New Beta Version (3-20b)

[Stalker0]

So I mentioned in my last game the unhappiness spiral I got into. I decided to abadon that game, and play another game as Spain on very similar settings. And unfortunately....had a very similar experience.

Key notes for this game, as I had pacifism and mandirs/TOA. So my growth was stronger this game, but I also tried to use my religion to counteract it.

Everything was going great until the New World expansion started. Mindful of my happiness crash in the last game, I only expanded once initially. I was 3rd in score with 8 regular cities and 1 puppet. The two top contenders (Celts and Mayans) each had more cities, so I felt like I was in a good spot.

My happiness stayed stable for a time, but then dropped to -5...next turn to -10, and the turn after to -14. I turned off growth in all of my cities, and began the process of happiness rebuilding.

The long long long process. Doing nothing but building happiness buildings, my unhappy eventually got down to -38 as the Mayans and Huns went to war on me. Fortunately I had amazing defensive position, so even with my big combat penalties I held my own so I could just focus on building. It took about 25 turns I would say, 25 turns of having 0 gold and almost no science, of building circuses for the happiness, and getting WLTKDs with my growth turned off, and losing my hard won city state to conversion....but this time I was determined to see if the spiral could be undone. I recovered a little, but it wasn't until the Mayans and Huns declared peace that I was really back in the game. The Mayans inquisitor use was the strongest I have ever seen, they actually kept an inquisitor in every city. However, the Huns did not do as much, so I have converted most of their cities. That pacifism bump helped quite a bit, and I managed to get back up to 26 happiness.

At 26 happy I decided I could come back out of my shell and get back to work. I allowed my cities to grow again. I took back my CS, but this time kept it as a puppet. I kept a mix of building and unit production, and expanded 2 more times. I double checked my opponents, and they still had more cities than I did....so I didn't feel that my expansion was crazy.

My happiness started to dip a bit more, but it was mostly in check for a time. And then the huns declared war on me again.

This is what happened to my happiness on a turn by turn basis.

1) -3
2) -10 (I immediately turn off growth in my cities)
3) -26
4) -45
5) -48
6) -45
7) -58
8) -55
9) -62
10) -68 (this is where I am currently at)

I just want to highlight how fast my happiness dropped. And remember, this is with growth off and doing nothing but building happiness buildings. My god I can't imagine how fast it would have been with my growth on.

The X factor I noted in this game was crime. Crime was probably the highest I can ever remember in a game. I can normally keep my capitals to near happiness neutral. My capital this game, with every crime fighting building available to me, with full Fealty for extra defense, for progress and the needs lower, and with the best melee garrison I had....was sporting -5 to -7 on crime. Many of my other cities were -3 to -4, which is not normal to me.

At this point in the game I am trying to get to military theory (and its the first tech of this tech level I would get, so its not like I have left it behind) and praying that military academies will save me.

But....I may just stop. Again, this is just unfun. Its not interesting gameplay for me right now, I have only stayed it in this long for the research aspect.

 

[chicorbeef]

Wow, I've never experienced a spiral like that before....the lowest I got to was -48, but that was because of war weariness and obvious neglect of infrastructure. I don't think I've ever had 5-7 crime per city unless I literally didn't build walls.

Maybe turning off growth lowered your yields and actually made it impossible to catch up?

What were the defense yields of other cities in the game?

I suppose going Industry would help, but....yeah, that game is not looking good for you.

 

[Gazebo]

So I mentioned in my last game the unhappiness spiral I got into. I decided to abadon that game, and play another game as Spain on very similar settings. And unfortunately....had a very similar experience.

Key notes for this game, as I had pacifism and mandirs/TOA. So my growth was stronger this game, but I also tried to use my religion to counteract it.

Everything was going great until the New World expansion started. Mindful of my happiness crash in the last game, I only expanded once initially. I was 3rd in score with 8 regular cities and 1 puppet. The two top contenders (Celts and Mayans) each had more cities, so I felt like I was in a good spot.

My happiness stayed stable for a time, but then dropped to -5...next turn to -10, and the turn after to -14. I turned off growth in all of my cities, and began the process of happiness rebuilding.

The long long long process. Doing nothing but building happiness buildings, my unhappy eventually got down to -38 as the Mayans and Huns went to war on me. Fortunately I had amazing defensive position, so even with my big combat penalties I held my own so I could just focus on building. It took about 25 turns I would say, 25 turns of having 0 gold and almost no science, of building circuses for the happiness, and getting WLTKDs with my growth turned off, and losing my hard won city state to conversion....but this time I was determined to see if the spiral could be undone. I recovered a little, but it wasn't until the Mayans and Huns declared peace that I was really back in the game. The Mayans inquisitor use was the strongest I have ever seen, they actually kept an inquisitor in every city. However, the Huns did not do as much, so I have converted most of their cities. That pacifism bump helped quite a bit, and I managed to get back up to 26 happiness.

At 26 happy I decided I could come back out of my shell and get back to work. I allowed my cities to grow again. I took back my CS, but this time kept it as a puppet. I kept a mix of building and unit production, and expanded 2 more times. I double checked my opponents, and they still had more cities than I did....so I didn't feel that my expansion was crazy.

My happiness started to dip a bit more, but it was mostly in check for a time. And then the huns declared war on me again.

This is what happened to my happiness on a turn by turn basis.

1) -3
2) -10 (I immediately turn off growth in my cities)
3) -26
4) -45
5) -48
6) -45
7) -58
8) -55
9) -62
10) -68 (this is where I am currently at)

I just want to highlight how fast my happiness dropped. And remember, this is with growth off and doing nothing but building happiness buildings. My god I can't imagine how fast it would have been with my growth on.

The X factor I noted in this game was crime. Crime was probably the highest I can ever remember in a game. I can normally keep my capitals to near happiness neutral. My capital this game, with every crime fighting building available to me, with full Fealty for extra defense, for progress and the needs lower, and with the best melee garrison I had....was sporting -5 to -7 on crime. Many of my other cities were -3 to -4, which is not normal to me.

At this point in the game I am trying to get to military theory (and its the first tech of this tech level I would get, so its not like I have left it behind) and praying that military academies will save me.

But....I may just stop. Again, this is just unfun. Its not interesting gameplay for me right now, I have only stayed it in this long for the research aspect.

You have logging enabled I assume? PlayerHappinessStats would be nice.

G

 

[ElliotS]

So I mentioned in my last game the unhappiness spiral I got into. I decided to abadon that game, and play another game as Spain on very similar settings. And unfortunately....had a very similar experience.

Key notes for this game, as I had pacifism and mandirs/TOA. So my growth was stronger this game, but I also tried to use my religion to counteract it.

Everything was going great until the New World expansion started. Mindful of my happiness crash in the last game, I only expanded once initially. I was 3rd in score with 8 regular cities and 1 puppet. The two top contenders (Celts and Mayans) each had more cities, so I felt like I was in a good spot.

My happiness stayed stable for a time, but then dropped to -5...next turn to -10, and the turn after to -14. I turned off growth in all of my cities, and began the process of happiness rebuilding.

The long long long process. Doing nothing but building happiness buildings, my unhappy eventually got down to -38 as the Mayans and Huns went to war on me. Fortunately I had amazing defensive position, so even with my big combat penalties I held my own so I could just focus on building. It took about 25 turns I would say, 25 turns of having 0 gold and almost no science, of building circuses for the happiness, and getting WLTKDs with my growth turned off, and losing my hard won city state to conversion....but this time I was determined to see if the spiral could be undone. I recovered a little, but it wasn't until the Mayans and Huns declared peace that I was really back in the game. The Mayans inquisitor use was the strongest I have ever seen, they actually kept an inquisitor in every city. However, the Huns did not do as much, so I have converted most of their cities. That pacifism bump helped quite a bit, and I managed to get back up to 26 happiness.

At 26 happy I decided I could come back out of my shell and get back to work. I allowed my cities to grow again. I took back my CS, but this time kept it as a puppet. I kept a mix of building and unit production, and expanded 2 more times. I double checked my opponents, and they still had more cities than I did....so I didn't feel that my expansion was crazy.

My happiness started to dip a bit more, but it was mostly in check for a time. And then the huns declared war on me again.

This is what happened to my happiness on a turn by turn basis.

1) -3
2) -10 (I immediately turn off growth in my cities)
3) -26
4) -45
5) -48
6) -45
7) -58
8) -55
9) -62
10) -68 (this is where I am currently at)

I just want to highlight how fast my happiness dropped. And remember, this is with growth off and doing nothing but building happiness buildings. My god I can't imagine how fast it would have been with my growth on.

The X factor I noted in this game was crime. Crime was probably the highest I can ever remember in a game. I can normally keep my capitals to near happiness neutral. My capital this game, with every crime fighting building available to me, with full Fealty for extra defense, for progress and the needs lower, and with the best melee garrison I had....was sporting -5 to -7 on crime. Many of my other cities were -3 to -4, which is not normal to me.

At this point in the game I am trying to get to military theory (and its the first tech of this tech level I would get, so its not like I have left it behind) and praying that military academies will save me.

But....I may just stop. Again, this is just unfun. Its not interesting gameplay for me right now, I have only stayed it in this long for the research aspect.

Try lowering the difficulty one level and see if that helps. I was having a lot of the same mid-game problems on Deity and tried a game on immortal. I'm crushing and sitting at very high happiness. The game has gotten much harder over the last few months. It's exciting finding the need to improve again.

 

[Gazebo]

Some things I've considered, actually, on this point:

1.) Shifting the 'Crime' mechanic over to a 'Productivity' mechanic and tying it to Production instead of Defense. I know it's a big change, but the primary reason I'm considering it is that the AI is getting really, really good at managing its tiles, which means it is growing much more sensibly (and on higher difficulties, quickly). Crime is the only one of the 'needs' that scales directly off of population because city strength is tied to population formulaically (not just through per-citizen buildings or policies). Thus, enough big cities can really wreck the global average.

2.) Removing the defense scaler on population size from city strength and instead adding it to the city's hit points. So big cities don't become more impregnable, just beefier. This would fix the issue above (and is much easier to implement). I'm leaning towards this as a fix, but I'm curious about y'alls' views.

G

 

[Owlbebach]

Try lowering the difficulty one level and see if that helps. I was having a lot of the same mid-game problems on Deity and tried a game on immortal. I'm crushing and sitting at very high happiness. The game has gotten much harder over the last few months. It's exciting finding the need to improve again.

Same here, i just reduced AI bonuses via .xml
Immortal is still too easy, but Deity is really damn Deity, i am trying to play tourism and i'm loosing in every aspect, even when using lots of saveloads. Just abandoned a game where i had 1 Artistry, while leader has 3 Imperialism lol

 

[Owlbebach]

Some things I've considered, actually, on this point:

1.) Shifting the 'Crime' mechanic over to a 'Productivity' mechanic and tying it to Production instead of Defense. I know it's a big change, but the primary reason I'm considering it is that the AI is getting really, really good at managing its tiles, which means it is growing much more sensibly (and on higher difficulties, quickly). Crime is the only one of the 'needs' that scales directly off of population because city strength is tied to population formulaically (not just through per-citizen buildings or policies). Thus, enough big cities can really wreck the global average.

2.) Removing the defense scaler on population size from city strength and instead adding it to the city's hit points. So big cities don't become more impregnable, just beefier. This would fix the issue above (and is much easier to implement). I'm leaning towards this as a fix, but I'm curious about y'alls' views.

G

I'll agree with 2nd.
Option №1 will be way harder to manage and it will be very punishing for Tradition

However i'm not sure i saw big unhappiness from crime in games where AI has 44 population in their citie while i gave only 12.

Pay attention to Stalker0's reports, this is waht i was also talking about, not just usual crime (this one is manageable) but crime during wars. Crime when at war is a real problem

 

[Gazebo]

I'll agree with 2nd.
Option №1 will be way harder to manage and it will be very punishing for Tradition

However i'm not sure i saw big unhappiness from crime in games where AI has 44 population in their citie while i gave only 12.

Pay attention to Stalker0's reports, this is waht i was also talking about, not just usual crime (this one is manageable) but crime during wars. Crime when at war is a real problem

I checked the code, though, and there's no link between crime and war in the code.

G

 

[Stalker0]

You have logging enabled I assume? PlayerHappinessStats would be nice.

G

Does installing a new version of the mod clean the logs? I went ahead and started a new game on the latest version.

If they are still there I'll send them. Else I was going to try a similar setup again to see if the behavior replicates again, so I can send the logs for that if the scenario once again occurs.

 

[Gazebo]

Does installing a new version of the mod clean the logs? I went ahead and started a new game on the latest version.

If they are still there I'll send them. Else I was going to try a similar setup again to see if the behavior replicates again, so I can send the logs for that if the scenario once again occurs.

Yes, it does clear them.

 

[Mad Madigan]

@Gazebo I think the second option would be best as it makes the most logical/mechanical sense. Bigger cities should be harder to take down because they're just BIGGER, not because they're more impenetrable. However, this will effect how much damage garrisoned units take, as their damage is based on how much damage the city takes per attack? Garrisoned units are already a little squishy, but maybe it's good to emphasize the need for swapping out a sieged garrison unit more frequently until the later stages of the game when Military Bases and Hospitals are available to keep them healed up? This change would also make the defensive CS of the garrisoned unit more meaningful as it contributes more to the overall city CS if population just adds to city HP.

 

[civplayer33]

I agree with the second option being the best; it also mirrors real life more (which is always good), for example if you look at the city of Mosul with >1 million inhabitants being taken by just 100 ISIS fighters in 2014 (although obviously there were other factors involved). A larger city will take more time to completely occupy since it's literally more "land" but it doesn't necessarily have better defenses.

 

[ElliotS]

Some things I've considered, actually, on this point:

1.) Shifting the 'Crime' mechanic over to a 'Productivity' mechanic and tying it to Production instead of Defense. I know it's a big change, but the primary reason I'm considering it is that the AI is getting really, really good at managing its tiles, which means it is growing much more sensibly (and on higher difficulties, quickly). Crime is the only one of the 'needs' that scales directly off of population because city strength is tied to population formulaically (not just through per-citizen buildings or policies). Thus, enough big cities can really wreck the global average.

2.) Removing the defense scaler on population size from city strength and instead adding it to the city's hit points. So big cities don't become more impregnable, just beefier. This would fix the issue above (and is much easier to implement). I'm leaning towards this as a fix, but I'm curious about y'alls' views.

G

I like #2. I think it would make things a bit better for warmongering too.

 

[pineappledan]

Also a fan of 2.

As Mad Madigan pointed out, this makes garrisons squishier and more consequential. It prevents single cities from causing as much damage if they aren't part of an organized line, because the garrisons would fall more easily without support

 

[ryanmusante]

Are the two options mutually exclusive? Can they not work together? I'm definitely a fan of #2.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Please do not remove the crime mechanic. Tying happiness to city defense is one of the best things about VP, and I would hate to see that go. Having a reason to prioritize walls makes the early game that much more dynamic.

 

[chicorbeef]

I'm not a fan of the Productivity unhappiness because Production is what you use to get rid of unhappiness. If you don't have it, you'd then doubly be punished.

Idea #2 sounds great, though.

 

[Randomsheep]

Some things I've considered, actually, on this point:

1.) Shifting the 'Crime' mechanic over to a 'Productivity' mechanic and tying it to Production instead of Defense. I know it's a big change, but the primary reason I'm considering it is that the AI is getting really, really good at managing its tiles, which means it is growing much more sensibly (and on higher difficulties, quickly). Crime is the only one of the 'needs' that scales directly off of population because city strength is tied to population formulaically (not just through per-citizen buildings or policies). Thus, enough big cities can really wreck the global average.

2.) Removing the defense scaler on population size from city strength and instead adding it to the city's hit points. So big cities don't become more impregnable, just beefier. This would fix the issue above (and is much easier to implement). I'm leaning towards this as a fix, but I'm curious about y'alls' views.

G

I'll agree with 2nd.
Option №1 will be way harder to manage and it will be very punishing for Tradition

However i'm not sure i saw big unhappiness from crime in games where AI has 44 population in their citie while i gave only 12.

Pay attention to Stalker0's reports, this is waht i was also talking about, not just usual crime (this one is manageable) but crime during wars. Crime when at war is a real problem

I'm not a fan of the Productivity unhappiness because Production is what you use to get rid of unhappiness. If you don't have it, you'd then doubly be punished.

Idea #2 sounds great, though.

Gazebo stated this is a measure to improve the AI.

Of course it will have to be balanced but it sounds like idea #1 is very sensible.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Productivity mechanic is a horrible idea I think. If you don't have Production, you can't build Poverty/Culture/Science reduction buildings on time, so you're punishing low-production cities two times, once by having their happiness crippled by three types of unhappiness, and then having the reason they're in a bad shape (lack of Production) also provide them with a penalty. It's way too harsh. Option 2 is better. Poverty is way worse for me, but then I usually go Fealty because I'm too much of a wrmongerer.

 

[Randomsheep]

Productivity mechanic is a horrible idea I think. If you don't have Production, you can't build Poverty/Culture/Science reduction buildings on time, so you're punishing low-production cities two times, once by having their happiness crippled by three types of unhappiness, and then having the reason they're in a bad shape (lack of Production) also provide them with a penalty. It's way too harsh. Option 2 is better. Poverty is way worse for me, but then I usually go Fealty because I'm too much of a wrmongerer.

Of course, it would need to be balanced so it is not too harsh. Probably too much rebalancing involved at this stage.

The consensus appears to be idea #2 which is fine as well.