View Full Version : A quantitative comparison of governments


Heroes
Oct 17, 2005, 01:05 AM
Seeing many discussions about republic vs. monarchy and so on, I have some thoughts about comparing different governments, especially their financial incomes.

The most relevant factors are number of cities (C), population (P), and units (U). More precisely, C = C1 (pop <= 6) + C2 (pop from 7 to 12) + C3 (pop >=13).

Despotism: unit support S = 4*C = 4*(C1+C2+C3).
Republic: S = C1 + 3*C2 + 4*C3. Each unit more than that costs 2 gpt.
Monarchy: S = 2*C1 + 4*C2 + 8*C3.
Feudalism: S = 5*C1 + 2*C2 + C3. Above this each unit needs 3 gpt.
Communism: S = 6*C = 6*(C1+C2+C3).
Fascism: S = 4*C1 + 7*C2 + 10*C3.
Democrazy :D has no unit support at all.

Republic and democrazy have less corruption than monarchy and feudalism: both have more Nopt by 0.1*OCN, and democrazy reduces rank corruption by 1/4. But these effects are generally quite small.

Republic and democrazy have commerce bonus, which is roughly 1 (base) gpt per citizen. After considering corruption (make it less) and multipliers (market, library, etc., make it more), the net increase in commerce is M*P, where M varies usually from 1 to 1.5, depending on corruption and multipliers.

When we are comparing republic and monarchy, that's usually in late AA or early MA, so metropolis doesn't exist, C3=0. Therefore, monarchy's unit support is bigger than that of republic simply by the number of all the cities C=C1+C2. In typical situations, the total number of units U is larger than support limit of monarchy, therefore the unit maintenance under monarchy is U-2*C1-4*C2 gpt, and that under republic is 2*(U-C1-3*C2) gpt. So monarchy saves U-2*C2 gpt comparing to republic.

It may seem confusing at first sight: why the number of towns C1 doesn't affect it? The reason is: adding a town, under monarchy you gain 2 more unit support and drop 2 gpt for maintenance, under republic you gain 1 more support and drop 2 gpt too.

So the basic lesson is: the more units, the better monarchy is; the more pop 7-12 cities, the better republic is. Note that if there are metros, 8*C3 and 2*4*C3 will still cancel, so what makes difference is just the number of middle size cities.

Now the question is, does this U-2*C2 advantage of monarchy offset the M*P advantage of republic? Certainly it depends on concrete situation. Let's say you have 10 towns and 2 cities, 50 units, 40 citizens. Then U-2*C2=50-4=46, M*P=40-60. They are actually quite close, aren't they? After considering war weariness and military police (bothing favoring monarchy), they are even closer.

Of course, under monarchy you want to maintain a large army to take advantage of U, while under republic you want to grow as much as possible to increase P and C2, build infrastructures to increase M, and maintain a small force to decrease U. Needless to say, under republic every worked tile must be roaded to make commerce bonus possible, but that is necessary for any government.

Feudalism is a funny government in that it strongly favors small towns. In the above example, 10 towns and 2 cities will give free support to 54 units! So don't worry about the 3 gpt maintenance, it just won't happen (unless you are extremely devoted to war). OTOH, in that example, monarchy and republic support 28 and 16 units, respectively. Feudalism saves 22 gpt than monarchy when there are 50 units.

Typically unit upkeep under feudalism is 0. So mathematically what feudalism gains is just the U-2*C1-4*C2 gpt upkeep fee of monarchy, or 2*U-2*C1-6*C2 gpt of republic.

Somebody could object to feudalism because it discourages growth. But that's unfair, what you need to do under feudalism is just some ICS in front or highly corrupt area, and your core cities can still happily grow. This ICS trick is applicable to any government, but it's the most useful for feudalism.

Another benefit of feudalism is that it's an necessary tech, so you can skip an optional tech. This could be important when the difficulty level is so high that you can hardly keep up with tech pace.

Certainly, war weariness is a drawback of feudalism vs. monarchy. But you have many tricks to deal with WW (oscillating war, artillery, army ...), while the U-2*C1-4*C2 gpt advantage is there every turn. From my experience, as long as you pay less than 30% (or even 40%) lux for WW, feudalism is more profitable than monarchy. Of course, if you don't go to war, it's a huge waste to keep so many units. So feudalism is really for hard core warmongers and difficult situations.

Communism is THE super power government in C3C, because of its amazingly low corruption. When you see every city has < 20% corruption, you will hate other governments. What's more, communism supports 6*C units, which is simply huge. And even if you exceed that limit, each unit only costs 1 gpt. Truly nothing to complain.

Fascism could be useful if it comes earlier. But since it's as late as communism, it becomes plainly the worst government (good coincidence with history :lol: ). Not to mention pop loss in revolution and no culture until assimilation. It's just too bad.

Democrazy is awkward for the same reason (coming too late). I can only think of one scenario where it could be worth a 2nd anarchy: when you have way too many units (otherwise why not stick on republic), and you are religious. But even so, the high WW still makes people think twice before revolution.

Conclusion: For your 1st revolution, republic is the choice for peaceful development, and feudalism is the choice for war and "pointy stick research". Monarchy is in general ok for every thing but great for nothing, except one field: always war (or the war is so hard and long that it's close to AW). Communism is usually the only government worth a 2nd revolution, and you won't be disappointed to it.

Ansar
Oct 17, 2005, 01:29 PM
Great Article, just a little side notes and opinion.:)

Democracy in some situations(not many should i say) can be better at unit support, because it is only 1gpt/unit. Also, I think democracy is commonly used by milkers because of the reduced corruption=more score.

I think the order for governments(IMHO) is:


Republic
Democracy
Communism
Monarchy
Feudalism-I didnt know where to put it because of its unique requirements.
Fascism
Despotism


Nevertheless, a great article.:goodjob:

TimBentley
Oct 17, 2005, 03:21 PM
@AnsarKing: And anarchy would be last. ;) Actually, I don't think milkers want to go through another anarchy to go to democracy. The reduced corruption doesn't really help much, anyways.

Interesting article. It's interesting that only the number of cities pop 7-12 affect the unit support comparison between monarchy and republic. I may consider feudalism as more of a useful war government.

Eukaryote
Oct 17, 2005, 04:18 PM
Too complcated, by the way, republic has no unit support.

Eukaryote
Oct 17, 2005, 04:20 PM
Also, I think democracy is commonly used by milkers because of the reduced corruption=more score

Nevertheless, a great article.:goodjob:

Whats a milker?

Ansar
Oct 17, 2005, 06:22 PM
Whats a milker?

Very talented players who can boost up their score a lot more than normal players.

Heroes
Oct 17, 2005, 07:13 PM
Too complcated, by the way, republic has no unit support.

That's in vanilla Civ3 and PTW, but thing changed a lot in C3C ...

Heroes
Oct 17, 2005, 07:17 PM
It's interesting that only the number of cities pop 7-12 affect the unit support comparison between monarchy and republic. I may consider feudalism as more of a useful war government.

Yeah, I notice it just after doing the math. And yeah, feudalism being the better warmonger government than monarchy is my main conclusion. :)

LoopyLewis
Oct 18, 2005, 01:17 AM
Feudalism is a funny government in that it strongly favors small towns. In the above example, 10 towns and 2 cities will give free support to 54 units! So don't worry about the 3 gpt maintenance, it just won't happen (unless you are extremely devoted to war). OTOH, in that example, monarchy and republic support 28 and 16 units, respectively. Feudalism saves 22 gpt than monarchy when there are 50 units...

...Somebody could object to feudalism because it discourages growth. But that's unfair, what you need to do under feudalism is just some ICS in front or highly corrupt area, and your core cities can still happily grow. This ICS trick is applicable to any government, but it's the most useful for feudalism.

I had a great game recently where I swapped from Republic to Feudalism as soon as I got the tech. Most cities (except the capital) were under size 6 and I was raking in the money and techs while at war! :eek:

Feudalism doesn't discourage growth IMHO since war (which is probably the reason you went to it anyway) cannot last forever. Eventually you'll be at peace with your neighbours and all you have to do is build some aquaducts.

I swapped back to Republic after my cities had aquaducts and still think that Feudalism is a decent early MA government :) - although it's useless from then on

Heroes
Oct 18, 2005, 02:09 AM
I had a great game recently where I swapped from Republic to Feudalism as soon as I got the tech. Most cities (except the capital) were under size 6 and I was raking in the money and techs while at war! :eek:

Feudalism doesn't discourage growth IMHO since war (which is probably the reason you went to it anyway) cannot last forever. Eventually you'll be at peace with your neighbours and all you have to do is build some aquaducts.

I swapped back to Republic after my cities had aquaducts and still think that Feudalism is a decent early MA government :) - although it's useless from then on

Emm ... Generally it's not good to revolt too many times, because anarchy is too wasteful, especially at highest levels. Most games have only 1 revolution. Now in C3C, because communism becomes so overpowerful, a 2nd revolution becomes seriously considerable, but that's the only good case for 2nd revolution. Since you have done well under feudalism, you have no reason to switch back to republic. Because under feudalism you must have accumulated a lot of units, which makes republic not profitable. Of course you can disband many units, but if you can crush your enemies using those units, why do that? The only 2 good reasons for disbanding units are: 1. You are too backward in tech so that you cannot defeat your foes; or 2. You have conquered all you continent.

Fried Egg
Oct 18, 2005, 09:24 AM
Is Communism that great for Corruption? I thought it just got the same amount as the others, but affected each city equally instead of distance related. Am I wrong?

Heroes
Oct 18, 2005, 10:15 PM
Is Communism that great for Corruption? I thought it just got the same amount as the others, but affected each city equally instead of distance related. Am I wrong?

Things have changed A LOT in C3C. :lol: You can look at Alexman's article in war academy. :goodjob:

Fried Egg
Oct 19, 2005, 02:31 AM
I've see Aleman's article but it's a bit tricky to understand. Why is communual corruption that much lower than the others? If you could explain it in layman's terms, it would be much appreciated...

LoopyLewis
Oct 19, 2005, 05:12 AM
Emm ... Generally it's not good to revolt too many times, because anarchy is too wasteful, especially at highest levels. Most games have only 1 revolution. Now in C3C, because communism becomes so overpowerful, a 2nd revolution becomes seriously considerable, but that's the only good case for 2nd revolution. Since you have done well under feudalism, you have no reason to switch back to republic. Because under feudalism you must have accumulated a lot of units, which makes republic not profitable. Of course you can disband many units, but if you can crush your enemies using those units, why do that? The only 2 good reasons for disbanding units are: 1. You are too backward in tech so that you cannot defeat your foes; or 2. You have conquered all you continent.

Actually, since anarchy only took place for a couple of turns each, I thought it was well worth the trouble. :) I'm not playing at a high level (Regent or Monarchy) so I can afford to loose these turns and besides, Feudalism is slow to grow and after war I was desperate to grow again. That was why I changed.

Imagine staying in Feudalism throughout the game :sad: YUCK! :cry:

I didn't have to disband units because I set out on a localised war - against two or three cities only - so I didn't require a large army in the first place (the unit support of Feudalism was good enough and I didn't exceed it). I lost units in the war (except my catapults and trebs :) ) so when I went back to Republic, the loss wasn't that bad.

In fact, I thought the turns spent in Feudalism did more help than hinder my empire - anarchy included.

DaveMcW
Oct 19, 2005, 09:22 AM
The big factor you are missing is the value of a tech lead. By selling every tech, you can convert trade -> beakers -> gold at a rate M much higher than 1.5.

eldar
Oct 19, 2005, 10:17 AM
Feudalism has become the goverment of choice for finishing off a 100K game, fast (i.e. 100K culture before 900AD :crazyeye: ). The combination of no tile penalties (as in Despo), and whipping, means that Temples/Libs/Caths can be whipped very very quickly.

Generally a game like this will go:
1. Choose Celts (Rel, Agr).
2. Republic slingshot - use Republic to expand to the dom limit (rush settlers, ICS).
3. Build/capture Temple of Artemis. DON'T RESEARCH EDUCATION!!
4. Once ICS is done - revolt to Feudalism (no prob as religious).
5. Whip away!

LoopyLewis
Oct 19, 2005, 10:36 AM
Feudalism has become the goverment of choice for finishing off a 100K game, fast (i.e. 100K culture before 900AD :crazyeye: ). The combination of no tile penalties (as in Despo), and whipping, means that Temples/Libs/Caths can be whipped very very quickly.

Generally a game like this will go:
1. Choose Celts (Rel, Agr).
2. Republic slingshot - use Republic to expand to the dom limit (rush settlers, ICS).
3. Build/capture Temple of Artemis. DON'T RESEARCH EDUCATION!!
4. Once ICS is done - revolt to Feudalism (no prob as religious).
5. Whip away!

See! Feudalism does work :)

Fried Egg
Oct 20, 2005, 08:25 AM
Feudalism has become the goverment of choice for finishing off a 100K game, fast (i.e. 100K culture before 900AD :crazyeye: ). The combination of no tile penalties (as in Despo), and whipping, means that Temples/Libs/Caths can be whipped very very quickly.

Generally a game like this will go:
1. Choose Celts (Rel, Agr).
2. Republic slingshot - use Republic to expand to the dom limit (rush settlers, ICS).
3. Build/capture Temple of Artemis. DON'T RESEARCH EDUCATION!!
4. Once ICS is done - revolt to Feudalism (no prob as religious).
5. Whip away!
Could anyone explain this strategy in a little more detail? What sort of city spacing should be used? What is ICS? Why build Temple of Artemis? Why Feudalism at the end? I find pop rushing really difficult as my populations get really unhappy...

eldar
Oct 20, 2005, 10:01 AM
ICS - packing cities as close together as you can. CxC spacing, wherever possible.
Temple of Artemis - free temples in every city. You won't be researching Education, so it'll never expire. Also assuming you get to the dom limit after 1AD (likely) you're not missing out on too much doubling of culture from those new cities.
One thing I forgot - Pyramids. Essential also :D
Argicultural civ because you can grow even with the city's single citizen assigned to be a specialist (3 food in central square).
Happiness - well you should control all 8 luxes, and not be researching. Use the lux slider.

Heroes
Oct 21, 2005, 10:15 AM
The big factor you are missing is the value of a tech lead. By selling every tech, you can convert trade -> beakers -> gold at a rate M much higher than 1.5.

That's certainly true ... providing you can get tech lead. :D At highest levels, you could feel lucky if you are behind by only 1 age ... :lol:

Pentium
Oct 23, 2005, 03:06 PM
That's certainly true ... providing you can get tech lead. :D At highest levels, you could feel lucky if you are behind by only 1 age ... :lol:This is correct for only 1 highest level, and it also has to be a Pangaea. But you can build the GL on that highest level, and get a tech lead from Edu on.

Heroes
Oct 23, 2005, 03:46 PM
This is correct for only 1 highest level, and it also has to be a Pangaea. But you can build the GL on that highest level, and get a tech lead from Edu on.

Deity is the level where you can simply win unless you do sth extraordinary (always war, settle only inside territory, etc.), sid is the level where you will simply lose unless you do sth extraordinary (multi cow start, archi map, etc.) ...

But, anyway, how can you get tech lead from education on? Do you have an example?

eldar
Oct 24, 2005, 05:13 AM
I believe (though I've not tried this, having been unsuccessful at solo Deity, and having never tried Sid) the aim is:
- With zero research, rake in the cash. Sell techs for gpt as much as possible.
- Use this cash to rush Libs and Markets.
- Pre-build Unis.
- Kick AI butt / expand as much as possible.
- Aim to kick off your GA the turn Education comes is.

That way you should get research going along at a nice pace, even at Sid first-time prices.

Second way:
- Just before learning Education, gift the G.Lib to a relatively weak AI. Sign ROP, surround the city with your units, and restrict it to as few tiles as possible with culture.
- Wait 'til you see *two* Civs running round with Infantry, then re-capture the G.Lib. Instant elevator to Replaceable Parts (or better!).

RandomNerd
Jul 27, 2008, 07:30 AM
For large empires, the incredibly low corruption of communism (under 10% in cities with Police station & Courthouse) can actually produce more science that rep/demo. Low corruption gives you more naturally and free unit support and military police allows you to spend more on science and less on taxes and luxuries. Its higher shield production is also really great in the early industrial age because you can build a factory and power plant in every single city, even the ones that used to be absolutely corrupted even under democracy.

Exwing17
Sep 15, 2008, 06:07 AM
I have just used Fascism for the first time on CTC. 70% water, monarch, continents, I am the Mayans, I just exterminated the Egytians and now own my continent with over 100 cities, and so i thought I'd choose a government that reflected my Civs opinion of the other civilizations!

After a short rev, I pooed myself to see me earning -500gc a turn, whereas I was earning +200 and 70% science. But after the assimilation of the population into my empire fascism really picked up. WW is a nightmare for a nasty civ like mine, and I ended up with higher production from my civ, but with less science.

In retrospect, communism would have been the best choice. But I wanted all the other Civs to know "you exist, because I'm letting you...for now". Nothing says that like Fascism. And now I have an entire continent of worked tiles and over 80 workers sitting around doing nothing, and an invasion force of around 100 infantry with a small amount of artillery razing their way across the other continent..actually, that sounds like Communism?!

In reality, Republic is the best gov when your at a level that matches your ability. If you can use Democrazy, then you've got it too easy. If you need communism,then your empire is too big and thus you're clearly going to win.