Happiness Details

Stephen Longshanks

Well-Known Member
I wasn't referring to you ;). Anyway my thinking is really that so much of a city's space is used for roads but the only information the game gives you about your existing road network is whether everything is connected or not. That's obviously important but you only need trails to do that.
And this is the only possible tangible benefit to this proposal. This is information that actually is highly difficult and tedious to ascertain at present time. It doesn't change my mind, but it is one way I might find it mildly useful were this to be implemented. I say mildly useful because I've been playing multiple worlds for almost 4 years without this and done alright.
 

Agent327

FOE Team
Forum Moderator
Like I said, I'm not really a proponent on the proposal but it would oddly be the only way to get some concrete information on your road network
Not if you have sand trails :)

aside from exhaustively using the reconstruction tool and doing a lot of math.
You still have to do the math, if you want to know what it will cost. As far as happiness goes, you will have more after you have replaced them. Basically that is enough info.

There are some awards with 2 store buildings (I think it's a 7-day DC award). I think at some point they were giving out multiples of watchfires and victory towers.
2 store buildings yes, but as far as I know there have never been multiples of anything. Even so, 4 road tiles, wouls still not mean much.
 
Last edited:

Algona

Well-Known Member
No, I did. I said it would make it easier for me to explain how happiness works to people that I try to help. It makes it easier to show them what the specific decos and cultural buildings are doing in connection with each other in an overall contribution towards enthusiasm and what they lack or have too much of. I think it's fairly simple that you could use this to see in a very consolidated way exactly what you have going on in your town for happiness production and how it impacts you. You can see very clearly what can be removed and what you should keep, if decos are useful to you, if cultural buildings are a waste of space... etc. Not everyone plays the same game, and some people think (whether correct or not) that they need these things, but maybe don't know exactly how or in what quantities. I realize this isn't something everyone wants, needs, or thinks is important. I'm not arguing that. I'm not trying to convince anyone who thinks they are better than me at explaining things that this would make my life simpler in that regard. I'm arguing why I think it would be useful and why I don't see it as harmful to anyone's game if implemented. I'm not concerned with how difficult it is or isn't to code. That's for the devs to decide.
Sigh. Some days I just can't explain things clearly. My apologies. (I seem to be doing that a lot in this thread.) I'll try once more and then give up because I just ain't getting there and it's my fault.

You're already teaching your students the fundamental concepts and best practices of Happiness.

This Proposal won't make any difference to that, because you will still have to teach your students the fundamental concepts and best practices of Happiness even after you know exactly what they have in their city, all this Proposal does is add an extra step.*

Anyway, i either explained my point clearly or not. I give up either way.



*And oooh, boy, what a step! I hadn't thought it through until now. Ignore for now what this Proposal does as fae as making your teaching easier. What about your student?

For you to get this information, your student has to bring up the information, write it down, and pass it along to you. And for say that tech racer in Modern that never did 'get it'? How many dozens or entries do they have to scroll through and annotate? How long wioll that take? What if, God forbid, they are as unreliable as me? Or even worse, as bad a typist as me? This is easier?

Now what about you? You just got the information and it ain't a pretty graphic, you get to wade through a long typed list. Is knowing just how many and what kinds of roads and decos and culture buildings and special buildings (oooh, different entries for the same specail building but different Eras, even more added to the list)and great buildings (what level, gotta look that up separately) worth it? Surely this is easier?

And a couple days later when there have been some changes you both get to go through it again! Hopefully the list got shorter... This, this must be easier!

i guess that makes great motivation for the student to learn all about Happiness and fix everything as fast as possible. Or find a new teacher. That is easier.

Or you can just take a minute or two to look at their city and point out what should be changed a little at a time, saving the hours of time wasted writing back and forth requesting the information, finding and annotating the information, reviewing the information and the times waiting for each step in the process.

That strikes me as easiest.

But who am I to be telling you what's easier for you and your students?
 
Last edited:

Orius Maximus

Well-Known Member
I'm very meh on this but I can see why some might value it. If nothing else, would let you know if there are roads that need to be upgraded.
As useful as that might be, we'd probably still have 20th century cities filled with dirt roads. It's the result of poor players rushing through the tech tree and never having enough coins or supplies to keep everything upgraded. It could be useful in cases where a road tile is behind a large building and hard too see though.

I think it is because you always win 1 and not more. What on earth would you do with 1 road tile? It is even more useless than a Face or a Gate.
Yeah, that makes premium roads useless. They're only like 5-10 points of happiness better than the normal roads and mismatched roads look like crap too.
 

Konrad the mediocre

Well-Known Member
And this is the only possible tangible benefit to this proposal. This is information that actually is highly difficult and tedious to ascertain at present time. It doesn't change my mind, but it is one way I might find it mildly useful were this to be implemented. I say mildly useful because I've been playing multiple worlds for almost 4 years without this and done alright.
I agree - I don't need it but it'd be nice. I just counted my road tiles and I have about 360 spaces devoted to roads which is about 23 expansions worth (by comparison 726 tiles are devoted to GBs). Those roads give me nearly 60k happiness.
2 store buildings yes, but as far as I know there have never been multiples of anything. Even so, 4 road tiles, wouls still not mean much.
Yeah, that makes premium roads useless. They're only like 5-10 points of happiness better than the normal roads and mismatched roads look like crap too.
I have VF roads. There are no premium VF roads but assuming I had OF roads, the difference in premium vs non-premium roads is 50 happiness per 1x1 tile which would gain about 16k happiness at a cost of 6.6k diamonds (certainly not worth it for me). If you need the 16k happiness you can get it from leveling up a GB (fp cost) or a culture building (space cost). I disagree with the idea that premium roads aren't worth it from awards just because 1 doesn't mean much. After all, 1 watchfire gives 4% defense which by itself is essentially trivial but many people devote tons of space to watchfire forests which they build 1 at a time. If you can gain awards of premium road tiles, even 4 at a time, you gain happiness with no cost. If that wasn't important no one would upgrade their roads in the first place.
 

Konrad the mediocre

Well-Known Member
You still have to do the math, if you want to know what it will cost. As far as happiness goes, you will have more after you have replaced them. Basically that is enough info.
Is it? You would upgrade your roads no matter the cost or benefit? Do you build anything else without knowing the cost or benefit?
 

Stephen Longshanks

Well-Known Member
Is it? You would upgrade your roads no matter the cost or benefit? Do you build anything else without knowing the cost or benefit?
Well, we know the general benefit. And we know the cost per road tile. And if we took the time to count the road tiles we would know both exactly. Have you ever done that before replacing roads? Or are you like most of us and just go on the knowledge that the increased Happiness without increased space used is worth it? I don't know about you, but I have never done a cost/benefit analysis before constructing anything in this game, at least in specific terms. Two questions I ask before building/buying anything in this game are: Can I afford it (do I have the resources to pay for it)? Do I want what it will provide me?
 

Konrad the mediocre

Well-Known Member
Well, we know the general benefit. And we know the cost per road tile. And if we took the time to count the road tiles we would know both exactly. Have you ever done that before replacing roads? Or are you like most of us and just go on the knowledge that the increased Happiness without increased space used is worth it? I don't know about you, but I have never done a cost/benefit analysis before constructing anything in this game, at least in specific terms. Two questions I ask before building/buying anything in this game are: Can I afford it (do I have the resources to pay for it)? Do I want what it will provide me?
No not since I got to the last era as had all the resources I needed (aside from diamonds). But when I was in the earlier eras I did except for every building except roads. I used the wikis to find the most cost effective housing and production buildings too.
 

Agent327

FOE Team
Forum Moderator
Is it? You would upgrade your roads no matter the cost or benefit? Do you build anything else without knowing the cost or benefit?
I am in a position not to care about the costs or the benefit. I can cover the costs and the benefits will be higher than what I had. That's all I need to know.
 

Salsuero

Well-Known Member
In the context of showing what boosts are active in your city, the Happiness is already addressed and shown in the boost overview.
Not broken down the way other boosts are. I'd like to see it that way. Thanks.

To be consistent with the existing mechanics of the Boost Overview, the Happiness buildings would only show if they were actively boosting, in other words if their level triggered Enthusiasm in the city.
I don't think it needs to be consistent. I understand that you might like it to remain so. I don't agree with that sentiment.

In the context of having a more efficient city, which is what this proposal is really about, all the other things I mentioned are just as relevant, if not more so, than having a list of your Happiness buildings.
More relevant to you, perhaps... and still more relevant doesn't mean exclusively relevant.

Not my point.
Sounded like a point.

Even if it is a generalized assumption, it's a pretty safe one.
According to you. We all assumed Hillary would win -- even Trump. Not sure that wasn't a "safe" assumption at the time.

That's an exaggeration of what you would need to do to help someone with Happiness issues. Most of the problems can be seen with a fairly brief look at their city.
Don't speak for me. I don't agree that I exaggerated anything. I'm speaking from experience and I already noted that other may in fact be much better at explaining it than I am.

Please show me where I said anything remotely like this. I like the Boost Overview window just as it is, which is why I oppose this proposed change to it.
I think you were at least "remotely" saying that here:
There is such a thing as information overload. And the very players that this proposal purports to help are the very ones that would be overwhelmed by information overload. Better that we have none of them
 
Last edited:

Salsuero

Well-Known Member
You're already teaching your students the fundamental concepts and best practices of Happiness.

This Proposal won't make any difference to that, because you will still have to teach your students the fundamental concepts and best practices of Happiness even after you know exactly what they have in their city, all this Proposal does is add an extra step.*

Anyway, i either explained my point clearly or not. I give up either way.
I don't expect you to understand or agree... as I've already given that up with many of the "no" votes so far. But, you think it's an extra step and I think it's helpful because I have run into MORE THAN ONE situation where having it broken down like this would've made it MUCH more easy to explain. Some people just don't have the patience to understand, lack the attention, or I'm not able to explain it clearly. I feel that having a visual breakdown like this would make a difference... and not just for me teaching, but possibly for people figuring it out on their own without me needing to teach them. If that doesn't answer your question, I don't believe I can.

For you to get this information, your student has to bring up the information, write it down, and pass it along to you.
...
Or you can just take a minute or two to look at their city and point out what should be changed a little at a time
Not in my view. We're already having a conversation... and to me, it would be very easy to direct them to the boost overview, explain what they're looking at and what I think they should consider, and then let them do the work (I mean, it is their town!) -- but that is much more difficult to convey by trying to tell them to look at the individual items all scattered around their town in a non-concise manner... especially with the kinds of towns I'm talking about... when I could just say... "you have way too many decos" and tell them to look in the boost overview to see what I mean. Then, if they have questions, it's much easier to say "see what I'm talking about" than to tell them to do a bunch of math, search all around their map and count up items... etc. Look -- it makes great sense to me, and that's really all I'm trying to argue.

But who am I to be telling you what's easier for you and your students?
Thank you.
 

Salsuero

Well-Known Member
I still think putting it in the boost section to be a bad idea. The happiness icon on the bar should be made clickable to get this info if Inno wants to put it in.
Cool with me. Make that the proposal. I don't care where it ends up. Makes great sense to me in the boost overview window. If people would vote yes, and their only issue is "where" it's located... put it somewhere else! I'm fine with that.
 

Stephen Longshanks

Well-Known Member
Not broken down the way other boosts are. I'd like to see it that way. Thanks.
Because it doesn't work the way the other boosts do. It is shown in an aggregate form because that's how it works. The other boosts are shown in detail because each building/feature provides its own individual boost independent on the others. The only relevant item regarding Happiness is whether your city is Enthusiastic, so that's all that is shown.
I don't think it needs to be consistent. I understand that you might like it to remain so. I don't agree with that sentiment.
If you look at what the majority of posters on the Forum say over time, being consistent is a much desired trait with features/mechanisms of the game.
More relevant to you, perhaps... and still more relevant doesn't mean exclusively relevant.
My main statement was "just as relevant", and I meant that in the context of the game, not my individual perspective. And nowhere did I say anything was "exclusively relevant".
According to you. We all assumed Hillary would win -- even Trump. Not sure that wasn't a "safe" assumption at the time.
That's a pretty far fetched analogy. I won't address it because we're not going to bring politics into this.
Don't speak for me. I don't agree that I exaggerated anything. I'm speaking from experience and I already noted that other may in fact be much better at explaining it than I am.
I didn't speak for you in any way. And of course you don't agree, that would undercut your argument. Most of us here are speaking from experience, and if you can't explain it without this feature, you're not going to be able to do it with the feature, either. It might give the learner a visual they don't have now, but it will actually make the explaining more intricate and difficult.
I think you were at least "remotely" saying that here:
You think that because you're misconstruing what I meant there. I was saying it's better that we don't add any of the things I mentioned to the Boost Overview. I said nothing about taking anything out of it.
 

Salsuero

Well-Known Member
Because it doesn't work the way the other boosts do. It is shown in an aggregate form because that's how it works. The other boosts are shown in detail because each building/feature provides its own individual boost independent on the others. The only relevant item regarding Happiness is whether your city is Enthusiastic, so that's all that is shown.
We'll agree to disagree as to the "comparison" aspect of this. I am not asking for you to agree with me.

If you look at what the majority of posters on the Forum say over time, being consistent is a much desired trait with features/mechanisms of the game.
I'm not them. I have my own opinion, which is why I have replied so many times here and elsewhere. If not, I'd simply click the "like" button, which I also do quite often. I'm not saying I'm any more or less right than those other opinions -- simply different.

My main statement was "just as relevant", and I meant that in the context of the game, not my individual perspective. And nowhere did I say anything was "exclusively relevant".
When someone says "more relevant" it often implies that the alternative "less relevant" thing is contrarily "irrelevant" meaning the "more relevant" thing is "exclusively relevant". I made a point that I didn't agree with that. If it wasn't your intention, then your point was moot in my opinion. It didn't render my points irrelevant, just because you had more relevant ones. You don't have to agree... I'm not asking you to.

That's a pretty far fetched analogy. I won't address it because we're not going to bring politics into this.
Nothing to do with politics other than on its face. I believe it was 100% solid as an analogy. You don't have to agree. It's my opinion.

I didn't speak for you in any way. And of course you don't agree, that would undercut your argument. Most of us here are speaking from experience, and if you can't explain it without this feature, you're not going to be able to do it with the feature, either. It might give the learner a visual they don't have now, but it will actually make the explaining more intricate and difficult.
We'll agree to disagree. I believe you were speaking for me when you claimed I was exaggerating because I was speaking for myself and you confronted my words as exaggerated. Perhaps I could've stated it differently and been more "accurate" but I believe you were refuting my personal experiences and that's what I was responding to. I'm not speaking about other people's experiences. See, the thing most of the "no" votes are doing is telling us "yes" votes that we don't need this. We know YOU don't need it. But to say that we don't because it doesn't apply to your experiences... that's not really reasonable logic. You are speaking to what my experiences and the value this would contribute toward better ones from a personal perspective. I'm speaking from mine. I'm not telling you how this would help you... that would be illogical and irrelevant. I'm talking about how it would benefit me and others in my shoes.

if you can't explain it without this feature, you're not going to be able to do it with the feature, either.
That's an ignorant and absurd hypothesis, sir. Don't pretend to know what I can and cannot do given a certain set of tools or another.

It might give the learner a visual they don't have now, but it will actually make the explaining more intricate and difficult.
Your opinion, not mine.

You think that because you're misconstruing what I meant there. I was saying it's better that we don't add any of the things I mentioned to the Boost Overview. I said nothing about taking anything out of it.
I read what you wrote. If it wasn't intended to be read as such, you weren't clear enough. "Better that we have none of them" sounds very much like you're saying "rather than add new stuff, it's better that we have none of it." I understand now that this is not what you meant. It's how it sounded to me.
 

Stephen Longshanks

Well-Known Member
We'll agree to disagree as to the "comparison" aspect of this. I am not asking for you to agree with me.



I'm not them. I have my own opinion, which is why I have replied so many times here and elsewhere. If not, I'd simply click the "like" button, which I also do quite often. I'm not saying I'm any more or less right than those other opinions -- simply different.



When someone says "more relevant" it often implies that the alternative "less relevant" thing is contrarily "irrelevant" meaning the "more relevant" thing is "exclusively relevant". I made a point that I didn't agree with that. If it wasn't your intention, then your point was moot in my opinion. It didn't render my points irrelevant, just because you had more relevant ones. You don't have to agree... I'm not asking you to.



Nothing to do with politics other than on its face. I believe it was 100% solid as an analogy. You don't have to agree. It's my opinion.



We'll agree to disagree. I believe you were speaking for me when you claimed I was exaggerating because I was speaking for myself and you confronted my words as exaggerated. Perhaps I could've stated it differently and been more "accurate" but I believe you were refuting my personal experiences and that's what I was responding to. I'm not speaking about other people's experiences. See, the thing most of the "no" votes are doing is telling us "yes" votes that we don't need this. We know YOU don't need it. But to say that we don't because it doesn't apply to your experiences... that's not really reasonable logic. You are speaking to what my experiences and the value this would contribute toward better ones from a personal perspective. I'm speaking from mine. I'm not telling you how this would help you... that would be illogical and irrelevant. I'm talking about how it would benefit me and others in my shoes.



That's an ignorant and absurd hypothesis, sir. Don't pretend to know what I can and cannot do given a certain set of tools or another.



Your opinion, not mine.



I read what you wrote. If it wasn't intended to be read as such, you weren't clear enough. "Better that we have none of them" sounds very much like you're saying "rather than add new stuff, it's better that we have none of it." I understand now that this is not what you meant. It's how it sounded to me.
There is no use discussing anything with you. You either dismiss anything that refutes your logic as "opinion" or you simply say "agree to disagree". Both are copouts and not worthy of a serious discussion.
 

Roxana 1184 the Wise

Well-Known Member
I vote no if this remains attached to the "Boost Overview" section. It doesn't belong there, any more than the number of boost potions I have in inventory does. If it gets moved to be attached to something appropriate, I will be neutral.
 

Salsuero

Well-Known Member
There is no use discussing anything with you. You either dismiss anything that refutes your logic as "opinion" or you simply say "agree to disagree". Both are copouts and not worthy of a serious discussion.
And you are condescending and arrogant in some of your responses when you think you know more based on time played or number of worlds or "experience" and dismiss any and all opinions to the contrary as illogical and/or irrelevant, instead of arguing against the proposal, but instead against someone's "want" of a proposal. Not saying I'm innocent either, but do you disagree that you do that? I agree... no use in discussing anything with me. Not like I haven't agreed with anything you or anyone else has said in the past... or changed my mind.

By the way, in my very first response to you on this thread, I agreed with you. I actually said I don't see why anyone should have a disagreement with you. Funny, eh?
put it at the bottom of the boost overview window so I wouldn't have to look at it, then it wouldn't negatively impact my game
When did this position for you change? I originally agreed with it:
I see no reason why this shouldn't be acceptable to anyone in favor of this proposal.
(And you ignored my response.)

For the record, I've done MUCH more than simply dismiss your points as "opinion" OR say "agree to disagree". But, at the end of the day, you're only saying the same things over and over in trying to change my mind when I'm responding with my own PERSONAL position that has nothing to do with yours. The only other responses one could have other than "agree to disagree" or to define your statements as opinions (when in fact, they usually are), thereby allowing you to have them and not actually be "wrong", would be to literally agree or disagree. Since I don't believe I'm wrong and you don't believe you're wrong... why would I say "you're right" or "you're wrong" outright?

The reason I say "agree to disagree" is because I'm tired of you replying with the same argument that I have to continue to refute based on my own opinions and experiences... and you see it as a "copout"? I see it as a kind gesture to stop the argument. If that frustrates you... don't try to refute my personal position. If it gets to a point where your point(s) is/are not changing my mind, I'm likely to end the argument in a way that leaves your point(s) intact -- with "agree to disagree" -- not a copout, just not changing my mind, and less aggressive, in my opinion, than to flat out tell you I'm right and you're wrong, especially when the argument is mostly opinion-based, and there really is no "right" or "wrong" in my view. You may think you're arguing facts or logic, and that's fine. But if I don't agree, it's going to frustrate you. That's not my fault. Your points just aren't always going to be logical to me. If you think I'm wrong... so be it. But, if you choose to respond by telling me so, I'm likely going to disagree with you.

I mean... why are you trying to convince me that I'm wrong on my opinion based on my own experiences? You're not attacking the proposal... you're attacking my desire for the proposal... you're telling me that I "shouldn't" want or need it, rather than address the proposal itself. You did that earlier and I disagreed with you. That should have been the end of it. I responded to your original issue with the proposal and you responded to me. But eventually, you wanted to go further into why I shouldn't want or need it... and how I can't use it... and how it won't help me... basically you personally attack my wants and abilities because you think it should be easy the way it is, even though I've already accepted that others may be better at things the way they are and would prefer this addition to make things easier FOR ME. That's not logical to me.
 
Last edited:

Stephen Longshanks

Well-Known Member
The early cities and cities where there aren't many Happiness buildings won't need this feature because it would be overkill. You can see the problem just by looking at their city. The cities where there are a lot of Happiness buildings (decos, culturals, supply buildings with plus/minus Happiness, event buildings, special buildings, GBs) will have such a long list that it will be a very tedious chore to even look at it in your own city and make any sense of it. Keep in mind that the Boost Overview window only shows you about 4 boosts in a row before you have to scroll right to see more. Imagine the amount of scrolling in some of these cities just to see them all. Every single type of building would have its own entry. Every different deco. Every different event building. All of them. In someone else's city you won't even be able to see it firsthand and will have to figure out some way for this player (who doesn't understand Happiness in the first place) to get the information from the list to you. Then you have to analyze it. Then you have to communicate back to them what you've deduced (if anything) from the list. Bear in mind that problems with Happiness are almost always with larger Happiness principles and not specific buildings. Use of culturals over decos. Constructing and leveling Happiness GBs...the right ones, of course. This is how you help someone with Happiness issues, not by nitpicking their use of specific buildings.

It is much like the old proverb about giving a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime. If you give a player building- and era-specific advice about Happiness in his city at this particular juncture, it may or may not help him now, but it won't help him at all in the next era...or the one after that...
Teach a player the basic principles of Happiness management, however, and they can easily take care of it without help in any future era. Bottom line is that this feature might...probably not, but might...be of some use in some situations. But only with a lot of tedious communication back and forth. However, teaching basic Happiness principles is really pretty simple, and doesn't take a lot of explaining/teaching skills. Just the ability to communicate overarching game principles. It is really not rocket science.