how about each civ gets a special ability when they have thier golden age. like hte americans could have manifest destiny, where settelers cost half. and the romans could have the renisance, where all buildidings already rpoducing culture produce 1 more, etc..

Nice Idea, but there is a risk of overpowering some civilizations, because some abillities will be much more usefull than other abilities.

I like this idea.

Civs already have special attributes that are there for the whole game (Industrial, Commericial, etc). The makers managed to keep them reasonably balanced: there's pretty lively discussion about what the best traits are, no foregone conclusions. As long as they were careful to balance the traits, I say extra abilities that kick in during a Golden Age would be cool.

This idea could also be combined with the entire-game traits in some way, for example, civs could get an extra trait for the duration of their golden age, or each entire-game trait could have one of its advantages only occur during the golden age.

Trying to control when you golden age was triggered would, of course, get even more important if this idea was implemented.

Golden age is a ridiculous idea to begin with. Civilizations did not enter a golden age for building wonders : they built wonders during their golden age because the golden age was the one moment in history where they were at the top of their power.

Having a "golden age" popping up and giving you an increase in anything as a reward for wonders-building is stupid IMHO.

Same thing goes for Dark Age - the dark ages were the *conquest* of the old empires by smaller, more backward ones. They were not Europe as a whole stepping back and losing science ; they were the fall of Rome (and such) to less advanced tribe.

Neither need special "triggered" representation in the game.

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
Golden age is a ridiculous idea to begin with. Civilizations did not enter a golden age for building wonders : they built wonders during their golden age because the golden age was the one moment in history where they were at the top of their power.

Having a "golden age" popping up and giving you an increase in anything as a reward for wonders-building is stupid IMHO.

Yeah, but the Pyramids didn't magically create granaries in all Egyptian cities, either. I think the Golden Age is a fun addition to the game, so what if its not entirely realistic?

Same thing goes for Dark Age - the dark ages were the *conquest* of the old empires by smaller, more backward ones. They were not Europe as a whole stepping back and losing science ; they were the fall of Rome (and such) to less advanced tribe.

Neither need special "triggered" representation in the game.
The fall of a powerful empire to smaller, more backward ones is exceeding rare in Civ, much less common than in history. If small civs can get a sudden boost from a "triggered" golden age, it increases the likelihood that they can shake up the status quo. Granted, the mechanism isn't all that realistic, but the end result is more realism.

And the triggered Golden Age idea isn't completely unrealistic, either. It might be a stretch, but one could make the argument that various nations have had periods where a surge in partriotism and civic pride, brought about by some specific event or combination of events, has caused an upswing in productivity. The concept of a Golden Age is at least as realistic as things like "We Love the King" Day, in fact, its sort of a WLTKD for your entire empire.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61118

Some of the ideas might be more appropriate to Civ4.

(I also posted an idea about this so you can see it there rather than me re-posting it here.)

I like it, but it might be hard coming up with one for every civ.

I would personally like to see that UUs did NOT cause golden age. I never use some of the earlier UUs because I really don't want a despotic golden age with three cities! This of course causes trouble, as then the only way to get a golden age would be with wonders - so some nations might not get a golden age at all. Would this be such a bad thing? The golden age could be more of a reward than something that you will have sometime, but you have to carefully see when. It could also be connected with the overall happiness of your civ, your wealth etc etc.

It could, though, cause some different effects apart from just increased economy and production. Perhaps militaristic civs would get an attack and defend boost, commercial civs an economic boost, scientific a science boost and so on. Then if you were commercial/scientific, your golden age would be similar to the current one. If you were militaristic/agricultural, you would have stronger units and bigger growth, or some such. It's a fine idea - I would like to see the golden age-concept developed further in other aspects too.

I voted for "yes" because a golden age should be a civ at its zenith. However that should exist for each civ type at a certain level of technology.

eg: the Babylonians came to power 1000BC (or close) so for 100years they should get increased ability to study, build and expand. China had a likewise golden age at almost the same time so why not give them a treat. England, America and other first world civs could arguably be experiencing a golden age now.

I think that this would be a good idea. As for GA's coming too early, the trigger for GA's should probably be different. Possibly, GA's should be optional early on, or the player should be able to switch governments free (which would make a whole lot of sense in a GA anyways!)

In addition, any GA should eliminate the tile penalty in Despotism. It's supposed to be a GOLDEN AGE , hello--golden age = things done well!

Doesn't the civ-specific abilities handle this already? If you experience a golden age, the things you do better than others are tweaked just a little bit more, right?

I think having a special civ-, trait- or era-specific powers would help make up for the disadvantages of a very early (Zulu) or very late (America) GA due to UU victories.

This poll needs to still be looked at. Come on people, we need more votes.

:bump: :worship:

you could have at least used the :bump: smiley

In general, I like this idea. It would need to be carefully balanced though.

A new idea by the Archbishop of Towels. You should be able to build a Small Wonder that would trigger the GA. For each Civ it would be a different SW. This way you could choose when you wanted to have your GA. Also, you coudln't use a SGL or MGL to rush build it.

As for unique GA powers, love it. Would take some play-test-balancing, but I love the idea.

Interesting idea but it would unbalance the game. Maybe you could pick a third civ trait or something that lasts for the 20 turns? Pick religious to cut out a period of anarchy and get some cathedrals built, pick industrious to get your infrastructure caught up (this would be especially valuable right when you get RR), pick militaristic for that big push.

Kulgan: America does get its GA in the modern age due to F-15s, and the Man'o'War gives England its GA at the proper time too . . . the Age of Sail, when the sun never set on the British Empire.

Kulgan: America does get its GA in the modern age due to F-15s, and the Man'o'War gives England its GA at the proper time too . . . the Age of Sail, when the sun never set on the British Empire.

not if it's instead triggered by wonders

A new idea by the Archbishop of Towels. You should be able to build a Small Wonder that would trigger the GA. For each Civ it would be a different SW. This way you could choose when you wanted to have your GA. Also, you coudln't use a SGL or MGL to rush build it.

As for unique GA powers, love it. Would take some play-test-balancing, but I love the idea.

Make it so that you can only build this small wonder after you get a victory with your UU.

Actually this is a really elegant solution. Now players with ultra-early UUs don't have to worry about triggering a GA too early. Of course a little balance is lost because they can trigger one way before someone with an INdustrial or MA UU(America). But that could be worked out as well, you can build the GA SW whenever your UU wins combat or you build the appropriate wonders.

Make it so that you can only build this small wonder after you get a victory with your UU.

make a thread to encourage discussion, and so i can put a link to it in current topics

not if it's instead triggered by wonders

Thanks for clearing that up. Would you disagree that the UUs generally place each Civ's GA during their proper historical time?

I raise the question that the 'Golden Age' is a universal constant among civilizations. If it means the time a civ was at ITS peak, okay, yes I can see that, but havent some civs had multiple peaks? And if instead it means a time when the civ was booming along, outpacing other civs I would have to disagree. Some civs have been mediocre forever, but have great longevity. Korea is a very old nation that has never really been that important globally until the middle 20th century when it became a hotly contested strategic flashpoint. Holland's 'Golden Age' if you could call it that was really just a lull in its defiance of Spain long enough for it to attempt (unsuccessfully) colonization in the New World. Rome on the other hand had many ups and downs during its turbulent era. Periods of expansion and near disintegration alternated over thousands of years until finally it split in two (creating Byzantium) and began a slow decline. Italy made a decent comeback however, in the middle ages and then in the early 20th century before becoming a battleground in World War 2. Japan was a mostly unimportant little island until the turn of the 20th century when it first defeated Russia in war, then dominated China, and finally joined the Axis, expanding rapidly towards its dream of a Pacific Empire. Losing WW2 and suffering incredible damage from nuclear destruction sent it into deep decline. Over the last few decades though, it has rebounded spectactularly well, becoming an economic Superpower to be reckoned with.

My point in all this is that Golden Ages are fine concepts but not truly balanced or realistic given world history. As game tools they work well, but I think they should be first toned down some in power and second allowed to occur more frequently than only Once. Offering other ways to trigger them would help too, because limiting them to a reward for using a civ-specific combat unit or building a great wonder isn't really logical.

-Elgalad

I thought that the game should measure how successful you are to others, plot that on a bell curve, determing about when your zenith is, in terms of game benefits. Whenever you are near the top of your game, you would get a UU, or if you were really powerful(spectacular fall later on) you would get multiple UUs and maybe even Unique Techs. This way you always get your UU during the height of 'your' power, not that civ in history. This is a what-if, not a this-is type game.

I thought that the game should measure how successful you are to others, plot that on a bell curve, determing about when your zenith is, in terms of game benefits. Whenever you are near the top of your game, you would get a UU, or if you were really powerful(spectacular fall later on) you would get multiple UUs and maybe even Unique Techs. This way you always get your UU during the height of 'your' power, not that civ in history. This is a what-if, not a this-is type game.

How would the computer know whether you were peaking or still on the rise? I think the system is fine, it gives each civ a chance to move ahead during its historic time. I think it does a good job of injecting history without damaging playability.

Currently now you never experience a fall. The algorithim of calculating a good curve is somethign left to someone with a little bit more math education(statistics would be preferred). I will still try to think of an answser though. The point was that you have to decline at some point, but your success will have been in what you accomplished during your time of power. You woudl also have the option, when your empire eventually splinters, of controlling one of the seperating factions, since it was your genius that got them there.

As for the second point, you are right in that it moves civs ahead in their historical time. Unfortunately that limits some of the 'what-if' part of Civ. In some ways Civ 2 was very interesting because everyone started with slightly different techs(random) but in other respects were same at the beginning. No assumptions about when their 'golden age' was. I would like a system where civs evolve(player controlled) rather than are static and have no social change(traits same throughout history).

As for the second point, you are right in that it moves civs ahead in their historical time. Unfortunately that limits some of the 'what-if' part of Civ. In some ways Civ 2 was very interesting because everyone started with slightly different techs(random) but in other respects were same at the beginning. No assumptions about when their 'golden age' was. I would like a system where civs evolve(player controlled) rather than are static and have no social change(traits same throughout history).

I think there's a packaged mod that disables UUs, and you could easily edit out traits. Problem solved.

But I still want traits and UUs, just not pre-determined ones. Civ 3 currently cannot implement this.

BUMP
Golden ages when the slop of increase in your score is decreasing and becomes below a certain gradient?
This is a perfect way to help failing civs and balance the game. Since everyone seems to think that warmongering is too easy, this would make it harder, because you'd force the game to give every one of your opponents a golden age. It would have to be carefully balanced so that the golden age could never entirely make up for failing situation.
There could be a score bonus for finishing without having had a golden age, so that if you win while in one or without ever having started one you get a bonus.