1.15 Beta -- Communism seems much, much better

[asleepathewheel]

man I just finished a game where I switched to communism. damn, good govt for those sprawling archipelago empires.

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by Tarquinius
Communism
Big minor point is pop rushing, under republic I rushed improvements in outer cities.

What I would do in this case is not pop rush but use your increased production to your advantage. Produce a bunch of explorers or arty and move them to the outer cities and disband. That's one way to rush shields in a city without whipping citizens to death.

[player1]

I just think that it would be nice to have pop rushing more valuable in modern govenments, like 30 or 40 shields for pop.

EDIT:
Idea for Firaxis: Just make pop-rushing become +100% effective (40 shields), after you discover Nationalism.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by player1
I just think that it would be nice to have pop rushing more valuable in modern govenments, like 30 or 40 shields for pop.

EDIT:
Idea for Firaxis: Just make pop-rushing become +100% effective (40 shields), after you discover Nationalism.

I agree. might as well just say no rushing for the commies, too prohibitive to use for any industrial + unit.

[SuperPower]

I think that its despotism, the most useless regime change, that contains the highest level of corruption. This is what I've noticed in the last week or so while I have been trying every government type over and over.

[Nisku]

I double checked and yeah no corruption in those three cities under communism, maybe I also have a courthouse/police station in them.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by alexman

Give Democracy communal corruption!!!

Democracy would still get the trade bonus, of course, so it would always be better than Communism for peace, and it would be much better than the Republic, especially for large empires.

This DOES sound good, even if it was the same communal rate as for Communism the trade bonus would mean, depending on your empire size, a small to significant amount more trade than in Communism. But production would not be affected... Also the SPHQ is a bonus to Communists that Democracies would not get, unless there was another FP-type building for Democracies (House of Representatives perhaps?).

[swat-spas2]

Originally posted by alexman


Give Democracy communal corruption!!!

Second the motion. Something must be done to improve the late game governments. I am in almost continous wartime at the late stages of a game (without that pesky peace score from civ of old) and that really hampers a democratic regime. On top of this I must pay a hefty fine of 5-8 turns of chaos (I hardly ever play religious) to get to this point to begin with. This is not a happy turn of events. While its not the last gov to discover; it should be somewhat useful compared to communism, or even (i haven't tried it yet myself) fascism.

In fact if you generally analyze the governments IRL, democracy has worked rather well in a more decentralized economic structure, meaning those border towns should fare well; while communist/fascist regimes have depended (at least to date) on harsh restrictive measures that run a few places smoothly and experience a scaling of corruptive influence away from the capitols (decreasing with the effectiveness of say, the KGB). The theory of both systems seems to be what is reflected here (although in theory communism is merely the economic system of a democratic nation, but this is confusion enough)

So in theory I might suggest actually trading their corruptions and leaving the SPHQ in effect for communists. The increased warmongering ability (martial law, no WW, good unit supports) and a seperate anti-corruption bonus should still make this a useful gov. While democracy would suffer heavily in protracted wars, but you could build up rather smartly beforehand, or secure new holdings easier. It could make for an interesting balance late game. But even just making demo-communal would strengthen it dramatically. It might not need something like the republic 1/2/4 to make it worth the chaos against republic (depending on your empire's size)

[Plotinus]

Ah, remember those halcyon days of Civ1? No corruption at all for Democracies! I don't think I ever built a courthouse. I prefer the current system, though. I don't mind having range-type corruption for Democracies - I just think of it as simulating a greater degree of local government. An example in the real world might be the Commonwealth - Canada and New Zealand are ruled by the British Crown, but we allow them self-government (must be kind to the poor colonials) and therefore we benefit little from their production, commerce etc.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by Plotinus
An example in the real world might be the Commonwealth - Canada and New Zealand are ruled by the British Crown, but we allow them self-government (must be kind to the poor colonials) and therefore we benefit little from their production, commerce etc.

I somehow thought that Canada is an independent country of sorts, though

[The Templar]

Originally posted by alexman
Give Democracy communal corruption!!!

Did it in my PTW mod (the Space Age mod) - but called it Neo-liberalism (without the worker bonus). That alone created a near supergovernment. Pure Democracy, with the worker bonus, creates an absolute supergovernment that ruins the game balance.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Plotinus
- Canada and New Zealand are ruled by the British Crown, but we allow them self-government (must be kind to the poor colonials) and therefore we benefit little from their production, commerce etc.

'Allow' us to be independent?
/me raises an eyebrow

There's an interesting aspect of future civ games' government systems. With local autonomy, there is a chance they will just split and form their own Republic, as some Australians want to do.

[Fatwreck]

about the pop rushing, would it be to unbalancing to let communism rush buy and pop rush?

[Plotinus]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
'Allow' us to be independent?

Ah yes - although I was surprised when I lived in New Zealand and found how amazingly popular the British Royal Family seemed to be. Every magazine had Prince William on the cover. There's even something called "Queen's Birthday Weekend". None of that nonsense here.

But still, Canada and the others may be separate countries with separate governments, but I think the fact that they retain the same head of state, on whose behalf those governments operate, indicates that they could be thought of as the same civilisation in the terms of this game. And that's something that corruption can simulate. It doesn't have to represent just unscrupulous provincial governors skimming off the taxes.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Fatwreck
about the pop rushing, would it be to unbalancing to let communism rush buy and pop rush?

Can't do it so the question is moot.

Right now, I'm playtesting Communism with goldrush instead of poprush. It changes the dynamic of the game a bit but doesn't seem unbalance the game. The AI still prefers facism - which is beyond me. The culture creation penalty is too much of a liability in my book.