Goverment Questions

[Arrian]

Ragnar,

Heh, funny you ask that since that's exactly my position in my current game. In my case, it doesn't really matter, because I've essentially won (I probably won't play it out). I've already built most of my RR's, so the worker bonus isn't as valueable to me, and I do have a goodly number of slaves. Therefore, the switch isn't really worth it.

I had planned to make the switch right at the end of the medieval age. I figured I'd upgrade my Cavalry, go into revolution, and attack my southern neighbor, Greece. By the time I came out of anarchy, I'd almost be done with the war. But I never pulled the trigger on the revolution, because I noticed that most of my original core cities were producing *just* enough food to feed themselves, and during anarchy they would inevitably have starved by a pop point or two each. That really wasn't a big deal, and I probably should have ignored it. So I remained a republic.

In your case, I don't know. What level are you playing on, do you have a tech lead, do you have a large empire, are you industrious?

If I had to guess, it probably isn't worth it. In order to get the max benifit from Demo, you need to switch pretty much right away, in the mid-to-late middle ages. Then you have time to reap the benifits and over time recoup the lost turns in anarchy. Obviously that doesn't apply to religious civs.

-Arrian

[Ragnar_84]

Thanks guys,

I didn't think it would make much of a difference. I'm playing the Carth's (Ind/Com) my land is nearly all railed, making decent $, my map is about 8-10 small to medium islands (I did everything random, so I'm not sure about the exact size or water %). The reason I'd switch would be to try to bolster my research a little and cut into corruption/waste a little. I don't think I want have to endure anarchy for such little benefit.

[nuther]

I hate to say this, but I think the sad truth is that it is possible to win the game without ever leaving Despotism. I just did it on Monarch level (up to replaceable parts, the game is a foregone conclusion now) and I believe I can do it again on Emporer level. That said, if I was religious, I would have gone to that for more production after the majority of my cities had hit size 7. That way I would get increased production, and the same number of free unitl support. Commercial and religious would be good for less corruption and a quick change to monarchy. You dont need anything else, and I think you are wasting time if you research any form of gov - let the ai do it while you forge ahead on one branch of the tech tree.

[CerberusIV]

I hate those turns of anarchy so I go straight for Republic and switch once. I only bother with Monarchy with a religious civ when it is a useful fallback if you are short on luxuries and WW is kicking in.

I usually (monarch level) get to the early industrial level on tech with the AI having switched to democracy when I have done all the cavalry wars I want. It is usually easy to beat the AI to Universal Suffrage at this level since the AI tries to build it without first building a factory and coal plant. With US, police stations and careful use of the luxury slider I find I can usually manage short wars in democracy without any problems.

Republic is the way to go for most of the game, just remember to prioritise marketplaces and banks to generate the gold to pay for your military.

[bongo]

I'm trying to win the game without leaving despotism for the first time now.

Monarch, scandinavians, tiny map, arcipalego, lots of water. My capital is my ONLY city with decent production. Amazing what you can do when you can spit out one warrior per turn and upgrade them later. Add the fact that I control (almost)ALL the iron in the world and own the lighthouse so the other civ can't even get to the few unoccupied iron sources Only thing that bothers me is that I will probably win the game before I get to build the berzerk (the reason I started this game in the first place was that I wanted to try the berzerk)

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I've just switched from Regent to Monarch. I've played Rome and France to victory, relying on a near-constant warmonger strategy. To that end, I've stayed in despotism awfully late... and came out ahead!

A large part of my strategy relies on the Great Library. Gotta have it! With it, though, I get typically 10 free techs while I pound away at my neighbors, assuring by the time it runs out I control ~50% of the globe.

I have been so afraid of letting production go during wartime that I didn't make the switch from despotism to monarchy until REAL late in the game - both times, around Invention. I knew this was "wrong" and it sure didn't feel good, but it didn't keep me from whupping behind and using despotism's one good power - the power to kill citizens for improvements - to good use.

I've built temple after temple and gotten rid of so many unruly masses that it makes me consider despotism in a new light.

Next game around, I'm going to go for Republic real early - I always switch to Democracy later in the game, gain to be had or no (to make up for my despotic sins, I suppose) - gonna play as a religious civ so I don't fear the anarchy.

Still, I wonder how often you warmonger types stay in despotism late, and under what circumstances. I always play a huge world, max # civs, continents. I know I could go to Monarchy, or even Republic, a hell of a lot earlier... but I've been... sniffle... too scared.

[vmxa1]

I can't address the warmonger part, but I wil say that Despotism is very unproductive with a large empire. I will research Republic fairly soon and switch at teh first opportunity. That mean, immediately unless a wonder is near completion.
If I was Religious, that is different or special game setting, ala AU208.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
[. . . .]

A large part of my strategy relies on the Great Library. Gotta have it! With it, though, I get typically 10 free techs while I pound away at my neighbors, assuring by the time it runs out I control ~50% of the globe.
[. . . .]

If you own 50% of the globe, the game is over. I've won a number of games as a despot, never switching to another government, but it's not necessarily my favorite way to play. If your goal is to win as convincingly as possible, then conquering 50% of the globe represents overshooting the goal in most instances - win the game before you take the trouble of controlling 50% of the globe! If you can control 50% of the globe as a despot then don't bother to switch, just finish.

Catt

[bongo]

The insane corruption is despotisms largest draw-back. you will only have decent production from a handful of cities(or two handfuls if you have a FP). That said, sometimes a handful is all you need.

Catt, when is a game won? When you have reached one of the actual winning conditions or when you know you will win?

[UnityScoutChopper]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
...what would be a Civ3 version of RL Communism? ...

I'll bite.

First off, it would NOT have communal corruption. If any thing, its bell curve might be even stronger (while keeping the same overall corruption). It is much easier to control the party bosses who are close to home than the ones far away.

That said, they should be allowed LOTS of FP's. 2 as in Conquests? Heck no, 4 or 5 or even 1 per X cities. But for that matter, so should Democracies -- do you really think Ohio loses more tax income to corruption than Washington? I don't either. (Although actually for this reason, Democracy, not Communism, is the ideal candidate for "communal" corruption, which would solve this flaw more elegantly than extra FP's.)

Nor should they be restricted to the whip alone. Yes, forced labor is a part of Communist history. But so are big projects financed from national treasuries. Offering this flexibility could be a nice "selling point" for this government type.

Oh dear, I've just writtten a "Things for Civ IV" type proposal, which I'd sworn to myself I'd never write...

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Catt
If you own 50% of the globe, the game is over... If your goal is to win as convincingly as possible, then conquering 50% of the globe represents overshooting the goal in most instances... If you can control 50% of the globe as a despot then don't bother to switch, just finish.

It's all a matter of taste I suppose. Once I had crushed Egypt, Cultural Victory would have been mine... once I crushed Carthage and the Celts, no one could compete with me in any way... I could have switched to Democracy about 50 turns ago and be building Theory of Evolution while the others were just researching Magnestism... but I want a DOMINATION victory, because I want to see if I'm up to the challenge of taking large overseas empires down.

I do agree with you... and if I was a more advanced player, more assured of my abilities as a warmonger AND builder, I would have made the switch long ago. But I'm earning industrial-era techs at a 4-turn clip and still make ~100 gpt, with large reserves, and that's good enough for me to pursue my greedy ambitions.

In other words: Despotism and Monarchy leave a bad taste in my mouth, but so does beer, and to use that analogy, I'm drunk off success with no war weariness.

[Arrian]

Yahweh -

I get out of despotism ASAP. I may go republic, I may go monarchy (typically monarchy only if religious). I will fight a lot as a despot and during the anarchy while switching to republic... and then fight until the war weariness really kicks in. Then, I take a nice break and build like a madman. Then I hit again, this time harder.

If you're using despotism to avoid WW, then you really ought to be a Monarchy. Less corruption/waste, better Military Police (3 instead of 2 maximum), and allows use of rushbuying instead of poprushing. I've played many games where I've gone Despot -> Monarchy -> Democracy. That works well if you start on a big continent and therefore have many neighbors to kill. You spend the ancient & most of the medieval fighting, and then switch to Democracy and build build build.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Arrian
I've played many games where I've gone Despot -> Monarchy -> Democracy.

This has been my typical pattern. The few tiems I've toyed around with Republic I've been sorely dissappointed. War weariness I just can't handle and general unhappiness across the board. I know it's something I have to work on. Next game I'm playing "PUP" so I'll try it then.

The only reason I've been sticking in Despotism longer than usual (normally I switch as soon as I get Monarchy) is fear of anarchy and the fact that in both my recent games I've hardly had a turn where I was not at war, either with a fearsome or pathetic foe.

Trust me, I'm not pro-depotism in any way. I might just be a little too war-crazed. But whereas I love Democracy - perfect timing for it in the tech tree - I am very wary of Republic. I typically don't have too many marketplaces built by the time I acquire, or could acquire, Republic, and that seems to be the key to success with that government type.

Also, as I always play a huge world, I typically have a lot more land to acquire/"security threats to address".

[Arrian]

I am very wary of Republic. I typically don't have too many marketplaces built by the time I acquire, or could acquire, Republic, and that seems to be the key to success with that government type.

Bingo. Marketplaces are key. They help pay for the military and they boost happiness if you have more than 2 luxuries.

Also, I tend to build my Forbidden Palace close to my original capitol in preparation for moving my Palace via leader. My FP often completes shortly after my transition to republic. That gives me a small boost as well.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

If marketplaces are key for a successful Republic, when do you republicans research currency - approxiamately when in your ancient era queue - and when do you start building said marketplaces?

I often find I have more pressing concerns when currency becomes availible - but then again, as I mentioned, I'm a bit of a warmonger. All with the goal of eventually building, of course - although sometimes I take it a bit far.

Hence, as marketplaces tend to come (for me) after barracks, plenty of settlers, workers, and military units, and, depending on my luxuries situation, after temples, I'm generally not in a position to switch to Republic when it first comes along.