View Full Version : Luxeries kill the usefulness of Monarchy
Sep 05, 2003, 04:48 PM
I had been thinking for a long time why Monarchy is so much worse in civ3 than in civ2, while both monarchy and republic are virtually unchanged.
It had finally dawned on me that monarchy was more equal because military police allowed you to spend less resources on the entertainment tax slider thingy. But since you can get up to 20 happy people with luxeries now, that entertainment rate, as well as military police, are not particularly usefull. Therefore Monarchy loses its edge and this is why in thr history of civ3 worlds everyone's being fairly represented by their government.
Short of taking away luxery resources, what can we do? I love that aspect of the game, but I think it makes things a bit too easy for the free goverments. Maybe make it so market places dont help luxeries but instead help the entertainment tax?
Quick its important!
Sep 05, 2003, 04:56 PM
I just use luxerys along with the military police that way I have more happy citizen, more happy people=less chance to cultre flip to another civ and no need to worry about civil disorder.
Sep 05, 2003, 07:20 PM
You won't earn as much in taxes in monarchy as in democracy. This is why luxuries become important, as a source of income from exporting them.
Sep 05, 2003, 08:37 PM
Normally I only use Monarchy right after switching from Despotism, at a time when I normally only have 3-4 luxs(tops). That way the 3 MPs are actually helpful.
Sep 05, 2003, 09:00 PM
Yes, monarchy is a great Gov't until democracy, because of MPs. Until the late game, when all civs hook everything up and empires grow large enough that most civs will have multiple sources of a few luxuries, the most that most empires can have is 3, 4, maybe 5 tops. The earliest i've "built up" to 8 lux is right before Education, and i lost one of them due to culture expansion on the next turn.
Sep 05, 2003, 09:21 PM
I have never found monarchy better than the republic in vanilla civ3 or ptw once. My point is that the luxeries make it far less usefull. Yeah military police in the very beginning is nice. But even with 2 luxeries (which is what I have at least by the time I get my 2nd gahverment), the military police dont compare to the added trade. Even the military police and free units combined. It's why I think the luxeries themselves make it so the republic is 9 times out of 10 flat out better.
edit: when I meant built up to 8 lxeries (if thats what I said) I meant by getting some and trading for most the others.
Sep 06, 2003, 12:01 AM
For me the difference is less about the luxury / MP differences and more about the war weariness differences. In most cities -- and virtually all cities about whose production you really care (i.e., core and "semi-core" cities) -- republic and heavy use of the luxury slider will still be more efficient than monarchy and use of MPs. Assuming your citizens are only working roaded tiles, the one extra gold per tile from the republic form of governement usually pays for equivalent citizen happiness as MPs would (one gold makes one citizen content).
Given that republic works very well in peace and fairly well in war, whereas monarchy works very well in war but not in peace, republic offers more flexibility. Only when constant or near constant warfare is expected, and where the standing army necessary for such warfare is expected to be especially costly under republic, does monarchy make a lot of sense to me. Disclaimer: I'm assuming a non-religious civ.
Sep 06, 2003, 12:04 AM
Monarchy can be a better alternative to the Republic in the ancient age when you have many units and few luxuries. It's also the best government in any age if you have to fight a long bloody war.
If you ask me, Monarchy is just fine as it is. It's not meant to compete with the Republic for a builder during peacetime. It's supposed to be a wartime government (in Civ3).
Maybe make it so market places dont help luxeries but instead help the entertainment tax?
Definitely don't make that change to marketplaces unless you're playing MP without AI. The AI doesn't use the luxury slider (except to combat WW), so it would hurt from such a change as it would have to assign more entertainers.
By the way, if you boost Monarchy, you definitely have to do something about Communism. These are both wartime governments, but Monarchy is always better than Communism for any kind of decent Forbidden Palace placement.
Edit: Catt, you kinda beat me to the punch. ;)
Sep 06, 2003, 02:57 AM
I had a game were I switched from republic after suffering max WW for a long time. I went to Communism, which was no better or worse than monarchy (same corruption level, just spread a bit differently, but nothing significant), and I found it was a complete wash. The luxery rate went down to 0 from 30% and while i didnt have to worry about losing a luxery deal anymore (thus going into disorder) I had no real benifits. This was mostly because of having 6+ luxeries at all times.