricted health system, hence the reason why you can't build hospitals any more (a hospital increasing housing sounds ridiculous), and the public transport system in Civ6 has been relegated to an absurdly abstracted civic that is barely useful under any circumstances.

    If housing was renamed health, we could get hospitals, public transport and other interesting things back. For example an overpopulated unhealthy city could spread diseases over trade routes.

    Don't you agree? Housing as a distinct concept feels so abstract and narrow...
     
  2. Namaspamus

    Namaspamus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    206
    Haven't played enough to form a definitive opinion but so far I agree.

    I feel I always have enough food, and that housing is my only reason to build farms, wich is weired.
    I liked the health system too, and I'd love to spread plagues... but I think it's too late, game is shaped otherwise now. You couldn't explain why, say, barracks would give health, or even neightbourhoods. Maybe modders will do it.
     
  3. Moriboe

    Moriboe King

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    659
    Location:
    Belgium
    I agree about its abstraction but in fact to me that does make it a broadly appliable concept. I wouldn't mind hospitals providing housing, it's better than hospitals providing food in civ5 at least. I'd like to see a hospital district, but alas the neighbourhood makes housing as its main effect kinda irrelevant. Maybe if we could get job availability into the equasion for neighbourhoods, like in city builder games... ;)
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  4. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Macro Land
    Hospitals don't have to be districts. They can be buildings in the City Center, like Sewers. In fact Sewers to Hospitals makes sense in a series of increasing sanitation needs. Also how do Sewers generate housing irl? ;P
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2016
  5. Moriboe

    Moriboe King

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    659
    Location:
    Belgium
    Well, there's no way to fit many people on a small surface without good sewage disposal. As for hospitals as a district: they can get pretty huge, which was my main line of reasoning. It could get buildings like a maternity and radiology unit.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  6. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Macro Land
    Hmm...

    Maybe Hospitals or one of their hosted buildings could add +1 housing to Neighborhoods and City Centers within a 6 tile radius? Not straight appeal, because that affects stuff like Beach Resorts.

    Or maybe units within that area heal more per turn?

    Maybe there can be humanitarian crisis missions, and having Hospitals can help with that.
     
    Ikael and nzcamel like this.
  7. VanitysFiend

    VanitysFiend Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Antrim
    Yeah, health was better than housing (and it made u want to build pastures) and happiness was better than amenities. Only good thing about amenities is that each luxury resource only provides a limited amount of happiness, which makes sense, but only the first instance of each luxury resource counts, which doesn't. What would be better would be if each city could get a max 1 amenity from gold for example, and the more gold u had the more cities would gain the bonus, but if u had a surplus, say 12 gold amenities but only 8 cities, then 4 amenity points go to waste, so u might as well trade it of for something else.
     
  8. Jarms48

    Jarms48 Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2016
    Messages:
    340
    I think the housing system is a compromise between health in Civ 4 and an overall nerf to tall in Civ 5. It's not terrible, just simplistic.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  9. Horizons

    Horizons Needing fed again!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,401
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Ah, you're quite right. The sewer does indeed add housing which doesn't really make sense either. So the omission of the hospital seems like an oversight!

    Other buildings that I miss include the courthouse and the police station. With the reintroduction of war-weariness, and the expanded range of espionage, surely there is justification for these old buildings to be in the game.
     
    FangoriousFae likes this.
  10. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,082
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    You gotta hold some buildings back for an expansion ;)
     
    Horizons likes this.
  11. Zenstrive

    Zenstrive Ocean King

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    Gender:
    Male
    Sewer is basically moving rotten things underground, opening up spaces on top for more housings
     
  12. FangoriousFae

    FangoriousFae Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2016
    Messages:
    10
    Gender:
    Female
    If housing is the new health, shouldn't marshes and jungles decrease housing?

    Here's an idea: instead of capping how much a city can grow, housing should cap how many citizens are able to work tiles or specialist slots; citizens who exist above the housing cap could represent sick and homeless people who are unable to work but would still need food to survive and amenities to keep them from revolting. Perhaps having a population that exceeds the housing cap could also have further penalties on amenities?
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2016
  13. OranHarken

    OranHarken Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    130
    It gives better drainage to a larger portion of land making it more suitable for constructing foundations and other large paved areas without flooding.
     
  14. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Macro Land
    Well you guys aren't wrong. As long as we are willing to accept that some stuff can be reasoned to provide housing while not being an actual living space, we have a lot to work with :p
     
    FangoriousFae likes this.
  15. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,082
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    They do once you're putting in neighbourhoods.
     
  16. Horizons

    Horizons Needing fed again!

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,401
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    On a related note, I like that a single copy of a luxury provides limited amenities but I think having more copies of a luxury should give more amenities to more cities (FilthyRobot suggestion from YouTube).

    And I don't know what they've done with strategic resources but it feels like a step backwards compared to Civ5, where 1 oil = one tank, 1 uranium = 1 nuke etc.
     
  17. OranHarken

    OranHarken Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    130
    I agree completely but if they did that Brazil and Congo would be automatically garbage due to their spawn location bias.
     
  18. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    But housing is not the new health, that's an incorrect analogy from the very beginning. Housing is a system that works similarly, and has the same goals, but it's not the same thing.

    @topic:
    The theming/naming is somewhat questionable, that I can agree with, but mechanically it's perfectly fine. Housing does exactly what it's supposed to do, softcap Growth early on, and force you to invest resources to enable more growth, both without limiting you too much during later parts of the game. I don't really see the value in a system that is just more complex but ultimately aims to achieve exactly the same goals. Complexity for the sake of complexity is worthless - I'd rather have them add more stuff than make existing stuff more convoluted than it has to be.
     
    CoconutTank likes this.
  19. OranHarken

    OranHarken Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    130
    I still think something needs to be done to detract from Jungle at the moment. Jungle tiles are too goo unimproved and present none of the challenges living in or near jungle presented historically to the civilizations that did so. Not being able to maintain populations of herd animals in particular meant those societies had to devote way more time and manpower into acquiring fat and protein sources for their diet as well as vastly increased risk of parasites and disease and the difficulty building foundations for large structures due to drainage issues in those climates.

    It is almost like (read exactly like) Firaxis wants to ignore the factors that held non-European and non-East Asian civilizations back in actual history because they insist on having terrain based starting bias for the various civilizations. PC revisionist history on display everywhere in this game, not to mention all the quotes mocking serious concepts they clearly don't like.
     
  20. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    It's a game, not a history simulator. Making Rain Forests bad just because Humans had a bad time surviving in these environments would just be adding an additional line of unusable terrain in the middle of the map - that would be really unfun. Instead, jungle-based Civs add somewhat of a unique gameplay-experience, which is great.

    And that accusation of "PC revisionist history" sounds really dumb to me. Civ is a light-hearted take on humanity, and it's not meant to represent actual history, so there can by definition not be any "revisionism" in this - the very idea of Civ is based on the idea of throwing Civs onto a battlefield where they start on (roughly) equal footing and then battle it out against each other. And it sounds like you just threw the accusation of PCism in there because you don't like it.

    About "mocking serious concepts they clearly don't like"... ALL the flavor-texts in the Civilopedia is written in a sarcastic/ironic tone this time around. Can't say I like that direction personally, but claiming that it's biased towards "concepts they don't like" sounds once again like an empty accusation.
     
    FangoriousFae likes this.

Share This Page