Suggestion: On Screen Potential DISORDER flag.

[bongo]

If I remember correctly, civ2s F1 showed cities with 3 colours, (normal, disorder, WLTKD) which were far better than civ3, which use the same colours to tell you about the food situation...

vmxa1, don't worry, a disorder flag will probably work like the city governor. It will do a nice job for those who don't like MM, but those who have the guts to do the MM will usually get an advantage

[gunkulator]

What Civ3 needs is an "emergency management governer" - call him The Governator - oops, already taken Normally, this governor would do nothing at all. The one and only time he would act is at the end of your turn when the city is about to go into disorder. Instead of going into disorder, the governor would act the same as the happiness governor to prevent it.

I'd leave that governor on in all my cities.

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by bongo
It will do a nice job for those who don't like MM, but those who have the guts to do the MM will usually get an advantage

Then we can get the requisite bragging about beating the game on Emperor or Sid because of attention to detail and micromanagement...

Before anyone accuses me, yes I'm jealous

I suck at micromanagement and Emperor level

[Dis]

Originally posted by gunkulator
What Civ3 needs is an "emergency management governer" - call him The Governator - oops, already taken Normally, this governor would do nothing at all. The one and only time he would act is at the end of your turn when the city is about to go into disorder. Instead of going into disorder, the governor would act the same as the happiness governor to prevent it.

I'd leave that governor on in all my cities.

well that would be too easy. What's the point of having happiness then? This governor would prevent all disorder. So the number of happy citizens is irrevelent- excpet for golden ages.

no I think the player should have to check the cities manually. The only thing I ask for is a city summary screen that shows the cities in red if they have more unhappy than happy citizens. That's all I want for christmas.

[Kuciwalker]

The point of happiness is that unhappiness decreases productivity by forcing you to assign lux % or entertainers.

[Fistleaf]

Such micromanagemnt should be abolished. A ruler of a country does not have to bother with such small issues as checking for happiness. Leave that to the subordinates (computer). We have world domination plans to strategise.

[Gray_Lensman]

Quoted from a post from CivFanatics:

Firaxis's Soren Johnson gave a presentation in this year's Game Developers Conference (GDC) and the topic was "The Civilization Series: How to Maintain a Successful Franchise".

Civilization IV: Best Civ Yet!

- Modern interface/help conventions
- Continuous, immersive 3D world (what-you-see-is-what-you-get)
- Drop unfun legacy (pollution, rioting, maintenance, corruption/waste) emphasis mine.
- New killer features (religion, civics)
- RPG elements (unit upgrades/experience)
- Coding from scratch (multiplayer, mod-friendly)
- Can still take over the world!

Soren Johnson is the lead designer for Civilization IV.

Obviously, the designers realize that rioting, corruption, waste, etc. is unfun for most players. Now if they will only realize that not completing (removing bugs) in a product is more unfun than anything else.

[Solomwi]

Originally posted by Fistleaf
Such micromanagemnt should be abolished. A ruler of a country does not have to bother with such small issues as checking for happiness. Leave that to the subordinates (computer). We have world domination plans to strategise.

He does when he has such incompetent subordinates as the AI gives us.

[Aramis]

Originally posted by Gray_Lensman
- Drop unfun legacy (pollution, rioting, maintenance, corruption/waste)

Now that's just downright scary.
Pollution and civil disorder, while a drag at times, seem such a part of the game. I'm not playing well if pollution is out of hand and cities are in disorder. They're part of the big picture. And I don't believe it takes an expert at micromanaging to keep an eye on these things.
A flag for disorder would be nice, but I'd hate to see civil unrest out of the game.

[bongo]

Perhaps it would work at a different level. The way disorder works now, you either got a city that works, or one that doesn't work at all, a binary city if you like

I guess they could make disorder into a corruption multiplier...If people are content, corruption will be low, as happines decrease, corrupion gets worse.


No wait, they wanted to get rid of corruption as well

[Dis]

Originally posted by Gray_Lensman
Quoted from a post from CivFanatics:

Firaxis's Soren Johnson gave a presentation in this year's Game Developers Conference (GDC) and the topic was "The Civilization Series: How to Maintain a Successful Franchise".

Civilization IV: Best Civ Yet!

- Modern interface/help conventions
- Continuous, immersive 3D world (what-you-see-is-what-you-get)
- Drop unfun legacy (pollution, rioting, maintenance, corruption/waste) emphasis mine.
- New killer features (religion, civics)
- RPG elements (unit upgrades/experience)
- Coding from scratch (multiplayer, mod-friendly)
- Can still take over the world!

Soren Johnson is the lead designer for Civilization IV.

Obviously, the designers realize that rioting, corruption, waste, etc. is unfun for most players. Now if they will only realize that not completing (removing bugs) in a product is more unfun than anything else.

taking all of those features (pollution, rioting, maintenance, corruption/waste) would make the game far too easy. We just want some semblence of realism. And occasionally cities do riot. And cities do have corruption. Though not in the way the game shows.

Here's my idea for corruption. Small towns should have 0 corruption. We all know the larger the goverment is, the more corruption. So the bigger the city size, the more corruption it has. The only downside to this is it encourages ICS. So I'll have to think about this some more. But I think distance from capitol is kind of silly. Though I htink corruption based on the number of cities is still important too have. It rewards smaller empires. so maybe that could balance out ICS. Once you exceed a certain number of cities, corruption creeps in, no matter what the city size is.

[Solomwi]

Only, it doesn't really reward smaller empires on an absolute scale, Diss. If I have 100 cities and you have 20, with identical terrain and city placement, etc., my top 20 will produce exactly the same as your empire. Hence, it's not going to hurt me, relative to you, to expand, even though my efficiency (defined as usable shields & gold versus total) will be far less. At least, it won't hurt me until my outer cities become drains on the economy due to improvements. There's an easy way around that, though... don't build improvements in them and keep them small.

I don't really mind the current corruption model, though I agree it bears little enough resemblance to the way the world works to appear silly. I like your larger city equals more corruption idea, but only if that corruption is conquerable with courthouses, police stations, etc., rather than just mitigatable.

I think corruption, if kept on the distance model, ought to be affected more as travel time between city and capital decreases, but not to the point that a railnet equals no corruption anywhere.

[Rommel2D]

I basically agree with vmxa1 about it belonging in the game, but what would be nice for the present system would be an optional tech like Sociology later in the game that would enable some sort of disorder flag.

[Hermann the Lombard]

Hermann: Using the faces isn't necessary. Either sort by population and check the happy/content number going down the list or sort by happy/content faces and check the population for each one that looks questionable. It's not perfect, but it's better than counting faces by hand.

"Grasshopper, you look but you do not see, you see but you do not observe."

I didn't realize that was there (or at least didn't remember it after first playing the brand-new Civ3). However, it isn't very useful; you *still* have to count the unhappy by hand. That should either be a triple number or simply happy and unhappy, not happy and content.

I *do* think that unhappiness (et al) should remain in the game, perhaps--only perhaps--starting at Regent level or as an option. If an option, it should default to "on." I'm in the "reduce busywork" camp. Micromanaging to squeeze every last bit has its place at higher levels, but sheer busywork is just a nuisance.

[Solomwi]

No, you don't have to count the unhappy. Just subtract happy and content from population. The same line gives you food consumed, and you know it's two per pop point, so it becomes two elementary level calculations.