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

Should Stadium be buffed up?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Pep, Jun 5, 2011.

?

Should be Stadiums buffed up to lessen the cost/benefict ratio over its predecessors?

  1. Yes. Make them also increase happiness by a % of the total population of the city.

    20 vote(s)
    30.8%
  2. Yes, but only increase current happiness by a fixed amount.

    10 vote(s)
    15.4%
  3. Yes, add a fixed amount of happiness and also increase happiness by a % of population.

    8 vote(s)
    12.3%
  4. No. It's OK as it's now.

    27 vote(s)
    41.5%
  1. Pep

    Pep King

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    688
    Location:
    Spain
    Just by looking at the happiness buildings numbers:
    • Circus: 240 :c5production:, 2 :c5happy: --> 120:c5production:/:c5happy:
    • Colosseum: 360 :c5production:, 3 :c5happy: --> 120:c5production:/:c5happy:
    • Theatre: 750 :c5production:, 4 :c5happy: --> 187:c5production:/:c5happy: (56% increase over Colosseum)
    • Stadium: 1800 :c5production:, 5 :c5happy: --> 360:c5production:/:c5happy: (93% increase over Theatre)

    Comparing it to research buildings progression:
    • University: 600 :c5production:, 50% :c5science: --> 12:c5production:/1%:c5science:
    • Research Lab: 1800 :c5production:, 100% :c5science: --> 18:c5production:/1%:c5science: (50% increase over University)

    IMO Stadium should be buffed up, to lessen the cost/benefit ratio over its predecessors. What do you think?
     
  2. MadDjinn

    MadDjinn Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    4,554
    why build stadiums at all? they come to late to matter. If you haven't got your happiness properly under control by the modern era, you're in deeper trouble than what a few more happiness will give you.
     
  3. Pep

    Pep King

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    688
    Location:
    Spain
    You need them if you're following a taller cities approach and you are going for a technological victory.
     
  4. Brichals

    Brichals King

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Location:
    Berlin, D
    You need to consider that later in the game you generally have more +gold modifiers from policy/tech/more improved tiles/more pop etc. So I think it's fine. Also happy faces are arguably more important later as you can get some mega growth for the same reasons (farms give more food/policies/hospitals etc.). This means you can use more specialists and so on. I know this is fairly obvious but I just point it out because I think it's a pretty complex area of the game and not dumbed down like is often said.
     
  5. UrbanX

    UrbanX Absolute Monarch

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    91
    I think its fine as it is. maybe the production cost could be lowered a bit but by the time stadiums come around cities should have a well enough hammers to complete in a decent time. Then again, I almost always buy stadiums during that time anyway because...well...I can.:)
     
  6. Pep

    Pep King

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    688
    Location:
    Spain
    I don't think Stadium hammers cost is the problem. Its cost is the same as other modern era buildings. What is unbalanced IMO is the benefit you obtain for such cost. I think benefit should be increased to match at least the cost/benefit ratio of Research Lab compared to University.
     
  7. Drawmeus

    Drawmeus Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,213
    Each point of happiness is worth at least one point of population somewhere in your empire. Population is at its most valuable late in the game with all the modifiers open. Stadiums worth 2 theaters would be totally broken, honestly. Each stadium lets you support 10 more population? 5 more cities without drawback? That'd be insane.

    Insofar as anything that late in the tech tree can be broken, of course... but that's a different issue.
     
  8. Pep

    Pep King

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    688
    Location:
    Spain
    It's not more cities without drawback. Stadium, as all happiness buildings, can't provide more happiness than there're citizens in its city. So it really would benefit taller cities.
     
  9. Randall Turner

    Randall Turner King

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    679
    This is essentially the same response as...

    ... in that you're not considering the problem. Not to imply intellectual limitations - you're just not accepting that there is a problem.

    I'd also make the observation that Pep's view of the problem is evolving since his OP. Cost of stadiums is irrelevant, for instance. The poll could be more clearly worded.

    The problem is this:

    There's no facility available for late-game happiness management, especially for scaled-up games. Even after you're forced into the Piety branch for Theocracy, have taken all Order-related SP's, have Freedom SP's for specialist effects, have built or straight-up stolen the appropriate Wonders - even after all that -

    On a Huge map, with all participants in the Modern era, growth (including conquest) will be governed by Happiness limits. There is no available mechanism to effectively manage "scaled-up" happiness issues.

    There.

    Is a buffed Stadium the answer? Don't know, don't have a strong opinion. The point I want to make is that trivializing the problem isn't indicated. It's real, if you get into that situation. Many players don't experience it, most players can avoid it (ie, win early) if they choose, but that's really dodging the spirit of the thread.
     
  10. jagdtigerciv

    jagdtigerciv Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    468
    They cost more because the post-Industrial units/buildings have dramatically increased cost in line with factories, and other production/food modifiers.

    They're fine.
     
  11. chazzycat

    chazzycat Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,892
    exactly what I came here to say. Thanks. If a game is still going in the modern age, it's worth building. Good for securing that final golden age (then you can sell it if you want)
     
  12. odin_toelust

    odin_toelust Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    46
    This.

    And my .02 I don't think that they need to be buffed as there should be a limit on the size of your growth, especially in the modern era. If your 3 main cities each have a stadium that is 15 happy which turns into 15 pop which turns into mucho science, gold, hammers etc.

    Also, I think that by limiting the amount of happiness they give it emphasizes the importance of the earlier buildings in your smaller cities.

    Off topic: the change that I think would be interesting to the happiness system is if you can choose between extra happiness or growth for connecting demanded resources and/or having missions to boost your empires happiness (i.e. make friends with X civ, take out barbs, etc etc). I think this would add a much needed buff to happiness in the trickier eras to maintain it and would give you incentive to go after the wanted lux's when you have low happiness. They could even be themed to the type of civ you are playing
     
  13. UrbanX

    UrbanX Absolute Monarch

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    91
    not sure if im understanding the problem but here goes...

    ok, lets put hammer cost aside and discuss benefit of stadium, specifically to taller empires not wider empires. there are already happiness policies that benefit taller cities. happiness buildings although built in taller cities really benefit wider empires.

    you would have to have an insane amount of population and be playing insanely late into the game to have happiness issues after all that.my last game i had population near 100 million and I still could manage happiness.There are points in the game where i dont have any options to further my happiness, but then I gain a tech, or policy, or luxury and that fixes it. your saying that late game after all happiness buildings and wonders are built, all the necessary social policies are taken, all luxuries are acquired, there is still unhappiness and a need for something else to be put into place??

    is that the gist of it or am I still "not getting it"?:confused:
     
  14. Randall Turner

    Randall Turner King

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    679
    Yeah. At this point, I'm basically calling "BS" on you guys.

    Gently, b/c I don't think there's any malice intent here, but the last few posters are just wrong. From now on, supply a save game for reference.

    Here's mine:

    I'm playing for my "normal" big end-game furball here. This isn't a "huge" map (I can go find one in a minute, but for now let's deal with the game I've got running), it's a "large". I'm still setting up.

    Date is 1920, my pop is 50 mil, I just went to #1 in population but that's not going to last b/c the very next edit I make in my defaults xml file is bump the AI happiness bonus up about 50 to offset their happiness problems.

    Bismarck just came out of a war with Arabia here and razed a number of cities he really shouldn't have. Look around on the Western edge of his continent, you'll see a few city ruin sites and a few cities that aren't puppets, ie, they've been partially razed. This happened about the time Pep made his OP, and I realized the problem - the AI is out of happiness.

    Note that the AI isn't ready to go to war yet. Japan still has prop planes, Bismarck has jets but no stealth bombers or SAM's, etc. I'm not going to war until they're "mature", ie, they match me in tech. (I need to see at least one GDR.) I just finished the tech tree - I'm working on my first "future" tech here. They've got a ways to go yet.

    (China is my lone ally, I lost USA b/c they wouldn't ally with me, btw.)

    I'm in great shape happiness-wise. NOW. I've got a 51 happiness. That's with everything - I have virtually every wonder, every SP, everything. As soon as I go to war, the happiness will drop down to around 10 due to loss of luxuries from "marginal" trade partners and, more importantly, my "garrison" units will have to vacate their cities.

    I'll take Monarchy this turn, probably - but definitely before the balloon goes up. I'll take another 3-4 SP's before war happens. At some point soon I'll also have no choice but to start annexing puppets, but that's normal. That'll help a lot.

    Note that we won't have a war for another 100 turns or so. (Guessing a bit more, probably 200, ie, around 1200 or so.) Once I fix the AI's happiness I'll drop back down to #2 in population, you can see Germany is leading me in food production, but the point is that we're all going to grow more. A LOT more.

    I have no more Stadiums to build.

    This is a pretty "mild" setup. In addition to being on only a "large" map, I only have four cities at 20 or more population. Both I and the AI will have numerous in the 30's before war happens.

    I am very, very good at SP management. I've got a superb civ for it, and I'm an expert. The AI is suffering primarily b/c it's not as good as I am at SP management. I have no choice but to bump their happiness bonus up a lot more. (I've got it at the default "Immortal" setting right now, didn't realize the problem until Germany started razing "good" cities.)

    Does that help? Does this look like a game you've played, or does it seem a bit more "mature", as I'm assuming? I really don't see how you could have done better, btw. On "Huge" maps the situation can be much, much worse. OTOH, some civs like India don't have this problem so much.

    ps - by the time the war starts, my opponents (Germany plus Japan, possibly Iroquois if Japan doesn't eat them) will be more powerful than I am - individually. That's what'll make it fun. Note that currently, for instance, Germany has destroyed my "naval" power rival, Arabia. By wartime both Germany and Japan will have massive navies. (I've done this before.)

    Edit: just bumped the AI unhappiness factor from 75 to 50 (Immortal == 75, Deity == 65, mine == 50) and growth from 75 to 50 (same numbers). That'll allow the AI to keep growing. I can't see a way to allow them to get SP's cheaper. I dropped their build cost to Deity level, could drop their build cost more, but my experience is they'll fill up the map without additional help. (That's "build" and "training" in the Civ5HandicapInfos.XML file.)

    These changes made Germany go from "worst" in happiness demographics to "not on the chart", ie, have to hook up the tuner or get the InfoAddict mod to see it exactly, but it's good enough now they can fight wars w/o razing everything. If the Stadium was buffed a bit, I wouldn't have to do this. (Note the AI's are doing fine gold-wise, I'm tight but I have a bunch of techniques to keep making money that aren't exploits - can't sell stuff to them at this point anyway.)

    If you're interested I'll repost when the war starts, shouldn't be but a few more days even at my snail's pace. (still staggered at how quickly some of you guys play.)
     

    Attached Files:

  15. Pep

    Pep King

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    688
    Location:
    Spain
    I think you didn't get my main point. It's not their hammers cost (1800 :c5production:), which I consider OK, same as Research Labs and other modern era buildings. It's the benefit you obtain for this cost, as I explained in my first post.
     
  16. Drawmeus

    Drawmeus Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,213
    Not quite. I freely acknowledge that there's a problem - Stadiums suck as is, to put it bluntly.

    My point is that simply buffing the numbers (I was responding that it being 100% better than a theater is not the answer) does not really even get at the problem.

    Basically, solve Stadiums with some other benefit, or remove it from the game, or develop the modern era so that it's a meaningfully interesting era to play in rather than the current mess, and then balance the Stadium into that picture.



    Then again, buffing the Stadium isn't going to HURT anything if only because the modern era of the game is practically irrelevant to the outcome of the game either way.
     
  17. Bandobras Took

    Bandobras Took Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,922
    Location:
    Orem, UT
    Voted no. Your whole premise is incomplete. At that point in the game, I don't care about the hammer cost; it's inconsequential. Any city that needs the building should be able to pump it out. What concerns me is the effect per maintenance.

    Colosseums give you 1.5 :) per gpt.
    Theatres give you 1.33 :) per gpt.
    Stadiums (Stadia? ;) ) give you 1.66 per gpt.

    A Stadium is the most efficient happiness generator in terms of maintenance, and the hammer cost is not unreasonable for its era. No need to change it.

    You appear to be playing on a longer game speed than standard; at least, all your hammer numbers are 3 times mine. Perhaps a quicker game speed would make building stadiums seem less onerous?
     
  18. Bandobras Took

    Bandobras Took Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,922
    Location:
    Orem, UT
    I admit to incomprehension -- what exactly do you mean by a "scaled-up" game?
     
  19. Randall Turner

    Randall Turner King

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    679
    Games above "normal" size. The example I posted was "large", I played "huge" until got tired of my ATI card scroll-crashes.

    None of these problems manifest on "small" maps.

    Basically, happiness management doesn't scale up with game size. <shrug> If you don't play large games, you don't encounter it. Edit: and if you don't "hold off" for late game play, you also probably don't encounter the problems.

    Bandobras, we've repeatedly said the cost isn't the issue. Neither build cost nor maintenance cost. It's that we need something with more positive benefits in big games.

    I'm not really objecting to posters saying buffing Stadiums isn't the way to go, ie, it's not the solution. I'm objecting to posters saying there's no happiness issue, ie, there's no problem that needs solving. That's like me spouting off on DLC unique units - if I don't have the experience, I don't have the understanding. They're not bumping into the problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

    I'm playing Marathon, but speed isn't the key here, it's game size. (Faster speeds == faster pop growth.)
     
  20. Bandobras Took

    Bandobras Took Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,922
    Location:
    Orem, UT
    That makes sense.

    That is, however, a separate issue than the strength or lack thereof of the Stadium.

    Personally, I'd be delighted to see the happiness/city factor scale by map size.

    Edit: I voted no, and felt I should explain my reasons for voting no. The discussion and thread title seem to be about the Stadium structure itself, not happiness vs. map size scaling. The comment is still valid.
     

Share This Page