|
AngryBooch posted:What's the difference between local and global happiness/unhappiness? I'm used to SMAC where all unhappiness was on a per-city basis but global factors influenced each city individually. misguided rage fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Jul 24, 2013 |
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 22:55
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
I wasn't aware there was a distinction between global and local unhappiness. I know there is one for global and local happiness. Local happiness gets added to your empire happiness rating. A city can only ever contribute as many local happiness points as it has citizens in the city, according to the game. This is to prevent cheesy exploits like settling 1 population cities that have lots of happiness buildings. It also means that with the 3 unhappiness points generated for cities merely existing, you cannot reach net positive happiness with buildings alone and you need resources and other extra sources, like wonders or social policies.
Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Jul 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
misguided rage posted:As I understand it global happiness is just added to your total, but local unhappiness can only 'negate' unhappiness from that one city. So if you have a city that would be contributing -3 unhappiness, and give it buildings which would generate +5 local happiness, your total happiness would only go up by 3. Ah, I see. So a city with a zoo, circus, stadium etc. would only be able to negate the unhappiness caused by that city and not the unhappiness in the city near by with no such amenities. So basically: "A city can only ever contribute as many local happiness points as it has citizens in the city" but the concept of local happiness can come into play when you select Order and the tenet that makes factories/workshops provide happiness but your happiness number doesn't increase as much as it should due to population restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
Are there general rules for fun in this game? I hit 'Play Now', became Spain, took over my continent by turn 150 or so, and spent the rest of the game until turn 400 watching my money, tech and happiness skyrocket while the other civs remained in the dark ages and made empty threats. After I won World Leader (and the game), I decided to nuke the renaissance/industrial era cities of the other civs just for the poo poo of it. Throughout the game I just started arbitrarily hitting buttons to build things based on what my advisers said. My stats were already so high that nothing mattered anymore. "gently caress it, build everything!", I said. It was too easy. I'm guessing I need to crank the difficulty and then flounder for a while to find the magic. I probably just answered my own question. Thanks guys!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
^^ Bump the difficulty way up, get smashed in the dick, learn how to beat them.misguided rage posted:-3 just for having the city, -1 for each citizen. So yeah a brand new city will give you -4. So if you found a city on a luxury and get to 2 pop and get a coliseum up you will have a +1 net in happiness? -3 for city -2 for pop +4 for Luxury +2 for Coliseum since there is 2 pop? Just trying to think of a way to drop a lot of poop cities but keep happiness in check.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
AngryBooch posted:Ah, I see. So a city with a zoo, circus, stadium etc. would only be able to negate the unhappiness caused by that city and not the unhappiness in the city near by with no such amenities. So basically: "A city can only ever contribute as many local happiness points as it has citizens in the city" but the concept of local happiness can come into play when you select Order and the tenet that makes factories/workshops provide happiness but your happiness number doesn't increase as much as it should due to population restrictions. I'm reasonably sure that's not how it works exactly. If a city is not generating much unhappiness, like a capital city with Monarchy, or one of Gandhi's cities, it can still contribute more local happiness than it does unhappiness. The limit is solely based on the number of citizens. There's no weird "negating" going on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:For a long, long time. This is how I was able to confirm that there is absolutely no bias or apparently randomization flaws back when somebody was alleging that random civs were rigged to show certain leaders more often. Before I read the rest of the thread (  ), this is back when the SDK was - finally - released, or have we had it for even longer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
I think I struck 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:35
|
|
|
After seeing screenshots it looks like people only build new cities near their others so they get a solid lump of territory with no holes. People don't go put a city on the other side of their continent to get more options for trade routes or maybe new resources over there? In my first game I went and conquered Austria to the far south to get a city there (burned her other one) and then took Rome and his other city to have another southern link plus the territory sprawl. I also took a city-state since it was in a good strategic position on the lake in between the north and south. I was going to get cut off as the two other civs spread from coast to lake otherwise. Also, without making another city on the west coast of the continent, I was going to get cut off trying to sail west when the other civ's territory spread all the way to the ice. I mean I got cut off anyway so my capital couldn't send ships west.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
nimby posted:I think I struck Split your lungs with blood and thunder!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:One thing that you can attempt in pre-galleass naval invasions is to have melee units with amphibious promotions stacked with the triremes and attack with both boats and men. Maybe that will help a little bit. But it's going to be real rough no matter what. You really can't even just land in a catapult or two? My first attempt ended in utter failure, so I waited the 25 turns or so to get out some galleas, since I had the UU anyway. This is what I had to deal with.  I still lost ~6 ships and 4 ground units. This is turn 162 and this was the only city alexander built, and his army was shockingly anemic. King difficulty. I'm utterly perplexed, but hey, it's a capital. William doesn't seem to mind that I genocided him either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Varjon posted:I still lost ~6 ships and 4 ground units. How? Unless he had ground troops that could help focus fire something or his city could one shot your troops (At strength 19 I doubt it) You should not lose anything. As soon as something takes a salvo just pull it back and continue shooting with what hasn't been hit. Once your last full health ship is hit their city will hopefully be at 0 HP or very low. If very low just pull all the ships you can in range to do a final barrage before assaulting. You should not lose any ships to cities unless they have several other ranged troops or if you are direct hitting the city with melee ships. Alexander is a dick though so good job getting rid of him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:After seeing screenshots it looks like people only build new cities near their others so they get a solid lump of territory with no holes. People don't go put a city on the other side of their continent to get more options for trade routes or maybe new resources over there? Early in the game, it's easier to defend closer cities. Later in the game, you have a lot of speed in the way of faster roads, bridges, or maybe even railroads, not to mention faster embarked units and speedy ships. You shouldn't be averse to settling far flung locations if they're going to be really beneficial. nimby posted:I think I struck Haha, wow, that city. You found the one good oceanic city. I've actually been thinking about this a little, and I do wish coastal cities were better in some way. The trade income boost helps, but typically you'll only have one or two good cities to trade with and the rest you might as well have in-land because land tiles are just so much better than coastal tiles. Maybe they should make atolls a bit more common and make seaports boost them so they're at least giving you some decent yields. But then I got to thinking something else. Maybe most of the environmental UAs should be abandoned and tied to a more dynamic trait thing that evolves over time based on how your civilization lives. Call it tradition, maybe. Work a lot of sea resources and have lots of coastal cities and you might develop a naval tradition that gives bonuses to coastal tiles. Live by a lot of mountains and you may develop a more mountainous tradition that lets you traverse them more easily (I also wish everyone got Dido's mountain trait, to be honest), or maybe even let you work them. And so forth. Basically I don't like situations where "Only this civilization can handle mountains" or "Only these civilizations are good with deserts." When I look at a start where I'm surrounded by desert, I get a little bummed out that the only thing my civilization which will live in the desert for thousands of years can do to make deserts better is hope for Petra. I want a little more dynamism in that regard. I also want expanding outside of your comfort zone to be perhaps just a bit more challenging (or at least not as rewarding).
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
Regarding happiness, is there any benefit to having a large positive happiness? Does it improve anything? Am I right in assuming you should just keep it at around +8 or so to cover for those times when trades on luxuries expire and you're not in a position to renew them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Varjon posted:My first attempt ended in utter failure, so I waited the 25 turns or so to get out some galleas, since I had the UU anyway. This is what I had to deal with. You can drop in like four siege weapons via the water and have them fire the very next turn, it shouldn't be that hard. Tindahbawx posted:Regarding happiness, is there any benefit to having a large positive happiness? Does it improve anything? You get golden ages faster.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Tindahbawx posted:Regarding happiness, is there any benefit to having a large positive happiness? Does it improve anything? A large positive happiness means you generate more Golden Ages quicker. It will also help offset all that negative pressure that occurs if another ideology has a lot of tourism over you once you hit the modern era.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:But then I got to thinking something else. Maybe most of the environmental UAs should be abandoned and tied to a more dynamic trait thing that evolves over time based on how your civilization lives. Call it tradition, maybe. Work a lot of sea resources and have lots of coastal cities and you might develop a naval tradition that gives bonuses to coastal tiles. Live by a lot of mountains and you may develop a more mountainous tradition that lets you traverse them more easily (I also wish everyone got Dido's mountain trait, to be honest), or maybe even let you work them. And so forth. Basically I don't like situations where "Only this civilization can handle mountains" or "Only these civilizations are good with deserts." When I look at a start where I'm surrounded by desert, I get a little bummed out that the only thing my civilization which will live in the desert for thousands of years can do to make deserts better is hope for Petra. I want a little more dynamism in that regard. I also want expanding outside of your comfort zone to be perhaps just a bit more challenging (or at least not as rewarding). Religions kinda tap into this already. Desert folklore is a great example. Would be nice to see the concept expanded though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:57
|
|
|
Does that often linked citystate script disable achievements?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:How? Unless he had ground troops that could help focus fire something or his city could one shot your troops (At strength 19 I doubt it) You should not lose anything. He probably dribbled his army in a unit at a time, or failed to withdraw to three hex range.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
I think my most ridiculous starting city was a coastal start as Attilla. 2 whales, a crab, maybe a pearl, 2-3 fish, and 3 hills with sheep and a couple of horses. Popped a hut and got faith, picked God of the Sea. I wish I hadn't abandoned that one. E: Shaka thanks you for the 6 world wonders, Wu.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
How is everyone getting on with their build openings? I've mainly been using a three city tradition opening where I send caravans of food to the other cities as quickly as possible. It can get pretty sketchy during the first batch of turns but then it explodes middle game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Before I read the rest of the thread ( It's effectively the "real" SDK that people were clamoring for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:How? Unless he had ground troops that could help focus fire something or his city could one shot your troops (At strength 19 I doubt it) You should not lose anything. As soon as something takes a salvo just pull it back and continue shooting with what hasn't been hit. Once your last full health ship is hit their city will hopefully be at 0 HP or very low. If very low just pull all the ships you can in range to do a final barrage before assaulting. You should not lose any ships to cities unless they have several other ranged troops or if you are direct hitting the city with melee ships. Alexander is a dick though so good job getting rid of him. His city did kill one unit per turn basically, and he was smart enough to march around the mountains and take my archers from behind, and to block landing spots with pikemen. In retrospect I should have concentrated my galleases a little more strongly from the get-go, but yeah, I was basically throwing triremes at it towards the end to get the city before all my archers were killed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Varjon posted:His city did kill one unit per turn basically, and he was smart enough to march around the mountains and take my archers from behind, and to block landing spots with pikemen. In retrospect I should have concentrated my galleases a little more strongly from the get-go, but yeah, I was basically throwing triremes at it towards the end to get the city before all my archers were killed. What was the city defense before you took it? He's exposed to 6 galleases, you should drop that in 3 turns max unless he's got insane defense or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
Varjon posted:My first attempt ended in utter failure, so I waited the 25 turns or so to get out some galleas, since I had the UU anyway. This is what I had to deal with. I'm running my first game as Venice at the moment, on emperor, and Alexander has just run away. He had four cities founded by turn 100 and at turn ~150 he's eliminated Germany from the game, taking the three cities that Bismark built. At least Byzantine and Babylon are between us. Alex and Hiawatha seem to always be the most trouble. Also in relation to the early wonder discussion I had a great start as Indonesia in a MP emperor game and finished the great library at a tense turn 48. It would have been a few sooner but I had to dance my worker and warrior against some barbs and couldn't finish tile improvements optimally. I've got to agree that on the higher difficulties getting pre-medieval wonders has a lot to do with recognising a a good start and knowing roughly when the AI will likely pop 'em.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
What does selecting World Age (3/4/5 billion years) specifically do to map generation? The other options are pretty self-explanatory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
Brannock posted:What does selecting World Age (3/4/5 billion years) specifically do to map generation? The other options are pretty self-explanatory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Nope, that food is generated by sheer free-market magic.  This is the part where I realize I've been playing the game entirely wrong the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 01:15
|
|
|
nimby posted:I think I struck Well this is civ so you know what you must do 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
Bradeh posted:How is everyone getting on with their build openings? I've mainly been using a three city tradition opening where I send caravans of food to the other cities as quickly as possible. It can get pretty sketchy during the first batch of turns but then it explodes middle game. This is what I've settled on as well, my first two trade routes are to provide food to my second and third city to get them up and running, then once those trade routes expire I turn them right back around to feed my capital so it can start running specialists and working production tiles while still growing at a decent rate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
I think one of my archers, now a crossbowman, may actually be out of upgrades to pick. The Zulu 25% xp boost plus the 50% xp boost from honor appears to be great at creating tiny gods.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
DEO3 posted:This is what I've settled on as well, my first two trade routes are to provide food to my second and third city to get them up and running, then once those trade routes expire I turn them right back around to feed my capital so it can start running specialists and working production tiles while still growing at a decent rate. Interesting. I haven't thought about turning them back yet. I have been building one guild per city. I'll have to give it a go though next game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
God, Jesuit Education is so good. I've been playing a wide Portugal game and basically shot from 9th (last) place in the literacy demographic to first place after a handful of turns after researching education. Even if the 160 faith cost were more, I've been making a metric ton of faith anyway for having the +1c/+1f for gold and silver belief pantheon, plus the Religious Texts belief is making Catholicism spread like wildfire. It's going to be an interesting Renaissance/Industrial era.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
edit: mixed up bonuses
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
In 1422 AD the Greater Zulu Empire finally knew a few years of peace. Five other cultures had been consumed by centuries of bloody warfare and were finally integrating into their new social order. In Kathmandu an exploration vessel was being commissioned by wealthy Zulu merchants to seek out new shores. Welp, time to make a caravel and introduce myself to polite society. "Oh, those smoking ruins? They came with the place, I assure you."
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Cirofren posted:I'm running my first game as Venice at the moment, on emperor, and Alexander has just run away. He had four cities founded by turn 100 and at turn ~150 he's eliminated Germany from the game, taking the three cities that Bismark built. At least Byzantine and Babylon are between us. Alex and Hiawatha seem to always be the most trouble. What *is* a good start though, what do you need for it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
There's no universally good start. Unless you get put on an area with a lot of tundra you can make MOST things work. Lack of hills can be really vexing due to lack of production, but if theres a lot of jungles they can pay off the long run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Jedi Knight Luigi posted:God, Jesuit Education is so good. I've been playing a wide Portugal game and basically shot from 9th (last) place in the literacy demographic to first place after a handful of turns after researching education. Even if the 160 faith cost were more, I've been making a metric ton of faith anyway for having the +1c/+1f for gold and silver belief pantheon, plus the Religious Texts belief is making Catholicism spread like wildfire. It's going to be an interesting Renaissance/Industrial era. Do you get to purchase the buildings before you've researched them, or does Jesuit Education just save you on build time?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
Saves you on build time/cost.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
Yep, you just buy 'em right out. The faith cost for them is insanely cheap too. And when you're making ~70 faith per turn, it's definitely a drop in the bucket to buy universities for 5-6 cities in one or two turns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 03:55
|
|