Spatzimaus
Mad Scientist
You're right. I play my own mod too much that I forgot what vanilla policies did.
I know the feeling. I keep having to do that as well, separating the Policy changes made in my own mod from the baseline effects. Regardless, removing Happiness would change a tremendous number of things. Why would you build a Colosseum or Stadium, if Happiness wasn't necessary? (The AI would continue to build them, and pay the maintenance for no gain.) Why take the Happiness-boosting Policies at all?
And Egypt would actually be WORSE than a normal civ, as its UB (+2 Happiness, +2 Culture, but enemies loot twice as much gold when they capture your city) would now be worse than the default Temple it replaces (+3 Culture).
And isn't unlimited happiness removing the point of the game? O_O
That was pretty much my response to the OP when he first posted this back in July. If you're constantly running into problems with negative happiness, that says more about the player's abilities than the game's design. It's a problem transitioning from Civ4 (where the "land rush", placing settlers at all key locations, is absolutely critical) to Civ5 (where you have to pace yourself by how much Happiness you can spare, and a good spot might stay vacant for quite a while), but it's something the player needs to learn if they ever want to be good at the game.