Republic

[Odin]

The main advantage of a Republic is reserved for players like me: Peaceful players who build cities close together and explores a lot. This is because placing cities near each other results in less "distance from capital" corruption. You can explore faster because Republics have less war unhappiness than Democracies. sorry expansionists. the republic is not for you if you don't want to end up like rome.

[fittstim]

Originally posted by Odin
The main advantage of a Republic is reserved for players like me: Peaceful players who build cities close together and explores a lot. This is because placing cities near each other results in less "distance from capital" corruption. You can explore faster because Republics have less war unhappiness than Democracies. sorry expansionists. the republic is not for you if you don't want to end up like rome.

Sorry to take up this discussion a bit late. But I simply NEED to add my 2 cents! I hate the Republic!!!!

Yes, I acknowledge that it is an important stage between Monarchy and Democracy but it is something that you should be desperately trying to get out of. You can explore and conquer much better with a Democracy. What? Did I say that? Yes and everyone knows why. Diplomats and Spies.

Diplomats have movements of 2 and if they are teamed up on the same hex, they can't be expelled by another civ. Spies get moves of 3! Great for exploring and then capturing a city smack dab in the middle of another civ in order to give you a base to attack from once they (and they definitely will) attack you.

Who needs to build Battleships (I have never in 5 years of playing ever built a Battleship or Carrier) when I can capture your city peacefully by buying it. Yeah, it's lame but it's effective.

The Republic is only valuable since it ups your research enough so that you can discover Democracy quicker.