Ages for BNW

[arkguy]

I suggests the some of the Era’s be divided up into shorter time periods, Ages, with there own benefits that would cumulative the any Era benefits, here are some suggestions. Ancient Era: Feudal age & The Viking Age. Renaissance Era-Age of Pirates (ends in the Classical Era), Classical Era- Napoleonic Age.

Age of Pirates (Barbary Coast 1530-1780). A period where a strong navy will be needed to insure the safely of unarmed/poorly armed ships sailing the oceans. Certain areas or zone on the world map could have higher rates of pirates becoming “Barbary Coast areas”.
Since ships were very important to International commerce during this period the Age would bestow a + 5 production bonus to ship units built during this age. A noticeable increase in the variety of ship units to build would occur during this time, some could become obsolete at the end of the Age to make way for better units. The age could also cross Era boundaries starting in one Era and ending in another.
Ships of this age: sloop, cutter, Brigantine, bark, merchant ship, square-rigger, Queen Anne’s Revenge, warship, frigate and battleship.
Buildings: dock, casino, shipyard and Buccaneer’s home (see Age of Pirate mod).
New promotion: deck modification-modify a ship to hold more or larger guns than that type of ship normally holds giving it a higher firepower rating than a ship of that kind would have. Pirates captured ships then modified the deck to hold more or bigger guns than normal for that type of ship so a pirate merchant ship for instance would out gun a normal merchant ship.
Units: Buccaneer, musket men, thief, raider, pirate, pirate Captain, cannon, ship of the line, galley, sloop, brig, Braque, privateer, galleon, frigate and dark sloop.

2. Napoleonic Age (1799-1815): techs: Divine Right, advanced ballistics-can build bombard cannon; Military Training-enables accuracy and Swiss Guard.
3. Feudal age buildings: archery Range, blacksmith; units: man-at-arms, skirmisher; techs: forging.
4. The Viking age- enables new fortification to help defend against Viking raids. A period were larger/stronger armies will be needed to defend against thier raids. A +1 production bonus to certain unit types to defend against the vikings during this age.

 

[kingchris20]

Age of Pirates Arrr, I like me booty!

 

[arkguy]

Hope the suggestion for Age agree with the pirate in you.

 

[fuzzatron717]

Napoleonic wars era. Although if it was on the poll I would say the enlightenment era.

 

[labrynianrebel]

Imperial Era

 

[MeowthLover]

Napoleonic wars era. Although if it was on the poll I would say the enlightenment era.

That's a great idea. I'd love to see a new Enlightenment Era (it seems much better than a "Napoleonic" era) to fill in the space between the Renaissance and Industrial Revolution.

 

[Biologist]

I'm confused as to the purpose of this poll. Am I supposed to vote for which age sounds coolest? Which one I think should be in BNW? Whether ages as a concept should be considered for BNW at all?

Not to mention they all seem rather Eurocentric (with the possible exception of the Feudal Age).

If I have to pick one then I guess the Age of Pirates because, well.... pirates.

 

[BTA51]

Ancient Era: Feudal age & The Viking Age.

"Feudalism was a set of legal and military customs in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism

"The Vikings (from Old Norse víkingr) were seafaring northern Germanic people who raided, traded, explored, and settled in wide areas of Europe, Asia, and the North Atlantic islands from the late 8th to the mid-11th centuries"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings



Edit: Not that I'm against the concept. More units, more buldings, more stuff = more fun. But I really don't think ancient era is the right place for "feudal age" or "viking age".

 

[iconocast]

its pretty obvious it will be the hyborian age

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0603571.txt

 

[Loaf Warden]

Edit: Not that I'm against the concept.

I am.

Not that I think adding more units and so forth is bad, but I'm pretty lukewarm on their system of "ages" as it is. Apart from enforcing the Euro-centrism (which it absolutely does, considering all the ages are based on what happened in Europe and completely ignores developments elsewhere), it suggests too strong a linearity to history. Granted a certain degree of linearity is inherent in the tech tree, and I don't know if there's any way to fix that. But to have, for example, the Classical Era move into the Medieval Era and then to the Renaissance Era suggests that all of that was inevitable. In European terms, the "medieval era" happened because the Western Roman Empire fell, causing future generations to feel there had been a break with continuity from "classical civilization". And the Renaissance happened because Europeans rediscovered classical Greek and Roman texts (which the Arabs had in Arabic translation all along) and tried, to an extent, to leave the "medieval" traditions behind and get back to their "classical" roots.

Since progress in the Civ games is always upward--technology advances and never stagnates, empires grow and never shrink (unless conquered by a different civ doing its own growing)--the concept of a "Medieval Era", let alone a "Renaissance Era", is pretty silly.

So what would these new eras even mean? The "Napoleonic Era" happened because one specific guy started to get grabby with land--the clue there is very much in the name--and in Civ, that can happen at any time. Same with the "Viking Era"; there was nothing specific about a society's stage of technological progress that made them become susceptible to Viking attack. It was socioeconomic issues within Scandinavia that made that happen when it did, and the towns they attacked were just unfortunate enough to be in their way.

In Japan, the Feudal Era was followed directly by the Industrial Era.

I don't think even the eras they have really work, so I don't agree that new eras should be added. More units, fine. More buildings, wonders, more stuff to play with, awesome. But I'd rather see them do away with set boundaries between pre-defined eras altogether than see them say, "Here, we thought of some more ways to arbitrarily divide up the course of European history."

At most, I think city graphics should change with certain techs. Discover Industrialization, now your cities have smokestacks in them. That's fine. But "Welcome to the Medieval Era" is a silly thing to say, and not really relevant to my civ's ceaseless progress, thanks.

 

[blackcatatonic]

I don't think we need any more ages/eras in the game in any case, aside from there being various problems with all of the ages suggested by the poll.

A case could be made for the Enlightenment Era, but I still don't think it's really necessary. It would make a lot more sense if slavery were a mechanic in the game, but I don't think the developers will go there again (and tbh am not sure if they should).

 

[blackcatatonic]

Oh, and another thing: bring back era-specific music.

 

[Zodan_Mir]

I like the way the eras are currently named just fine. If I could change one thing, though, it would be to add more techs to the ancient and classical eras (again), as these eras tend to be short-lived. Historically, the opposite occurred, with the early eras taking longer periods of time (relative to later eras) before new technologies appeared. Humanity spent a long time in the ancient and classical periods, and the game doesn't reflect this at all. By contrast, the medieval era, and later, feel about right, as they capture the quickening pace at which science worked leading to the modern and informtion eras.

 

[Biologist]

Humanity spent a long time in the ancient and classical periods, and the game doesn't reflect this at all.

I think the slow advance of technology in the Ancient/Classical eras is represented by the fact that each turn represents thousands or hundreds of years. I find that playing the game at Epic speeds seems to produce an appropriate length for the early eras.

 

[IkM]

Feudal age or Age of Pirates or both.

 

[Biologist]

Feudal age or Age of Pirates or both.

Napoleonic Age of Feudal Viking Pirates.

 

[IkM]

Napoleonic Age of Feudal Viking Pirates.

lol what?

 

[blackcatatonic]

Napoleonic Age of Feudal Viking Pirates.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Don't get me wrong; I would love to see them expand on sailing ships. I think the new Trade Route system could open up a lot of possibilities for that. I want them to make Privateers have hidden nationality again, so we can plunder the Cargo Ships of other civs without going to war--not to capture ships, but to steal money from the Trade Route.

In fact, I want them to take out the "Privateer" ship altogether and instead make it a promotion which could be given to any ship to give it hidden nationality. (After all, in real history, a privateer was not a kind of ship. The master of any vessel, of any type, could be given a letter of marque designating him a privateer and authorizing him to, in effect, engage in piracy on behalf of a government.) And there could be a "Pirate Hunter" promotion for warships that would give them extra strength against hidden-nationality ships--and maybe give it a small percentage of discovering the nationality of a defeated privateer, causing an international incident. (Maybe not an automatic declaration of war, but it would sure make the leader you were preying on angry.) I think that would be really fun.

But to designate a specific "Age of Pirates" which inevitably follows the "Renaissance Era" and precedes the "Industrial Era"--as though it were a stage of technological progression rather than a result of specific geopolitical factors such as the increasing use of the seas to transport goods, harsh conditions on Navy ships inspiring sailors to desert and turn rogue, the desire for minor European powers to establish a colonial presence in the New World and decrease the power of Spain, etc.--is not really meaningful.

 

[blackcatatonic]

Just had a thought: what if Privateers didn't have hidden nationality, but could plunder/pillage trade routes anyway?

Obviously this would result in a diplomatic penalty, but there'd be some pretty hefty swag to make up for it. Perhaps you could even 'steal' a Civ's access to one of their luxuries (although they could get rid of that by just pillaging it )