reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
Well its because foy would speed up production by not relying on circuses coloseums or any of the happiness buildings that take time to get built.
What do you think of Persia as a civ?
- Thread starter Athenaeum
- Start date
Greece.
The +1 strength is alright. Double healing is probably underrated.
On many difficulty settings, finding an early unit upgrade hut can make trivial taking a neighboring capital.
Why is The United States, the richest and most powerful country to ever exist an absolutely mediocre civ? That's a severe glitch because Washington should be mega OP.
Although time line matters a lot. England for example used to be ridiculously dominant as well as Russia. The same with France, Portugal and Spain. Europe used to practically rule the world. Now they are merely 1st world countries with Spain even being questionable with that rank these days.
My latest Persia game I have been in golden turn 97 - 180 without any end in sight. I timed my first first natural golden age after CI (which I engineered) and then took representation, used an artist and engineered Taj mahal and went freedom and then burned two more artists. CI is somewhat hard to get but you can compensate by picking aesthetics or great artists from liberty finisher and leaning tower.
Basically, you can get golden ages any time you want turn from turn 100+. With Persia you can chain them so that it is very cheap to go back in again after worlds fair, and since their golden ages are so good it is worth doing so. This times well with a medieval push with crossbows, trebutchets, muskets, cannons or starting your serious infrastructure and population build up after the initial expansion phase.
Their unique unit is a bit meh as I have said, but their ability is as good as every unit being unique, especially for siege and melée units. This makes them much more versatile than one trick ponies like huns or mongolia.
Basically, you can get golden ages any time you want turn from turn 100+. With Persia you can chain them so that it is very cheap to go back in again after worlds fair, and since their golden ages are so good it is worth doing so. This times well with a medieval push with crossbows, trebutchets, muskets, cannons or starting your serious infrastructure and population build up after the initial expansion phase.
Their unique unit is a bit meh as I have said, but their ability is as good as every unit being unique, especially for siege and melée units. This makes them much more versatile than one trick ponies like huns or mongolia.
Please tell me why Persia having a +50% GA bonus equates to them living in a permanent Golden Age?
Maybe you guys are referring to Standard pace, but on Quick Pace a GA only lasts for 8-10 turns, so with Persia you get about 5 extra turns of being in a Golden Age. That is not a "permanent" golden age.
Plus, Great Artists start to snowball in costs. So while I guess you could save up a few (which would sap gold from you in unit maintenance) and use them all at once when you want to go on a prolonged war, I see Persia relying too much on CI and Taj Mahal to get them anywhere.
Maybe you guys are referring to Standard pace, but on Quick Pace a GA only lasts for 8-10 turns, so with Persia you get about 5 extra turns of being in a Golden Age. That is not a "permanent" golden age.
Plus, Great Artists start to snowball in costs. So while I guess you could save up a few (which would sap gold from you in unit maintenance) and use them all at once when you want to go on a prolonged war, I see Persia relying too much on CI and Taj Mahal to get them anywhere.
You seem to be downplaying the +50% golden age time. Yeah, sure permanent golden age is an exaggeration, but an additional 50%, or 100% if you managed to snag the Chichen Itza, is a really long time, even for Quick game standards.
Yes, great artists get more costly as you get more of them and yes, they do eat up gold for maintenance, but it's still really worth it considering:
- Your golden ages grant +1 more gold for each gold-producing tile you own and work on, then multiplied by your buildings, including the Satrap's Court
- Your golden age lasts 50% longer, meaning 4-5 more turns to earn that aformentioned gold increase on Quick games
- Speaking of longer golden ages, using two GAs as Persia still mean three GAs (four, with Chichen Itza) for other civilizations, meaning you don't actually need a lot of GAs to work out their strategy
If you use golden age for war, all the better because of Persia's bonuses. They might not be as powerful as the Zulu, but they're still terrifying on their own right given a different strategy; they can take and control key areas faster than most any other civ. However, as someone pointed out, even if you don't use golden ages for war, they still gain a lot from the golden ages because the bonuses they get from them are also extended.
I love Golden Ages too...I just don't feel like I come across enough Golden Ages for it to make much of a difference.
I usually only get one natural golden age in a game, if that...I typically have enough happiness to keep my ahead above water but my growth keeps me from getting more golden ages. Especially if you're going Liberty and conquering people, you might spend a lot of time being unhappy and this can prevent you from ever getting a Golden Age.
I just think the Golden Age stuff is too situational.
I usually only get one natural golden age in a game, if that...I typically have enough happiness to keep my ahead above water but my growth keeps me from getting more golden ages. Especially if you're going Liberty and conquering people, you might spend a lot of time being unhappy and this can prevent you from ever getting a Golden Age.
I just think the Golden Age stuff is too situational.
Weird. I don't go below 0 happy faces even during war.
What do you build in your cities? As persia I never build shrines at start for example. Circus, coloseum. Shrine only after I adopt that religion that has the most happy faces.
Happy faces are as important as beakers.
How many cities? I build my capitol plus 1-2 extra cities. The rest I don't or get prebuild from AI (during GA). If city doesn't have extra lux, I burn/sell.
For me its like Horse Archer that is not age dependant.
HA doesn't last forever, it becomes absolite, and yet Huns are one of top civ. Reason is that (atleast for me) HA gets you a couple of extra capitol cities. Getting extra capitol (good land, WWs) is usually win.
Persian GA doesn't have to last forever, just long enough.
First of all, any discussion you see on these boards revolves around standard settings unless otherwise specified. Stanard size, standard civs, standard speed. Anything other than that changes the balance dramatically. Warfare is incredibly easy and valuable on slower settings, and it's incredibly situational on faster settings. Likewise the amount of civs in a game directly influences how much land you have to expand and wrestle for, as does the size of the map.
So, to answer the rest, great people are already routinely saved as a matter of standard practice. It's common to have 6-8 great scientists sitting around after Hubble, waiting for their time to shine. The amount of maintenance you pay on them is a pittance compared to the value they bring later on. It's not a big deal to acquire and save artists (liberty, aesthetics, Pisa, Uffizi, etc, plus the first couple are very cheap) to coincide with natural GA's or forced GA's (policies, wonders, etc). Chichen Itza also doesn't have to be built -- you can just take it you know, and it grants you the same bonus. You should have no issues obtaining any one of the architecture wonders (so Taj Mahal is the answer here, when most people would typically go for PT), because you should be ahead of the AI in science by then. You can have 50+ turns of golden age EASY by the time you enter the industrial era, and with +1 movement on everything, and the heavily promoted units you should have by that point, it doesn't take long at all to sweep a continent. You can have artillery that can move, set up, and fire in the same turn. Or crossbows that can move and attack twice. How long do you think cities last when you have that kind of movement? You slice right thru land like a hot knife thru butter and keep on moving, compared to other civs. Other civs have to spend a turn or 2 getting into position once they enter enemy lands, then spend a couple of turns bombarding, then take the city. Persia swoops in, hits hard and fast and then runs out the other side towards the next target. And they do this CONTINUOUSLY.
You can manage your happiness and your golden ages to this level. It's not difficult. It's not even remotely time consuming. Like I said before, just because you're not capable of it, doesn't mean it can't be done. I can't clear a continent with the Huns before T100, but I'm not gonna tell people that it's impossible, because it very clearly is possible.
It leads to a nearly permanent golden age because you can stack that ability with Chichen Itza and get great artists to pop before the golden age wears off. If you get your artists guild early and open aesthetics for 25% artist production along with a garden and epic you will get artists quite rapidly.
On top of that you can stack getting the Taj Mahal and other things which give you a free golden age. There is also an Ideology tenant which increases golden ages further and wonders which award artists. If you make it your main focus your golden age can last for an incredibly long time.
Just make sure that you enter a natural golden age before beginning the extravaganza so stack your artists until the natural one pops up.
1. If you're really popping that many artists, think about how much tourism you're wasting just using them on Golden Ages. And each successive GA is shorter than the last.
2. I kindly reject arguments based on wonders, because I like to operate under the assumption that you don't have any wonders. This is more realistic for playing on higher difficulties.
3. The ideology tenet that increases Golden Age length is Freedom, and I don't think you want to go Freedom if you're trying domination.
4. I guess this isn't fully necessary, but I like to prioritize Education above all other things, so at the earliest I'm not going to rush Guilds until I get Education.
Regardless of the civ I'm playing, unless going for cultural victory, I usually use great artists for Golden Ages, especially if I won the World Fair. It is best to spend all those 20 turns in a Golden Age, and this may require 1 or 2 Great Artists. Usually I will burn the first one for a great work, but unless I have cathedrals there are no other spots for them anyway. You can manage with 3 Great Works to theme hermitage, but even if you just use one, you don't lose that much tourism.
If we are talking domination you don't really need to spend your great people on great works because you get works from conquering, and sometimes they get lost because you don't have the proper space for them, so basically you are just wasting your own GWAMs.
In BNW, each GA is the same length. A natural one is 10 turns before buffs (this includes the GAs from polices), a Great Artist popped will generate 8 turns of GA. So how is each successive one shorter?
This is part of the beauty of the UA. You can choose to further buff it with other game mechanics, in this case Chichen Itza or Universal Suffrage, or you can focus on other things, but you still get the buff for the UA. With Persia it's like having a free Chichen Itza, but with the possibility of having it double, plus the second bonus for warfare. Because of this UA, it may be worth it to plan getting this wonder, yourself or by conquest.
Another similar situation is the Mongols. The Keshik has Quick study so it already gets 50% more XP. But this does not force you to get the Military Tradition buff. You can choose to further buff this or leave it as is.
Why not? Freedom gives you 6 free Great War Infantry replacements that have a 20% bonus on foreign lands. If you get them while others are still using Muskets and cannons you can do plenty of damage.
Universal Suffrage will also get you some happiness since puppets will have merchant specialists, and you can just move citizens to specialists in controlled cities if you are in trouble.
An lastly you can also get a 15% bonus when producing units, which is minor but it means that it will save a turn for each 6-7 turns of production. And when you are done you get a free CS ally.
With the right conditions freedom can be good for domination. But really you don't need all those buffs, you are not forced to go for Freedom, especially if you want to go for domination. If you already have Chichen Itza your golden ages are at 20 or 16, Universal suffrage will only add 5 or 4 to it, so in practice a 25% increase in this case.
This does not influence you that much, you will get your artists a little bit later, but depending on the timing you will probably have the same number of Great Artists. If you go for domination, some domination strategies require a beeline to machinery instead of education, and Guilds is on the path.
Amrunril
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2015
- Messages
- 1,236
Golden ages generated by great people did become successively shorter in vanilla, when any great person could start a golden age. Once this ability became limited to great artists, though, the length became fixed.
You care about tourism when you're dominating a continent why, exactly? (Hint - you don't.) And no, each GA is not shorter in BNW
Capturing wonders is better and easier than building them and works on all difficulties.
You don't have enough experience to make this claim. Domination works with any ideology. 6 foreign legion instantly is devastating if you rush to ideology, which you should be doing anyway
Good thing you don't need to rush Guilds. Its on the way to Machinery though. And we all know why that's important. Kinda hard to not see the synergy here if you were open minded.
GenuineRisk
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2015
- Messages
- 155
The Zulu are good at war not just because of the UA, though. Granted, the UA by itself would make the Zulu a decent warmonger civ, but it's the combination of their UA/UU/UB that make them so amazing. I agree that the Zulu are the best civ for Domination, but you keep talking about only their UA in this thread. If you compare UAs in isolation, Persia's is stronger than the Zulu's.
I never said persia is bad civ but overrated, especially at war and I added IMHO to end of my sentence. So converting my sentence to discuss is useless since there is a big IMHO, no?
Btw, if Zulu isn't strong without UU/UB, can you say that persia have same strong without its UU/UB?
Anyway, it's better the put an end to this meaningless discussion.
I don't know how the Zulu got in the topic, clearly it isn't worth comparing. These two civs don't really have much in common. Some Buffalo promotions are somewhat similar to the Persia military bonus but that is it. They require different approaches, and depending on situation they may perform better or worse. If we are just comparing UA for warmongering, Zulu are ahead because of the 25% reduction for XP when promoting units, because it applies to all units.
I see you want to end the discussion again, but the funny thing about that is that you're not actually contributing to the discussion in any way.
To answer your question, a large majority of Zulu warmongering strength is attributed to the Impi and Ikanda. A very small percentage of Persia strength is attributed to immortals and Satraps. And considering how powerful +1 move and 10% strength is, yes - persia is EASILY as strong if you're only comparing UA.
But I suppose to you guys, Brazil isn't a cultural civ because their UA only works during golden ages too, right?
Feel free to not respond with any substance again.
"Yay! I made him shut up! He doesn't want to argue anymore! Mom I win an argument on a forum" lmao.
Kids nowadays...
Edit:
Babies nowadays.
Kids nowadays...
Edit:
AGAIN? I don't remember I said something to close discussing before. Come back to our world and read my posts again and please quote it that if I said something about closing discussing twice.
Babies nowadays.
Similar threads
