Revolt during Golden Age?

[chunkymonkey]

I've just started a new game with the Maya on Monarch and have expanded pretty well due to their perfect trait combo. I can see myself conquering the continent by the industrial age, however, the Americans have just forced me into an early war and despot GA by attacking my JavThrower. I will research Monarchy in 2 turns.

Question is, should i revolt and form Monarchy, potentially wasting 6-8 turns, but assuring a healthy economy for the last 10 turns of the GA, or play out the GA in despotism?

I'm not too worried about the war effort, cos i have plenty of javs and a few horsies to hold of the Americans. It's just really annoying, my last game, i had my GA during Republic which I think was a major factor in me winning the game. What would you guys do?

 

[Kiech]

Its your call. The general rule is NO, of course, especially if you aren't religious.

Hmm...Monarch game and you ARE going to own your own continent soon? Go for it.

 

[Rik Meleet]

If you can afford it (not in absolute need for troops or workers or anything) I'd revolt. A GA in Despotism isn't worth much, a GA in Monarchy a whole lot more. Any builds early will work for a very long time and a GA helps you to build quickly.

 

[Revolutionary]

I remember in one game a long time ago in civ3 I was the French and some bastard AI (the Aztec I think) triggered my golden age right before I got Democracy which I was planning on changing to, I revolted anyway and the revolution to my surprise seemed to be quite fast, the French golden age during the French Revolution what a coincidence

anyways what I'm trying to say is that you should definitely revolt, it probably won't last long and the rewards will be much greater

 

[vdd]

I will recommend revolt before finish developing the monarchy tech. In revolt time, you can still develop monarch by setting you workers to scientists. I am assuming you are play C3C, if not, forget what I am saying.

 

[chunkymonkey]

Thanks for the advice guys. I ended up revolting after I researched Monarchy. It took 5 turns to get out of Anarchy but I still mangaed to pound some American butt with the men I had. Once I was in Monarchy it only took a few more turns to overrun them with my swords and horsies. (Capturing Temple of Artemis on the way ) The Iroquois'll be next! They'll regret demanding tribute from me earlier in the game!

 

[Aggie]

If you can afford it (not in absolute need for troops or workers or anything) I'd revolt. A GA in Despotism isn't worth much, a GA in Monarchy a whole lot more.

Yes, but now he had 5 turns without production. I would NOT revolt during the GA for this reason. You always have to bite the bullit. Why choose a GA to do it?

 

[Commander Bello]

I would make up the decision depending on the size of my civ. If I already have a lot of good developed towns, most probably the loss in shields and gold due to the revolution would be more than one could gain later. Below ~10 cities I'd go for the better government, I guess.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Yes, but now he had 5 turns without production. I would NOT revolt during the GA for this reason. You always have to bite the bullit. Why choose a GA to do it?

He'd always have a 5 turn period without production. That's why to first check "if you can afford it" at that moment. Despo + GA is worse (long term) than Monarch + GA.
It's not really a matter of choice anymore; the GA was there and Monarchy was there. It's not like he waited for a GA to revolt in. If you have a choice when to ignite your GA, I would never choose to have a revolution during GA, but since a given fact is that you are in GA, I wouldn't wait.
The 13 turns Moarchy + GA outweigh the 5 turns of anarchy if his empire is good enough. If it isn't, than why revolt to Monarchy in the first place ?
The main reason for revolting as early as possible (even during GA) is: the sooner you can get your production and population up, the more you benefit as the effects tend to be cumulative. 1 single pop increase 1 turn earlier means perhaps only 1 extra shield and 2 extra commerce, but this increase will stay (next growth, also 1 turn sooner), thus after 400 turns it's 400 extra shields and 800 extra commerce. For just 1 city.

Do not take this as a n iron rule though, if you are on turn 18 of your Despotism + GA, it's better to wait 2 more turns. The Despo + GA is usually better than Monarchy or Republic. But if you can get a part of Monarchy + GA or Republic + GA, I wouldn't wait.

Prettige vakantie.

 

[Stile]

The main reason for revolting as early as possible (even during GA) is: the sooner you can get your production and population up, the more you benefit as the effects tend to be cumulative. 1 single pop increase 1 turn earlier means perhaps only 1 extra shield and 2 extra commerce, but this increase will stay (next growth, also 1 turn sooner), thus after 400 turns it's 400 extra shields and 800 extra commerce. For just 1 city.

I agree with most of your post, but I don't understand what you are trying to say here. By switching to Monarchy, any irrigated grasslands or other tile with a despotic food penalty will produce more food allowing a city to grow 1 or more turns earlier. The effect is cumulative but not for every turn played. Instead after every population increase you would get the extra sheild/ commerce until the city that you are comparing with would match the population level. This effect would end should the growth of your city ever stall, but it could also extend should the extra population give you food that allows you even faster growth.

As far as switching to Monarchy during GA, I would estimate the benefit of switching at about 40% increase in shields and commerce. So if chunky monkey switched on turn 2 and received 5 turns of anarchy and 13 turns of GA then it would benefit him. With 12 turns of GA, one turn later, he would break even.

The benefits:
1) Every tile that would normally produce 2 or more shields or commerce will recieve an extra one. That would be a 50% increase for roaded river tiles and mined bonus grassland. But less as a percentage (mined hills for instance) for others and no effect for just a regular road or river tile or irrigated plains. So there would be a maximum of 50% increase, with an average of, say, around 25%.

2) Corruption is decreased. Let's say 25% throughout your empire on top of the #1 benefits. (From my understanding of alexman's corruption article in the war academy, distance corruption is decreased 50% and rank corruption will not be effected.)

3) More food. Population increase will take a few turns and only has much effect if you have a bunch of food bonuses or irrigated grassland. I might be underestimating the benefit here, but it's hard to quantify. With the exception of cows, the food benefit comes at the expense of increased shields in Monarchy, so I assume it is largely covered by the #1 benefit.

The penalty:
1) The unit support drops from 4 per town to 2 per town. This could be significant in reducing increased amount of commerce from above, of course depending on the number of units you have and towns. Presumably you would have many towns as I usually get Monarchy before Construction.

 

[Stile]

2) Corruption is decreased. Let's say 25% throughout your empire on top of the #1 benefits. (From my understanding of alexman's corruption article in the war academy, distance corruption is decreased 50% and rank corruption will not be effected.)

I realize this is probably wrong, but I don't know what a better estimate would be. The corruption would only be 25% less if both the distance and rank corruption values (which are added to find the total corruption) are equal. That seems extremely unlikely. I would think the distance corruption would have a greater impact at this point in the game, which would mean the corruption could be much less in Monarchy.

 

[knacki]

From the info center :

During a "golden age", all worked tiles in your empire contribute one additional trade and shield per turn.

So let's say ur a despot and every worked tile in ur empire is worth 2 shields + 2 gold (which is often the case, I mean these tiles are the best for despotism, right ?), do u really think golden age + despotism is good ? Cause in this case golden age changes nothing to production, neither to commerce, I guess...
So my answer would be try not to waste ur GA and switch to monarchy immediately!

 

[starrider]

From the info center :
Quote:
During a "golden age", all worked tiles in your empire contribute one additional trade and shield per turn.

It works slightly differently: Bonuses work it the same way the Collossus does. Only squres with at least one trade get additional trade. Only squares that produce at least one shield get an additional sheild.

For example: Irrigated grassland with no shield gets ZERO extra shields during the Golden Age. A square with no road and no trade (not by a river either etc) gets NO trade bonus. I haven't fully tested the trade aspect, but IIRC correctly it's the same. I am positive about the shield bonus though.

 

[Portuguese]

I've just started a new game with the Maya on Monarch and have expanded pretty well due to their perfect trait combo. I can see myself conquering the continent by the industrial age, however, the Americans have just forced me into an early war and despot GA by attacking my JavThrower. I will research Monarchy in 2 turns.

Question is, should i revolt and form Monarchy, potentially wasting 6-8 turns, but assuring a healthy economy for the last 10 turns of the GA, or play out the GA in despotism?

I'm not too worried about the war effort, cos i have plenty of javs and a few horsies to hold of the Americans. It's just really annoying, my last game, i had my GA during Republic which I think was a major factor in me winning the game. What would you guys do?

Maya's good civ? Play Port. Great traits combo and a perfect timed golden age.

Advise: Don't waste your GA in a revolution. 10 turns at 50% more is no gain against 17 good turns for a lot of small reasons...

 

[Revolutionary]

Maya's good civ? Play Port. Great traits combo and a perfect timed golden age.

you never give up do you, always trying to convince people that Portugal is the best civ to play as