About goverment differences

[Athitis]

I am messed up with the goverments. I mean, if you have democracy why turn to Republic? Why to keep Monarchy when you can be Communistic? And what's the use of despotism apart from being the starting goverment? Isn't Democracy the best of them all?

[Sheik]

Not really. It depends on what your style of play is.

[asleepathewheel]

Re: About goverment differences

Originally posted by Athitis
I am messed up with the goverments. I mean, if you have democracy why turn to Republic? Why to keep Monarchy when you can be Communistic? And what's the use of despotism apart from being the starting goverment? Isn't Democracy the best of them all?

If you are involved in lots of wars, then democracy will prove unusable, quickly falling into anarchy. republic is much easier to wage war in, the people don't revolt as quickly. If you are peaceful, or only get into short wars, then democracy is the way to go.

Get oiut of despotism ASAP, it won't allow you to harvest as much food or shields as monarchy or republic.

If you are religious, then you can hop from govt to govt. if you are not, you might want to skip monarchy and go straight for republic, or get monarchy then wait for democracy. depends on if you can handle the 6? turns of anarchy.

I don't care for communist b/c you have to pay for stuff with pop points, i prefer to pay with gold.

[Ethelred]

Re: About goverment differences

Originally posted by Athitis
I am messed up with the goverments. I mean, if you have democracy why turn to Republic? Why to keep Monarchy when you can be Communistic? And what's the use of despotism apart from being the starting goverment? Isn't Democracy the best of them all?

Unless I am playing a Religious Civ I go from Despot to Republic and stick with it till the end barring War Weariness enduced Anarchy. It saves a lot of turns of Anarchy and War Weariness is much reduced over Democracy. The only real advantage that Democracy has is that the workers are 50% faster, nice but not realy needed especially for Industrious civs. Its not worth the WW or the 4 to 8 turns of Anarchy. Thats two tech lost for me much of the time.

I have only tried Communism once. I think Monarchy would have been a better choice. I was playing Egypt and was having WW from a long war as a Democracy something I wouldn't have been if I wasn't Religious. Switching to Communism actually increased my research, I had been spending so much on entertainment to fight off Civil Disorder.

Despotism is something you want out of as soon you can manage it. It realy hurts shield and food production as well as money. If you are religious its usefull to go for Monarchy while building up your finances and Cathedrals for the Republic. Otherwise I like to have a marketplace and either a coliseum or a cathedral in my larger cities,or at least three to four luxury resources I can sometimes do with just a marketplace for a while.

The Republic gives you more money than Monarchy but you lose the free units so you need enough money to make up for that and the loss of military police means you must have more content or happy faces to make up for that.

[vmxa1]

I think that about some it up.

[Athitis]

Thank u for ur replys

Do u prefer communist over monarchy or/and democracy? Lower corruption is a big advantage, isn't it?

[vmxa1]

I loath communism and it is useful in only a few rare circumstances. If you are not religous civ, the fewer switches the better. Despot to Rep is a good route then. If religous, then go to monarch and then to dem. These ideas are not taken into account your situation and where you are in terms of wars. It is just for production basis. After 129f, I do not worry about corruption. Yes it hurts some, but it is not going to make me play differently. IOW you can live with it.

[JohnM2433]

I'm not sure, but Communism might be advantagious for a large empire because you don't have to waste money rushing things in high-corruption cities. I don't thinks its total commerce output is ever as high as in Democracy or even Republic, though. (Does anyone know if there are cases where it might be? A huge empire, for example?) But while your outlying cities become much more productive, your core cities become less so, and thus cannot produce Wonders as quickly. Courthouses, police stations and WLTKD also are said to lower corruption and waste to managable levels in fringe cities under non-communist governments, but I haven't had much experience with that myself.

Under Republic or Democracy, you can probably make up for the lack of military police by allocating some of your greater income to luxury spending. The greatest concern is War Weariness, as far as I can see. The more aggressive you are and the longer you stay at war, the less representative a government you want.

I'm not sure how Monarchy compares to Communism.

[Athitis]

Perhaps its not the right moment but I am very messed up with corruption..........I have heard that courthouses cannot prevent it....and I though that Police Stations only reduce War Weariness. Am I wrong?

Monarchy or Communist? That's the question.....

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by JohnM2433
I'm not sure, but Communism might be advantagious for a large empire because you don't have to waste money rushing things in high-corruption cities. I don't thinks its total commerce output is ever as high as in Democracy or even Republic, though. (Does anyone know if there are cases where it might be? A huge empire, for example?) But while your outlying cities become much more productive, your core cities become less so, and thus cannot produce Wonders as quickly. Courthouses, police stations and WLTKD also are said to lower corruption and waste to managable levels in fringe cities under non-communist governments, but I haven't had much experience with that myself.

WLTKD helps my cities drastically, but there will still be severe corruption in the cities furthest away.

IIRC, police stations only help with WW, not corruption (unless you mod it, which I have done.)

I've had a massive empire-511 cities, 1 bil population, horrible corruption in 2/3 of my empire. wasn't happy with communism. I would rather have a few super cities than a bunch of mediocre ones. That game was heavily modded corruption wise, so its not a good indicator.

I also like buying stuff over the whip, which is why i don't like communism over republic.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Athitis
Perhaps its not the right moment but I am very messed up with corruption..........I have heard that courthouses cannot prevent it....and I though that Police Stations only reduce War Weariness. Am I wrong?

Monarchy or Communist? That's the question.....

I was going to make a detailed post about corruption, but then I figured it would be easier to just link you to a great thread on the subject.

corruption thread

Hope that helps

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Athitis
Perhaps its not the right moment but I am very messed up with corruption..........I have heard that courthouses cannot prevent it....

Nothing except not playing the game or modding the heck out of it prevents it. However Courthouses do decrease corruption.

and I though that Police Stations only reduce War Weariness. Am I wrong?

Wrong. Police stations worked that way in the original release. Since the first patch Police Stations have the same effect on corruption as a Courthouse does.

See the link to the thread that asleepathewheel posted below for details.

Monarchy or Communist? That's the question.....

From what I have seen those that use Communism are using it to pop rush in distant cities. They mostly play religious civs and are pretty much into warmongering. By pop rushing they get a temple up and the population down without spending cash. The catch is it hurts the core cities production. I don't think its as popular as it was before changes in the way unhappiness due to use of the wip were made.

[Athitis]

Thank u once again for your replies (and the great link)

One last question: What's the best goverment type for a player that is about to start/join a World War? Monarchy?

[Ethelred]

Depends on how long you think the war will last and how well you will do in it.

Unless you are a religious civ its probably best to stick with whatever you have unless you are in a Despotic government. The more cities you have the longer the anarchy will last in a government change. It could easily last eight turns. Thats eight turns with no new techs and nothing build including the military you will need for the war.

Even if you are stuck in a Democracy its probably best to stick with it so you can get a fast start in the war. Now if you are religious I would recommend The Republic untill WW gets bad enough to make things difficult.

Spending money on entertainment doesn't help corrupt cities one bit. Be prepared to lose luxuries you are trading for. That is why I like to have MPPs at least with my important trade partners. That way I can get them on my side instead of against me. If you don't have all the luxuries allready I would recomend making the aquisition of the ones you don't have a priority before WW becomes a problem. Besides winning by domination or conquest resource gathering is the best reason for going to war.

[SpencerH]

I usually go despot ->republic but lately I've also switched to democracy in order to speed up workers when not using an industrious civ.