Ages

joony · July 17, 2002, 15:38

Which age do you think is the wrong length, compared to real life?

Arrian · July 17, 2002, 16:48

Depends on the difficulty level, map type and style of play.

As a builder at Regent and above, the ages will go pretty quickly if civs have contact with one another. The AI trading bonus will speed tech along. As a warmonger, things slow down. Seriously. If you break AI civs, you hurt their collective research power, and thus slow the technological progress.

Having said all that:

Chieftain: ages (all) move too slowly
Warlord: ages (all) move a bit too slowly
Regent: ages (all) are pretty much fine
Monarch: ages (ancient/medieval) a bit too quick, others ok
Emperor: not much experience... but is obviously quicker than Monarch...
Diety:

-Arrian

monkspider · July 17, 2002, 16:53

Ancient and modern especially are typically too short.

FrustratedPoet · July 17, 2002, 18:32

Is there a modern age? I hadn't noticed ....

In most games I play if I get as far as the modern age then I am doing badly ... I should have won ages ago ...

That's only because I play a lower level like Regent ... and on no bigger than Standard maps. If I played on bigger maps the games would last longer.

The Ancient and Medieval eras are the most fun anyway.

FrustratedPoet · July 17, 2002, 18:34

This should have been a multi-choice poll ... I wanted to vote that the Ancient AND Medieval era's were too short.