Optional "Postpone Golden Age?" pop-up dialog?

[Ralf]

I would like to see an optional "Postpone Golden Age?" pop-up dialog added to the game. Bear in mind that this dialog should be optional, so if you dont like idea of more pop-ups, you dont have to see it.

With certain Civs, I have got to the point there I deliberately try to avoid building Civ-specific units and related Wonders, just to avoid having an untimely "Golden Age" far too early in the game.
Take the Egyptians for example: If I have one succesful battle with those war-chariots, or if I construct the early industrious-related Pyramid-wonder, I suddenly find myself with an untimely "Golden Age" stuffed down my throat.

I DONT mind having an early "Golden Age" as an option - But why not give the player the option to accept or postpone it through an optional pop-up dialog?

[Moraelin]

Personally I can't see how would you realistically postpone a golden age.

And besides, early golden ages aren't THAT bad. Later in the game I have everyone happy, I'm getting 4-5 turns for any research, and I'm making 1500 or more gold per turn. It's early when I have more problems.

IMHO a better idea would be to have multiple golden ages. Of course, it would become less and less probable to get one, and there should be a minimum of 100 turns after one when you absolutely can't have another one yet, no matter what you do, but it should be possible. Can't see why just because I had one golden age in 2000 BC, my people absolutely can't get all worked up again, 4000 years larter.

That said, I voted that I wouldn't use it, but if anyone else wants to, why not?

[Ralf]

Maybe the AI couldnt exploit this idea as good as the human player can - that would be a viable argument not to implement it.

Other then that, I see no obstacles or problems with it. As for the realism of postponing an Golden Age, my response is: Its only a fun game, for crying out load. Regardless above; this is not a "game-breaker" for me. If they add it; great!! If not; I can live with that too.

[Xentropy]

I think the problem here is that the way it is now isn't because Firaxis didn't think of it, but it is because the timing of Golden Ages was part of the INTENDED balance between civilizations.

Greeks will tend to have a very early Golden Age. Americans will usually have one very late. I'm fairly certain I even *read* this somewhere in developer's notes on civ3.com or the like, but if not, it was a very strong impression I got from something I *did* read.

If you want a later Golden Age, play the Americans, English, or other civilization with a later special unit. Part of how the Egyptians are intended is having an early Golden Age. You can TRY to postpone it, but it's deliberately difficult to do so. One big American advantage is the ability to "save" their Golden Age for much later than the average civ.

To make changes to this, either by letting ANYONE postpone Golden Ages as much as they want, or by allowing multiple Golden Ages, would cause a shift in the balance between civs which would need playtesting to work out. The Americans would actually lose their advantage and gain a DISadvantage if multiple Golden Ages were implemented, for example. They wouldn't get the early one most Civs get, and every other Civ could get one/some later in ADDITION to their early one.

[Moraelin]

The problem there is that maybe I don't want to play the Americans in the first place. Maybe I want a Religious civ, so I can switch governments quickly when I'm forced into a war, or maybe I want a Scientific civ to stay ahead technologically.

Not to mention that aircraft that can't kill, have a laughably short range and can't operate off an airbase are close to useless in the first place. AND that I usually want an advantage earlier. So the Americans' UU is pretty much useless to me.

Well, maybe if the game let me not only choose a different civ name, but also my own two attributes for it, it would be more of a solution.

[esidebob]

I think there should be two golden ages possible for each civ, one of which could only be gotten by winning a battle with your UU, and the other only obtainable through wonder-building.

[Oligarf]

I don't think it is realistic to postpone a Golden Age, it is just there. But as an option, why not. I personally like the idea of Moraelin more, having several Golden Ages should be possible if you play very well.

[Code Monkey]

Not only is it not "realistic" to postpone a golden age but it's also very inconsistent with the game mechanics implemented to trigger it.

The most reliable way to trigger a golden age is via the UU - which, not coincidentally, becomes available around the time the real-world civ had their peak. Ditto for wonders which can trigger golden ages, they are available to build more or less around the equivalent period they were constructed in the real world.

Golden ages occur when a number of things come together for a civ such that they are more productive and inventive than their contemporaries - it's not something you should be able to turn on and off.

Because if I could save a golden age, I'd just put it on the back burner until world war broke out in the modern era and use it to whack everyone in my way.

I do agree strongly that multiple golden ages should be possible.

[Jrad]

If you build enough wonders, but don't fill what your civ is, you can get a Golden Age (I triggered it playing the Americans and building Leonardo's Workshop...)...

I find it annoying that playing as the Americans and building the Colossus and Pyramids causes a golden age.

[Xentropy]

Originally posted by Moraelin
The problem there is that maybe I don't want to play the Americans in the first place. Maybe I want a Religious civ, so I can switch governments quickly when I'm forced into a war, or maybe I want a Scientific civ to stay ahead technologically.

Not to mention that aircraft that can't kill, have a laughably short range and can't operate off an airbase are close to useless in the first place. AND that I usually want an advantage earlier. So the Americans' UU is pretty much useless to me.

Well, maybe if the game let me not only choose a different civ name, but also my own two attributes for it, it would be more of a solution.

EXACTLY! Almost everyone agrees that the American unit and attributes kinda suck compared to most civs. So to balance that, they get a late Golden Age where other civs have a very difficult time doing so.

It's part of the game. And THIS part is VERY easy to edit. You can open up civ3mod.bic and give any two attributes you want to any Civ. Hell, you can even give all 6 to a Civ if you want heh

Originally posted by Code Monkey
I do agree strongly that multiple golden ages should be possible.

So basically you agree strongly that the Americans should suck even more than they already do.

Think about balance, people, not just what would be cool to make you kick even more ass than you already do.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
Golden ages occur when a number of things come together for a civ such that they are more productive and inventive than their contemporaries

Well, thats exactly my point. Quite often I accidently or unwillingly trigger an Golden Age when Im definitely NOT "more productive and inventive than my contemporaries".

That is just SO unrealistic, isnt it?

it's not something you should be able to turn on and off.

Who said anything about turning it on and off, back and forth?

Its a one time occurrence that lasts about 20 turns. This topic is about the optional ability to postsponing that Golden Age - perhaps only within the realms of each ERA.
That is, if you plays the Egyptians you can only postpone it before the switch between the ancient era and the medieval era. In above case you MUST trigger it before that switch.

I do agree strongly that multiple golden ages should be possible.

Arrrgh! I must say I strongly disagree with the idea of multiple Golden Ages. That would work inflationary on the whole Golden Age-concept. It should be a one-time occurrence only - preferebly only related to that same historic era, that the real-life historic counterpart had its heyday.

As for "turning it in and off":
Isnt that something the player would do (at least indirectly) if they added multiple Golden Ages?

[Moraelin]

Actually, there are plenty of ways to implement multiple golden ages in a less easy to predict way. Throw in a random delay, and an extra luck roll that becomes more difficult once you had one. (And extremely difficult if you had two.) So it's not just a case of "let's build one more wonder". You build one more wonder, and maybe nothing happens.

As for Xentropy, noone said we want to make the Americans suck even more than they already do. (Heck, you said it, not me) Just remove the requirements that it's a UU that wins the battle. There, problem solved. Now everyone can get a Golden Age at any time, the Americans included.

But back to stopping a Golden Age, how would you do that? Basically you're dealing with your citizens' being all worked up in a patriotic pride and enthusiams frenzy. How do you stop them?

Wait, I can picture it. You send messengers in the four corners of Egypt, with the message: "Oh, people of Egypt. So speaketh our divine Pharaoh Dave the Great, and so it is written: Oi! Will you cut it out with this enthusiasm crap? No, we're not the greatest nation under the eye of Ra. No, just because we dumped a buttload of money and work into building those Pyramids, instead of improving our economy, doesn't mean we're high and mighty. It means we're all a bunch of losers, and every civilization worthy of that name is laughing their ass off at us. As a reminder of this, I'm changing my title from Dave the Great to Dave the Crappy Megalomaniac. And cut it out with the research already, or I'm starting research on Monotheism and send the Inquisition after all you wannabe scientists. Get out of that Great Library and get a life already. Get a date. Get drunk. Whatever. And what's with this lack of corruption? Go bribe someone already, for crying out loud. The governors have already been instructed to start accepting bribes, or I'm accepting their skull on a sharp spike in front of the palace."

[cam hardy]

You shouldn't to be able to postpone a golden age, since it is more the result of the efforts of your intellectuals, artists, and citizens than your decisions...

But multiple golden ages should be possible. The Americans have had a couple golden ages, I think (the 20s, and the 90s)...

[uh Clem]

If the GA was shortened to, say, 5 turns then I'd be in favor of unlimited golden ages. If it stayed at 20, then more than one, or two at most, would seem unbalancing IMO.

CTP2 had 'Feats of Wonder,' which was like a limited GA, and which you got for being the first to do something. Be the first to circumnavigate the globe and ships get +1 MP for 25 turns.

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by Ralf

Who said anything about turning it on and off, back and forth?

Um.. you?

If you complete the necessary requirements to trigger a golden age and then postpone the actual golden age, that is indeed turning it off and then on again at a later time. (I don't think anyone said anything about back and forth)

This would be the equivalent to the Americans getting all hopped up after the end of WW2 (which was arguably another golden age for this country) and having the President declare that we will withhold our excess productivity until the next crisis (e.g. Korea). It doesn't make any sense in realistic or game terms.

[Dadeo]

It is very important when the "Golden Age" comes. I have had it triggered at a times when most of my cities are built up with little left to build. What a waste. I mainly play the Japanese and use the Samurai with Cavalry to trigger the golden age. This way the extra production is used to provide reserve troops for my invading army.

[felder]

I'm never opposed to giving the player more options, but I don't think I'd personally use the postpone golden age option. Seems to me that this would detract somewhat from the game.

As mentioned before on this thread, I think the civs were designed such that some would have golden ages before others. Being able to manipulate this might affect game balance...but I dunno. Using this option just wouldn't feel right...it just kinda seems like a cheat to me.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Moraelin
Personally I can't see how would you realistically postpone a golden age.

And besides, early golden ages aren't THAT bad. Later in the game I have everyone happy, I'm getting 4-5 turns for any research, and I'm making 1500 or more gold per turn. It's early when I have more problems.

IMHO a better idea would be to have multiple golden ages. Of course, it would become less and less probable to get one, and there should be a minimum of 100 turns after one when you absolutely can't have another one yet, no matter what you do, but it should be possible. Can't see why just because I had one golden age in 2000 BC, my people absolutely can't get all worked up again, 4000 years larter.

That said, I voted that I wouldn't use it, but if anyone else wants to, why not?

I couldn't have said it better myself