The discussion isn’t about the midgame but the lategame.
If there are too many sources for Gold in the lategame this quetions the whole ressource design of the game. It is one important part that Gold is becoming scarce first. That’s why the Gold units are so much stronger than trash units.
So I am for a slower inflation from lategame to trash wars, but I’m definetely against unlimitede gold supply in the very lategame.
Also this:
Is just weird @IkoKnight8151 . Cause it would just be as pop efficient as Selling other ressources on the market. Yes on some FFA games this could be useful as they tend to dragg until it becomes a ressource game. But for normal 1v1s it’s just useless, would even encourage players to intentionally go for the “very long games” when they have a civ that is very strong in these trash game situations.
I see no benefit to make the ressource lasting for 4 hours instead of 2. Actually the opposite: Knowing ressources won’t last forever encourages players to try ending games earlier.
I am for a bit more sustainable gold in 1v1s as the drop of from Gold units being by far the strongest (until the gold / ressource drops under 50) and then basically in seconds trash becomes King.
One part is that the market inflates way too fast in this lower exchange rates, the other is how Gold is implemented in the game. That it is so easily mineable until it is gone.
Imo one solution for this can be made by neutral trade workshops like in aftermath but less powerful (and only gold), a few or even only 1 unlimited gold pile or other comparable implementations.
But I think the Feitoria concept how it is implemented currently is flawed. A single Feitoria could possibly be balanced like i tried in my Theorycrafting the Feitoria concept.
But anything that gives access to basically unlimited Gold supply defies the whole Ressource design of the game in 1v1s and we already also see this in Team Games with the resulting very stale Power unit Meta.