4 distinct ages

[dh_epic]

@dh epic you understood me wrong, 'city-states' is just a name of an era, nothing influencing the game play. I just talked of 'eye-candy' (a civ has more leaders, etc etc)

Haha, I was getting hopeful. At risk of totally diverging this thread -- please don't take me too seriously -- I envisioned it something like this.

You start the game with a bunch of cities littered throughout the world.

Or maybe instead of building settlers -- that's something you only get when you develop to the classical age -- people get up and leave your city just automatically. Expansionist civs experience more of this.

When all is said and done, you have to go out and meet these new "cousin" cities. Some of them you'll have to negotiate with, they realize that if they join your empire, they get access to silk, and you could be a better protector. Others will want to be independant. You might have to conquer them. Ultimately, "some people lead, and some people follow".

Of course this would be crazy, because then you wouldn't be any such thing as "starting civs". This really is a whole other game. But an interesting one to think about.

(Again, don't take this idea too seriously.)

 

[Beloyar]

I guess some of you already mentioned this. Why have only 4 ages? This is inaccurate.

• Ancient
• Middle
• Neoclassical: The missing age of Napoleonic wars and its military uniforms, Versailles-style palaces, art, and architecture, European colonization, enlightenment and discovery, etc.
• Industrial
• Modern

I really hate it when my defenders upgrade from musketmen to American-style volunteer riflemen in bell-bottom jeans. Regular armies of Europe had distinct uniforms, not included in the game. These uniforms are associated with a whole era in European history. It is also lame when Euro cities upgrade from Midieval round "swimming pool" and spire architecture to smokestacks and factories. What happened to Buckingham Palace and St. Paul Cathedral of London and other places?

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

The missing age of Napoleonic wars and its military uniforms, Versailles-style palaces, art, and architecture, European colonization, enlightenment and discovery, etc.

I agree, there is a small 300 year gap there!

 

[mitsho]

@beloyar you make one thinking mistake. You are right that this is they way it happened in rl. But there was only a medievel age in europe, india, the middle east and china for example didn't have this (or not at the time it was in europe). So it's totally wrong to speak of a middle /medieval age. It just doesn't make sense.

If you look at the life of various empires, you can find another structure, namely: 'city states'/ little principalities (correct word?) -- the Ancient age; then afterwards, these develop into kingdoms (Classical age) and afterwards empires (Imperialistic Age), empires are in my definition states that expand and bring their culture to other civs (like the romans did, the chinese, and the indians), after this the Industrialization comes and last but not least the modern age:

ANCIENT AGE -> CLASSICAL AGE -> IMPERIALISTIC AGE-> INDUSTRIAL AGE -> MODERN AGE

this would be one version of a more accurate system of ages. On your example, for the european cultural group, 'your' neoclassical age would be the imperialistic age.

I hope I was able to explain to you why the middle age just doesn't make sense.

mfG mitsho

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

@ mitsho our perception of history is definitely an unbalanced one, because of culture, nationality and our subconcious submission (OMG) to the historiographical trends I agree with you that we should have a more global approach to the ages(although the concept of age itself is manufactured-and a politically motivated construct)
Consider this:Ancient age 4000BC-circa150AD=4150 years
:Classical age 150AD-1500AD=1350 years
:Imperialistic age 1500-1820=320 years
:Industrial=1820-1945=125 years
:Modern=1945-2004=59 years
So an age can be as long as our current perspective is imposing. I dont think that historians of the future will consider 125y. as an age the same way as historians of the past did not consider 4150y. as one age only!
I think that the age concept must be much broader especially if you take into account the non-european view(Africa? South america?)
therefore IMHO the least we could do is efface MA completely and give the broadest and more balanced(in terms of years) makeover to the rest...

 

[Evie]

Classical could well continue past the renaissance anyway. I think "Imperialistic" should actually be part of classical. That way we keep the default four-age system.

 

[Beloyar]

mitsho, I think you're way off. Imperialism is a name for a submovement of this era, however, not all countries were empires. Imperialism itself did not inspire people to new things. It was intellectual enlightenment that lead to new discoveries in social and scientific fields; interest in classical literature, history, and knowledge lead to new movements in the arts, architecture, and political changes. A new way of thinking was the result of accumulation of knowledge from many different sources in spite of attempts to curtail it by political imperialism and church concervatism in the West.
That's how I see it.

I also know that regions other than Europe did not have a Midieval and Neoclassical period, but, hell, some societies still live in the ancient age today, like Afganistan, Papua New Ginea, the natives of the Amazon, etc. Such countries will, of course, have to skip right into the space age some day.

Maybe we ought to come up with a way for other regions to skip ages, but Europe that went through this age of discovery should get a bonus. Maybe the Rennaisance should be a tech to discover. This should be reflected in the graphics too: I want to build a Versailles Palace for my palace instead of the fug-ugly black gothic monstrosity!

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

IMHO the whole concept of ages is a fake. Fake but useful. Age is a technical boundary, or border that was imposed, by historians for aesthetic but mainly political and ideological reasons. We have the tendency (many years after the facts) to group a series of events and to imply a network of interactions between them that usually exists only in our mind.

In the game now, ages are nice since a long tech tree would be rather boring, and the transition always gives to the player a sense of achievement.
That said, the quasi-linear tech tree does not represent any scientific reality(maybe a limited western perspective):
Democracy preceded Philosophy in ancient greece, Astronomy preceded gunpowder in the arabs, Iron working just never happened for many Civs around the world, Philosophy was not a prerequisite for the advance of England into the middle Ages...

Therefore we always keep in mind that using a game concept in order to form a reality argument in order to form a game concept is a cyclical (deeply flawed) argument.

I also know that regions other than Europe did not have a Midieval and Neoclassical period, but, hell, some societies still live in the ancient age today, like Afganistan, Papua New Ginea, the natives of the Amazon, etc. Such countries will, of course, have to skip right into the space age some day.

So, I agree that Medieval and Neo-classical periods is a Europe-linked concept, applied many years later and therefore there is little limit to the flexibility we could use in the tech-tree age continium. As for tribes living in the ancient age that probably implies that there is a CIV like evolution in all societies , assumption already proved as false.

But ,and to return to the game, a series of alternate tech-trees although politically and historically correct would again over-diversify civs and unbalance game play(any given civ would have a "best" way to play with).
IMHO a way of compromise would be to reduce the techs that are necessary for Age advance in order to create greater flexibility.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't really care too much about the names of the ages. I think they should be as culturally neutral as possible, anyway. (And for the record, Afghanistan does not live in the ancient age. In spite of how we might view their culture, especially under the illegitimate rule of the Taliban, they actually enjoy many of the same technologies we do.)

I think the real important question is what do ages offer you, besides aesthetics and 4 distinct pages of technology?

One of my favorite ideas was the idea that to advance an age you needed certain pre-requisites... and if said pre-requisites were ever destroyed, you would have a probability of hitting a dark age. (And especially probable if you were a powerful nation.) This would open up a strategy of smaller nations trying to trigger a dark age in an empire, to level the playing field.

 

[Pirate]

For those of you that propose adding more ages, how do you propose that each age be different? Is it just a new name and graphic look? If so, this is not the thread for that.

This thread is about making each age a distinct playing experience. Transitions between ages should mark fundamental changes in basic subsistence (farming & production), and in how political and social institutions are organized. This is not to say there are only 4 ages, but each age should be something revolutionary - that's why you hear phrases like the "agricultural revolution," "industrial revolution," and "digital revolution."

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

One of my favorite ideas was the idea that to advance an age you needed certain pre-requisites... and if said pre-requisites were ever destroyed, you would have a probability of hitting a dark age. (And especially probable if you were a powerful nation.) This would open up a strategy of smaller nations trying to trigger a dark age in an empire, to level the playing field.

there was a big discussion on the DA thread: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=89209)
about the possible triggers of such an event. I dont think that a similar suggestion was made, but have a look there and we can continue in order to avoid hijacking this thread

 

[mitsho]

@Beloyar Of course you are right if you speak of Imperialism and mean the time period 1850-1914, but I'm talking of the roman imperialism. Today, we really forget that this concept was really often used in the ancient age. (Rome, Greece and all these civs/countries did expand and expand and expand).
So, like we today speak of american culture-imperialism (at all we do in german = Kulturimperialismus), we can also do this for the romans, greeks, persians etc.

I just had to show you this, because most people make the mistake you apparently did and forget completely that there is also a history before 1850. I'm sorry I don't say you don't know the world history before 1850, but it looked like...

mfG mitsho

 

[Beloyar]

I don't think the time of Roman imperial history was ever referred to officially as an age of imperialism.

Anyway, I would suggest
Stone Age - where civs cannot build towns, but can roam the land and settle in villages temporarily, herding and grazing their livestock. When they discover farming or something, they can discover settlement as well. The Huns and Mongols lived this way until the 13th century.

 

[mitsho]

@beloyar, ok I heard it referred to that term because that is what imperialism means (the term) and where it comes from. And Beloyar, there is a thread suggesting this, it's called 'nomadic age' and it's somewhere on top. so it's too easy to find that I have to provide a link

mfG mitsho

 

[Old_Man]

It may be easier if you can specify ages for different categories such as military.
Neolithic- at the start for some cultures. You don’t have soldiers yet, just hunters with spears and bows made of stone or flint.

Ancient- you enter the ancient era with the development of metalworking and higher social organization. You now have a king or warlord leading troops of armored men into battle. This is the age of heavy infantry, i.e. Roman legions. As you go along, you have technical increases, iron, artillery, transport, tactics. You have great war leaders: Sun Tzu, Hannibal, Alexander, Marius, Caesar… All these changes occur within the age, but they are just steps. There is no significant change.

Classical- The age of cavalry. In “real” history, this would begin at Adrianople. With a few exceptions, armored knights were the military might. Cataphract to Cuirassier.

Industrial- The age of gunpowder. Musket infantry can once again defeat knights, but artillery becomes the king of the battlefield. When you put artillery on top of a horseless-carriage…

Modern- My words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS. The troops are still important, but the bomb is teh Bomb!

You could set ages for other categories
Industry and commerce
Health and science
Religion and philosophy
Art, music, and literature

This way,
The ancient age is the bronze age, the barter age, the observation age, the temple age, the poetic age
The classical age is, the iron age, the silk age, the leech age, the gothic age, the perspective age
The Industrial age is, the gunpowder age, the steam age, the experimental age, the enlightenment age, the jazz age
The modern age is the nuclear age, the computer age, the research age, the secular age, the rock and roll age…

(Come up with better terms/redefine the divisions)

 

[warpstorm]

Wow, you pulled that thread from the back of the rack. BTW, it seems ages are gone from Civ4.

 

[mastertyguy]

Ages are gone, but if they were still here this would be interresting. But it may apply, when you discover some techs your civ changes.
Happy birthday to this thread's last post, old man resurrected it after a year.

 

[Old_Man]

Yeah, I’m a little sad IV won’t have Ages. I didn’t like the way they were implemented in III, especially the abrupt way you had to finish out the tech tree before proceeding to the next age. but I really would have liked to have seen them reworked.

It would be great if not only your advisors reflected the appropriate age, but also when you parleyed with the other civs. You meet with Shaka, Emperor of the Zulus (who has classical clothes) in the background, you notice his health, trade, and social ministers are still in togas and he has a shaman for his religious advisor. How backwards. Oh oh, his military advisor is sporting a gorget, bearskin helmet, and pistols. The Zulus are in the gunpowder age!

I know, you could get the same info from a spy summary, or some foreign affairs chart, but this seems more fun. Maybe modable… or for 5.

 

[Illuminatiscott]

There should be these ages, each having its own effects on gameplay and the like, each with roughly half the technology of a 4-5 age tree age. Different culture groups can have different names, so you dont have like china with a renaissance age, or zulu with a hellenic age. Years are just for reference
1)Ancient age 6000 BCE - 3000 BCE
2)Early Classical Age 3000 BCE - 300 BCE
3)Hellenic Age 300 BCE - 200 CE
4)Dark Age 200 CE - 700 CE
5)Medieval Age 700 CE - 1300 CE
6)Renaissance Age 1300 CE - 1600 CE
7)Colonial Age 1600 CE - 1850 CE
8)Industrial Age 1850 CE - 1895 CE
9)Motor age 1895 CE - 1970 CE
10)Electronics Age 1970 CE - 2050 CE