|
Author
|
|
Topic: famine should create unhappiness |  |
|
The diplomat
Warlord
madison,IN USA
Sep 1999
|
 |
posted August 22, 2000 10:19
   | 
 |
 |  |
I think that famine should create a certain amount of unhappiness. After all, if people are dying of hunger, wouldn't the population get pretty angry at the government for the situation?
So, I think it just makes sense to make famine be one of the factors that determines a city's unhappiness. It's a small change but one that would make civ3 just a little bit more realistic and more interesting. ------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends. |
Shadowstrike
Prince
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jul 2000
|
 |
posted August 22, 2000 13:47
|
|
| |
Maybe unhappiness untended to will cause rebellion. As it stands, it seems riduculous to leave a city in disorder for centuries without anything happening. |
DarkCloud
Warlord
of the Ring
Jul 2000
|
|
posted August 22, 2000 21:24
 |
|
| |
How about if you have famine for 1 turn .5 people become unhappy and if famine continues for 5 turns 1 person becomes unhappy. Every increment of 5 would cause .5 people to become unhappy.The .5 people is better explained in my Cities 0.1 post I believe. However any questions are welcome. |
UltraSonix
Warlord
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
|
|
posted August 23, 2000 05:15
|
|
| |
Famines should definitely cause unhappiness, as stated above, but on a minor semi-related topic - once a city has been maxed out on its population (ie half the city's gone into entertainers), and the food supply is odd numbered - the last person in the town would only require one food to survive. I got tired of getting messages that my city was starving. Building a food caravan in this instance seemed to be trivial.------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
