Friday night, Alpha Wolf and I came to the sudden realization that there is no unhappyness for population size. There is a provision for it in the game, but it dosn't seem to be working.
To me, the is a major omission. Without negative happyness for population size, you lose the following elements of the game...
1) No need to theaters, arenas, etc. Why bother building them, except to combat polution.
2) No need for city moral. Citys don't riot, period. You can do just about anything you want in a city and it dosn't make a difference. Cities are not longer collections of your population, they are just resource generators. Don't even bother to check your cities - they will all be "82" or so anyway. So go to war - what else is there to do.
3) The empire values for wages, food, and gold settings are of little importance. Set them all the way to the stops. Big cities can take it, and you can dip them down only when starting little cites.
4) The whole concept of stopping growth in a city becuase of the negative impact (what negative impact?) is lost. If you build a "pittsburg" city in a cluster of hills, and suddenly the city begins to grow out of these bounds, go ahead and let it. What harm comes from letting it get too big? But if you had to pay for all those improvements (arenas, theaters, etc) you might not be so hot to incorporate all that swampland. You might, rather, hold down growth by playing more of your population into science, merchant, or mechanical fields.
5) Whats the point of having entertainers. Has anyone ever been forced to use it? Elvis was my best friend in Civ2, and allowed you to quickly head off disasters (throw entertainment to the mob and watch them stop and gape - what a life lesson!).
6) The AI's ability to wage war becomes critical, since now you can build massive armies and go on your little military adventures. Without having all those resources available to throw into "might", you might have to be a little more careful in who and when you attacked.
7) As resources become critical, you might drop out of war footing once or twice in a game. Wouldn't that be a change?
Really, arguing about the AI is fine, but we've lost a good chunk of the game by not having this feature in. Drop a line to activision support and mention it - I'd sure like to see this go into a patch.
------------------
Bluevoss-
To me, the is a major omission. Without negative happyness for population size, you lose the following elements of the game...
1) No need to theaters, arenas, etc. Why bother building them, except to combat polution.
2) No need for city moral. Citys don't riot, period. You can do just about anything you want in a city and it dosn't make a difference. Cities are not longer collections of your population, they are just resource generators. Don't even bother to check your cities - they will all be "82" or so anyway. So go to war - what else is there to do.
3) The empire values for wages, food, and gold settings are of little importance. Set them all the way to the stops. Big cities can take it, and you can dip them down only when starting little cites.
4) The whole concept of stopping growth in a city becuase of the negative impact (what negative impact?) is lost. If you build a "pittsburg" city in a cluster of hills, and suddenly the city begins to grow out of these bounds, go ahead and let it. What harm comes from letting it get too big? But if you had to pay for all those improvements (arenas, theaters, etc) you might not be so hot to incorporate all that swampland. You might, rather, hold down growth by playing more of your population into science, merchant, or mechanical fields.
5) Whats the point of having entertainers. Has anyone ever been forced to use it? Elvis was my best friend in Civ2, and allowed you to quickly head off disasters (throw entertainment to the mob and watch them stop and gape - what a life lesson!).
6) The AI's ability to wage war becomes critical, since now you can build massive armies and go on your little military adventures. Without having all those resources available to throw into "might", you might have to be a little more careful in who and when you attacked.
7) As resources become critical, you might drop out of war footing once or twice in a game. Wouldn't that be a change?
Really, arguing about the AI is fine, but we've lost a good chunk of the game by not having this feature in. Drop a line to activision support and mention it - I'd sure like to see this go into a patch.
------------------
Bluevoss-
Comment