Forced era timing

[roidesfoux]

I am interested in a game mechanic which would moderate tech research, based on what era it "should" be. I would like to see an option (definitely an option rather than a rule) where ages are given time spans based off of history (eg. Ancient Era: 4000 BC-500 AD, Medieval Era: 500 AD-1880 AD, Industrial Era: 1880 AD-1950 AD, Modern Era 1950 AD-2050 AD). If a civilization is outside that range, they recieve a bonus or penalty. If it's 1000 AD, and a civilization (read: a computer player) is still in the Ancient era, they would advance more quickly, allowing them to catch up with historical development. Conversely, if it's 1900 AD and you're already in the Modern era, you would research more slowly. You could still get ahead of the times, but not by too much.

This would have two major effects. First, it would help to balance the technological playing field. Secondly, it would make your advancement somewhat more historically realistic (for those of you who desire more realism in their games).

-RdF

 

[rcoutme]

I disagree completely with the first example. The Zulu were still in 'Ancient Age' technology when the British and Dutch were colonizing South Africa. As for the second example, I could probably live with it as a toggle, but don't really see the point.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

My sole issue is that there should be 1-2 more ages in the game as standard. In particular the current Ancient Age should be split into Ancient and Classical. The current middle ages could also be split into an early and late component.
Anyway, just my thoughts.
As for the main topic here, I agree with rcoutme. Nations progressed at different rates in different parts of the world. One way to deal with your concerns, though, might be to allow some techs-like cultural and non-military techs-flow more between nations who are allied or in fairly multilateral trade arrangements. This would allow what you are asking for, but would still create areas of difference between geographically isolated regions of the map.
To resort to history for a moment. The European and Arabian powers were of roughly equal tech level up to the industrial age because they were all in very close contact with each other. Alliances and extensive trade networks allowed new ideas to spread to and fro. Nations like Australia and Southern Africa, however, were almost totally isolated from the civs of the northern hemisphere (i.e. Asia and Europe) thus causing them to progress at a slower rate! I know thats not entirely accurate but, from a gameplay perspective, I feel it would be a close enough facsimile.
So, my main points are:

1) Terrain features (like dune-seas, Oceans, mountain ranges and jungles) should be much more of a factor in seperating civs from each other-via a combination of impassible terrains and operational ranges.

2) Cultural techs should have a chance of passing, naturally, between civs involved in extensive trading-especially if they are of the same culture group.

3) Non-military techs should have a chance of passing between civs that are in an alliance. Again, even greater if they share a culture group!

4) Military Techs should be limited to direct tech trading ONLY!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[covenant]

1) Terrain features (like dune-seas, Oceans, mountain ranges and jungles) should be much more of a factor in seperating civs from each other-via a combination of impassible terrains and operational ranges.

Absolutely.

 

[warpstorm]

I don't like this idea at all. It punishes those who do well and rewards slackers.

 

[Fromage10x]

I agree it's a bad idea. I do like some of Aussie's ideas though, especially number 1.

I've often thought that mountain ranges and deserts, especially, should be a lot more dangerous than they are.

 

[Slax]

Some aspect of this is in the game already: As each tech is discovered by each civ, it gets easier to discover by civs who don't know it yet.