Golden ages unbalanced?

[Grumbold]

An interesting observation that a very unique item (the special unit) which may prove contentious or unbalancing is needed to trigger a very even fixed special event. Players who want to turn off the special units will also lose the Golden Ages. Another approach would be to make it a cheap tech you could research anytime. That way the Ages and the Units could be toggled on or off separately.

[Mannamagnus]

Since my favourite civ is likely to be the French and their UU is a musketeer I would say their GA is perfectly timed just before the industrial age.

[Didymus]

GA: Turn Advantage

FWIW, I think that a Golden Age in the beginning is far more powerful for two reasons:

A late GA will probably not matter -- the game will be over by then, unless Firaxis does an excellent job of preventing this. Which isn't likely. The rich get richer, etc.

A late GA will confer a smaller turn advantage. Why? Because each tile is producing MORE in later ages, so the proportional benefit is reduced. And you could very well end up suffering from a late GA because of increased pollution, unless the extra shields are exempt.

Of course, a GA in the first ten turns will likely be worthless.

As far as the GA trigger goes, I prefer simply building the special civ unit, since I agree that actually fighting with it is something some civs will want to avoid. OTOH, simply researching the tech seems too passive a trigger.

[KrazyHorse]

Personally, I'm looking for a GA somewhere in the 0-500 a.d. gap. That's where my science rate has become sluggish and I have to wait what seems like forever before I can do anything. Since I'll be using Greeks, this means I'll probably have to delay the deployment of of my UU, the hoplite.

[Scrooge]

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
Since my favourite civ is likely to be the French and their UU is a musketeer I would say their GA is perfectly timed just before the industrial age.

My favorite nation is Duckland, AFAIK they have a GA all the time and their SU is the famous Pink Panther Engineer Team. I mean, with all due respect, Civ is a game based on history and not a lesson in history.

Historically-valid SUs an GAs serve well in, prehaps, earth-like scenario games, not in open random-map games, where the Mighty Zulus build Statue of Liberty.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
Since my favourite civ is likely to be the French and their UU is a musketeer I would say their GA is perfectly timed just before the industrial age.

A man after my own heart. I made these comments on the 'Civ3 - Civilizations' forum:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24536

I think the point the French get their golden age is ideal, earlier and your civ will be too small to feel any great effect from it, and too late and it may be a bit of a 'drop in the ocean' in the modern era. So yeah, it could be useful, although if earlier on, it could give you the advantage in grabbing those ancient wonders...

[Dimorier Maximus]

List of Civ-Specific Units?

Originally posted by Mannamagnus
Since my favourite civ is likely to be the French and their UU is a musketeer I would say their GA is perfectly timed just before the industrial age.

I was just curious. How do you know that the French unique unit is the Musketeer? Please tell me that there is a list of each civ with its unique unit somewhere.

[Scrooge]

Re: Special units

Originally posted by M. le Comte
... But don't forget that war is a big part of civilization. Without war, there would be no strategy. No interest. In fact, the aim of the game is always some how to dominate the other civ. Blood is a way to this goal. Blood must be an element of the birth of a golden age.

Not only blood. You're thinking about military sims or srats. IMhO, when broken down to the broadest components, Civ is a game of two very distinct aspects:

1. internal affaires (health, wealth and -good- spirit)
2. external affaires (treaties, espionage and finally WAR).

This makes up for the uniqueness and depth of Civ - it is in fact a game of DIPLOMACY. War and blood, are ultimate TOOLS of DIPLOMACY. As as you can win the game, by building a great nation, you can do it through war and conquest but also by peaceful means - trade, pacts internal happiness and stability. There are many ways to skin a cat in Civ- as there are many ways to win the game. Sometimes you fight, sometimes you roll over and play dead, sometimes you talk (combination usually works best). Treaties, trade, pacts, espionage (preferably successful) is also strategy, not just killing frenzy.

I actually remember, when you were awarded a score bonus for extended peace!

[Kenobi]

Originally posted by Grim Legacy

Reminds me of a friend of mine, actually -he used to carry a sole Phalanx around until the modern age, just to make it travel along his cities as a sort of triumphant parade. Made me frown back then already!

That reminds me of a game I played as the Greeks. One of my first Goodie Hut surprises was a mercenary Phalanx, which then earned itself a Veteran rank. I based the unit in my capitol as some sort of Royal Guard. Didn't cost me any production as the unit had no home (i.e. it was from "NONE").

Apologies for the OT post.

[korn469]

i think the best trigger for golden ages would be simply, when you build your civ's unique unit, so it is still possible to control when you hit a GA, plus it would be in the same time frame as a combat victory from a CSU, and it would also allow peaceful players to have a GA without being forced to goto war

[Grim Legacy]

Originally posted by Kenobi


That reminds me of a game I played as the Greeks. One of my first Goodie Hut surprises was a mercenary Phalanx, which then earned itself a Veteran rank. I based the unit in my capitol as some sort of Royal Guard. Didn't cost me any production as the unit had no home (i.e. it was from "NONE").

Apologies for the OT post.

Heheheh. I used to do that with goodie hut units too, to replace the standard garrison -saves precious production shields for the city.

Regarding the suggestion that the GA should start when the first special unit is built -this just strengthens my thought that military units have little to do with a GA. I think a GA should be more of a cultural/scientific thing.

[Orlando]

Golden Age

If first victory with civ-specific unit is not a good idea, how about when the first civ-specific unit is organized (built)?

[Mannamagnus]

I think a golden age should reflect a relationship between trade, production and especialy culture. As far as I know going to war has never brought about a golden age. Ending a war however did.

[Orlando]

In the Modern Age, perhaps. I do not profess to be an expert in history, but in the Ancient and even Renaissance Eras, were Golden Ages were not born of conquest and supremacy? Such as Rome (in the Ancient Age) and England (in the Renaissance Age).

Even in the Modern Age, can it not be argued, for example that the Golden Age of the United States began after its involvment in WWII?

I think the actual construction of a civ-specific unit might better reflect the pinnacle of research, production, and in some cases trade (if you do not have the resources initially to build the unit) in the Modern Age, but for Ancient and Renaissance Eras, perhaps the victory of the unit in battle not so bad a trigger after all.

[Mannamagnus]

Like you said Orlando: the "golden age" of the US started after WW2 in the late fourties and fifties.
During Rome's golden age there were no real wars only skirmishes with much weaker civs like for example the Israelites or some Germanic tribes. In the periods that Rome was facing a more or less equal oppenent (e.g. the Punic wars) the situation was so dire that you could not speak of a golden age.
Englands golden age also started after its war with Spain when there came stability and it was no longer threatened by equaly strong nations. Englands golden age ended with a war even though they won it.
All out war is too costly for a golden age; ending a war frees up means for culture, education and social improvements.