The Bandit Lord Event

[Fafnir13]

Finally got an even that wasn't something involving having a specific mana/religion/alignment handy. It was the one involving the Bandit Lord Nietz or however it's spelled. The choices presented were temporary happiness (worthless), spend money and get longer temporary happiness (also worthless), or suffer 5 temporary unhappiness in all my cities and get a hero unit. I'm thinking, okay, my cities will be out of it for a few turns, but then I'll be back in business, right?
Having made the choice, I'm going to say the unhappiness effect is too harsh. Unless you're playing FoL, there's no way you'd have enough happiness in any but your major cities to withstand it. Everything that was under 5 pop (everything except my capital and a conquered capital) has starved down to 1, and the unhappiness only just started to lower. Heroes are nice, but I don't think it's worth crippling your empire just for a Grigori equivalent one.
Possible fixes would include making the unhappiness more local. Crippling one city, the one that felt the worst of the Bandit Lord's marauding, would make sense. If it needs to stay a global effect, lower the unhappiness to 3 at the most and make it deteriorate faster.
And on a random side note: Can we nix more of the temporary happiness from events? You're just setting a trap for yourself if you let the city grow and the happiness really doesn't seem to give any benefit other than being there. Temporary percentage gains to money, culture, research, or hammers would be great substitutes.

 

[Marksman77]

I'm only here for a sidenote.
I also never choose temporary happiness, from exactly the same reasons. While it's ok from flavour perspective, it's a trap gameplaywise, unless in very special circumstances (like you know you'll acquire new happiness source before the temporary effect ceases)
It'd be cool if it was replaces with some other bonus, like commerce %increase.

 

[DuckAndCower]

Temporary happiness is good if you let yourself go over the cap. There's really nothing bad about having that next to your city, and it can actually be an advantage, since when you do get some more happiness, you don't have to wait for the city to grow to take advantage of it.

I really don't see why people are so afraid of having an unhappy citizen or two.

 

[Darksaber1]

I never have unhappyness issues. ('Course I play the Calabim and Cualli, but I don't think that has anything to do with it)

 

[Chip56]

I really don't see why people are so afraid of having an unhappy citizen or two.

1) You might trigger some negative events
2) You have to feed them for nothing (unless of course calabim)
3) The gov. of the city will now use a farm with 4 food instead a grass tile with a city
-> less commerce

 

[smjjames]

heh, I haven't seen that Bandit Nietz event in a long while, not since .31, probably got crowded out by all the new ones.

On the topic of unhappyness, there are events such as that new medicine one where you get a bonus by testing it on subjects, but there is unhappyness as a result.

edit: The event I'm talking about is not new (it has been around for a long time), its the one where you discover a new plant or something that has medical properties.

 

[Darksaber1]

But that has good chance of permanently boosting health. Besides, as Calabim, I can just eat the unhappy citizens, while keeping a health boost.

 

[civ_king]

as a side note for the Calabim get the governors mansion and then pillar of chains those unhappy are equal to an Engineer in terms of production

 

[rocklikeafool]

I never have unhappyness issues. ('Course I play the Calabim and Cualli, but I don't think that has anything to do with it)

Me too. I also play those two. So, the extra food and the fact that the citizens are used to cruelty prolly helps.

 

[DuckAndCower]

1) You might trigger some negative events
2) You have to feed them for nothing (unless of course calabim)
3) The gov. of the city will now use a farm with 4 food instead a grass tile with a city
-> less commerce

1) I've actually never seen a negative event from unhappy populace. Could just be me, though.
2) If you were providing enough food to grow anyway, I don't see how this is a problem. If you weren't, then just let them starve.
3)This is a problem with the AI that can easily be overridden by manually changing which tiles are worked.

However, it is my experience that the AI "governor" will automatically avoid growing the city if it has or will have unhappy populace.

 

[MaxAstro]

1) I've actually never seen a negative event from unhappy populace. Could just be me, though.
2) If you were providing enough food to grow anyway, I don't see how this is a problem. If you weren't, then just let them starve.
3)This is a problem with the AI that can easily be overridden by manually changing which tiles are worked.

However, it is my experience that the AI "governor" will automatically avoid growing the city if it has or will have unhappy populace.

1)I have gotten the (main) event from unhappyness, and it ~sucks~ (Randomly smashes your improvements). It's actually an event that triggers for other players, targeting your unhappy city, and lets them spend gold to rape you, basically.

2) Each unhappy population slows down your growth rate without giving you anything in return, and possibly forces you to work more food tiles without getting anything from them. Also, the unhappy population doesn't give anything, but adds unhealthiness.

3) Yes, but the manual solution is to starve the city back down one population point. XD No matter how you look at it, the extra population is a cost without a benefit (since if your happiness is about to increase, you could just avoid growth one turn from growing).

Also, the AI governor will only ~usually~ avoid growing the city. It will NOT avoid growing the city if stopping growth would require sacrificing a large amount of whatever it is being told to focus on right now. Also, if the city is right on the food border, where it can only either be starving or barely growing, and no tile combination will result in a growth of 0, the AI will not avoid growth. In short, it's always smart to click avoid growth if the city is one or two turns from growing into unhappiness. Unless you are the Calabim, in which case unhappy citizens are no problem. They won't be complaining for long anyway... XD

Also, I'd like to second temp happiness being worthless. The only times I've ever wanted temp happiness were when I got hit by unhappiness from a war and the temp happiness reduced it for a while, and when I was the Balseraphs and had 200 turns worth of temp happy from arena battles. XD

 

[DuckAndCower]

Ah, I guess I've been lucky enough to avoid the improvement-smashing event. That could be obnoxious.

Honestly, I almost always pass the temp happiness by, too. I don't see it as a hindrance, but it's usually such a small bonus that it's basically negligible.

As far as the +5 unhappiness from getting the hero in the Bandit Lord quest, I actually don't think it's that bad. All it takes is a gambling house with your $ slider set to 50% to completely offset the unhappiness.

(I'd also like to point out that if the penalty were not harsh, you would just always take the hero, removing any interesting decisions from the event. At least with how it is now, you might be tempted to take the temp happy).

 

[Caradoc]

All it takes is a gambling house with your $ slider set to 50% to completely offset the unhappiness.

Oh, is that all?

 

[The13thRonin]

Yeah, temporary happiness is a really underwhelming reward.

 

[rocklikeafool]

Yeah, temporary happiness is a really underwhelming reward.

Yes, it is.

 

[The13thRonin]

Yes, it is.

Unless all temporary effects were quadrupled in length I don't think I'd choose any. Even after that buff only if it had no permanent consequences or alternatives.

 

[cyther]

I believed that the pillar of chains did not stack with governors manor at least back at the beginning of shadow.

 

[DuckAndCower]

Oh, is that all?

Um... yes? What is the point of this question?

If it's to passive-aggressively argue with me (i.e., you are trying to say that gambling house + slider set to 50% cash is not a reasonable solution), please remember that the unhappiness is temporary, so it's not like you're setting your research back indefinitely. Also, your slider is probably not set to 100% science, so you're not even taking a 50% hit to research. Also, you only need to offset the full unhappiness if your cities were already at the happiness cap.

"Oh, is that all?" Yes, yes it is. It's a simple solution, which I think works quite well.

 

[Ahriman]

Yes, the Neitz event is pretty useless.
If its early enough that a strength 4 hero would be useful, you can't afford the unhappy.
If its late enough that you can deal with the unhappy, then a strength 4 hero is worthless.

Or, you're playing on Chieftan

By the time you have gambling houses built in most of your cities, a strength 4 hero is virtually useless.

I would suggest the event only give 1 unhappy, but require the horsebackriding tech be researched to trigger.

 

[uberfish]

I like this event, it gives the player meaningful choice as opposed to just handing out free stuff. It's also well balanced in that although the hero is more useful early on, the cost is also comparatively more severe early on. I think Nietz is upgradable if you happen to get him later in the game though?