Rejected Happiness

[Grzechu Junior]

Reason

To balance attack inflation

Details

as above

Balance

perfect

Abuse Prevention

none

Summary

as above

Have you looked to see if this has already been suggested?

it is not

Nowadays we see more and more attack (i will use word attack for red and blue and for deff stats) New building provide unhappines
Currently happines affects only gold and supplies - you 20% more gold and 20% supplies when you are happy. It does not affect ranking points, goods, anything

As more and more attack is given to buildings, maybe unhapinness should afectt attack? Few more events and many players will have negative happines. But still it does not matter cuz i will not lost anything.

For example in less than a half year my happines dropped form 700k to 300 k (100 k w/o motivation)

What if, unhapinnes affect attack, i propose:

0-50k unhappines- minus 10% attack
100-250k unhappines- minus 20% attack
250k-500k unhappines - minus 35% attack
500k+ unhappines - minus 50% attack


But not flat 10% for example, when you have 1000 attack, - 10% is 100. So you would have 900 attack bonus with 50k unhappines.


this will balance the inflation of attack building giving more and more attack.

<numbers are not important> <More important is the idea itself as an option>

 

[CrashBoom]

the idea is not balanced

because the values are absolute
500k unhappines in iron age can't be reached

but in titan age very easy

 

[Grzechu Junior]

the idea is not balanced

because the values are absolute
500k unhappines in iron age can't be reached

but in titan age very easy

okey, so it should be seperate number for every age - you are right. Still more important is the idea itself, not the numbers.

 

[CrashBoom]

should be more simple: take the happiness % ?

if the city only has 50% of what it needs than minus 50% attack
if it is at 73% then minus 27% attack

but it should be capped. (minus 50%)

and it would be much better because every percent counts
flat numbers (250k-500k or other) gives a too huge range where people don't need to care because reaching the next better value is just impossible

 

[Grzechu Junior]

should be more simple: take the happiness % ?

if the city only has 50% of what it needs than minus 50% attack
if it is at 73% then minus 27% attack

but it should be capped. (minus 50%)

and it would be much better because every percent counts
flat numbers (250k-500k or other) gives a too huge range where people don't need to care because reaching the next better value is just impossible

sound good.

 

[drakenridder]

Happiness affecting points from battles used to be a thing since the start of the game. It has been removed. I don't see any way they would make happiness affecting %.
Using % of happiness 1:1: -50% +/-0% +20% on the base %. Although yes this would be dramatic. For example having 1.000% can be raised by 200% with enough happiness but could also be cut by -500%. Imho it'll be too impactful. Simultaneously reducing those numbers with a flat -50%or +20% would do very little to 1.000%. Striking an balance that is cohesive and simple to understand will be difficult.
I've used 1.000% as an example. Advanced cities can hit more than double of that. Earlier ages could get half of it, if the player knows what they're doing.

Either way it's part of DNSL (Do Not Suggest List): making the game easier

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Happiness affecting points from battles used to be a thing since the start of the game. It has been removed. I don't see any way they would make happiness affecting %.
Using % of happiness 1:1: -50% +/-0% +20% on the base %. Although yes this would be dramatic. For example having 1.000% can be raised by 200% with enough happiness but could also be cut by -500%. Imho it'll be too impactful. Simultaneously reducing those numbers with a flat -50%or +20% would do very little to 1.000%. Striking an balance that is cohesive and simple to understand will be difficult.
I've used 1.000% as an example. Advanced cities can hit more than double of that. Earlier ages could get half of it, if the player knows what they're doing.

Either way it's part of DNSL (Do Not Suggest List): making the game easier

it is making the game harder xD not easier xD

i am proposing to lower the attack of almost every player when they will not be looking at happiness.

something must be done with attack inflation

 

[drakenridder]

it is making the game harder xD not easier xD

i am proposing to lower the attack of almost every player when they will not be looking at happiness.

something must be done with attack inflation

Hahaha good one. Giving us easy excess to 200%+ bonuses is making the gamer harder?

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Hahaha good one. Giving us easy excess to 200%+ bonuses is making the gamer harder?

what?

IG is making this game easier, they propose many building with sick attack.
They are also giving unhappines.

Therefore i want to happines affect attack. What you dont understand? I Dont want happiness to increas aattach

full hapinnes means you have 100% of your city attack
50k unhappines means you have only 70% of your city attack
100k uunhappines meand you have only 50% of your city attack

so when you have 4000 attack and 4000 deffence and 100k unhappines your effective attack would be 2000 and 2000 (with 50% penalty) instead of 4000 and 4000 (as stats show)

for exaple builign gives 50 red stats, with unhappines it would give only 25 (50% penalty)

 

[drakenridder]

what?

IG is making this game easier, they propose many building with sick attack.
They are also giving unhappines.

Therefore i want to happines affect attack. What you dont understand? I Dont want happiness to increas aattach

full hapinnes means you have 100% of your city attack
50k unhappines means you have only 70% of your city attack
100k uunhappines meand you have only 50% of your city attack

so when you have 4000 attack and 4000 deffence and 100k unhappines your effective attack would be 2000 and 2000 (with 50% penalty) instead of 4000 and 4000 (as stats show)

for exaple builign gives 50 red stats, with unhappines it would give only 25 (50% penalty)

Happiness affects productivity of coins/supplies:

Angry	-50%
Happy	+/-0%
Enthusiastic	+20%

If happiness gonna affect by the same %, full happiness lead to an increase of 20% of unit’s strength. What I misunderstood was how it would affect units. If it’s affecting the % directly it’s making the game vastly more easy. If I understand you correct, it’ll affect the base values of units. Much like it does with coins/supplies. Making the game indeed more challenging and making happiness very relevant again.
To simplify it I’ll give an example with the satellite spotter (future era’s ranged unit):

Happiness	Att value	Def value
-50%	40	50
+/-0%	80	100
+20%	96	120

This may not seem to be that significant. With an example of 250% it’s easier to understand:

Happiness	Att value	Def value
-50%	140	175
+/-0%	280	350
+20%	296	370

As illustrated above, the impact of an angry population is devastating. Compared to the current state (+/-0%). While the +20% buff isn’t that significant it’s still in practice an extra 20% buff. It’ll make the game overall harder but offers a 1-time off more easy 20% increase.

50k unhappines means you have only 70% of your city attack
100k uunhappines meand you have only 50% of your city attack

This flat 50/100k happiness isn’t applicable to all cities. The needed happiness depends on the present population. Happiness has only 3 possible statuses: angry, happy and enthusiastic. There ain’t no -30% productivity, only -50%. See also this;
https://forgeofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Happiness

Correct me if my interpretation is still incorrect. Asking to make happiness affecting the units in the same way as coins/supplies is actually quite an interesting idea. However asking to remove the 20% bonus for providing 40% more happiness than needed, probably won’t work very well.

 

[Thunderdome]

Oh man, I can see a short coming from this on YouTube one day:

*two opposing forces entered the battlefield with 50% happiness*

Soldier A: I don't feel happy and I don't want to attack. Does anyone want to attack *yelling to his comrades*?!
Soldiers B-H: Nope, not me. Nuh-uh. Not today.
Soldier A: Hey, you guys, do you want to attack?
Opposing Forces: Hell no! We're too sad to do anything!
Soldier A: So are we!
Opposing Forces A: So, what now?
Soldier A: I don't know. Maybe, go home?
Opposing Forces A: Yeah, let's go home! Come back tomorrow!
Soldier A: See ya!

Narrator: And, on that day, no one fought and had left the battlefield. The player was given a note on their screen saying "Battle Forfeited as both forces were sad to continue fighting" and that you need to take really good care of them. The end.

Me: The last time someone was unhappy at a theme park (Rollercoaster Tycoon), I would pick them up with the mouse, drag them over to the lake that was made, and I would just drop them in there. Teaches them to be "unhappy" next time.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

To simplify it I’ll give an example with the satellite spotter (future era’s ranged unit):

Happiness	Att value	Def value
-50%	40	50
+/-0%	80	100
+20%	96	120

As illustrated above, the impact of an angry population is devastating. Compared to the current state (+/-0%). While the +20% buff isn’t that significant it’s still in practice an extra 20% buff. It’ll make the game overall harder but offers a 1-time off more easy 20% increase.

i dont propose increas 20% when city is happy

Happiness	Att value	Def value
-50%	140	175
+/-0%	280	350
+0%	280	350

I propose this as above. Happines should give NOTHING to attack. It should give only penalty when you are unhappy.

btw. thanks for tables.

This flat 50/100k happiness isn’t applicable to all cities. The needed happiness depends on the present population. Happiness has only 3 possible statuses: angry, happy and enthusiastic. There ain’t no -30% productivity, only -50%. See also this;

hmm, okey but maybe i was not so "clear"

In every moment your city need X happines to be "nuetral" - when you have more your city is happy.
So i want it this way:
When you have 20% less then needed for being neutral - you get x% penalty
when you have 50% less than needed for beng neutral - you get y% penalty

 

[Emberguard]

i dont propose increas 20% when city is happy

If you're going to reduce attack boost based on happiness, I would want the increase for maintaining enthusiasm as well. Otherwise there's no point in having a difference between enthusiastic and happy

 

[drakenridder]

i dont propose increas 20% when city is happy

Happiness	Att value	Def value
-50%	140	175
+/-0%	280	350
+0%	280	350

I propose this as above. Happines should give NOTHING to attack. It should give only penalty when you are unhappy.

btw. thanks for tables.

hmm, okey but maybe i was not so "clear"

In every moment your city need X happines to be "nuetral" - when you have more your city is happy.
So i want it this way:
When you have 20% less then needed for being neutral - you get x% penalty
when you have 50% less than needed for beng neutral - you get y% penalty

That’s honestly overcomplicated. Just using the existing framework of happiness: angry, happy, enthusiastic based off population and happiness needs, makes more sense. It’s a solid and fair system. Reinventing the wheel is not practical and causes unnecessary confusion.
I can agreed and support the proposal to make happiness affecting unit’s base values, like it does with coins/supplies productivity. To make it somewhat harder as the penalty of an 50% weaker army is quite severe. While an slight but fair 20% bonus is sweet but not game breaking.

To put it into perspective. The penalty is effectively reducing the % by half, no matter how high the buff is. While for example at 50% an 20% buff is relative an increase of 40%. While at for example 1.000% a 20% base bonus is only 2% more % but an angry population is still cutting it down by half.

 

[XIA*]

...and then we would also need to adjust buildings that give out happiness. With the amount of happiness reduction by 2x2 items (jumping pumpkin takes away 7040 happiness in Future) and new event buildings, we need ways to increase happiness, and for example the oracle of delphi gives 4809 happiness at level 80. LEVEL80. Alcatraz gives 31.962 happiness at level 80. That's enough for 4 jumping pumpkins.... and takes a ridiculous amount of fp to level. So if you take away attack % for unhappiness, adjust the GBs happiness levels higher.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

...and then we would also need to adjust buildings that give out happiness. With the amount of happiness reduction by 2x2 items (jumping pumpkin takes away 7040 happiness in Future) and new event buildings, we need ways to increase happiness,

just dont put them. This is the main reason. You will not be able to put EVERYTHING from event in city.
Thats the main idea of this idea to limit the "super mega building" provieded with new events.

i have 4500 attack, 3500 deffence. 350k happines overneeded do still i can put some sick builigns. But there should be some max limit to balance new buildings.

There is a reason why they are giving more and more unhappinnes. But tut currently penalty for lack fo ahppines (20% for coins and supplies) is kind of joke. Noone will care about it and will builidn more and more new buidling with sick attack and negative happines.

The only soluutuion is to affect attack with happiness.

 

[drakenridder]

...and then we would also need to adjust buildings that give out happiness. With the amount of happiness reduction by 2x2 items (jumping pumpkin takes away 7040 happiness in Future) and new event buildings, we need ways to increase happiness, and for example the oracle of delphi gives 4809 happiness at level 80. LEVEL80. Alcatraz gives 31.962 happiness at level 80. That's enough for 4 jumping pumpkins.... and takes a ridiculous amount of fp to level. So if you take away attack % for unhappiness, adjust the GBs happiness levels higher.

There are already plenty event buildings providing efficiently happiness. For example the vineyards from fall event23, alongside many other event buildings. Negative happinesses on event buildings are an balancing act. To give something powerful, something else must absorbed it’s negative side effects.

 

[XIA*]

There are already plenty event buildings providing efficiently happiness. For example the vineyards from fall event23, alongside many other event buildings. Negative happinesses on event buildings are an balancing act. To give something powerful, something else must absorbed it’s negative side effects.

those buildings ar ebecoming obsolete. since we have limited place, many of us retire old buildings because they are not relevant anymore. Vineyards take up a lot of space for what they provide. and if you replace old event buildings with newer ones, your happiness balance suffers.

 

[drakenridder]

those buildings ar ebecoming obsolete. since we have limited place, many of us retire old buildings because they are not relevant anymore. Vineyards take up a lot of space for what they provide. and if you replace old event buildings with newer ones, your happiness balance suffers.

I'm sure newer buildings will be introduced with (positive) happiness. Take the flamingo's from wild life event 2024 for example. They also give a ton of happiness. Only a few special buildings offer negative happiness but in return offer quite something remarkable. Jumpin pumpkins for example are the only 2x2 event production buildings. Offering high efficiency + military bonuses but in exchange players taking an hit on their happiness.
Either way, even w/o trying most exceed 140% happiness needs. It's also a strategy game afterall. Compromises to optimise something are bound to be made

 

[Grzechu Junior]

bump xd