Ungrateful citizens of Civ3

Master Zen · April 5, 2003, 17:39

Hola,

During my latest war of agressi...I mean, liberation against the Iroquois, I couldn't help but laugh at some really silly things concerning citizen happiness.

After the war, happines went up because of war weariness being eliminated. However, as usuall, many of the large conquered cities were still experiencing severe bouts of disorder.

This is of course, normal, but I had never bothered to figure out the causes of this unhappines, when I did I was up for a suprise:

"Hell no, we won't go!" What??? It was your mother country which drafted you not me!!

"We can't forget the cruel oppresion you have bore down upon us" Huh??? It was your mother country which forced you into slavery to build improvements!!

Frankly, I don't understand why they are pissed, after all, I liberated them from their despot ruler!!

Dida · April 5, 2003, 17:48

Very true!
I can understand people from newly conquered lands being unhappy. Afterall, they are not ruled by a foreign ruler. But the citizens being unhappy because of what their formal ruler did to them was plain stupid.
If you are the Americans and just recently occupied Iraq, the Iraqis should be like :"Get out! you stinky yankees! Long live Saddam!"

CerberusIV · April 5, 2003, 18:00

Maybe the theory is that it takes a while to convince your new citizens that you are an enlightened ruler, unlike your predecessor - so it still takes 20 turns for their unhappiness to wear off.

Master Zen · April 5, 2003, 19:11

Quote:

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Maybe the theory is that it takes a while to convince your new citizens that you are an enlightened ruler, unlike your predecessor - so it still takes 20 turns for their unhappiness to wear off.

They also might be pissed because their size=28 capital turned into a size=11 outpost in the edges of my empire...

ALPHA WOLF 64 · April 5, 2003, 20:14

maybe they realized that having no food and water wasnt the normal, and now they want to be full fledged capitalists, which by default means they will be unhappy....LOL

vmxa1 · April 5, 2003, 21:35

I am some what in agreement, but I can understand the unhappy people. I mean when you get really mad, it takes a while to cool down , regardless of the reason or the fact that the ones in front of you now, are not responsible for the past problems. You are still angry. Have you not snap at an innocent party?

Jaguar · April 5, 2003, 21:45

Well I agree that their reasons are stupid, but it's reasonable to assume that an evil dictator would spread propaganda against you, hence making them unhappy.

badams52 · April 6, 2003, 01:13

Yep, this is nothing new and has been known for ages. While the AI drafts and pop rushes and takes the negative, once the city is captured, you inherit the negative from the AI. What's worse, is if you disband the city, the negative will transfer to another close city in your empire.

Maybe the reasoning's not very good, but that's how the game was programmed.

pedrojedi · April 6, 2003, 01:15

Well, when cities flip around with conquest, people may be confused. One never know in troubled times were his allegiance should be.

Wazell · April 6, 2003, 16:51

Oh, it's quite logical. The people are used to their old oppressor, they don't wan't a new one who could be even worse, and also foreign. Think what would happen in Iraq if it is to be declared a u.s/u.k colony post-war: extreme unhappiness. It takes time to convince the masses.

Strakorfsky · April 6, 2003, 19:05

Well, that raises the point of even keeping the city.

I always disbanded cities that didn't like me...I stress they didn't like "Me".

But also, the best way to destroy any anger without having to keep units around to recapture city is to burn the population off with communism or despositism (Of course you will have to be religious civ to do this).

And I also agree that people often don't liek switching dictators, an example was when Hitler invaded the Soviet annexed territories in ww2, they thought Hitler would help them, but he made them miserable.

Daz · April 7, 2003, 06:54

Draft unhappiness will go away in max. 20 turns. Thats the amount of time they need to see that you're "not that kind of guy". Sounds logical to me.

The "cruel oppresion" thing is indeed anoying. When I plan a war, I make sure I have the means to destroy that civ, thus not having this unhappiness problem.

Master Zen · April 7, 2003, 11:08

I did destroy that civ! Totally!

The cruel oppresion is a result of pop-rushing. When they are upset about a war against their mother-land they say it (something like "stop the war against our mother land!")

Thirgaral · April 7, 2003, 12:30

Quote:

The cruel oppresion is a result of pop-rushing.

It´s also a result of war... I´ve had "the cruel oppression problem" without having pop-rushed once.
"war against their mother-land " only comes while you´re still at war....

Daz · April 8, 2003, 02:42

Yea, you're right. But the "aggression against our mother country" dissapears if you destroy that civ entirely. At least something...

Rogerdude · April 8, 2003, 04:51

No matter how you put it, the explanation it's still unacceptable to me.

If they wanted to reflect unhapyness caused by switching rulers, they should have put it another motive, like "Babylonians, Go Home !", for example.
No way should they tell me they "Can not forget the cruel opression" or "Hell, no..." as long as for occupied people that should be the least of their concerns !

So, IMO, this is a flaw in the game.

Thirgaral · April 8, 2003, 09:02

Maybe they´re just angry because you "accidently" killed their families in the war...not the switch of ruler...
But yes...they could have come up with something better to say.

Wazell · April 8, 2003, 09:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Rogerdude
, they should have put it another motive, like "Babylonians, Go Home !", for example.

Now THAT would be something

Of course the easiest way to get happy people is gradually starving your conquered cities. Maybe even tax them like hell during the process. Other civs are cool with that, and survivors become content. Passive genocide at work, and something that defies logic so bad it really needs correcting.

badams52 · April 8, 2003, 16:48

Passive genocide, and the world loves it

. or you could endlessly bombard said cities till it's down to 1 population before taking over

Master Zen · April 8, 2003, 17:17

well, since I wiped them out I decided to keep the cities since there was no fear of a culture-flip (my main fear which makes me raze cities)

In fact they were the #1 Cultural civ which was the reason I wiped them out completely instead of just taking say half their land. After all the corruption in all those conquered cities really made them a stink-hole and since I was saving a leader for the UN I didn't do a palace jump.