 |
| |
|
|
GodKing
|
 |
Detroit
Feb 2002
time: 00:19
|
|
With sumeria, to me it felt obvious that we would go directly for Monarchy. However, when I casually posted that, several people didn't like the idea. So, here is a good place to have some discussion on it.
Here is a listing of the governments:
As sumeria, we will have cheep (10 shield) defenders. We will also have expensive offensive units if we go the slow mover route (swords), which, it depends on where the iron and horses are. No warriors, so we have to build swords direct.
So, first government change, monarchy or republic?
In the last game, our civ was severly hampered by our excessive military, particularly when we went into republic. Our MoI insisted on a force that was able to take out our neighbor all by itself, despite having PAL also joining in on the attack. Then, when I started to order units that were not needed any more disbanded, our consuls refused. Our Lux slider was kept high, and our science and treasury suffered greatly as a result. When we decided towards the end of that game to stop science and switch to pure gold, many people were surprised to discover we were making almost 100gpt, yet as researches with a scientific civ, we couldn;t keep up.
We will ahve the same issues here.
So, we have cheep defenders. Do we intend on building any of them or not? I suggest we do, and build lots of them. 2 plus per city actually. Under despotism, the 2 per city will act as MP's, helping to keep the people happy. emperor level, remember? Need to keep the masses happy, and we got no cheep temples to do it with either.
Under republic, no MP's allowed. Under Monarchy, we can have 3. Big difference. That is 2.5 additional luxuries we don't have to have for the same happyness effect.
Unit support also plays into it. Monarchy gives 2/4/8, while republic gives 1/3/4. Ouch. So, having defenders in republic means that we need large cities. Which means that you are no longer in REX, and that those not on fresh water have built aquaducts. Also, it means that the people are happy, else they wouldn't have the food to grow large. I honestly don;t see it happening.
3rd reason, the least important, is the potential fo War Weariness. With these units and with our rep, I know I would start poly's GA as soon as possible if I ever had the chance.
The biggie against monarchy is the corruption. However, as we are small and trying to grow, I doubt it is a major issue.
OK. I probably should ahve organized my thoughts before posting them, but the chart kinda says it all IMHO. Post your thoughts here. To me, it is a no brainer, go monarchy. Once we have many moderatly sized cities, go to republic if we traded for it, or democracy (I suggest we skip demo all together in the tech tree, just not worth the diversion from industrialization).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001
time: 00:19
|
|
granted, there are trade offs with either Gov. Monarchy allows us to get a boost on our REX efforts, sooner (research cost to Monarchy IS cheaper) and still keep our people happy while securing more Luxes (building cities and getting workers over to them) and building things like Markets, Temples. All takes time.
And that is assuming that we don't have to prepair for War anytime soon. Granted, we won;t let ourselves get weak compaired to others, but you can only build so much in some space of time, especially while trying to REX as fas as you can.
And In Monarchy, you have less trade and your corruption is worst, compaired to Republic (with C3C, not really that much better, courthouses give you better results than Gov changes do). But there is a point were your losses outweigh your gains.
Republic IS better, if you can support the Populations and keep them happy. Great for peaceful building and research, but if your going to be going to war, you had better be sure that it;s short, which requires a large standing army to acheave. Which essentially costs more (twice from PTW, even with the slight free units with C3C).
But if your cities are mostly 6 or less, your better off with Monarchy. Yes, using the Lux slider is good, but even with better corruption, your going to have cities that the Lux slider setting isn't enough and you'll need Specialist, which slows or stops the growth of that city. Also, C3C Markets don't modify the Lux slider amounts (like in PTW, was 50% increase, great in Republic), so you don't have that 'crutch to lean on'.
C3C was made to be a game more towards the Warmonger than the builder, because they changed/added things that supported the warmonger and reduced things for the builder. And the Corruption can be crippling, even if Commecial (and Commercial isn't as powerful as it was in PTW, in respect to Corruption). The only good things is that Courthouses give a greater benfit, copaired to PTW, so you'll see a few of those going up as the game progresses.
So, all reasons why we chose this Civ, because Sci Trait is still good and we can still do a lot, even if we have to endure more than 1 Anarchy, during the main course of the game.
E_T
|
|
| |
|
|
|
E_T
|
|
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Master Zen
Actually I'd argue the exact opposite.
Besides the two unit-producing wonders and the improved armies, practically every other change in C3C supports the builder.
Think about it:
- The new FP rules
|
Which only helps with Rank Corruption, not with Distance. It's been debated that they could have kept the older system and properly coded the game engine to remove the RGN bug. So, instead, the FP is also neutered, which makes very large PRODUCTIVE empires a thing of the past.
But that still doesn't keep you from Warmongering, as you just ignore the super corrupt cities and work from your core. In reality, what true Warmonger even cares about how thier cities produce (or workers do their jobs), they just want to invade someone else. Most of the time, the typical (and I emphasize typical, not your more experienced player) Warmonger will set everything to run automatically and just play with his Mil Units.
quote:
- No wonder building for MGLs
|
So, you HAVE to use them for an Army. And your point was???
quote:
- Bigger upgrade cost for units
|
Which makes getting Leo's a major priority. Granted, the costs can be prohibited, but that can be overcome with a different style of play. Doesn't mean that you still can't be a Warmonger and that it's neutered.
quote:
- Agro trait overpowered, Industrial trait neutered.
|
Commercial trait is also neutered, with new corruption Model. Read the excellent Corruption thread by Alexman (the Corruption Nazi of Apolyton) Everything about Corruption: C3C edition, that shows that commecial isn't as powerful in resect to cCorruption. And as for Agri, why do you think we went that route (and most every other civ playing this game)??
quote:
- None of the new civs have a particularly overpowering offensive unit.
|
But the some of the new ones had traits that allows for different tactical flexibility, so they can be overpowering if used well. Read the
quote:
- SGLs CAN build wonders |
[/quote]
Very Rare, don't count on them. If you get them, you CAN save them as having one doesn't keep you from having another.
quote:
- Scientific Golden Ages
|
Only if you get an SGL AND you use him to generate the "Age of Science" and only for 25% per city (was changed slightly in latest patch). As they are very rare, you get a choice to use him for GW or SciGA.
quote:
- Enslavement ability gives more workers
|
Only for Mayan Civ
quote:
You should also note that Firaxis explicitly made C3C to the benefit of builder strategies and only improved armies to balance it off a bit. |
Granted, they did improve a few things, but overall it still is a game more for the typical Warmonger.
E_T
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krill
|
 |
On a cold wet rock, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Dec 2003
time: 05:19
|
|
I don't think that it would be wise to set any strategy that we devise in stone, at this moment in time.
The only thing that we do know is that we have a four turn settler pump. We could be 10 tiles from an opponent, we could have enough space to REX and plant an FP without having to go to war.
And the part that pertains to government choices: we don't know what other civs we are near. If we are near a civ that starts with alphabat, we may be able to trade our way to republic. It is the trade that shall determine what techs we have to research and buy, as it is foolhardy to research techs that we could trade for if we researched something that had yet to be discovered.
For example, we could end up trading IW and a bit of gold for writing, then Maths for Philo and some gold as insurance, then finally research Construction and Currency for CoL and Republic.
This is why I suggest that we don't make up our minds yet, but rather just debate the issue.
---
One thing that nobody has yet mentioned is the sheer amount of commerce that republic can bring in compared to monarchy, if you have enough pop and enough cities at size 7 and above for the unit support. If you then factor in the amount of extra gold that a city will produce if a marketplace is present, then the unit support becomes trivial in comparisson.
In the last game we were starved for pop. We only built one early granary, and that city was only an eight turn pump. Our capital here will grow twice as fast with a granary, and if we find another such location to act as a worker pump, population will not be a problem.
And as a note for ET, plan more than two worker pumps next time, and add the excess workers to cities to increase the size of those cities. Ideally, we need about a two turn worker pump for every 8 cities that we have.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-07-2005 06:45
|