In the poll, vote as if you can get the Taj Mahal and Mausoleum of Masollos if you want them.

When I'm playing, I can't help but devote one of my Great People to a Golden Age. I also shoot for the Taj Mahal to get one too. Beyond that, usually I'll burn a pair of GPs in the late game, but rarely will I toss 3 of them on the fire.

So it occurred to me to wonder if Golden Ages were really worth the cost. Let's enumerate their advantages right quick:


+1 Hammer on each tile that has a Hammer and is worked
+1 Coin on each tile that has a Coin and is worked
+100% Great People birth rate
No revolts when changing civics or religion

Any others? Mention them and I'll include them.

I rarely play as Spiritual, so the ability to change civics without revolt is my primary motivation to have a Golden Age - some revolts can last unconscionably long, but the other points are what make the Golden Age worth the expenditures required, and at some point, spending GPs is too costly. At what point do you consider it too costly?

For me, the norm is two GP initiated golden ages. If I build the Taj Mahal, that's a third. If I get a lot of great people, that's a fourth.

I'd generally go for three GP initiated golden ages (particularly to burn off the less useful types in the later stages of the game). I can only think of one game where I've triggered 4 (and I had the mausoleum for that one). Taj Mahal and any random events would be on top of that.

Golden ages now only require 1 GP for your first. Since BTS i've been having 3-4 golden ages now.

(3 from GPs and 1 from Taj)

I have been triggering at least two GP Golden Ages and maybe one late if I have a significant amount of relatively useless GP's.

If I have access to marble and a city that can crank out the Taj mahal in a reasonable time frame, I'll grab that one as well.

Hi

I usually end up with two maybe 3 at most but I will always take as many as I can get. Best I have ever done in one game was was like 5 though. But best ever stretch for me was a game where I had mauselum and finished taj then during that 24 turn ga I got a cpl of gp I didnt need so burned them to add another ga on top of first one then during that I got musketman quest and one of rewards was a golden age so I picked that for 72 turns in a row of golden aginess hehe :).

Kaytie

Around two in a typical game I think. I may or may not go for Taj (Emperor level), and I may not succeed either.
Burning a single GP is certain, and two is likely unless I get really useful ones. So two on average fits me well I guess.

I rarely initiate a Golden Age with Great People. I do try to get the Taj for one, though. I also don't have BtS so I don't get the +100%GPP or the anarchy-free revolts.

In the early game, Golden Ages don't seem to be worth doing - settling 2 great people (or lightbulbing/shrine/whatever) always seems to have a better effect than 8 turns of +1 hammer/+1 coin per tile in my 6-10 cities. And by the late game, great people seem to come too far apart, and I don't like idling one for 40 turns. I have occasionally started a late-game Golden Age, but usually it's overkill.

I rarely initiate a Golden Age with Great People. I do try to get the Taj for one, though. I also don't have BtS so I don't get the +100%GPP or the anarchy-free revolts.

I don't blame you. I don't think I've ever started a GA with great people prior to BtS.

Also, you forgot that the GP threshold for golden ages has lowered. First one costs only one great person. Second costs two, and so on.

Only 1 or sometimes 2.

I never have GP initiated golden ages. GPs are far too precious to me for other purposes. But I am happy to be convinced otherwise.

Well yeah, Harborboy, that was kinda the point. I recognized the possibility that GPs were too important to blow on Golden Ages, but I can't stop myself from spending that lone one at some point, preferably after I get MoM and desperately need to adjust my civics.

And it goes without saying that the bigger your empire, the more benefit you get. Lots of cities, lots of population in the cities, those maximize the obvious gain of the first two benefits I listed. With a gain in the GPP production, you should even get another GP out of it. But the question remains, is it enough to counter the loss of that/those GPs? In later stages, with larger empires, almost certainly. Early on, maybe, maybe not. I wouldn't waste it on a single city empire, probably not on less than 4 cities with less than 25 total people, but I haven't done the math on it.

How many Golden Ages are good? As many as possible, I'd think. But, I end up getting maybe 1 or 2 on average. I rarely end up playing a game to the end.

Golden Ages are usually a huge payoff in the late game since bulbing is no longer possible and settling won't give you much benefit as the game is nearing the end. Also you naturally have a larger empire to benefit from it. What I struggle with is what to do when you get an early GA from pollution before it would really be worth to burn him but after the period when gps can bulb whole techs or close to it?

In a typical Space Race game, I get 1 from the Taj Mahal, and 3 from a total of 6 great people. Sometimes I won't get the 6th one in time and have a total of 3 golden ages.

I think the title of this thread is misleading.

I think the title of this thread is misleading.

I agree. :)

I voted for 2, thinking in BtS terms.

But I must say it's very dependent on the pursued victory condition :
- if you go for early conquest, you may use a late comer great person for a golden age. You may not tech up to nationalism, so no taj. That would be 1.
- if you go for cultural, you may manage to build the taj mahal. If you get anything else than a GArtist, you may want to use him for a golden age. If you played with fire inyour GP generation, you may end up with more than 1 useless GP. So the result would be another Golden age. Total 1 to 3. average 2.
- If you go for domination, you won't have tech constraints, and golden ages could be very valuable. But not as much as lightbulbing. I'd say 1.
- If you go for space, nothing beats late game golden ages, and I would say 3.
More than 3 this is really overkill.

How you use your Great People, depends entirely on how fast you are at producing them and what it is you want to do with them.

I use:
GEs to hurry Wonder production and build Mining Inc;
GMs to conduct trade missions and build Sid's Sushi; and
GSs to build Academies.

I never use them to join cities or research techs (unless I am lagging behind), so GPs (with the exception of using one to build a Holy City - if I get to discover a religion first), GA's (I never go for cultural victory) and GSPs (maybe use one to build a Scotland Yard), I usually use for Golden Ages.

I shouldn't forget to mention that one factor I take into account is whether I have managed to construct Maussollos. That greatly influences my decision to use Great People for Golden Ages.

I did mention that you should include Taj and MoM if you wanted them. Some people might not ever want a Golden Age if they don't have MoM, some people might think the cost of Taj can't be made up for with the GA. And you're certainly welcome to express that opinion here; I don't share it, but I'm willing to be convinced.

I personally tend to have 3 GAs. If I get a mission that provides one, I'll usually take it, and if I have 3 GPs pop up in quick succession toward the end, I'll usually take that too, but otherwise, it's 3. I don't know if that's optimum, and I know circumstances dictate that, so I wanted to hear from you all and maybe learn something.

(OTOH, I rarely use a GP to lightbulb; my science is usually strong enough that this only represents a savings of 3-6 turns of research.)

This is why I love the forum: I had this question, ran a search, and found this thread. 'm trying my first SE (specialist economy) and popping out great people like chicklets. Tempted to use 2 A (GM and a GSci) for my 3rd Golden Age (got Taj Mahal) and wanted opinions. Glad someone else thinks GMs are underpowered, and I have GSci coming out my ears; academies everywhere.

This will be my last Golden Age, I promise. I can quit any time I want! :D

GM's are awesome, two of them equal another free specialist for your city when settled. I can burn the one GP for a GA maybe two towards th end but not more than that. With corps I can find a use for them.

Usually I'll have one Golden Age. I rarely build Taj Mahal because it's extremeley expensive when you've got no marble. I avoid triggering GAs in the early game because their effect is small... and if I wait, I can start a really helpful late game GA with only one GP. I like to start one in the final stage of a space race, when all cities are building space ship parts. GAs make for a really helpful boost there.

Sometimes, when I get the mausoleum (not too often, usually not in my research path) I'll go for 2-3 GAs. But I never triggered more than two with Great People. In fact I never have three different GPs around... I'll have mostly scientists and the occasional GM.

Though now that I think of it, it wouldn't be difficult to breed at least three different GPs under Caste System. Together with MoM and Taj Mahal that would be four extended GAs. I might try to do this in one of my next games.

I have a hard time letting GPs sit and do nothing for seveal turns. I feel that if you have something that can do something for you, each turn of delay is a waste. Of course, this doesn't mean I'll burn them if I KNOW I have a good use for them coming up, but I've only once held one for more than 10 turns or so. (I held a couple GAs I got in quick succession to derevolt 2 major enemy cities I was going to be capturing - took me a little longer than I thought to be ready for war, then a little longer than I thought to take those cities, but I DID get them in there and set them off immediately, saving me 10+ turns of revolt apiece.)

I rarely initiate a Golden Age with Great People. I do try to get the Taj for one, though. I also don't have BtS so I don't get the +100%GPP or the anarchy-free revolts.

In the early game, Golden Ages don't seem to be worth doing - settling 2 great people (or lightbulbing/shrine/whatever) always seems to have a better effect than 8 turns of +1 hammer/+1 coin per tile in my 6-10 cities. And by the late game, great people seem to come too far apart, and I don't like idling one for 40 turns. I have occasionally started a late-game Golden Age, but usually it's overkill.


Now that I have BtS, I wish to revise my answer. For me, the ideal number of GAs is now 3, possibly 4 (assuming you have the Taj).

Reason? Well, the GA benefits got a lot better in BtS. Considering that now a GA allows you to switch civics without anarchy, a late-game GA allows you to save thousands of lost hammers and commerce (and growth, incidentally) that you would otherwise incur by making a radical change involving 2 or more civics. This benefit is really noticeable in Epic/Marathon, and is on top of the extra hammers/commerce you get from the GA in the first place.

Add in the +100% for GPP generation (which in some cases means that before the GA is over, you'll have a new GP to replace one of the ones you expended) and the wonder that increases the GA duration by 50%, and multiple GAs become very tempting. The combined benefits just seem much better than lightbulbing or otherwise burning one or 2 GPs. I'm not sure about 3.

I now plan my major civic changes to take place around the time when I complete the Taj, and I may consider holding onto a GP (or if needed, 2) just to give me the flexibility to flip in and out (over 5 turns) of civics during wartime.

I'll maybe have 1 or 2 Golden Ages towards the end of the game when the GPs don't have as much use.

GPs are too valuable to me in the early and mid game to use on a Golden Age. The earliest I'd have a Golden Age is around the Renaissance-era, if I need to make a few civic changes.

I very rarely build the Taj Mahal.