OOC: Government Choice

[Ninot]

Togas has publically stated we are steering towards Monarchy.

But, in our less-than-militaristic goals, atleast further down the road when we have a full choice of governments, are we going to stick to governments because "thats what Spain would do"... or are we going to choose what best serves our needs?

[jdjdjd]

True, we want to play to win, not finish second. But initially, there will be benefits to switching to Monarchy, before moving on to Republic.

If there was a Fascist government type, we would have to at least dabble in it, ala Generalisimo Francisco Franco.

[E_T]

Monarchy as soon as we can try to get there, as we can have 3 garrisons to each city for happieness. We can also try for the Hanging Gardens.

As we aren't as yet doing any pop rushing, we should try to do some of that, right before the change.

As we (at least I am) expecting a war to break out, as soon as Chivalry is discovered by GoW, we need to try to keep our Military costs down to a minimium for as long as we can.

E_T

[GodKing]

I would like to see war break out sooner that with chivalry. In my games (16 civ, huge maps) I have usually concured my nearest two neighbors by the time chivalry comes about. Just me however. I see this map as leading us into war around the time of chivalry, but others, particularly GS vs Vox, and GoW against Lux and ND

[History Guy]

I'd prefer not to see GS vs. Lux yet, though. That would be too dangerous, putting them on our continent.

However, I'd like to see all three other civilizations near us with less power. I'd especially like to see Glory of War crushed, for they offer us, on this continent least-ways, the most immediate threat. Lux Invicta and Neu Demogyptica are also terrible worries. Both could very easily become warmongers, though I should like to see them fight each other before getting into a war with us.

Hernan de History Guy Calamari the Younger
Ambassador to Neu Demogyptica

[Aidun]

We know GoW and we don't know ND and do we know Lux yet. I think GoW is a threat to us, but be must keep in mind that we still don't know what shall become of Lux and ND. How shall they develop during the game? Knowing some nmation doesn't mean we can rely on such a nation, but at least we know what we can expect form them. We don't know what we can expect from ND and but little of Lux. The unknown is a greater danger, because we can't anticipate on it and we shall thus be badly prepared if we are being attacked by them.
My mind tells me that it is better to have ND removed from our continent because politics shall be much easier.
I do however not wish to declare them teh war, but rather aid someone in a war: the attacker gets the first and strongest assault and. Two dogs fighting for a bone: the third one gets it for himself alone.

Aidun Cian the Older

[OliverFA]

I don't think we should stay in Monarchy just because that's what "Spain would do". Otherwise, we can have a reigning powerless king even in Democracy if you want to mimic the real Spain. The king would take command if the president "disapears or feels indisposed"

Back to game issues, Republic is too far away and too expensive to research. Not to mention that the warmonger civs on our north are not going to research the peaceful techs before republic (Am I the only one who doesn't believe in the 4-way tech research agreement?) so going for Monarchy during a while before Republic would be beneficious to us. Also, once again we should play our strong as religious civ. This means we can switch first to Monarchy and then to Republic without much problem because of the just 1 turn anarchy periods.

[E_T]

Originally posted by oliverfa
(Am I the only one who doesn't believe in the 4-way tech research agreement?)

You are not. I too have doubts about the motives behind Ghengis Farb Khan's proposal. I feel that we are being set up.

E_T

[Ninot]

4 way treaty with possibly countless enemies?

I also dont like the smell.

Sounds like good reasoning for the top 3 members of this club could always choose the bottom one, and declare "your not pulling your weight, so we'll cut you off and invade you in 20 turns "

But it sounds very much like the type of club where you either prosper with them, or fail without them.

If we are in this (im lost, i hadnt heard about this untill the above post)... then I suggest we find the earliest possible way to ruin this for everyone, and make it all disband, not just remove ourselves from it.

If that means making an tech alliance with all not-included parties so its not exclusive... or even gifting techs just to keep things even so no one gets ambitious, i say we do it.

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Ninot
But it sounds very much like the type of club where you either prosper with them, or fail without them.

Yes, I agree completely with you. We have no option but to join that if finally is done. Other wise we would save them the work of choosing a common enemy. But I wouldn't actively work on this to become a reality...

[jdjdjd]

The tech treaty is OK, but in a step by step basis. Each civ that we have met, thats Lux, ND and GoW, and of course us, research a different tech and then when all done trade it. We could trade to the other three civs, once we do meet them, but that is a long way off and they may not have anything to trade us.

As all have mentioned, we need to be cautious though and remember that those we tech trade with may seek to kill us tomorrow - its the nature of the game or at least how those three will probably play the game.

So we need the tech deal so that we stay at the cutting edge of tech research. But, we need to remember that our friends are our enemies sooner or later. And we need to include in the agreement that any war cuts off the trading - or in fact stip that any civ in the tech alliance is cut out should they start a war.

Imagine what Ghengis Farb Khan would say to that?

See more of this topic in Diplomacy Thread.

[ruby_maser]

Originally posted by jdjdjd
And we need to include in the agreement that any war cuts off the trading - or in fact stip that any civ in the tech alliance is cut out should they start a war.

Very good idea, Señor jdjdjd. However, can we prove this. Even if the game tells us that one team started the war, they may try to disseminate false information about the reason they were "forced" to strike first (ie: someone was casually walking military units into their territory or, later, they caught them trying to plant a spy, etc.)

It seems to be a workable plan as long as we can sort out who the real culprit is when war starts, one giant incentive to be peaceful. This goes against my nature in Civ 3, though

[Ninot]

Ok, we can join this 4 way tech thing.

But to keep ourselves at the forefront, we value our tech-trade plan with Lego more. We gift Lego as many techs as we can, and in exchange they act as a secret 5th tech researcher, only for the benefit of ourselves and the Legos.

LoL, id be suprised if the other 3 hadn't thought of this, and maybe on a larger scale.