04-01-2005 03:06									#1
	Best governments... Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

So you're probably sick of my polls, but I am trying to get some info here on what the pros prefer and suggest, so, for this poll, select the government you most commonly are in.

Note that you can vote for more than one. I realize that some of you have a war time government, so if you do, make that your second choice, otherwise, only vote for one, thanks...

	04-01-2005 04:03									#2
	Inflate your Upload Space

It's a little bit game and style dependent. But even so I would argue Democracy, overall. You can do it all with Democracy.

If you're talking PTW then you could argue for Republic.
If you're talking Conquests then you could argue Democracy or Communism.

Depends on the level you're playing at too.

	04-01-2005 04:25									#3
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Mace It's a little bit game and style dependent. But even so I would argue Democracy, overall. You can do it all with Democracy.

Long wars will force a Democracy into Anarchy. Also, you need to do two government changes to get there, and you need two non-mandatory technologies researched. It has advantages, but only if you are comfortable enough to go for it. Plus there's the hidden danger - the AI seems to attack civs that are in Democracy more likely than others.

	04-01-2005 04:38									#4
	Suffering from ads?

Democracy all the way. First stop, though, is republic...

	04-01-2005 04:55									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I will only make one switch per game as a non religious civs, at least most of the time.

In fact I probably would only make one as religious civ. I tend forget about communism and no way am I going to Demo. I will probably be at war almost the whole game, by the time I learn that tech.

	04-01-2005 05:13									#6
	Remove this text

Republic in Conquests is much stronger than in PTW, enough to make Democracy irrelevant, IMO. The unit support and middle of the road war weariness makes it a pretty decent warmonger government, and usually, in my games, the support covers the corruption difference between it and Democracy.

	04-01-2005 09:26									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Yeah, I rarely switch away from Republic, even when Religious. There's really rarely a reason to.

	04-01-2005 11:24									#8
	Got spare money?

Me:

Despotism-->Republic
Despotism-->Republic-->Communism
Despotism-->Republic-->Democracy
Despotism-->Monarchy-->Communism

	04-01-2005 17:37									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I find early republics troublesome in C3C if I have a large military on the go, including lots of workers, and/or have few luxuries. Research almost stops in the early Middle Ages until I either conquer loads of cities or build aquas everywhere.

Having said that - Republic is the best all-round government, and a definite one-stop-shop for a building game with a non-religious civ, but for warmongering on Emperor, Monarchy/Feudalism --> Communism can be good. Feudalism has the benefit of being a mandatory tech, and on low-food maps offers awesome unit support.

	04-01-2005 19:20									#10
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Purely on personal style, not 'best':

Despot-->Feudalism-->Communism

(*vs AI, and only up to Demigod. Don't play above that personally, haven't since vanilla.)

	04-01-2005 23:49									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 Long wars will force a Democracy into Anarchy.

I understand the WW problem. Except on the highest diff levels, I have found that I am able to largely avoid it when I have proper cities (read: Police Stations, lux, etc) and a powerful, fast-striking military, and the civ know-how to use it correctly. On Monarch it can even be done without Univ Suffrage, although that helps.

quote: Also, you need to do two government changes to get there, and you need two non-mandatory technologies researched. It has advantages, but only if you are comfortable enough to go for it.

Yes, on non-religious civs the two switches hurts.

quote: Plus there's the hidden danger - the AI seems to attack civs that are in Democracy more likely than others.

This, I have never heard before. Could be, seems to happen a lot. When the AI does attack a Democratic player, it just helps the Dem player, as he is able to get extra war turns of happiness to do some damage to the offending AI.

	04-01-2005 23:53									#12
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Solomwi Republic in Conquests is much stronger than in PTW, enough to make Democracy irrelevant, IMO. The unit support and middle of the road war weariness makes it a pretty decent warmonger government, and usually, in my games, the support covers the corruption difference between it and Democracy.

But what about the weaker FP in C3C?
Doesn't that weaken the Republic, vs. PTW?

	04-01-2005 23:55									#13
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Mace I understand the WW problem. Except on the highest diff levels, I have found that I am able to largely avoid it when I have proper cities (read: Police Stations, lux, etc) and a powerful, fast-striking military, and the civ know-how to use it correctly. On Monarch it can even be done without Univ Suffrage, although that helps.

High WW will force you into Anarchy. Not just make your luxury high, but overthrow your government. And you won't be able to help it, except by ending all wars before it happens.

quote: Originally posted by Mace This, I have never heard before. Could be, seems to happen a lot. When the AI does attack a Democratic player, it just helps the Dem player, as he is able to get extra war turns of happiness to do some damage to the offending AI.

The problem is with the end-game neverending world war. Once you're in it, you'll be at war for a long time, with multiple opponents (meaning: very hard to make peace). Usually long enough for the automatic Anarchy to kick in. Republic doesn't seem to draw the same kind of attention.

	05-01-2005 00:00									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

In Conquests, I think the clear winner in Republic.

Communism is great for those of us who hate corruption/waste, but it comes very late and is more and more impressive the larger your empire is. By the time you're big enough for Communism to REALLY rock, you're big enough to win using darn near any government.

Republic comes early - end of the ancient age. It's flexible - it offers unit support such that a well-developed empire can field a strong military, and its WW level is manageable. It gets the commerce bonus and has a low corruption level, so it's strong for research as well. It has rushbuying, not poprushing. Overall, it's just solid.

Democracy... I've hardly touched it since I got Conquests. If religious, I *might* make the switch. If not, no way. Typically I find that my empire will actually pay more for its military under Demo than Republic, and the difference in corruption is quite small. The worker speed bonus is nice, but it's a pretty small perk to endure anarchy for.

-Arrian

	05-01-2005 00:10									#15
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 High WW will force you into Anarchy. Not just make your luxury high, but overthrow your government. And you won't be able to help it, except by ending all wars before it happens.

I know this. But I have almost always been able to end the war before that happens. Usually I destroy the AI civ.

The neverending world war happens a lot, but I have found myself able to get myself OUT of that war before bad things happen.

	05-01-2005 00:13									#16
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Arrian Democracy... I've hardly touched it since I got Conquests. If religious, I *might* make the switch. If not, no way. Typically I find that my empire will actually pay more for its military under Demo than Republic, and the difference in corruption is quite small. The worker speed bonus is nice, but it's a pretty small perk to endure anarchy for.

I'm currently experimenting with Republic..
My current game is Carthage, Arch80 map. Since I'm industrious, I am probably going to stay Republic.

	05-01-2005 00:43									#17
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Mace But what about the weaker FP in C3C? Doesn't that weaken the Republic, vs. PTW?

Not really, because the comparison has to be made of Republic in either game relative to the other government choices available in that game.

In PTW, it could often be worth it to switch to Democracy. In C3C, I've rarely found that to be the case, despite playing the same type of games with the same playstyle.

	05-01-2005 01:57									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

My use of Demo in PTW became less and less the more I thought about it - the benifits just weren't worth anarchy for (unless you were switching out of Monarchy, having never used Republic).

-Arrian

	05-01-2005 02:02									#19
	Increase Your PM Length

My normal pattern is Despotism -> Republic -> Democracy

But I like to mod the early game govts to cut unit support down to 0 for Metros for Depositsm, Monarchy, Repubilc, and Fedualism to enforce switching out of them.

	05-01-2005 02:10									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I really do not see how anyone can justify taking as much as 9 turns of lost production to go from rep to dem (non religious).

In fact I will not even research it. The AI is reticient to trade it, so I won't even have it most of the time.

	05-01-2005 02:10									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Republic sucks. Way too expensive in the early medieval age.

I'm pretty much in accord with UnO... poprushing ROCKS!!!

	05-01-2005 02:15									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Republic rocks if you're going the builder route, T. Build up, build up, build up, KILL (Cavalry).

If you're into a slow 'n steady diet of KILL, well, yeah, Republic prolly isn't for you.

-Arrian

	05-01-2005 02:22									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Republic sucks. Way too expensive in the early medieval age. I'm pretty much in accord with UnO... poprushing ROCKS!!!

The words of someone who can't stay away from wars, eh? Not valid for most of my games, no matter how hard I try. Guess the thing about governments is, as usual in Civ3, dependent on situation.

	05-01-2005 03:57									#24
	Remove this text

With Conquests, the primary benift of Democracy over Republic can be seen better the larger your empire is. (Corruption)
Unforunately with Conquests, the larger your empire, the longer your anarchy is likely to be. (When non-religious)

The key factor however between Republic & Democracy is the size of the military. That 4 free unit support for Metros for Republic was the exact wrong thing to do if the idea was to give people an incentive to switch from Republic to Democracy. The 3 free support for medium sized cities is also a little on the high side.

Democracy's can still fight wars safely in Conquests, they just can't be wars of attrition on foriegn / netural soil. Bypass their offensive stacks on enemy & netural land in favor of a combiniation of quick strikes directly against a city to make it become your land + killing fields inside your cultural boundary against the enemy stack and citizens won't mind nearly as much.

Monarchy is far if your planning to be at war most of the time between that discovery and the next govt and have a large number of cities with free aquaducts. This is particularly good if you have a Swordmen or Horsemen replacement UU.

Fedualism is also for when your planning on being at war most of the time until the next govt, but is for when you have very few cities with free aquaducts. (Inverse Free Unit Support) The usual plan here is Horsemen built in masse upgrade to Knight (or especally a Knight-replacement UU)

A Republic's standing army size in conquests under standaring rules is highly dependent on number of size 7+ towns. If you REXed out into very favoriable lands, you'll have a better chance affording to have a large enough army to attack your neighbors. (Athough with such favorable land, it's not as needed.) An Agricultural civ can also switch to Republic easier than a non-Agricultrual one thanks to half price Aquaducts.

Democracy is generaly an indication of wanting to win the game via either a peaceful means or else a carefully managed war planning to avoid wars of attrition. If the military is large enough (double the Republic limit), it's cheaper than Republic. Conversely, if military is extremely light, it's also cheaper than Republic.

Communism is the usual choice of an empire that's already large when this govt comes around that intends to win via domination.

Fascism is the usual choice of a small empire that's very well developed (mostly Metros) that intends to win via domination.

	05-01-2005 04:03									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Solomwi Not really, because the comparison has to be made of Republic in either game relative to the other government choices available in that game.

Hm...here's my thinking about Repub in C3C:
In C3C...
You have a FP that does not establish a second core.

And without a 2nd core, you've got a serious corruption problem with Republic. Enough of a problem to hinder your development, esp. with a larger map.

That's always been my thinking about Republic in C3C.

Now, I am playing some Republic games and perhaps I will change my tune. I suspect Rep may be better on large+ map, Arch, Seafaring...(which is what I'm playing now).

Losing the 2nd core potential of the FP really made me shy away from high-corruption govts. It really got down to Demo or Communism. Demo for peace/builder/spacerace and Communism for warmonger. But that's too rigid. I need to broaden...

I have a problem with Communism, though, in that I can't get good advancement (playing in monarch, emperor levels) in late industrial and modern times. Still working on figuring that one out.

	05-01-2005 21:00									#26
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The deceased corruption with Democracy vs a Republic is OCN based.
(The cities with rank orders 20 - 30 are going to see the same improvement weather or not they are near a FP.)

And the global commerce affects is much more noticeable than the local shield affect.

Even with Communism's SPHQ, it's still not recomended for peaceful builders, even a large one. It's reduced corruption does not offset the lack of an extra trade in every tile already producing one for scientific research. You need to go out and conquer your neighbors under this govt to reduce their science production.

quote: Originally posted by Mace Hm...here's my thinking about Repub in C3C: In C3C... You have a FP that does not establish a second core. And without a 2nd core, you've got a serious corruption problem with Republic. Enough of a problem to hinder your development, esp. with a larger map. That's always been my thinking about Republic in C3C. Now, I am playing some Republic games and perhaps I will change my tune. I suspect Rep may be better on large+ map, Arch, Seafaring...(which is what I'm playing now). Losing the 2nd core potential of the FP really made me shy away from high-corruption govts. It really got down to Demo or Communism. Demo for peace/builder/spacerace and Communism for warmonger. But that's too rigid. I need to broaden... I have a problem with Communism, though, in that I can't get good advancement (playing in monarch, emperor levels) in late industrial and modern times. Still working on figuring that one out.

	05-01-2005 22:28									#27
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

There are a few flaws in your reasoning, Mace.

First, that same issue (the lack of a second core) affects every other non-communal government just as much as it does Republic. Again, the comparison has to be between available choices, and the lack of a second core just isn't that crippling when no other government can establish a second core, either.

Second, Republic isn't a high-corruption government. The difference in corruption between Rep and Dem is in the adjusted distance calculation. Under Dem, the distance is multiplied by a factor of 0.75 (among other factors), where that factor is 1 uncer Rep. The upshoot is basically that productive cities in a Democracy have 3/4 of the distance corruption that the same cities in a Republic would have. The net effect of that will vary from city to city, but when factoring in rank corruption, that 25% reduction is an unachievable upper limit on the difference. What you see as a serious corruption problem isn't really that much more serious than the corruption problem under Dem.

Third, the bottom line isn't how much you lose to corruption. It's how much is available for research and the treasury. The unit support added to Republic makes it preferable to Democracy in that respect if you have a large enough military that support costs are higher than what you gain through reduced corruption. In PTW, the only advantage Rep had over Dem was the decreased WW. In C3C, it can be economically superior to Dem, as well. This, in a nutshell, is why C3C Rep is stronger than PTW Rep.

	05-01-2005 23:45									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Not to mention that Dem is an optional tech you do not need to research. It comes to late to wait for (in depotism), so you will have to suffer an extra government switch.

All of that for a small gain, if any (depends on your military).

	05-01-2005 23:57									#29
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Solomwi First, that same issue (the lack of a second core) affects every other non-communal government just as much as it does Republic.

Ah, I see yer point there. 2nd core is of no signifigance since no other non-communal govt can do that either now.

quote: Second, Republic isn't a high-corruption government.

Well, I think ALL Civ3 govts (except Communism) are "high" corruption govts...but that's just me.
(I think corruption is modelled incorrectly in Civ3.)

I agree with you more and more. You must understand that I have not played many Republic games in C3C, and my observations are in part based on what I've seen in the editor, and Civ2 knowledge. Back with Civ1 and Civ2 I had a lot more time to experiment with these things. Now, I don't.

In my latest game I have gone Despotism ---> Republic on an Arch80 map playing Carthage. I have done two things that I did not think Republic was capable of: I've been able to maintain a large army as the middle ages went on. I've been able to control WW.

***I have, when in the Editor, noticed that Republic has a different corruption rating than Demo (one level worse, if I remember correctly). And this led me to conclude that Repub is a high- (or at least high-er) corruption govt. Technically, it appears that Rep does have higher corruption as you alluded. But the end-result, which is tech and gold, is not much different.

	06-01-2005 00:41									#30
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by vmxa1 Not to mention that Dem is an optional tech you do not need to research.

You need two optional techs to get democracy at a time when your other options are things like Magnetism, Military Tradition and Industrialization.

As to Mace's opinion that corruption is not modeled correctly, well, everyone has a different feeling on that. My personal opinion is that we all got spoiled with Civ2's infinite number of non corrupt cities. All you had to do was get to one of the zero corruption govs, take a couple AI cities so that you had the most, and then sit back and out-produce, out-research and out-tax everyone else. Any slight lead led to an unstoppable snowball effect.

In vanilla and PTW corruption was pretty harsh and there were some cheesy exploits like RCP. C3C rebalanced corruption and gov'ts. The end result is that Republic is probably the best overall gov't however you are likely to have some riots on hand if you stay at war too long.