Facist vs Communist Governments

[Steve5304]

I just had a huge arguement over which government is better and can win wars. Tho I have no PBEM victorys yet . On TCPIP internet , Communism always beat Facism. Facists usaully fail to defeat the Higher Producing Communist Governments. However This debate conintinues, and I ask you to post the success or failure you've had with either government. Maybe we can Settle this stupid debate!

btw I prefer Communism over Facism. Love that sweet production

[This message has been edited by Steve5304 (edited March 23, 2001).]

[Swissy]

Communism is the government of choice in an online game. Most of these games are played at a quicker pace and have fewer players on smaller maps.

In PBEM, you have larger maps and more players, so the ultimate victory takes longer. This is where the main weakness of communism comes to the forefront, high pollution. The two games which I am playing which have reached the Genetic Age have both experienced major eco-disasters.

So from my point of view as a PBEM vetern, the arguement is which government is better, Technocracy, Virtual Democracy or Ectopia?

[St Jon]

In conventional CtP I would always opt for the wonderful production of Communism, regardless of the environmental cost, because one of the saddest shortcomings of the entire Game is that it is basically all that really counts SP, MP or PBEM. This is especially true when war is in the air for unlike Civ2 or SMAC you just cannot afford, even if you have got LE, to buy 'quickie' Battleships or upgrade your outdated Musketeers and Cannon for state of the art Machine Gunners and Artillery.

Another very bad feature of the Game is that unless you are playing at high difficulty levels the Unhappiness caused by an oversized empire really does not hurt enough. The simple route to success is Theocracy, stupidly strong, followed by Communism and Corporate Republic in SP as the chances of the AI remaining a challenge when the advantages of the really advanced systems of government kick are just about nil. It is, as Swissy says, harder in PBEM but the principle remains the same for you do not even get Fascism, let alone Fundamentalism or Technocracy, until far too late. In PBEM you have the compensating disadvantage that the only reason you change to Fascism is that you are intending to go to war and it is just as big an alarm bell to everyone else as going to War Readiness. Does anyone really want to spend any length of time in Anarchy when the bullets start flying?

It is all different using CD's Mod but there is only the one PBEM game, that I know of, using it and I have never seen it used in an Online game.

Long live the Priests and the Reds!

[Rick Elkins]

Blackened squares from pollution may be merely annoying. When they're on a prime river square, they become more than annoying.

But watching big, built up cities sink into the sea after a apocalyptic flood is a sight that will make few smile! I for one will be very reluctant to build any more cities on swamp tiles!!

[Steve5304]

quote: Originally posted by Rick Elkins on 03-24-2001 01:30 PM Blackened squares from pollution may be merely annoying. When they're on a prime river square, they become more than annoying. But watching big, built up cities sink into the sea after a apocalyptic flood is a sight that will make few smile! I for one will be very reluctant to build any more cities on swamp tiles!!

Cant say Ive ever built on a swamp before. They usaully starve.

[Keygen]

For quick deathmatch scenarios I vote for Communism.

For standard long games I recommend neither Communism of Fascism even for war. Theocracy is still the best for almost everything until Genetic Age where you can have Corporate Republic or Technocracy.

[Rick Elkins]

Steve5304,

Cities built entirely on swamps would certainly starve, but sometimes a city has mostly great land, but also includes 1 or 2 swamp squares. During a pollution-induced flood, the whole city could be lost, as swamps and the areas around them are the first to go. I saw another player in a PBEM game lose an enormous amount of populated land that way!

[St Jon]

quote: Originally posted by Rick Elkins on 03-24-2001 04:59 PM Steve5304, Cities built entirely on swamps would certainly starve, but sometimes a city has mostly great land, but also includes 1 or 2 swamp squares. During a pollution-induced flood, the whole city could be lost, as swamps and the areas around them are the first to go. I saw another player in a PBEM game lose an enormous amount of populated land that way!

So have I!

It's great fun when it happens to someone else isn't it?

[Rick Elkins]

Ahh, a proponent of schadenfreude!

[St Jon]

You got it!

If you cannot Nuke them then I say Pollute them!

[Steve5304]

quote: Originally posted by St Jon on 03-24-2001 06:40 PM You got it! If you cannot Nuke them then I say Pollute them!

[jpww]

Believe it or not! In a recent game I had a city bloom because of its swampy surroundings!
Ironically, after a pollution-induced disaster ocurred, my city found itself in the midst of a great lake with plenty of goods to profit from

Oh yeah! I'd take Communism over Fascism any day!

Edit: no reason
[This message has been edited by jpww (edited March 24, 2001).]

[Steve5304]

quote: Originally posted by St Jon on 03-24-2001 07:05 AM In conventional CtP I would always opt for the wonderful production of Communism, regardless of the environmental cost, because one of the saddest shortcomings of the entire Game is that it is basically all that really counts SP, MP or PBEM. This is especially true when war is in the air for unlike Civ2 or SMAC you just cannot afford, even if you have got LE, to buy 'quickie' Battleships or upgrade your outdated Musketeers and Cannon for state of the art Machine Gunners and Artillery. Another very bad feature of the Game is that unless you are playing at high difficulty levels the Unhappiness caused by an oversized empire really does not hurt enough. The simple route to success is Theocracy, stupidly strong, followed by Communism and Corporate Republic in SP as the chances of the AI remaining a challenge when the advantages of the really advanced systems of government kick are just about nil. It is, as Swissy says, harder in PBEM but the principle remains the same for you do not even get Fascism, let alone Fundamentalism or Technocracy, until far too late. In PBEM you have the compensating disadvantage that the only reason you change to Fascism is that you are intending to go to war and it is just as big an alarm bell to everyone else as going to War Readiness. Does anyone really want to spend any length of time in Anarchy when the bullets start flying? It is all different using CD's Mod but there is only the one PBEM game, that I know of, using it and I have never seen it used in an Online game. Long live the Priests and the Reds!

Jon, It appears you are always the "Big polluter" I have read the Dutcheese and APQS threads . I love reading the propaganda on those things.


I usaully dont have very much regard for pollution either. I still cosider it "Everybody elses problem".


There is however that intersting time where Tanks and Marines are available. when Communism and Facism exist with each other for about 20 turns until better Govs.


[This message has been edited by Steve5304 (edited March 24, 2001).]

[Yeti]

Ahh, Fascism..Long live it! One neat thing I like about Fascism is the Fascists. Since they are always at full readiness, you can save a buck or 2 by reducing the readiness of your military and still have a decent force.
However, as a few have learned, Fascist makes for a crappy invasion force, since they have limited mobility. If used with units like tanks and warwalkers, however, the always ready fascists can take a beating while the lower supported tanks and etc take shots from behind.

Also, once it is researched, why anything else? Your nation was put on this earth to destroy other nations, pillage, and unite the world! Falling behind in tech? no problem! Simply invade! Get paid to invade! You think that democracy will out produce you? Ha! Vs Commi's? Invade them before they have been a Communism long. If you're a good Fascist, you've been building your military up from day 1 It is very true that an unchecked Commi gov't will have production out of this world. Simply nuke them and sell off those oil refineries and other junk your newly liberated pop 4 city wont need. I usually plan for 2 nukes for every primary stategic city. Of course the more the merrier. No nukes? No problem. Invade whoever has them.

Fascism dont do too shabby in pollution either, however Communism beats it hands down. So if I can't defeat my enemies on the battlefield, Communism is definately a great alternative. Why put all that production in one missle, when you can virtually nuke the world? Nothing puts a grin on my face more than the polar caps melting for the 2nd time Just don't forget to put a city or two in the mountains so you can watch in glee as you witness your enemies' huge 20+ pop cities vanish right before your eyes.

So I guess to summarize, Fascism for War and Peace until Corp Rep, and Communism for Armageddon.

Supreme Commander Yeti

[MOBIUS]

Geez, you guys are a bloodthirsty lot!?

Personally I prefer Fascism, but there are times when you need to have a communist government just to stay alive!

I actually think that anyone who makes a choice of becoming a Communist government during times of peace is a willful polluter with a complete disregard for others and the welfare of the planet should be hunted down and exterminated at the earliest opportunity!

Just my 2 cents