What government should we target for our first government switch? This thread is for discussion and I expect that we will poll this. The outcome from this discussion will be used by other departments to plan how to obtain this tech.

Domestic Consul recommends Replublic. The commerce bonus is significant. The main drawback is unit support which is quite limited.

one reason I dislike republic is because it costs 2 gold for each unit over the allowed amount, and the allowed amount is very low.

I would reccomend monarchy, it looks like one of our ancient age objectives is to take out india, which will require an army larger than republic will support

Long live the Monarch!!!

Long live the Monarch!!!
God Save the Queen (if Chieftess was elected president)

Monarchy...it would be a lot easier to have a huge military.

- TP

For the non-Conquest owners, republic's free unit support has been changed to have 1 per town (pop <=6), 3 per city (7<=pop<=12), 4 per metropolis (pop>=13), and any additional units cost 2gpt. Monarchy supports 2 per town, 4 per city, 8 per metropolis.

Remember that republic has war weariness (which means short, effective wars would be more important) and monarchy has military police. The slight difference in corruption, different draft rate, and different resistance and propaganda modifiers are not important, IMO.

Especially since the warmongers seem anxious to mong war, monarchy is the way to go.

Although Monarchy would be better for early conquests, we need to keep in mind our tech position. Seeing as how we're almost definitely going to go for Philosophy, and that Republic is right behind that(after Courthouses), it'd be most cost-effective to go right for Republic. Even with trading, we probably wouldn't get farther than the second tech on the Monarchy lead-in(I know it's Ceremonial Burial->Something->Something->Monarchy but I don't remmeber what) before we would have to research ourselves. However, in the case of Republic, we're already headed down that road anyway with our current research on Writing.

That, and a lot of coastal/river cities = maximisation of the Republic commerce bonus. I'll have to run some numbers to see what the MP vs. Slider effect would be on happiness and to see which would be more cost effective as well.

Although Monarchy would be better for early conquests, we need to keep in mind our tech position. Seeing as how we're almost definitely going to go for Philosophy, and that Republic is right behind that(after Courthouses), it'd be most cost-effective to go right for Republic. Even with trading, we probably wouldn't get farther than the second tech on the Monarchy lead-in(I know it's Ceremonial Burial->Something->Something->Monarchy but I don't remmeber what) before we would have to research ourselves. However, in the case of Republic, we're already headed down that road anyway with our current research on Writing.

That, and a lot of coastal/river cities = maximisation of the Republic commerce bonus. I'll have to run some numbers to see what the MP vs. Slider effect would be on happiness and to see which would be more cost effective as well.
I believe that Republic is also the way to go. With the added unit support, it makes sence to go with it and have a large empire. It is the perfect Government for expansion and still allows for war to be done.

The order that you were think is this: CB->Myst->Poly->Mon.

I think we should beeline to Republic. Republic permits greater commerce and has lower corruption than most other governments, including Monarchy. Commerce is the key to wealth, permitting more trade, faster scientific advances, and more production (contributing cash towards completing city improvements or military units become easier and a viable strategy). Under Republic we will want to build marketplaces in large cities (except for those that are hopelessly corrupt) and acquire more luxuries (either through trade or war). Luxuries and judicial use of the slider are the keys to success under Republic.

Several citizens make the point that it can be problematic to maintain happiness under Republic if we have too many troops. This is an excellent point, and we’ll have to plan to overcome it. It doesn’t justify favoring Monarchy (which allows the use of troops as military police) over Republic, however. Under Republic, having more cities it makes it easier to maintain a larger military, so we will want to grow. As described above, more luxuries and use of the slider also makes maintaining happiness straightforward (although a healthy commerce is a necessity). We will want to wait to time our revolt to Republic until we have a decent-sized, productive civilization. We should have that towards the last third of the Ancient Age.

One of the perceived advantages of Monarchy – the ability to use troops as military police – is actually a major disadvantage. First, using troops to maintain happiness rather than using the slider may encourage less diligent development of our cities. Second, there is a cost to using those troops. Although their maintenance is “free,” we have to keep them in cities. Having troops in cities far from our borders means they’re useless to defend against an attack on our borders. More significantly, should we decide to go to war, we can’t use those troops that are on MP duty unless we want to increase unhappiness. Although Monarchy has less war weariness than Republic, as long as a Republican war doesn’t last too long (over 20 turns), war weariness doesn’t become a big problem.

Last, we are the citizens of Fantannia! Do we want the jackboots of an authoritarian military on our necks? The military should be the instrument of the policy goals of Fantanian citizens; the function of the military shouldn’t be to “pacify” free Fantannians!

I thank MOTH for starting this discussion (as it's one I've been meaning to post for the R&T C).

I feel that given our current tech flight plan, we should head for the Republic. Granted, we have many a new neighbor who will be able to fill us in with anything we miss tech-wise, but we should still head for Republic. We will be researching Philo. After that, we're free to research CoL (or lit) after we take our free tech (Map Making, as decided by the poll). Republic is just a step away from that. Also, I feel the tech race should be at a moderate speed, due to all the neighbors we have/will be getting soon (mark my words: 80% pangea).

Republic is the way to go, so sayeth the Dean.

Remember that republic now has a unit cost of 2 gold per unit.

With the presented path, and the government preference of England.
Republic!

I think we should aim for anarchy. I mean republic.

How about anarchy, THEN republic? :D

Despotism then Communism :evil:

Six weeks ago my answer would have been Monarchy, without question. Then I played in a SG on Emperor, with domination as the designated victory condition, and mandated switch to Republic at the first opportunity. I think that I learned how to be a warmonger in Republic, though that knowledge remains to be tested in my own standalone games. ;)

The key in Republic is to fit the right kinds of units into the lower supported units cost structure. This was fairly easy to learn once the others on the SG team demonstrated it, but it does not bode well for a demogame environment. Basically, if we really want to do well in Republic, we need to be comfortable with leaving the core undefended, and we need to be willing to disband obsolete units. When you have more than the support limit of units, the old obsolete ones are the ones which are costing you a king's ransom in gold.

If the people are committed to following these principles then I think we can be successful.

BTW the real reason that Republic warmongering is not for the faint of heart is not the MP ability of Monarch, nor is it the unit support cost. Republic has WW concerns, and we in the demogame tend to go for blood, especially when Babylon is involved. We need to have the resolve to get out of a war and stay away from war with that civ for the full 20 turns.

This military budget planning is the root cause for splitting the External Consul.

As long as we monitor costs and weariness during wars, Republic will nicely compliment our commercial advantage. Keep Monarchy in our back pocket just in case we get in a long, drawn-out conflict and the WW gets too high.

-- Ravensfire

Remember that republic now has a unit cost of 2 gold per unit.

This is key.

Republic unit support is T1 C2 M4
Monarchy is T2 C4 M8 IIRC please correct me if I am wrong.

Republic unit support is 2 per unit. Monarchy is 1.

Corruption is lower in Republic.

So people. How many defenders do we want in each city? If the answer to that question is "zero" then I would go for republic. We can build an offensive team without upkeep cost. If the answer is "2 per city" then we will not be able to support an offensive army in republic and will need to be in Monarchy.

Accurate play would dictate republic due to corruption considerations, but it depends how comfortable people feel leaving cities undefended. The difference between republic and Monarchy is smaller now for C3C and either government is playable.

I always wonder in my games why the AI builds so many defenders. I'll check on an AI city and see five or six spearman in the city, all sucking up gpt, and there'll be one worker taking 12 turns to mine a mountain. I usually have only one or two defenders in my outlying cities, but plenty of workers roading and otherwise boosting my cash flow. I always have a comfortable stash of gold in the treasury, while the AIs seem to have small incomes and little in the bank.

As long as we don't get carried away building defenders, we should be able to afford units under Republic. Plus there's the point that lower corruption boosts income, which pays for a couple of units all by itselt.

Under republic, we better not sign ROPs either, otherwise a ROP rape could effectively end the game for us.

In a recent game I played, I was trying some of the strategies we've been planning in this, and beelined for republic. I was making a decent income in despotism with a good research rate going, and when I got into republic, my income dropped to -20 a turn. I realized I had warriors all over my empire doing nothing, so I started deleting them, but still, I was in a war with the Americans before that, and was rushing swordsmen towards their capital, and had just over the limit, and I was not going to disband swordsmen.

My cities nestled behind my border had no defenses, everything else only about one spearman. Republic just killed my economy and ruined the game.

So I think if we go for republic that we'll have to make a choice of either an army capable of going on the offensive and no research, or no unecessary units and scant defenses. Otherwise we should go monarchy.

Monarchy. Two gold per unit? No thank you.

Or if we want to do something different and keep city sizes low, then feudalism could be interesting.

Monarchy. Two gold per unit? No thank you.

Or if we want to do something different and keep city sizes low, then feudalism could be interesting.

Feudalism would be awesome for RP purposes.

Perhaps, but if we do go to it, then we must not let our towns grow to cities. Feudalism gets you 5/3/1 unit(s) (maybe 5/2/1) for free (that's right, support goes down as the city grows.) Any additional unit costs three gold per turn. That scares me away unless we just pack our cities together.

Fuedalism is rather far down the tech tree. It becomes available in the Middle Ages.

First tier tech. Plus it's not a dead end.

The advantage of Feudalism, if you can handle the weird way that unit support drops as cities get larger, is that you don't have to research or buy a non-required tech. I haven't tried this personally but suspect the resources normally spent on either monarchy or republic would get diverted to a quicker start down one of the three main middle ages paths.

OTOH if you research either republic or monarchy and get a monopoly on it, the AIs will empty their treasuries to buy either one.

For your convienence, I will post this information in this thread too:

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads9/Feudalism.JPG

Is discussion starting wind down? Maybe...

It seems there is strong support for Republic, good support for Monarchy, and some support for Fuedalism.

I will start polling on these 3 unless significant discussion starts back up.

I'd say it is a good time for a poll on which government to prefer. There is another issue, which is when to change. At least two possible answers there, as soon as possible to gain the bonus for more turns, vs. waiting in the case where we are in the middle of something we don't want to be impacted, like a wonder build, if settlement is not finished, or a war.

The extra commerce generated by Republic (nearly) always overcomes the higher unit support cost.
Monarchy is only worth considering if we'll be in a long war in the forseeable future (in 10 turns, for at least 50 turns). If not: Republic is so much better.

Agreed. Republic generally makes more money than the extra cost.

PLease poll this so we can end this debate, it seems 3/4 in support or Republic.

Agreed. Republic generally makes more money than the extra cost.
Not always. I've been burned many a time when switching into this government. 70% - 80% taxes, the rest to luxuries. Ouch!