This site is in archival mode. A replacement is being developed. In the meantime, please use the PBW2 Forums for community discussions. The replacement software for this site will use a unified account system with PBW2, and any newly created threads will carry over.
Does the recreational achievement decrease anger once when it is researched or every turn after that?
AFAIK the latter, it gives an empire wide % similar to the naturally happy racial trait.
Quote:
I think spacing people should make other people angry as an event.
'Active Population Control' would be the norm for any self respecting Xenophobic, Insular, Belligerent Hive empire.
The Population Minister adopts the population spacing tactic as its default (indeed only) way of undoming planets.
Having an anger event for population spacing would hit the AIs hard.
Making other races angry would hit their happiness rating and get those empires rioting and rebelling, the opposite effect desired ? Perhaps restrict it to the affected subject races within the empire doing the spacing taking into account the empires tolerance for aliens too.
What is lacking is a practial method of undoming colonies without tears for those less squeamish civilisations.
Changing the way migration works to have non breathers migration heavily boosted once they are on mixed colony with native breathers ? More racially tolerant, the faster the auto migtation?
That should sit well with the AI.
A modified Cargo facility allowing the storage of unwanted non breathers(they then don't count as planetary population) ?
AI builds as default on a mixed race domed colony, pop minister auto fills it ? Once its undomed, no more non-breathers arrive. Back to top
Does the recreational achievement decrease anger once when it is researched or every turn after that?
AFAIK the latter, it gives an empire wide % similar to the naturally happy racial trait.
Quote:
I think spacing people should make other people angry as an event.
'Active Population Control' would be the norm for any self respecting Xenophobic, Insular, Belligerent Hive empire.
The Population Minister adopts the population spacing tactic as its default (indeed only) way of undoming planets.
Having an anger event for population spacing would hit the AIs hard.
Making other races angry would hit their happiness rating and get those empires rioting and rebelling, the opposite effect desired ? Perhaps restrict it to the affected subject races within the empire doing the spacing taking into account the empires tolerance for aliens too.
What is lacking is a practial method of undoming colonies without tears for those less squeamish civilisations.
Changing the way migration works to have non breathers migration heavily boosted once they are on mixed colony with native breathers ? More racially tolerant, the faster the auto migtation?
That should sit well with the AI.
A modified Cargo facility allowing the storage of unwanted non breathers(they then don't count as planetary population) ?
AI builds as default on a mixed race domed colony, pop minister auto fills it ? Once its undomed, no more non-breathers arrive.
I don't think the AI's can get rebellions. Maybe they get a drop in productivity, but they seem pretty much immune to anger.
You can certainly get an AI colony to rebel (& join you) via an Intel Action, takes a *lot* of Intel to do though.
I'm pretty sure I saw a break away in a recent game, not sure if it ceded from it's parent empire or it was a bunch of migrating aliens wanting freedom from their new overlords.
I just stumbled on it whist exploring. Back to top
You can certainly get an AI colony to rebel (& join you) via an Intel Action, takes a *lot* of Intel to do though.
I'm pretty sure I saw a break away in a recent game, not sure if it ceded from it's parent empire or it was a bunch of migrating aliens wanting freedom from their new overlords.
I just stumbled on it whist exploring.
Good news, if it's so. I'd just like to know how my enemies are avoiding it - they lose ships left and right, far more than I could get away with. Back to top
You can certainly get an AI colony to rebel (& join you) via an Intel Action, takes a *lot* of Intel to do though.
I'm pretty sure I saw a break away in a recent game, not sure if it ceded from it's parent empire or it was a bunch of migrating aliens wanting freedom from their new overlords.
I just stumbled on it whist exploring.
Good news, if it's so. I'd just like to know how my enemies are avoiding it - they lose ships left and right, far more than I could get away with.
Station troops on every planet you own. It helps with morale in general and thus counteracts anger. Back to top
The average loyalty of a planet (sum of loyalty / number of races on planet - not weighted by population amount) is used to determine the happiness penalty applied in the events script. Basically every 10 points less than 100 loyalty equals -1 happiness each turn in addition to whatever the happiness file does.
The loyalty level always starts at 100%, which is why a newly captured colony usually starts with a high level of happiness. After a number of turns, both should be steadily decreasing if hostilities have continued.
For v1.19i, I'm going to try out the idea I mentioned earlier here regarding government types. Basically the each government type will have its own natural happiness level which a population in that empire will trend towards. The exact figures are to be determined but will set based on the relative magnitude of the current happiness modifiers. Most will fall within the indifferent category - albeit at slightly different levels.
The strength of the effect each turn will be based on the difference between the current happiness amount and the natural level. In order for a population to be happier than the natural level, the positive modifiers must not only exceed the negative ones but also must be sufficient to overcome the natural tendency - which of course becomes increasingly harder to do as the population gets happier. The natural tendency works both directions.
The aim of this is to make obtaining/maintaining jubilant populations difficult without adding more management to prevent populations spiraling into angry and rioting states as would be the case using harsher penalties under the linear component of the system. Space Empires Depot | SE:V Balance Mod Back to top
A few comments here:
...For v1.19i, I'm going to try out the idea I mentioned earlier here regarding government types. Basically the each government type will have its own natural happiness level which a population in that empire will trend towards. The exact figures are to be determined but will set based on the relative magnitude of the current happiness modifiers. Most will fall within the indifferent category - albeit at slightly different levels...
In principal it sounds good, but I would prefer not to see cliched generalizations made in regards to happiness levels of different government types.
For example, a democratic government does not necessarily engender happiness (e.g. Haiti is currently a democracy, much of Eastern Europe is democratic, but rated low in happiness), while I can think of several examples of proud, happy and generally content peoples living under tyrannical or oligarchical governments (e.g Imperial Rome). SEV Visual Mods:
Black UI Reduced Size Shipsets Back to top
The actions of an empire are the primary determining factor of the overall level of happiness. This mechanism acts as a natural baseline which without other inputs the population will trend towards.
None of the types will have a baseline set lower than indifferent. Where the differences will be more apparent is in the effort to maintain happy/jubliant level populations. Space Empires Depot | SE:V Balance Mod Back to top
The strength of the effect each turn will be based on the difference between the current happiness amount and the natural level. In order for a population to be happier than the natural level, the positive modifiers must not only exceed the negative ones but also must be sufficient to overcome the natural tendency - which of course becomes increasingly harder to do as the population gets happier. The natural tendency works both directions.
Captain, it sounds so great I'm speechless. Why haven't I thought about it? Back to top
A few comments here:
...For v1.19i, I'm going to try out the idea I mentioned earlier here regarding government types. Basically the each government type will have its own natural happiness level which a population in that empire will trend towards. The exact figures are to be determined but will set based on the relative magnitude of the current happiness modifiers. Most will fall within the indifferent category - albeit at slightly different levels...
In principal it sounds good, but I would prefer not to see cliched generalizations made in regards to happiness levels of different government types.
For example, a democratic government does not necessarily engender happiness (e.g. Haiti is currently a democracy, much of Eastern Europe is democratic, but rated low in happiness), while I can think of several examples of proud, happy and generally content peoples living under tyrannical or oligarchical governments (e.g Imperial Rome).
Imperial Rome isn't the best example. Sure the people were happy whenever there was a benevolent dictator, but they were very UNhappy with Nero. Back to top
Imperial Rome isn't the best example. Sure the people were happy whenever there was a benevolent dictator, but they were very UNhappy with Nero.
This is incorrect.
Though his personal behavior, paranoia and erosion of the powers of the senate made him unpopular with the nobility, Nero’s spending on the theater and games made him extremely popular with the general populace. He also reduced taxes generally, and especially on grain imports.
Bread and circuses have always been a hit with the masses!
His bad rap comes mainly from disgruntled equestrians like Suetonius, and from his persecution of disruptive cults like the Christians (especially after the fire of 64).
Tacitus, who was concurrent his later reign, makes it clear in the Annals that the lower classes were saddened by his suicide in 68.
With a bit of research, you can certainly come up with some examples of unpopular emperors, especially in the latter days, but I don't think you can credibly deny that the Roman empire provided its citizens with an unprecedentedly long period of peace, prosperity and civic pride.
“Civis Romanus sum” was one of the most powerful phrases any person could utter during this period. SEV Visual Mods:
Black UI Reduced Size Shipsets Back to top
A few comments here:
...For v1.19i, I'm going to try out the idea I mentioned earlier here regarding government types. Basically the each government type will have its own natural happiness level which a population in that empire will trend towards. The exact figures are to be determined but will set based on the relative magnitude of the current happiness modifiers. Most will fall within the indifferent category - albeit at slightly different levels...
In principal it sounds good, but I would prefer not to see cliched generalizations made in regards to happiness levels of different government types.
For example, a democratic government does not necessarily engender happiness (e.g. Haiti is currently a democracy, much of Eastern Europe is democratic, but rated low in happiness), while I can think of several examples of proud, happy and generally content peoples living under tyrannical or oligarchical governments (e.g Imperial Rome).
The problem with your argument is that you're not translating things into game terms. When Rome was "happy" it was due to facilities overcoming the discontent which always accompanies elitism, and it was pretty much confined to the city of Rome itself - not the majority of the empire. Keeping the home system happy usually isn't too big a problem from what I've seen, and if you need facilities for that, you've got little to brag about.
So the real issue is: what would Rome have been like without happiness facilities? How do different empires compare outside of their "home system"?
As for "democracy", what is the trend? Sure it's possible to bungle things, but I don't think there's much denying the preference for equality and freedom over the shoddy con jobs & corruption that accompany any elitist set-up you can name.
The game's the game, of course, so we're stuck with gadgetry like troops making populations happy. How often has that trick ever worked? Force may dissuade uprisings sure, but bringing happiness? Back to top
... When Rome was "happy" it was due to facilities overcoming the discontent which always accompanies elitism, and it was pretty much confined to the city of Rome itself - not the majority of the empire.
So the real issue is: what would Rome have been like without happiness facilities?
Sorry, that's not true.
The city of Rome accounted for only a fraction of the total population of the empire. The vast bulk were from an incredible variety of races and cultures, the majority of them conquered.
Even given this fact, the Empire managed to flourish for centuries longer than any modern so-called 'democracy'.
The reason for this was not due to it's 'happiness facilities', but due to the fact that citizens of the empire could count on decent roads and infrastructure, reasonable and enforced laws, and effective protection from outside agression - all with tax rates generally lower than we have today and comparable levels of overall freedom.
The same conditions, incidentally, that maintained the support of the people for (oligarchical) British Empire for so long also.
It is factors such as these that influence the overall level of happiness of a given population, not some largely imaginary sense of popular control of the gov't.
Anyway, we are getting a fair bit off topic here.
The point I was trying to make is that the type of government is much less important than the way it is managed, and that I would prefer not to see overly simplistic and cliche falacies used to influence in-game happiness.
From the sound of things though, Kwok has the issue well in hand, and the model he has described sounds excellent. SEV Visual Mods:
Black UI Reduced Size Shipsets
Last edited by gurachn on Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:35 am; edited 1 time in total Back to top
... When Rome was "happy" it was due to facilities overcoming the discontent which always accompanies elitism, and it was pretty much confined to the city of Rome itself - not the majority of the empire.
So the real issue is: what would Rome have been like without happiness facilities?
Sorry, that's not true.
The city of Rome accounted for only a fraction of the total population of the empire. The vast bulk were from an incredible variety of races and cultures, the majority of them conquered.
Even given this fact, the Empire managed to flourish for centuries longer than any modern so-called 'democracy'.
The reason for this was not due to it's 'happiness facilities', but due to the fact that citizens of the empire could could on decent roads and infrastructure, reasonable and enforced laws, and effective protection from outside agression - all with tax rates generally lower than we have today and comparable levels of overall freedom.
The same conditions, incidentally, that maintained the support of the people for (oligarchical) British Empire for so long also.
It is factors such as these that influence the overall level of happiness of a given population, not some largely imaginary sense of popular control of the gov't.
Anyway, we are getting a fair bit off topic here.
The point I was trying to make is that the type of government is much less important than the way it is managed, and that I would prefer not to see overly simplistic and cliche falacies used to influence in-game happiness.
From the sound of things though, Kwok has the issue well in hand, and the model he has described sounds excellent.
Well I'm not sorry or particularly happy about it, but what I said is the truth. Apparently you've found some "historian" who just loves the Roman emperors all to bits, and fallen under his spell. The real history's available for anyone who cares to research.
If Kwok decides to favour the despotic with happier populations, I can adapt. If it somehow gets too annoying, the game's moddable... Back to top
Well I'm not sorry or particularly happy about it, but what I said is the truth...
He he, you had me going there for a moment.
For a minute there I actually thought you were attempting to claim that the Roman empire was an example of. "shoddy con jobs & corruption that accompany any elitist set-up".
Zwo_Dvoongar wrote:
The real history's available for anyone who cares to research.
Indeed.
I might suggest starting with the famed historian Edward Gibbons.
In Volume 1 of his seminal '...Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', he states, "If a man were called to fix the period in the history of the world during which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of Commodus. The vast extent of the Roman Empire was governed by absolute power, under the guidance of virtue and wisdom... The forms of the civil administration were carefully preserved by Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian and the Antonines, who delighted in the image of liberty, and were pleased with considering themselves as the accountable ministers of the laws.
Zwo_Dvoongar wrote:
If Kwok decides to favour the despotic with happier populations, I can adapt.
The real history's available for anyone who cares to research.
Indeed.
I might suggest starting with the famed historian Edward Gibbons.
In Volume 1 of his seminal '...Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', he states, "If a man were called to fix the period in the history of the world during which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of Commodus. The vast extent of the Roman Empire was governed by absolute power, under the guidance of virtue and wisdom... The forms of the civil administration were carefully preserved by Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian and the Antonines, who delighted in the image of liberty, and were pleased with considering themselves as the accountable ministers of the laws.
Zwo_Dvoongar wrote:
If Kwok decides to favour the despotic with happier populations, I can adapt.
I think you can relax. Nothing in Kwok's description leads me to think this likely.
80 years? Out of how many?
...And extensive use was made of "facilities" even during that brief span. Back to top
...And extensive use was made of "facilities" even during that brief span.
He he, probably the longest single such period in human history, I would guess!
And the need for 'happiness facilities', a.k.a. recreation and entertainment, is a universal human need.
My point still stands.
Happiness has more to do with the way a political system is handled, than the form it takes. SEV Visual Mods:
Black UI Reduced Size Shipsets Back to top
...And extensive use was made of "facilities" even during that brief span.
He he, probably the longest single such period in human history, I would guess!
And the need for 'happiness facilities', a.k.a. recreation and entertainment, is a universal human need.
My point still stands.
Happiness has more to do with the way a political system is handled, than the form it takes.
I think you lost track of your point. You cherry pick a small fraction of the time Rome was ruled by emperors and overlook the majority of the time - and that's without even bothering to look into the details of your chosen historian's assessment.
I agree that there's a lot more involved than the system, but I don't deny its role. Indeed, I sincerely hope nobody could take the impression that I disagree with either of these statements:
Quote:
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. " - John Adams, 1798
Quote:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens... Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." - G. Washington, 1796
also, Rome was not your traditional empire. the emperor was not a dictaator. Sure he could overrule the Senate, but it wasn't usually a good move to do it. Back to top
I think you lost track of your point. You cherry pick a small fraction of the time Rome was ruled by emperors and overlook the majority of the time...
Please don't misrepresent my position.
I am in no way trying to claim that the Roman empire was happy and prosperous throughout its long history. No political or social system can make that claim.
My point was that non-democratic systems do not automatically engender unhappiness among their general populations, and I think the example I provided clearly shows that people can be happy and content under largely totalitarian/oligarchical systems if they are well managed.
Of course, in many such cases they are not, but I would prefer not to see a player who choses an absolutist system for their empire be penalized just because other Kings/Emperors/Grand Poobahs in history have been greedy, evil bastards.
I probably won't be layering in the patch soon, but I'm really digging the idea. If it's balanced right, players will be rewarded for a change when they successfully improve the happiness of their empire.
When I say "balanced" I don't mean it should be easy, but rather possible, at least later in the game to maintain "happy" if not "jubilant", with commensurate effort. Back to top
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
All logos and trademarks used on this site, all comments and stories posted for reading, all files hosted for download, and all art work hosted for viewing are property of their respective owners; all the rest copyright 2003-2010 Nolan Kelly.
Syndicate news: - Syndicate forums:
Page Generation: 0.22 Seconds
SEV Visual Mods:
- Syndicate forums: