Is anything better than monarchy?

[Angelic_Tyrant]

So far, I haven't found an occasion where republic, democracy or any other government can beat monarchy. Although it isn't always the best with generating gold, nor is any other government, and besides, all you need really is to have a lot of luxuries and resources to export and generate plenty of gold. As for being invloved in a war, no government is better than monarchy (admittedly I haven't tried communism). What do others think?

 

[Special_O]

Communism is great for wars... You can pretty much go on indefenitely.

 

[Switch625]

If you've got Police Stations and the Universal Sufferage wonder, you CAN fight wars as a Democracy. All you have to do is make sure the other guy starts it, and your people will pile on the bandwagon.

 

[Mapache]

No anarchists?

I'm still looking for the perfect anarchic strategy. Advantage is the infinite number of military units. But where do I get them?

Until then demos kratia(=ppl roolz).

 

[Sprite]

I've had wars that lasted over a thousand years in AD with communism. When it comes to starting wars with reckless abandonment nothing beats it. It is better from a corruption stand point then a monarchy too.

I've had bad luck with democracy. Shortly after switching to it someone will declare war on me even if I have great relations with everyone. Do people usually rush for universal sufferage when they take a democracy?
-Sprite

 

[No.Dice]

Republic, you still get the speedy tech rate of a democracy, but the people are far less unpleasant during war time. Though i'll usually have a late switch to demo.

For me, it depends a little bit on the difficulty level. On Emperor-Deity when i'm faced with less content citizens i usually find myself going the Monarchy route. Military policing helps keep the citizens content and i'll be waging war to extract some techs from peace treaties anyway.

On Monarch level i usually find myself in one of the more peaceful governments for the duration of the game. I can out-expand the AI at these levels and snag enough luxaries to keep everyone happy, war or not.

With enough luxaries, its completely possible to wage 500+ year wars as a Democracy, without setting the entertainment slider above 10%.

I guess it depends on what the game throws at me, Repubic seems like middle of the road, nice and flexible.

 

[Carbon_Copy]

If you're going for the space race, Monarchy sucks. That's a fact. Better than Despotism or Communism, but you're not going to hold onto a tech lead for very long with that. Demo or Republic are really a lot better for peaceful research or expansion.

If all your games end in Conquest or Domination, I'd probably say that Monarchy is the best government for your final push for world conquest/domination. MP of three, the ability to wage unlimited war, leaving your core cities untainted by corruption, and the ability to rush-buy rather than whip (the latter is what sends it over the top vs. Communism, IMO). I am not a big fan of communal corruption, since you tend to get more meaningful output from a few really well-developed cities than with a whole slew of half-output half-developed cities. In terms of throughput they're probably equal, but if you need something right now, I'd rather have just my 10-15 core cities produce a unit per turn than 30-40 cities with no infrastructure producing a unit every 5 turns.

 

[FenrysWulf]

Or you could just do what I did, which is disable the war weariness feature on Republic and Democracy. Then Democracy is the best government. I'm sure everyone thinks that is cheating, but I like conquest, and conquest is no fun when all of your cities are in disorder.

 

[benjdm]

I usually like to play a religious civ (Babs or Egyptians) so I stay democratic until a war forces me to communism or monarchy.

 

[LordAzreal]

Democracy is definitely the best for these reasons.

1.) Economic bonuses are great (sure its the same as a republic, but anyway... beside the point)

2.) Worker rate is at 150%. This means that a single worker working on grassland, plains, desert, floodplain or tundra can build a railroad there in 1 turn, two workers can do it on hills, three on mountains. Not to mention instant irrigation and mining at the same rate. Only two workers are required to clean a square of pollution and cut down forests. Jungles go down much quicker (very important for the health of your people near them).

The war weariness is not a problem. Increase the luxury rate to a measly 10%, build Universal Suffrage and police stations and it will be under control.

The lack of free unit support is hardly noticable with the economic bonus and less corruption (even if it doesn't seem like much of a reduction, its there and it influences your income and science (and happiness if you invest in luxury).

 

[Matrix]

I'd say communism when you're at war and democracy when you're at peace. But since you'd better have communism furing peace than democracy during war, I voted for communism.

 

[Angelic_Tyrant]

I tend to judge governments on how much revenue you make and what the profit margin is. The reason why I don't think much of democracy is it's lack of financial support needed to sustain a large army. I remember once play a game where I ruled around 1/3 of the world, and was making around +150 gold per turn (mostly thanks to a lot of exports). I then though democracy MUST be better than this ancient government system of mine, so I changed. The moment I did that I had to revert back to my beloved Monarchy due to the vast expenses made on sustaining a very large military.

As you can imagine, ruling a 1/3 of the world under a monarchy suffered intolerably from corruption, losing a few hundred gold a turn because of it. But if you have a huge army then monarchy suits your needs much more, under democray the cost to maintain it is just too high.

 

[Reichsmarshal]

Communism, becuase in a Democracy you have so many enterainers (it can reach a HIGH percent of your population) since you have NO martial law and the support serverly drops income. Communism has almost the same discovery rate and close income and is much more flexible. The spy bonus is worthless though. It seems to have fairly low corruption and waste too.

Democracy would work decently if you had extreme amounts of luxuries and tons of marketplaces.

 

[chiefpaco]

Republic & Monarchy are my favs for most games played when I'm not a Religious civ. Republic is good for research if you have a few luxuries but doesn't have as much war weariness as a Democracy. I think the Democracy bonuses are generally overrated. Republics in the late game are very powerful.

Most games I play, since I only research already discovered techs, or buy them until at least the mid-Industrial era, I am in a Monarchy until then. Same or better production than Republic (cause you don't have to use as many entertainers) & can still generate enough gold to buy since the military is subsidized & luxury tax is zero. However, the Industrial & Modern techs are too expensive to research using the Monarchy & I often want to start getting to a few techs first so I'll often switch to Republic unless I really need to maintain a war.

So I'd slightly disagree with the poster here to say Monarchy's are always the best. I like them the most in the early game, but in the late game, I often switch. I always believe though, that all govts have a time & place...

I'd also urge ppl to consider here govts without using the Religious switching trait as an argument. To me, being Religious makes the decision easy - "whatever I feel like". More interesting is considering a government when you have to figure in Anarchy periods every time you switch.

 

[eyrei]

I switch to republic as soon as the expansion phase is over, and stay that way until the end of the game. As long as you are not the agressor in wars, war weariness is not much of a problem. Build Universal Suffrage and police stations, and you can almost ignore it. Republic produces nearly as much commerce as democracy, so the only additional benefits democracy provides are increased worker production(hardly a necessity) and immunity to propoganda(has anyone ever had the AI bribe a city). War weariness under democracy is crippling within a few turns of a war starting. My vote is definately for republic.

 

[Jimcat]

I posted a lengthy analysis of Democracy a while back. My conclusion was that it's not always better than Republic. I'm a builder rather than a conqueror, so Communism and Monarchy are right out for me.

In some games I never use Democracy at all, particularly those where I have aggressive neighbors. When playing my three favorite civs, I find that as Babylon I often go to Democracy, as Germany almost never, and as America it depends on the circumstances.

I have to chuckle when I see people here post "Oh, just build Universal Suffrage and war weariness won't be a problem." Well, sure, we all WANT to build Universal Suffrage, but sometimes you're stuck back at #2 or #3 in the tech race, or some other civ has a super-productive city, or they just get lucky with a Great Leader...

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Jimcat

I have to chuckle when I see people here post "Oh, just build Universal Suffrage and war weariness won't be a problem." Well, sure, we all WANT to build Universal Suffrage, but sometimes you're stuck back at #2 or #3 in the tech race, or some other civ has a super-productive city, or they just get lucky with a Great Leader...

On monarch level, I manage to build Universal Suffrage about 90% of the time. The AI normally researches communism, espionage, and medicine (as well as nationalism if none of them are scientific) first, while I go straight for industrialization. At this point in the game, I am at least caught up in tech, and often have a lead anyway.

 

[brody]

I'd say republic is probably better, but I love democracy... I was in democracy for about 40 turns before war weariness really started hurting, so I know it can be done. The other guys even offered me peace, but I figured "I got 'em running, might as well take 'em out now". So I switched to communism and now my money and research SUCK... but I can continue my war. Oh well.

In any case, I think under Republic you could wage a pretty long war if you have luxuries. I was in a 40 turn war before I switched, and only a couple of my cities had actually gone into disorder at that point, and again, that was Democracy! So I'd say that unless you want an unending war, republic is probably the way to go.

 

[china444]

Originally posted by Sprite
I've had wars that lasted over a thousand years in AD with communism. When it comes to starting wars with reckless abandonment nothing beats it. It is better from a corruption stand point then a monarchy too.

I've had bad luck with democracy. Shortly after switching to it someone will declare war on me even if I have great relations with everyone. Do people usually rush for universal sufferage when they take a democracy?
-Sprite

I voted for communism also. Its great for warmongoers. The only bad thing is the human sacrifice for hurrying stuff. The massive amounts of gold I get later in the game dont go toward hurying, which i enjoy about monarchy. Oh well, I guess ill just upgrade my units ith the gold.
Communism Rules!
:soldier:
{edit}-whoa! I just realized I revived this like year old thread! I didnt even know! I clicked on Sprites profile and saw his last post-this thread, nearly a year ago. Welcome Back Sprite! I didnt even notice the date!

 

[stalin006]

monarchy??
eh...........i never ever go for monarchy.....i go straight for republic, monarchy is a waste of time to even research, if i want money republic or democrasy is good, if i want war i use communism (which i dont use much either, but still i do sometimes.)