Can't Make Cities Healthy....

[joncnunn]

With regards to angry citizens, emphaticly disagree.
An angry citizen does not work but still consumes 2 food. Your much better off if you have an angry citizen killing him with a pop rush than keeping the free loafer around.

Now as to a sick citizen(s) there still working fine but are consuming a bit more food than normal, so the only real time that's a disadvantage is when producing settlers & workers.

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
I'd say no city is ever way too crowded.

Either you lack the special ressources to boost your happiness/healthiness, either you lack the technology to connect them to your empire, but I keep thinking a big population is never a disavantage.

In the early game, if you want further growth, a good choice might be to research and create small settlements for a few bonus ressources you can connect.

In the later game, I never found it a problem. I havent started to play past Monarch, tho, what level are you playing ?

[Cyclotron]

I never let population go to unhappiness levels unless I plan to whip them. Otherwise, it's just a waste. The "no pop growth" button is very useful for this, but you have to remember to turn it off. I'd like to see a "grow only if not yet at max happiness" button.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
I never let population go to unhappiness levels unless I plan to whip them. Otherwise, it's just a waste. The "no pop growth" button is very useful for this, but you have to remember to turn it off. I'd like to see a "grow only if not yet at max happiness" button.

How is it a "waste"? There's no negative to having unhappy citizens. It's a zero-sum. Thus, there's no reason to not want to have them.

The only way it might be a waste is if you have the emphasize food button clicked, and thus you're still bringing on max food where you could have more commerce or hammers instead. Try the Better AI... the citizen governor is actually excellent. It's smart enough to know that if you're at the health/happy limit, don't prioritize food at all. It does this without you having to click any emphasize buttons, saving the micromanagement.

Reasons to have unhappy citizens:
1) When you do get more happiness, instant city growth without having to wait on the food to come in.
2) You can whip them. Especially if you whip multiple unhappy citizens (because each whip, no matter how many you whip, only results in an additional -1 )
3) Higher pop means greater score, which impacts your relations, which means the AI thinks you're stronger and is less likely to sneak attack.
4) Emergency whip/drafting. If they aren't there when you are attacked, when you emergency whip/draft, it really hurts.
5) There's probably more, but that's what comes to mind at the moment.

Wodan

[realpolitic]

You can also let your population grow past your unhappiness limit, if you're approaching a civic that would raise it. Corodinating building temples with cathedrals/synagauges etc, for a city that needs the 50% culture boost is occasionally useful.

[couerdelion]

As with many things, hovering the mouse over the information will reveal a lot. In this case, hovering over the unhealthiness (or unhappiness) will tell you what is generating unhealthiness (mainly population until the mid/late game) and what is causing healthiness. The latter comprises

a) Base value
b) Forests
c) Fresh water
d) Resources (including health generated from bonus buildings)
e) Buildings (eg Aqueduct)

[Provost Harrison]

Yes, letting cities grow past the unhappiness limit is an opportunity cost - why produce that food when you can have more resources/trade/specialists. However (as has been mentioned), I will let it pass if I can quickly bring them under control - it is all about timing.