Announcement

**Tassadar500** · December 13, 2004, 01:50

And remember to put your games in the HoF.

**Modo44** · December 13, 2004, 06:56

Re: AU 505 The Power of Fascism - After Game Comments

Originally posted by Theseus
Were you Center-of-a-Black-Hole eeeeviiilll??? Or a namby pamby dictator, with a velvet fist in a silk glove?

Well, judging by the number of enemies left at game end... Center of Black Hole comes close.

Originally posted by Theseus
Thoughts on Fascism?

With the AU Mod, it's useful. But only if you keep the AI at war. A peaceful Democracy, or ever Republic, can out-research you easily. If you can plan and execute short wars, or don't want to fight at all, you are better served with those two.

I almost felt the advantage on the home continent to be unfair. They all went down too fast.

It seemed like the government form didn't matter, because of the speed of those wars. The meaningful difference showed during my war with Russia, which dragged longer, and would have given considerable War Weariness to other governments.

The SPHQ was fun too. Put into Moscow, aided by Iron works, it allowed for 1-turn Modern Armor production. Not that it mattered that late in the game, but it was nice.

Originally posted by Theseus
Thoughts on unit support for REP and DEM?

Don't know about Democracy, didn't use it. But Republic allowed me to go without paying upkeep for a while, because of the 18 units free. I had a small military, and relatively few workers at that time (switched governments right after researching Republic). Later my income allowed for a larger force without any cash worries. So, for small empires, not warmongering, it allows a very relaxed game - the early switch doesn't hurt.

Originally posted by Theseus
Who gets what DAR awards?

Looking forward see what Dominae will do with those modern units. I can't recall when I last saw Rocket Artillery in Civ3.

**Golden Bear** · December 13, 2004, 10:20

Sorry, I put my after game comments in the last DAR thread because I did not see this one last night.

In short, I liked Fascism for the speed that it helped me develop my continent and for allowing me to have ceaseless war. Unlike Republic or Democracy, those "everybody against me" wars were of no concern. I could turtle up and defend my island and outlast them while I built up.

However, the inability to spawn culture in conquered territories hurts the speed of the game. Going to full conquest in stead of domination chafed. I could have switched back over but I figured that 8 turns of Anarchy followed by paying for temples followed by 4 turns of culture building was too tedious.

The slow pace of tech progress goes against my grain too, but sometimes it is good to try something diffferent in order to appreciate what you have. The lack of money was not such a biggie because I could not buy city improvements anyway - another huge downside.

As I said before, I could see using this government in selected situations - perhaps with a Religious/Commercial civ where I could develop my infrastructure quickly, fight my WW, and get out and back to peaceful development.

What is this HOF? What do I post there?

BTW, again a repetition, but I won by conquest on stock Monarch in 1822 with the low value of 2878 points.

**-SafaN-** · December 13, 2004, 10:29

Well, i never finished the game, just because it was to boring. I had 100 f15, 100 art, and tanks could be rolled from the factory to the battle field with the use of a few transports, add in a golden age mobilization and tech lead, so the game was over. I didn't like to play 10 minutes for each turn.

notes:
fascism and industriuos gives reeeeal fast workers, u can also have many without a cash shortage. I was surprised.

Food is a little more important then otherwise, and so i went for the Pyramids. Later on you could do with the longetivy, but the free granarys worked like a charm: city conquering, starving and then rebuilding pop was realy quick.

Fascism is a real nice gov, Mayb i will use it as wartime gov for the celts: religious so one turn lost, and agricultural so there is a fast pop boost afterwards.
What i realy hated is that my continent had no aluminium and the NMY was bombarding my harbors to shredder. And the cities were to small to poprush, so no harbors, no alumium

Thats it for now

Greetz

about the F15, well it sucks. I just used them because they were the special unit, but 100 bombers have a longer range and did more damage then the F15's

**Modo44** · December 13, 2004, 10:41

Yes, that F-15 is basically a different-looking Jet Fighter. If it has some meaningful advantages, I couldn't see them.

HOF is short for Hall of Fame. You can put your game in there.

**Golden Bear** · December 13, 2004, 11:56

I never used F15s at all. Once I reached Tanks I was able to rush the other civs. But I was playing only on Monarch. I might (probably won't) try it again on Emperor. I found that the most productive thing, once I had a slight tech edge, was to just build units. I built a ton of bombers, tho' and they were just fine.

**pvzh** · December 14, 2004, 17:19

The more interesting question is "does Fascism need a boost"? or even "does it have a purpose?"

In AU mod Fascism has extra FP, but I found this somewhat indiffrent for this game. By the time my FP city "Rome" was up and running, I have already finished most of opponents. Plus I had a feeling that I could have done all the same in republic without 7 or 8 turns of anarchy that I got. At the very worst I would have the same research rate due to high upkeep on units and luxury slider to suppress WW.

So, do we need to:
* remove "forced resettlement flag"; (1) it is contradicting to the purpose of the goverment in the game: you are trading the long run advange for a short run; which is opposite to communism. (2) it is bigger penalty for AI than for human who can join workers produced from woker pumps and make-up population loss very quickly.

* since it is shunned goverment by AI's (they are not suppose to use it anyway). Why not remove it entirely from the game? Thus, AI will not waste resourses to research it.

-----------------
A random thought
-----------------
In general, in Civ there is a flaw that representative goverments are always much better and there is no need to use any other, in the most cases. This is due to +1 trade at each tile: it is like having The Colossus at each and every city, and that is very hard to beat. Unless you are in the always war and cannot sign peace treaties when WW is unbearable.
I am not even sure how to address this without something drastic: give to roads +2 trade instead of +1 trade and increase the cost of tech's to compensate for this.

**Dominae** · December 14, 2004, 19:06

Like I said way back (before I left the panel), the solution to making the representative governments (and their trade bonus) more balanced is to make them pay through the roof for unit support costs.

C3C tried to do this with Republic with 2gpt support instead of 1, but this had little effect because of the boosted unit support values for cities and metros. The AU505 tweak of granting Rep. and Dem. +15 or so free unit support is definitely a step in the wrong direction.

The "builder" governments should have enough money to support a defensive standing army. Waging war while in Republic should be difficult. If ever diplomacy fails, the player will have to think long and hard about his or her government choice: do I risk getting overrun while staying in Republic, or do I defend myself properly with Monarchy/Communism, etc.?

Thus I suggest 0/0/0 unit support for both Republic and Democracy. Very rich countries will be able to afford to defend themselves and have a representative government, but only much later in the game. This is as it should be for gameplay balance. Yes, I know that "realistically" democracies support large armies just fine thank you very much, but AU is interested in gameplay first (I think).

Note that this change will surely hurt the AI, as most of these changes tend to do anyway. But with free unit support at increasing difficulties, I'm sure it would not be fatal to the AI's competitiveness.

**bigfatjonny** · December 15, 2004, 07:42

Dominae is right, the power of fascism is the unit support and no WW.
The free unit support for Demo and Republic undermines this.
If you want to be a builder and have a tech lead then go for Republic, but you shouldnt be able to lead an offensive war with it otherwise there is no point in an other government.

The republic free unit support of 15 is only really important in the early stages of the game, later on 30gpt doesnt really make much difference. I agree with Domanae that it should be put back to 0/0/0, a really rich Republic or Demo could afford that anyway. How about changing Demo to 2gpt unit support as well or would that make it totally useless? ( i would like a Demo 3rd forbidden Palace)

One thing that no one has said - what about the comparison between Communism and Fascism? I like Communism because all of your cities have some productivity, even newly captured ones. Using the SPHQ on another continent with Fascism would also bring that benefit, i think that it is a great AU change.

One of the worst things I found about Fascism was that pop rushing was rather difficult, i normally lower science and buy factories as soon as i get the tech but couldnt do that because i had changed to Fascism already. It is so costly in human life to pop rush expensive buildings or units, particularly after taking a pop hit on changing goverments. I think that it is a good balanced part of the goverment though, just one reason that i wouldnt normally use it.

**Golden Bear** · December 15, 2004, 13:41

I'm just not certain that fascism is worth the bother, given the way things are set up. Why bother with the unnecessary extra research path if you do not get anything that is really worth the effort? Sure we like Police Stations, but they come off a different path from Nat and is yet a third non-necessary tech.

At that stage in the game I usually am beelining to other techs am can just live without those techs until I trade/steal them later.

I think that the geometry of the tech tree demands that Fascism and maybe Communism need beefing up in order to entice people to spending the time on them.

**Modo44** · December 15, 2004, 13:53

Or, make Nationalism a required tech. It would definately be right with history, and it would increase the relative value of all techs that require Nationalism.

**joncnunn** · December 15, 2004, 15:29

Making Nationalism a required tech wouldn't change a thing, it's already the AIs top Industrail era priority.

As for a human, because of how unpopular the Musket Men are to build / upgrade it, if the AI weren't in such a hurry to get Nationalism, a human would as well to upgrade all those PikeMen.

**Modo44** · December 15, 2004, 16:04

The point of Nationalism as a required tech is to make the human go after Communism/Fascism/Espionage some more. Those three techs often get completely neglected otherwise, especially because you need to research/trade for Nationalism to get them. You can often beeline for Rep Parts and completely forget that part of the tech tree - a part that just as often stalls the AI for a while. Making Nationalism required could break this human habit, at least to some extent.

The AI already is in love with Nationalism, and it does research Communism and/or Fascism very often anyway, so this change wouldn't hurt it at all (which is good)

**Dominae** · December 15, 2004, 18:48

Nationalism is not the prerequisite of anything all that useful, so you could just wait until the end of the Industrial era to research it. Not a huge change, if you ask me.