24-10-2003 21:19									#1
	Goverment Questions Remove this text

I must say I gave up on this game too quickly the first time... I've gone back to playing it again, and I'm totally obsessed, almost as bad as I was with Alpha Centauri.

My question is, I am having a hard time deciding which forms of government to use, when. I'm a big fan of Monarchy, but I can't decide if Communism is better or not.

Republic and Democracy's lack of support for military units seems crippling... war exhaustion isn't my friend either. I tend toward hybrid builder/war strategies.

If there is an old thread about this, let me know and I'll go read it, but I couldn't find it when I looked.

Thanks...

	24-10-2003 22:10									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I prefer republic/demo, and I'd call myself a hybrid warmonger/builder - I destroy that I may build

I do a lot of fighting - typically a lot in the ancient age as a despot, but even as a republic as well, until war weariness kicks in. It's not *that* difficult, however, to take 20-turn breaks in your warfare.

While rep/demo have to pay unit support, they also get a commerce bonus, a corruption reduction (in the case of demo anyway, rep & monarchy are equal), and in the case of demo, the worker speed bonus.

A few large cities with marketplaces can pump out a TON of money for unit upkeep if you're a republic. If you have a few different luxury types that help keep your people happy without the use of military police, then I'd say republic/demo is the best, warmonger or not.

If, however, you are lacking in the luxury department, and expect to need to fight nearly constantly over a long period of time, then Monarchy is indeed the government for you.

Communism... well, I haven't seen it's effects in a long time. I checked it out a long time ago (pre-play the world) and decided it sucked, and I'd rather be a Monarchy. Monarchy is superior if you have good Palace/Forbidden Palace placement. If not, however, communism is probably best for a large, sprawling empire.

-Arrian

	25-10-2003 20:53									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Get your wars over quickly, and let the AI start them to reduce war-weariness in Republic.

I'm about to finish a Standard Pangea conquest (as India) all in Republic.

I'd 3 Mongol cities left to eat when China declared war. So I made peace with Mongolia, pulling them into an alliance against China as the price. China took a Mongol city (which I then took - no resistance) and after a while China made made peace with Mongolia and allied them against me. When Mongolia redeclared I got a happiness boost. I eventually fought about 40 turns of war, taking all of Mongolia and China with only a drop of WW at the end - because they had declared against me.

I took a breather to research MA and build some tanks for the final putcsh, which should be just a few turns taking one more civ which should trigger domination.

	26-10-2003 02:37									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Agreed with Arrian and Cort Haus, fight a series of short wars against an AI where you take one - three cities and if your not getting anywhere after that (perhaps because you used the rope-a-dope AI empty city trick to get their army out of your way.) when they'll willing to pay you to stop fighting, take their money and take a 20 turn break, and use it to get ready to attack them again and take more cities when the 20 turn is up.

Last edited by joncnunn on 26-10-2003 at 02:44

	27-10-2003 04:43									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Republic is generally considered the best all-around government.

Communism, in my experience, is best for big, sprawling civs and big IC wars... commie drafting is a warmonger's best friend. But get the heck back to Republic as soon as you can!

	27-10-2003 04:45									#6
	Remove this text

Thanks for some of the ideas here... interesting reading.

	27-10-2003 13:21									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Just bear in mind that sometimes you have to stay in Monarchy for the whole game, even if you would have prefered to switch government.
In Theseus' game (posted on my 'Emperor level' thread), I had a military of about 190 units (I usually have a dozen or so...), due to some hyper-aggressive neighbours.
In Republic/Democracy, this would have costed me 190 gold/turn as upkeeping, and would have severly hampered my research.
Therefore, if you can switch from Monarchy, do it. If not, you can still win on higher levels and stay level on the tech race.

	28-10-2003 06:08									#8
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Keep in mind that even with very large standing armies, Republic or Democracy may be more economically efficient than Monarchy or Communism (putting aside war weariness for a moment). If you have a well-developed empire with two solid cores and a bevy of city improvements, a Republic supporting a large army may take in more commerce than a Monarchy with the same army.

Look even to MS's example of a 190-unit army -- since Republic gives one extra gold per tile that already produces one, a Republic supporting 190 units (and paying 190 gold per turn) would need 190 extra gold per turn to "break even" with a Monarchy (assuming all 190 units are free of upkeep in Monarchy). A large, well-developed empire can easily net an extra 190 gold per turn as a Republic versus a Monarchy, even after taking into account corruption. For example, if I can produce 12 extra gold in Republic from a size 12 city in my core, that 12 extra gold may equate to 24 extra depending on the mix of improvements (markets, banks, libraries & universities). I don't need a whole lot of these low-corruption cities to reach the 190 gold target pretty quickly if the cities are large and well-developed. And if I have a 190-unit army, I fully expect to control enough luxuries to make the effect of military police superfluous, meaning no need for luxury spending under the representative governements.

In short, I've found even very large standing armies don't always dictate a more "unit-maintenance-friendly" government.

War weariness is another issue, however. . .

Catt

	28-10-2003 08:18									#9
	Tired of ads?

Communism's greatest effect is to make one type of corruption/waste in all your cities the same. Thus, if you have a civ sentred around your Palace and Forbidden Palace, do not do Communism, as it will ultimately cost you production and commerce in cities near your Palace/FP that would be extremely productive in any other government type. If however you need shields in far-spread cities more, COmmunism may be worth checking out.

Careful: I have never even researched Communism, let alone tried it, so I am just going by what the formulae say!

	28-10-2003 09:12									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

WIA:

You are, of course, correct from an economic / game mechanics standpoint re corruption / waste... but that is not all, nor the point.

What is not conveyed... and I want to make this VERY CLEAR... is that what we have to work with is not Communism, but rather Stalinism.

In RL, one of the ugliest forms of government, if it can be called that, ever. My entire family is of Russian descent, and I in fact visited my home town while the Soviet was still in power.

So I can say this, acknowledging RL... in Civ3, Communism is about the whip.

(Man, I hated writing that, but it's true)

	28-10-2003 09:30									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

i use republic and sometimes communism.
i use republic whenever possible, but in the inustrial age when those damn MPP's make you at war with every other civ, communism can be usefull.
i find i gennerally can ignore republic war weariness, it takes a lot for it to kick in... i have used monarchy and democracy, but niether seem to compare to republic. the big bonus of communism is pop-sacking (something to do with those millions of workers you enslave) and for absurdly long wars.

	28-10-2003 10:01									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Theseus ...what we have to work with is not Communism, but rather Stalinism. So I can say this, acknowledging RL... in Civ3, Communism is about the whip.

I have read your full post Theseus, but I do have to ask about this part: in the game "Communism" is basically Monarchy with a flat corruption/waste (there may be a few more parts to it that I am not remembering). If this in RL is Stalinism, what would be a Civ3 version of RL Communism? I understand there are several varieties of Communism, both ideologically and those put into practice (the Soviet vs China forms), but let us take the general form of Communism without the differences particular to different dictators and regions - what would that be like in Civ3 different to how Communism is in the game already?

	28-10-2003 20:22									#13
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: In short, I've found even very large standing armies don't always dictate a more "unit-maintenance-friendly" government.

Quite true. I've had ~400 units as a democracy without breaking a sweat (standard map). That was late-game, with stock exchanges & commercial docks added to my full developed cores, and I was Rome, a commercial civ. My empire in that game could probably have supported double the army I had. That's an extreme example, of course, but I often find I'm able to support relatively large armies as a republic, once I've got these city improvements down: courthouses, marketplaces, libraries. The key is high pop core cities with the right improvements. If you don't have that, Monarchy is best for a largish army.

-Arrian

	29-10-2003 00:36									#14
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I agree with most of the above, never had a problem with builder/warmonger in Rep/Dem. I may also suggest trading for or aquiring luxuries during wartime and building wonders such as Sistine, J.S. Bach's and Universal Sufferage.
I do have a separate question. I am in Republic, just finished TOE, researched up to replacable parts/corporation, plan on remaining fairly peaceful (playing on a map with med. to small islands) do you think it's worth losing the 5-6 turns on anarchy to make the change to democracy??

	29-10-2003 00:57									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Depends on your empire size, your empire needs to be of some size to benefit from a change to democray. If you have a large undeveloped empire it may be worth it for the more efficent worker alone(150% )

	29-10-2003 01:02									#16
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Ragnar,

Heh, funny you ask that since that's exactly my position in my current game. In my case, it doesn't really matter, because I've essentially won (I probably won't play it out). I've already built most of my RR's, so the worker bonus isn't as valueable to me, and I do have a goodly number of slaves. Therefore, the switch isn't really worth it.

I had planned to make the switch right at the end of the medieval age. I figured I'd upgrade my Cavalry, go into revolution, and attack my southern neighbor, Greece. By the time I came out of anarchy, I'd almost be done with the war. But I never pulled the trigger on the revolution, because I noticed that most of my original core cities were producing *just* enough food to feed themselves, and during anarchy they would inevitably have starved by a pop point or two each. That really wasn't a big deal, and I probably should have ignored it. So I remained a republic.

In your case, I don't know. What level are you playing on, do you have a tech lead, do you have a large empire, are you industrious?

If I had to guess, it probably isn't worth it. In order to get the max benifit from Demo, you need to switch pretty much right away, in the mid-to-late middle ages. Then you have time to reap the benifits and over time recoup the lost turns in anarchy. Obviously that doesn't apply to religious civs.

-Arrian

	29-10-2003 09:16									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Thanks guys,

I didn't think it would make much of a difference. I'm playing the Carth's (Ind/Com) my land is nearly all railed, making decent $, my map is about 8-10 small to medium islands (I did everything random, so I'm not sure about the exact size or water %). The reason I'd switch would be to try to bolster my research a little and cut into corruption/waste a little. I don't think I want have to endure anarchy for such little benefit.

	30-10-2003 00:17									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I hate to say this, but I think the sad truth is that it is possible to win the game without ever leaving Despotism. I just did it on Monarch level (up to replaceable parts, the game is a foregone conclusion now) and I believe I can do it again on Emporer level. That said, if I was religious, I would have gone to that for more production after the majority of my cities had hit size 7. That way I would get increased production, and the same number of free unitl support. Commercial and religious would be good for less corruption and a quick change to monarchy. You dont need anything else, and I think you are wasting time if you research any form of gov - let the ai do it while you forge ahead on one branch of the tech tree.

	30-10-2003 01:30									#19
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I hate those turns of anarchy so I go straight for Republic and switch once. I only bother with Monarchy with a religious civ when it is a useful fallback if you are short on luxuries and WW is kicking in.

I usually (monarch level) get to the early industrial level on tech with the AI having switched to democracy when I have done all the cavalry wars I want. It is usually easy to beat the AI to Universal Suffrage at this level since the AI tries to build it without first building a factory and coal plant. With US, police stations and careful use of the luxury slider I find I can usually manage short wars in democracy without any problems.

Republic is the way to go for most of the game, just remember to prioritise marketplaces and banks to generate the gold to pay for your military.

	30-10-2003 01:35									#20
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I'm trying to win the game without leaving despotism for the first time now.

Monarch, scandinavians, tiny map, arcipalego, lots of water. My capital is my ONLY city with decent production. Amazing what you can do when you can spit out one warrior per turn and upgrade them later. Add the fact that I control (almost)ALL the iron in the world and own the lighthouse so the other civ can't even get to the few unoccupied iron sources Only thing that bothers me is that I will probably win the game before I get to build the berzerk (the reason I started this game in the first place was that I wanted to try the berzerk)

	31-10-2003 03:55									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I've just switched from Regent to Monarch. I've played Rome and France to victory, relying on a near-constant warmonger strategy. To that end, I've stayed in despotism awfully late... and came out ahead!

A large part of my strategy relies on the Great Library. Gotta have it! With it, though, I get typically 10 free techs while I pound away at my neighbors, assuring by the time it runs out I control ~50% of the globe.

I have been so afraid of letting production go during wartime that I didn't make the switch from despotism to monarchy until REAL late in the game - both times, around Invention. I knew this was "wrong" and it sure didn't feel good, but it didn't keep me from whupping behind and using despotism's one good power - the power to kill citizens for improvements - to good use.

I've built temple after temple and gotten rid of so many unruly masses that it makes me consider despotism in a new light.

Next game around, I'm going to go for Republic real early - I always switch to Democracy later in the game, gain to be had or no (to make up for my despotic sins, I suppose) - gonna play as a religious civ so I don't fear the anarchy.

Still, I wonder how often you warmonger types stay in despotism late, and under what circumstances. I always play a huge world, max # civs, continents. I know I could go to Monarchy, or even Republic, a hell of a lot earlier... but I've been... sniffle... too scared.

	31-10-2003 05:26									#22
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I can't address the warmonger part, but I wil say that Despotism is very unproductive with a large empire. I will research Republic fairly soon and switch at teh first opportunity. That mean, immediately unless a wonder is near completion.
If I was Religious, that is different or special game setting, ala AU208.

	31-10-2003 05:46									#23
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth [. . . .] A large part of my strategy relies on the Great Library. Gotta have it! With it, though, I get typically 10 free techs while I pound away at my neighbors, assuring by the time it runs out I control ~50% of the globe. [. . . .]

If you own 50% of the globe, the game is over. I've won a number of games as a despot, never switching to another government, but it's not necessarily my favorite way to play. If your goal is to win as convincingly as possible, then conquering 50% of the globe represents overshooting the goal in most instances - win the game before you take the trouble of controlling 50% of the globe! If you can control 50% of the globe as a despot then don't bother to switch, just finish.

Catt

	31-10-2003 12:54									#24
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

The insane corruption is despotisms largest draw-back. you will only have decent production from a handful of cities(or two handfuls if you have a FP). That said, sometimes a handful is all you need.

Catt, when is a game won? When you have reached one of the actual winning conditions or when you know you will win?

	31-10-2003 15:32									#25
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt ...what would be a Civ3 version of RL Communism? ...

I'll bite.

First off, it would NOT have communal corruption. If any thing, its bell curve might be even stronger (while keeping the same overall corruption). It is much easier to control the party bosses who are close to home than the ones far away.

That said, they should be allowed LOTS of FP's. 2 as in Conquests? Heck no, 4 or 5 or even 1 per X cities. But for that matter, so should Democracies -- do you really think Ohio loses more tax income to corruption than Washington? I don't either. (Although actually for this reason, Democracy, not Communism, is the ideal candidate for "communal" corruption, which would solve this flaw more elegantly than extra FP's.)

Nor should they be restricted to the whip alone. Yes, forced labor is a part of Communist history. But so are big projects financed from national treasuries. Offering this flexibility could be a nice "selling point" for this government type.

Oh dear, I've just writtten a "Things for Civ IV" type proposal, which I'd sworn to myself I'd never write...

	31-10-2003 20:32									#26
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Catt If you own 50% of the globe, the game is over... If your goal is to win as convincingly as possible, then conquering 50% of the globe represents overshooting the goal in most instances... If you can control 50% of the globe as a despot then don't bother to switch, just finish.

It's all a matter of taste I suppose. Once I had crushed Egypt, Cultural Victory would have been mine... once I crushed Carthage and the Celts, no one could compete with me in any way... I could have switched to Democracy about 50 turns ago and be building Theory of Evolution while the others were just researching Magnestism... but I want a DOMINATION victory, because I want to see if I'm up to the challenge of taking large overseas empires down.

I do agree with you... and if I was a more advanced player, more assured of my abilities as a warmonger AND builder, I would have made the switch long ago. But I'm earning industrial-era techs at a 4-turn clip and still make ~100 gpt, with large reserves, and that's good enough for me to pursue my greedy ambitions.

In other words: Despotism and Monarchy leave a bad taste in my mouth, but so does beer, and to use that analogy, I'm drunk off success with no war weariness.

	31-10-2003 21:05									#27
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yahweh -

I get out of despotism ASAP. I may go republic, I may go monarchy (typically monarchy only if religious). I will fight a lot as a despot and during the anarchy while switching to republic... and then fight until the war weariness really kicks in. Then, I take a nice break and build like a madman. Then I hit again, this time harder.

If you're using despotism to avoid WW, then you really ought to be a Monarchy. Less corruption/waste, better Military Police (3 instead of 2 maximum), and allows use of rushbuying instead of poprushing. I've played many games where I've gone Despot -> Monarchy -> Democracy. That works well if you start on a big continent and therefore have many neighbors to kill. You spend the ancient & most of the medieval fighting, and then switch to Democracy and build build build.

-Arrian

	31-10-2003 21:22									#28
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Arrian I've played many games where I've gone Despot -> Monarchy -> Democracy.

This has been my typical pattern. The few tiems I've toyed around with Republic I've been sorely dissappointed. War weariness I just can't handle and general unhappiness across the board. I know it's something I have to work on. Next game I'm playing "PUP" so I'll try it then.

The only reason I've been sticking in Despotism longer than usual (normally I switch as soon as I get Monarchy) is fear of anarchy and the fact that in both my recent games I've hardly had a turn where I was not at war, either with a fearsome or pathetic foe.

Trust me, I'm not pro-depotism in any way. I might just be a little too war-crazed. But whereas I love Democracy - perfect timing for it in the tech tree - I am very wary of Republic. I typically don't have too many marketplaces built by the time I acquire, or could acquire, Republic, and that seems to be the key to success with that government type.

Also, as I always play a huge world, I typically have a lot more land to acquire/"security threats to address".

	31-10-2003 22:06									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: I am very wary of Republic. I typically don't have too many marketplaces built by the time I acquire, or could acquire, Republic, and that seems to be the key to success with that government type.

Bingo. Marketplaces are key. They help pay for the military and they boost happiness if you have more than 2 luxuries.

Also, I tend to build my Forbidden Palace close to my original capitol in preparation for moving my Palace via leader. My FP often completes shortly after my transition to republic. That gives me a small boost as well.

-Arrian

	31-10-2003 22:14									#30
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

If marketplaces are key for a successful Republic, when do you republicans research currency - approxiamately when in your ancient era queue - and when do you start building said marketplaces?

I often find I have more pressing concerns when currency becomes availible - but then again, as I mentioned, I'm a bit of a warmonger. All with the goal of eventually building, of course - although sometimes I take it a bit far.

Hence, as marketplaces tend to come (for me) after barracks, plenty of settlers, workers, and military units, and, depending on my luxuries situation, after temples, I'm generally not in a position to switch to Republic when it first comes along.