[Vote] (5-29) Golden Age Removal Series: Remove GAPs From Luxury Monopoly Resources

[pineappledan]

VP Congress: Session 5, Proposal 29

current situation:
Some luxury resource monopolies gives +25% GA length and +2 GAP on the resource tile.

Proposal:
Remove the +2 GAP on the resource tile
Increase the GA length bonus to 30% (no changes to Imperialism or Indonesia's monopoly % change bonuses)

Rationale:
On standard, GAs last 10 turns. 25% GA length is rounded down to +2 turns of GA. Increasing the GA length bonus to 30% increased the GA length to 3 turns.
There are no other sources of 25% GA length for the monopoly to stack with until the GA length corporation. The only place that extra 5% comes into play is if you have 2 separate GA length monopolies or are playing on a non-standard speed, where GA length is rescaled so it is divisible by 4.
The GAPs on resources are very minor, usually only 6-10 GAP per turn on empire. However, it is contributing a bit.
GAPs are ugly on the tile, and make the map messy.
GAPs should not be considered yields. They have no real world analogue like "Food". They are being distributed in the game carelessly as a filler yield. Happiness should be re-centered as the main source of Golden Ages.

 

[azum4roll]

Resource monopoly bonuses do not stack, so if you get 2 different +25% GA length bonuses, you still only get +25% GA length on empire

They stack.

 

[pineappledan]

No they don't.
Yes they do

 

[KlHannibal2]

While I like the general approach of reducing sources of GAP, I would prefer to keep them on resources. Otherwise, resource yield diversity would suffer.

 

[Anarcomu]

Imperialism bonus only apply ones per % bonus type, ie with two monopolies with +10% (+20% total), you only get +10% from imperialism (+30% total), not +20% (40% total).
I think this is the source of your confusion.

 

[pineappledan]

I can sponsor

 

[tsmith7163]

I like to the logic for the 30% and generally agree with overall nerf to continuous GA in late game ( although I do like those) to make GA unique but these monopiles are the worst to get even if 2 or 3 turns of increase culture and gold and production mathematically exceed the other monopolies (which I'm not sure if they do) - GA are too iffy and variable - and the power of GA comes later. Slated per turn yields or flat percentages for monopolies are almost always preferred. So it is filler but at least it's something.

 

[azum4roll]

Some final details:
This proposal will affect Gold and Ivory, as well as Porcelain.

Gold is generally great to have early game and post-Bank, with or without .
Ivory is ok early game (early improvement + unlocking War Elephants + meh yields), peaks at Circus (+3 ), and suffers from having low yields later due to being a featureless camp.
Porcelain change is mostly a buff - you rarely get to use the but you can easily get the monopoly through Statecraft.

My personal opinion is that luxuries are mostly balanced currently and do not want a change.

 

[tsmith7163]

Some final details:
This proposal will affect Gold and Ivory, as well as Porcelain.

Gold is generally great to have early game and post-Bank, with or without .
Ivory is ok early game (early improvement + unlocking War Elephants + meh yields), peaks at Circus (+3 ), and suffers from having low yields later due to being a featureless camp.
Porcelain change is mostly a buff - you rarely get to use the but you can easily get the monopoly through Statecraft.

My personal opinion is that luxuries are mostly balanced currently and do not want a change.

Ahh.. ok - I agree both gold and ivory are very strong but for some reason I thought I saw it on another one/

 

[Zuizgond]

Ahh.. ok - I agree both gold and ivory are very strong but for some reason I thought I saw it on another one/

Jade?

 

[tsmith7163]

Jade?

Yeahhhhh..... that is the one I was seeing in last game which prompted the comment- thanks

 

[Recursive]

Timestamp post to arrange all the threads in a neat order.