Social welfare programs should be a policy, not an edict

[scaper12123]

I feel that having social welfare programs as an edict you can enact and revoke at any time is good in terms of gameplay, but it misses some opportunities in terms of depth. I, for example, would prefer it if I could enact some social welfare programs that take up less resources but gives a smaller happiness benefit in return. It'd be less of it but at least I could set it and forget it without having to worry about the consequence.

I think the edict should, therefore, be a policy instead, one which has multiple levels of happiness benefit to resource cost. It would make the most sense seeing as how changing established welfare programs would not be a simple matter a ruler can change on a whim, as a lot of people would complain about it. The ten year limit to changing policy would therefore fit social welfare programs nicely.

It would be detrimental during wartime, of course, which I presume is the reason why it's an edict in the first place. To that end, I think that a social welfare policy should have its effects cut in half during wartime. That way a player stuck with the policy on would not be put in utter danger by using the policy.

 

[Derp]

Why is this necessary or desirable?
Varying levels wouldn't make it more deep, it would just make it easier to gain some kind of happiness bonus while not having to pay the heavy price it normally requires.


Also the last thing I want is for happiness bonuses to be slashed during a war.

 

[scaper12123]

Why is this necessary or desirable?
Varying levels wouldn't make it more deep, it would just make it easier to gain some kind of happiness bonus while not having to pay the heavy price it normally requires.


Also the last thing I want is for happiness bonuses to be slashed during a war.

Because not all empires are capable of sustaining massive levels of social welfare or even need a lot of extra happiness tacked on to their empire, but many would benefit from a smaller version of benefit or even a larger version of it! And, furthermore, most people would be forced to turn off social welfare programs during a war due to the extreme cost of running the large navies you get by that point. During a war, having social welfare programs leaves me with -150 monthly power, whereas it's around 50 or so without it. So you would have to turn off the benefit, and thus you'd lose the happiness bonus during the war.

 

[Derp]

Because not all empires are capable of sustaining massive levels of social welfare or even need a lot of extra happiness tacked on to their empire, but many would benefit from a smaller version of benefit or even a larger version of it! And, furthermore, most people would be forced to turn off social welfare programs during a war due to the extreme cost of running the large navies you get by that point. During a war, having social welfare programs leaves me with -150 monthly power, whereas it's around 50 or so without it. So you would have to turn off the benefit, and thus you'd lose the happiness bonus during the war.

So get a couple more energy planets and you won't have to turn it off. Plan ahead.

 

[Agamemnic]

Because not all empires are capable of sustaining massive levels of social welfare or even need a lot of extra happiness tacked on to their empire, but many would benefit from a smaller version of benefit or even a larger version of it! And, furthermore, most people would be forced to turn off social welfare programs during a war due to the extreme cost of running the large navies you get by that point. During a war, having social welfare programs leaves me with -150 monthly power, whereas it's around 50 or so without it. So you would have to turn off the benefit, and thus you'd lose the happiness bonus during the war.

WAD. What you're asking for is to have a hapiness benefit with minimal cost. Thats unbalanced

 

[AlphaAsh]

I feel that having social welfare programs as an edict you can enact and revoke at any time is good in terms of gameplay but it misses some opportunities in terms of depth. I, for example, would prefer it if I could enact some social welfare programs that take up less resources but gives a smaller happiness benefit in return... <snip>

So do I. I have something just like this coming for the next version of AlphaMod. More granular control over such things as energy/minerals -> happiness adds depth and is exactly what I keep adding with mods.