Late game happiness

[SilverEye]

Im in the year 2126 on my game and unhappiness is a huge problem. As I keep conquering civs, my population increases. I can'tally city states because they are all allied to rome by the thousands of points (doing my best to destroy rome, but this late in the game that is a long process with a lot of nukes). I'm also obviously all stocked up on happiness buildings and social policies. I've started nuking my own cities just to bring down the population and get a few happiness points back.

[Amanoob105]

The act of taking cities will always lower your happiness by a large amount, at least until you build a Courthouse in them, then it can start to even out. Maybe slow down on the taking of new cities?

Putting spies in city states doesn't just help raise your standing with them but also help lower other civs at the same time. Making good with these guys is something best done in the early game (just keep an eye out for any easy requests they give for most, while making a point to try and befriend the ones that have what you want the most) so it's less of a fight for them later game.
On top of that all ideologies have ways to help get them to like you more, though some are easier than others.

Speaking of ideologies. If yours is different from most others found on the map then this will be doing a lot of the damage to your happiness levels. The more of these other ideologies in other civs you are sharing boarders with the more it will lower your happiness.
This is one reason it can be useful to wipe out the smaller civs over the bigger one as for each one gone that's one less opposing point of view feeding ideas to your people about how "the other way is likely better".

One trick I like to pull off whenever I can is to combine the above two points.
Gather as many allies as I can with city states, seek out as many of civs I can to try and find them first and then get an ideology up ASAP. When the world council first gets made this means I should have at least the second seat if not the first and as such can set resolutions.

The first chance I get after founding my ideology is to try and have pass a resolution to make it the World Ideology before anyone else has started to get their own (and as such, don't really care). Then spam diplomats into the capitals of anyone who doesn't hate me and pay though the nose (short of wrecking my civ) to as many other civs as I can in those turns before it gets voted on to give some votes to say "yes" to it.
This means as other civs are picking an ideology of their own they're more likely to pick the same as me and if any do pick another then by law my voice is louder than theirs when we try to say who's is better.
The AI will rarely, if ever, try to repel it. Normally their too busy trying to ban crabs.

[Matthew]

I'm not sure nuking citizens should make them happy :/

Are you getting hit by ideology unhappiness? Otherwise, ye, if you are going to play super wide, you want to cap cities at around 15 pop. or less. That is enough to work great scientists and have enough production to function. Coastal cities with certain policies can do with about half that.

Also, raze any useless cities which aren't offering anything. City borders can (eventually) reach a 5 tile radius if you have enough culture, so you don't need a city every 4 tiles.

[SilverEye]

Originally posted by Matthew:

I'm not sure nuking citizens should make them happy :/

Are you getting hit by ideology unhappiness? Otherwise, ye, if you are going to play super wide, you want to cap cities at around 15 pop. or less. That is enough to work great scientists and have enough production to function. Coastal cities with certain policies can do with about half that.

Also, raze any useless cities which aren't offering anything. City borders can (eventually) reach a 5 tile radius if you have enough culture, so you don't need a city every 4 tiles.

Interestingly enough, when you have a population problem nuking your own cities does increase happiness. I turned off city razing because I didn't want cities I might lose to be razed.

And no its not ideology, I have something like half of the map so its really just from taking a bunch of cities.

[Amanoob105]

Originally posted by SilverEyesaac:

Originally posted by Matthew:

I'm not sure nuking citizens should make them happy :/

Are you getting hit by ideology unhappiness? Otherwise, ye, if you are going to play super wide, you want to cap cities at around 15 pop. or less. That is enough to work great scientists and have enough production to function. Coastal cities with certain policies can do with about half that.

Also, raze any useless cities which aren't offering anything. City borders can (eventually) reach a 5 tile radius if you have enough culture, so you don't need a city every 4 tiles.

Interestingly enough, when you have a population problem nuking your own cities does increase happiness. I turned off city razing because I didn't want cities I might lose to be razed.

The same is true if you set your cities to work tiles that don't bring in food so they starve themselves down. You'd think these things would make them more unhappy .

The AI very rarely ever razes a city, I've never known them to if there was some one-of-a-kind-building (i.e. a wonder) in it, and even if they do just build a settler and place a new city down after the army moves away.

[clif9710]

Originally posted by Amanoob105:

The AI very rarely ever razes a city, I've never known them to if there was some one-of-a-kind-building (i.e. a wonder) in it, and even if they do just build a settler and place a new city down after the army moves away.

Doesn't Attila raze cities as standard practice? (I play Gods and Kings)

[SilverEye]

Originally posted by clif9710:

Originally posted by Amanoob105:

The AI very rarely ever razes a city, I've never known them to if there was some one-of-a-kind-building (i.e. a wonder) in it, and even if they do just build a settler and place a new city down after the army moves away.

Doesn't Attila raze cities as standard practice? (I play Gods and Kings)

Idk about Attila but I know that Arabia does

[Amanoob105]

Originally posted by SilverEyesaac:

Originally posted by clif9710:

Doesn't Attila raze cities as standard practice? (I play Gods and Kings)

Idk about Attila but I know that Arabia does

If they do that's still only 2 out of 40+. What I said is still correct, so you just need to keep an eye out for the few that normally do over the many that normally don't as far as what the AI does with cities.

I may as well add that capitals, city state cities and holy cities (on the very rare occasion that someone capital doesn't become the holy city) can never be razed.

[Damsteri]

AI not razing cities might be something that is caused by (easy) difficulty level. AI might keep cities if they have excess happiness that allows then to keep them. At least Emperor AI razes useless cities, but not all.

[Grendalcat]

Originally posted by Amanoob105:

I may as well add that capitals, city state cities and holy cities (on the very rare occasion that someone capital doesn't become the holy city) can never be razed.

Gotta watch out for city states taken by Venice(with Great Merchant) or Austria
(with Diplomatic Marriage). They can be razed, which fooled me once into thinking city states in general could be razed.

[Damsteri]

Originally posted by Grendalcat:

Originally posted by Amanoob105:

I may as well add that capitals, city state cities and holy cities (on the very rare occasion that someone capital doesn't become the holy city) can never be razed.

Gotta watch out for city states taken by Venice(with Great Merchant) or Austria
(with Diplomatic Marriage). They can be razed, which fooled me once into thinking city states in general could be razed.

Now this list is almost complete. Only thing to add is the three Indonesian cities which are settled on (three) different continents than their capital. Those three cities can't be razed (their unique ability).

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by SilverEyesaac:

~

Could we appreciate though real quick, how perfect this sounds for like some dystopian fiction?

The year is 2126 CE. Overpopulation is insufferable, the war with the New Roman Empire has lasted decades. People are in revolt, they are so unhappy from the planet’s overpopulation. The government tried everything to make the existing population happy. It didn’t work. The nations’ governments have resorted to dropping nuclear weapons on their own cities to reduce the overpopulation.

[Grendalcat]

Originally posted by Damsteri:

Originally posted by Grendalcat:

Gotta watch out for city states taken by Venice(with Great Merchant) or Austria
(with Diplomatic Marriage). They can be razed, which fooled me once into thinking city states in general could be razed.

Now this list is almost complete. Only thing to add is the three Indonesian cities which are settled on (three) different continents than their capital. Those three cities can't be razed (their unique ability).

If you take someone's Holy City, which was not their capital, then use an Inquisitor to remove its Holy City status, can you then raze it?

[Amanoob105]

Originally posted by kamikazi21358:

Originally posted by SilverEyesaac:

~

Could we appreciate though real quick, how perfect this sounds for like some dystopian fiction?

The year is 2126 CE. Overpopulation is insufferable, the war with the New Roman Empire has lasted decades. People are in revolt, they are so unhappy from the planet’s overpopulation. The government tried everything to make the existing population happy. It didn’t work. The nations’ governments have resorted to dropping nuclear weapons on their own cities to reduce the overpopulation.

Now you mention it .

Originally posted by Grendalcat:

Originally posted by Damsteri:

Now this list is almost complete. Only thing to add is the three Indonesian cities which are settled on (three) different continents than their capital. Those three cities can't be razed (their unique ability).

If you take someone's Holy City, which was not their capital, then use an Inquisitor to remove its Holy City status, can you then raze it?

I wouldn't put money on it. I suspect that once a city has immunity to razing it likely can't loose it.

[Damsteri]

Originally posted by Grendalcat:

If you take someone's Holy City, which was not their capital, then use an Inquisitor to remove its Holy City status, can you then raze it?

Yes.

[SilverEye]

Originally posted by Amanoob105:

Originally posted by kamikazi21358:

Could we appreciate though real quick, how perfect this sounds for like some dystopian fiction?

The year is 2126 CE. Overpopulation is insufferable, the war with the New Roman Empire has lasted decades. People are in revolt, they are so unhappy from the planet’s overpopulation. The government tried everything to make the existing population happy. It didn’t work. The nations’ governments have resorted to dropping nuclear weapons on their own cities to reduce the overpopulation.

Oh I know, I kinda imagine it as my nation nuking its own population, but blaming it on the Romans to justify the war of attrition. Both continents are on fire right now and my soldiers are fighting in radioactive waste lands that were formerly bustling cities, consumed by the destructive powers of the atomic era.