43 cities is more than double optimum city, usualy i got about 20 city( regent, standard map, continent). Communism corruption is affected by number of city only not distance, monarchy distance only( from the book), so your test was better for monarchy. I didnt make any test to prove what i said, i dont have number either. It is from my gaming experience ( which i agree it is subjective). But with only 20 city, courthouse+police station my corruption is very low under commi. and from the book it is said communism have less corruption then monarchy( p. 130)
Anybody use Republic or Communism?
- Thread starter Edara
- Start date
43 cities is more than double optimum city, usualy i got about 20 city( regent, standard map, continent). Communism corruption is affected by number of city only not distance, monarchy distance only( from the book), so your test was better for monarchy. I didnt make any test to prove what i said, i dont have number either. It is from my gaming experience ( which i agree it is subjective). But with only 20 city, courthouse+police station my corruption is very low under commi. and from the book it is said communism have less corruption then monarchy( p. 130)
Higher Game
National Socialist
I guess communism is ok if the cities are spaced far apart, if distance is really a total non factor. Increasing the optimal city limit makes communism too powerful, though. It should be powerful, but not have 70% efficiency in over 250 cities with over 1000 units. That's ridiculous. I can see communism if you depend on some massive cities but not a large number of cities.
chiefpaco
Emperor
Ok, the test did not take as long as I thought. Here is the effect of 1.21 on my previous game's study. To test the new effects of 1.21, all I had to do was bump the luxury slider to 10% and back to 0% to re-jig the production numbers. I then resaved & restudied. Here is Monarchy vs. Communism, using Mapstat's export, which I think is better to compare than F1 and F11 screens (I apologize for the format, I am bad at this):
Since science is 0, commerce is all gold and no research is deducted. Waste are the red shields, Production the blue shields, Corruption the red coin, and Commerce the gold coin.
As we can see, the patch helps corruption quite a bit.
Now for my analysis:
- Again, not dominating numbers of Communism over Monarchy. Production is nearly identical. Commerce is better under Communism by a modest margin. Not as bad as I thought before. I like to compare Communism off Monarchy because they have close Military Police (MP), no war weariness (WW) and Monarchy's corruption is the same as Republic.
However, I still have these exceptions:
- I only gunned for Communism in this game. Again, No Forbidden Palace was in place. This would have saved Monarchy quite a bit while not helping Communism much. I wish I could instantly place one, but I can not. (can a savegame editor do this?)
- All that time I was building courthouses that would not help Monarchy could have been spent building other buildings to help Monarchy. i.e. this was a game where I only considered "what would be good for a communism". See my previous post for more details here.
- The size of the empire is very relevant, but not in the way Tassadar stated, IMHO. A 20 size empire would help Monarchy's numbers too. The corruption % for # cities increases the same whether you are in a communism or monarchy, just that in Communism, the corruption is spread out over the empire, where in Monarchy, it only appears in the distant cities.
example: The practicality of this point is a downside to Communism, as shown in SirPleb's test. The fact that your empire must stick to low city counts to be optimally productive strikes hard against Communism, a government free of WW so you are probably thinking of expanding.
- MP of Monarchy to Communism is only 3 to 4. Not much difference here. All the stating that WLTK is easy to induce in Communism can be applied to Monarchy, with not much more effort. A huger blow to communism is the poprush. When you poprush in Communism, there goes your WLTK.
example: Assume your city produces 8 shields. A marketplace is 100 shields and would take 13 turns to build. After 8 turns, 5 turns are left or 36 shields. A rush job will cost the communist 2 citizens (20 shields/per) and make 2 citizens unhappy for 20 turns and then 1 citizen unhappy for another 20 afterwards. How can you maintain a WLTK with a rush when you lose citizens and make others unhappy? Meanwhile, the Monarchy player will spend 36*4= 144 gold, no unhappiness, WLTK maintained.
- All the time you are in Communism, the Republics and Democracies speed ahead in science because of the trade bonus. While Corruption % may be close, the Republic will out-research or "out-income" the communism because of the commerce increase (near doubling).
- Centralized corruption. Means that you get super-to-mediocre-to-poor production/income in Monarchy rather than mediocre-decent production in Communist cities. While this sorta balances itself out, it doesn't help you in the big ticket items like wonders. In a communism, assuming all other players have roughly the same sized empire, try to get to wonder techs first and then build that wonder first. You are disadvantaged in both cases.
Also, there is the fact that Communism is discovered as rails comes available. Take a case where the Communism may produce units with 20 cities in 10 turns per unit. The Monarchy may use 10 cities to produce the unit in 7 turns and then use the other cities for whatever they wish. After 21 turns, the Monarchy player has 10 fewer units but has used the other 10 cities for something else and has deployed their units sooner (i.e turns 7, 14, and 21 rather than all at 10 and 20). With rails & unlimited movement, I assume that the location of production is irrelevant.
- Victory conditions. Where is Communism most suitable?
You will not have the same production capacity to build SS parts or research fast enough to combat a comparable Democracy player. They will finish parts faster because of corruption free cities.
You could go for a culture victory, but that would go against what Communist empires are trying to save. With all the cathedrals, temples, and colosseums, you might as well be in a Republic.
Domination & Conquest have equal access to as a Monarchy. They would be tough in a Republic or Democracy. 1 point awarded to Communism here.
Diplomatic: Communism is a shunned govt for many nations. Good luck.
There are some little other benefits of Communism:
- Higher assimilation % than Monarchy. Will convert citizens twice as fast.
- One more MP, as discussed.
- Better espionage.
Summary
While communism's corruption structure can be made efficient to the point that it can be comparable to other governments, it does not take into account that in the meantime, the player could have greatly improved the corruption and state of the other governments.
It offers some small benefits, but largely ties down the player to a smaller # of cities, very limited rushing, and blanket corruption in core cities (i.e. how your nation developed in the first place).
All talk of great Communisms have been subjective at this point. While I maintain that it is not vastly inferior to other governments, I don't believe it offers any advantages other than perhaps a few rare cases, and then, only marginal ones.
BTW, I know I never read long posts like this, but I had a lot to say....
Code:
[B]
Govt Patch Waste Production Corruption Commerce[/B]
Communism 1.17 319 473 344 530
Communism 1.21 291 513 318 567
Monarchy 1.17 370 462 399 466
Monarchy 1.21 334 506 361 523As we can see, the patch helps corruption quite a bit.
Now for my analysis:
- Again, not dominating numbers of Communism over Monarchy. Production is nearly identical. Commerce is better under Communism by a modest margin. Not as bad as I thought before. I like to compare Communism off Monarchy because they have close Military Police (MP), no war weariness (WW) and Monarchy's corruption is the same as Republic.
However, I still have these exceptions:
- I only gunned for Communism in this game. Again, No Forbidden Palace was in place. This would have saved Monarchy quite a bit while not helping Communism much. I wish I could instantly place one, but I can not. (can a savegame editor do this?)
- All that time I was building courthouses that would not help Monarchy could have been spent building other buildings to help Monarchy. i.e. this was a game where I only considered "what would be good for a communism". See my previous post for more details here.
- The size of the empire is very relevant, but not in the way Tassadar stated, IMHO. A 20 size empire would help Monarchy's numbers too. The corruption % for # cities increases the same whether you are in a communism or monarchy, just that in Communism, the corruption is spread out over the empire, where in Monarchy, it only appears in the distant cities.
example: The practicality of this point is a downside to Communism, as shown in SirPleb's test. The fact that your empire must stick to low city counts to be optimally productive strikes hard against Communism, a government free of WW so you are probably thinking of expanding.
- MP of Monarchy to Communism is only 3 to 4. Not much difference here. All the stating that WLTK is easy to induce in Communism can be applied to Monarchy, with not much more effort. A huger blow to communism is the poprush. When you poprush in Communism, there goes your WLTK.
example: Assume your city produces 8 shields. A marketplace is 100 shields and would take 13 turns to build. After 8 turns, 5 turns are left or 36 shields. A rush job will cost the communist 2 citizens (20 shields/per) and make 2 citizens unhappy for 20 turns and then 1 citizen unhappy for another 20 afterwards. How can you maintain a WLTK with a rush when you lose citizens and make others unhappy? Meanwhile, the Monarchy player will spend 36*4= 144 gold, no unhappiness, WLTK maintained.
- All the time you are in Communism, the Republics and Democracies speed ahead in science because of the trade bonus. While Corruption % may be close, the Republic will out-research or "out-income" the communism because of the commerce increase (near doubling).
- Centralized corruption. Means that you get super-to-mediocre-to-poor production/income in Monarchy rather than mediocre-decent production in Communist cities. While this sorta balances itself out, it doesn't help you in the big ticket items like wonders. In a communism, assuming all other players have roughly the same sized empire, try to get to wonder techs first and then build that wonder first. You are disadvantaged in both cases.
Also, there is the fact that Communism is discovered as rails comes available. Take a case where the Communism may produce units with 20 cities in 10 turns per unit. The Monarchy may use 10 cities to produce the unit in 7 turns and then use the other cities for whatever they wish. After 21 turns, the Monarchy player has 10 fewer units but has used the other 10 cities for something else and has deployed their units sooner (i.e turns 7, 14, and 21 rather than all at 10 and 20). With rails & unlimited movement, I assume that the location of production is irrelevant.
- Victory conditions. Where is Communism most suitable?
You will not have the same production capacity to build SS parts or research fast enough to combat a comparable Democracy player. They will finish parts faster because of corruption free cities.
You could go for a culture victory, but that would go against what Communist empires are trying to save. With all the cathedrals, temples, and colosseums, you might as well be in a Republic.
Domination & Conquest have equal access to as a Monarchy. They would be tough in a Republic or Democracy. 1 point awarded to Communism here.
Diplomatic: Communism is a shunned govt for many nations. Good luck.
There are some little other benefits of Communism:
- Higher assimilation % than Monarchy. Will convert citizens twice as fast.
- One more MP, as discussed.
- Better espionage.
Summary
While communism's corruption structure can be made efficient to the point that it can be comparable to other governments, it does not take into account that in the meantime, the player could have greatly improved the corruption and state of the other governments.
It offers some small benefits, but largely ties down the player to a smaller # of cities, very limited rushing, and blanket corruption in core cities (i.e. how your nation developed in the first place).
All talk of great Communisms have been subjective at this point. While I maintain that it is not vastly inferior to other governments, I don't believe it offers any advantages other than perhaps a few rare cases, and then, only marginal ones.
BTW, I know I never read long posts like this, but I had a lot to say....
I did a quick test, i have 24 cities( some size 16, some size 12 and 3-4 size 3) and monarchy give me better result than commi for corruption( with courthouse +police station). All my city are prety close to either palace or FP.
24 city is 8 over optimum in my game so i guess that s why monarchy is better( afected by distance only). I guess 16 city which is right on optimum will be better for commi( affected by #city over optimum ).
It is confusing sometime ( i hope the book is right) but the best governement depend on your situation. If you got way up optimum number of city built close togheter, then monarchy is better than commi, but if you got optimum number of city built away from each other, then commi is better. Sorry if i induce confusion.
24 city is 8 over optimum in my game so i guess that s why monarchy is better( afected by distance only). I guess 16 city which is right on optimum will be better for commi( affected by #city over optimum ).
It is confusing sometime ( i hope the book is right) but the best governement depend on your situation. If you got way up optimum number of city built close togheter, then monarchy is better than commi, but if you got optimum number of city built away from each other, then commi is better. Sorry if i induce confusion.
Hi chiefpaco, i read your post after i wrote mine. Here some conclusion i made.
If you are under attack by a.i, then republic( or democracy) is the best, you can wage a long war.
If you want to declare war in old time, monarchy is best.
Now if you are in begining of modern era( with a tech lead or equal) and you have only about optimum city( 16 for std) but fully devlopped, some on other continent ( military base) and you want to RAISE every a.i. city and declare war to every body, then commi is the best.
Monarchy is better only if you got many city over optimum and you want to capture a.i. city.
A strong commi, is small, got base on other continent, and raise everyone on the map.
If you are under attack by a.i, then republic( or democracy) is the best, you can wage a long war.
If you want to declare war in old time, monarchy is best.
Now if you are in begining of modern era( with a tech lead or equal) and you have only about optimum city( 16 for std) but fully devlopped, some on other continent ( military base) and you want to RAISE every a.i. city and declare war to every body, then commi is the best.
Monarchy is better only if you got many city over optimum and you want to capture a.i. city.
A strong commi, is small, got base on other continent, and raise everyone on the map.
Chiefpaco, you might want to look at this save. It outperforms democracy in production, forget monarchy. Oh, and that is with an FP and no Police Stations. I had 2.00 of mapstat- not 2.12- have it now 
I'll run the numbers on it as well. It can be a pain because it isn't a religious civ, so I have to repopulate after changing civs.
I'll run the numbers on it as well. It can be a pain because it isn't a religious civ, so I have to repopulate after changing civs.
Ok, I ran the numbers for the above file. I would like to point out that I was gunning for high score, along with a 6 condition victory, not communism, with the save. Failed the UN vote though 
I did achieve researching all required techs and building all required components to meet the conditions though.
Notes: I ran the above save until population was maxxed in all cities, except the worker producers. (the tightly placed group of cities in the tundra) This was done to allow for a easy way of determining when the different governments were at an equal position because of the long duration of changing government types from the non-religious civ. Cities would lose between 3-5 population each. Tests were ran with ver 1.21.
Results:
Govt Waste Prod Corrupt Commerce
Communism 2289 1774 3647 3435
Monarchy 2670 1406 3899 3175
Democracy 2629 1437 6177 5261
Results after Forbidden Palace Destroyed
Govt Waste Prod Corrupt Commerce
Communism 2931 1106 4745 1298
Monarchy 3092 946 4352 2131
Democracy 3053 993 6984 3490
Very different than your results. In your test, Monarchy produced 98.6% of communism. Which I would agree isn't that much of a benefit- especially when the production is spread out. In my test it produces 79.3% of communism. That is a real benefit that unique play styles and stategies can be developed for.
The difference in results are? I don't know. I haven't seen a test map except for mine. I offered some things that could cause it, but none seem apply in this case.
Now for my analysis:
- Forbidden Palace. The Forbidden Palace does add a significant benefit to communism. In my test it affected communism the most, both numerically, and percentage wise. Communism was at 62% efficiency after the removal of it, while Monarchy was at 67% and Democracy was at 69%. This might be cause from the fact that I generally build the FP near a point where without a courthouse, the city has 95% corruption, but with a courthouse it has less corruption. This causes an area of overlapping affects, which means some of the potential of improvement is lost. I suspect the loss will be identical between Monarchy and Communism if an ideally placed FP was used- one that has zero area of overlapping influence.
- Build Times. The time to build improvements under communism that you would not normally build is minimal. It consists of building courthouses in your 14 core cities, the palace, forbidden palace, and 6 cities around each. (at least with how I layout cities) I would have already built courthouses in all other cities that aren't at 95% corruption, because you can generally build courthouse, temple, aqueduct, and marketplace. in less time than a temple, aqueduct, and a marketplace due to production improvements from the courthouse. The 14 cities take 4-5 turns for the most part. For the cities that are at 95% corruption, I will money hurry as many courthouses as my bankroll will allow the turn before I switch- keeping $1000 so that it collects interest. After I switch I will then build courthouses in the city's that don't have them yet. Since the cities are no longer at 95% corruption, I can build the courthouse, and a few improvements in the time it takes you to build one improvement.
- Size is important. Until you are at 2x optimal cities, production should be identical. Rounding, terrain improvements, and city placement would cause it to not be identical though. I suspect that the further over 2x the more noticable communism's benefits become- up to a point. SirPleb's test illustrates this. With over 10x optimal cities you reach a point were the average corruption for all your cities is 95%. At this point ANY government is better than communism. You aren't at this point at 6x optimal cities, as my game illustrates. Previous to the "95% corruption everywhere point" you will reach a point where, while you are producing more overall, it is so low in each individual city that it is in practice useless. Having 100 cities producing 2 shields isn't better than having 10 cities producing 10 shields and 100 producing 1. This point will also vary due to individual tastes and play styles though. I enjoyed the 46% corruption everywhere in my game. I also wouldn't call enough cities to cover 80% of the land mass on a huge, 60% water, pangea map a low number of cities. If you play a dense build game though, communism isn't a good choice though.
- Poprushing. Pre-Metropolis, I generally limit poprushing to "required" building improvements. Required are an aqueduct, a marketplace, and a hospital. At some point a temple will be produced to push the boundry out to 21 tiles as well. I generally will only poprush these if growth exceeds production. ie: A yellow 6 while building the aqueduct, unhappy people while building the marketplace, a yellow 12 while building the hospital, or stuck growth because of still being a 9 tile city. The 4 MP go a long ways overcoming hurt feelings from the aqueduct. The marketplace covers itself after one turn, you just need to make sure it isn't left revolting. Same with the hospital, just join enough slaves to work all tiles and make everyone happy. Post-Metropolis, I try to keep them a few population points below max. This keeps them producing everything that they can produce- shields, commerce, and population. Should I need something NOW, I poprush and add enough workers, changing them to entertainers to maintain complete happiness. This maintains WLTKD. Should a massive invasion occur (or I decide sporatically to have a huge Conscript Infantry/Mech Infantry invasion) where I need to draft from a lot of cities to repel the attack I have another tool at my fingertips listed in next section, happiness. Another plus is that for 10 shields worth of worker I receive 20 shields of rushed unit, while it takes 80 shields worth of commerce. Though shield/food/commerence exchange rates can't actually be taken literally, as it can depend on a lot of things.
- Happiness. There are 2 areas where communism excels at happiness. The one listed previously in this thread is the 4 MPs. Much better than Democracy and only 1 better than Monarchy. What does 1 better mean? Well, should you be good enough to have dominated the game by the 1400AD(NO, I am not that good . . . yet! ) and are milking the game, you can't use temples for the duration to make up the difference because you will have a culture win previous to 2050AD. Of course there are other ways to compensate, but ONLY one does have an impact. The second area where communism is better at happiness is the luxury slider. It works at a city level. When you put the slider to 10%, it goes to each city and moves 10% of the uncorrupted commerce to happiness, each unit of commerce producing a smiley. So under Monarchy, that 10% adds 3 smileys to your core cities and less as you move outwards. Your furthest cities receive ZERO smileys from it. You have to move the slider all the way to 30% before it produces 1 smiley at your most corrupted cities(while it produces 10 smileys in your core cities), the second smiley comes at 80%. What this means at a practical level is that in areas where happiness is easiest to compensate for by building improvements, it produces the most happiness, in areas where it is the most difficult to build improvements and most likely to culture flip, it provides the least improvement- needing at least 30% before it provides any. In contrast, 10% in my game produce a smiley in every metropolis, 20% provides 2. Draft two people from every city, go to 20% luxury to compensate.
- Research. Yes, it is faster with Democracy and Republic. 6 turn unknown research is the best I have achieved with Communism while I have hit the 4 turn roadblock several times with Democracies. The entire tree can be researched even under Cheiftain with it's slow speeds though. Just take out anyone that is building something you don't like
-Distributed Corruption. It does suffer when trying to build non-rushable big ticket items. ie: wonders. Though I have always managed to build Longevity, the one I want, if I try for it.(Some times I haven't managed to get through the tree quick enough for it to be worthwhile.) Just take out anyone that is building something you don't like :O
-Victory Conditions: It is mostly geared towards combat type finishes, though it is the second best choice for diplomatic victories. Only Democracy is less shunned than Communism and it comes in second- along wih all others except Democracy- for favored governments.
Summary: Communism's ability to use population as a very effective production method, better smiley production/control, and relatively equal/better (results vary) production makes it a very viable government. (Did you think I was going to say best? That depends too much on play styles and circumstances.) I do find it very useful when, after researching it, I expect a lot of combat, will want to develop conquered areas, and am trying for a high score. I think that more test cases need to be done in a controlled fashion so that different aspects can be determined. Why are our results so different? Is it terrain affecting it? Or is his test empire too small? Or perhaps Communism is only effective on huge maps? At what optimal city multiplier does corruption go to 95%? Is that on all size maps?
Chiefpaco, if you managed to get this far
, I plan on using a test map of seeded, railroaded, and irrigated grassland to try and answer some of the above questions.
I did achieve researching all required techs and building all required components to meet the conditions though.Notes: I ran the above save until population was maxxed in all cities, except the worker producers. (the tightly placed group of cities in the tundra) This was done to allow for a easy way of determining when the different governments were at an equal position because of the long duration of changing government types from the non-religious civ. Cities would lose between 3-5 population each. Tests were ran with ver 1.21.
Results:
Govt Waste Prod Corrupt Commerce
Communism 2289 1774 3647 3435
Monarchy 2670 1406 3899 3175
Democracy 2629 1437 6177 5261
Results after Forbidden Palace Destroyed
Govt Waste Prod Corrupt Commerce
Communism 2931 1106 4745 1298
Monarchy 3092 946 4352 2131
Democracy 3053 993 6984 3490
Very different than your results. In your test, Monarchy produced 98.6% of communism. Which I would agree isn't that much of a benefit- especially when the production is spread out. In my test it produces 79.3% of communism. That is a real benefit that unique play styles and stategies can be developed for.
The difference in results are? I don't know. I haven't seen a test map except for mine. I offered some things that could cause it, but none seem apply in this case.
Now for my analysis:
- Forbidden Palace. The Forbidden Palace does add a significant benefit to communism. In my test it affected communism the most, both numerically, and percentage wise. Communism was at 62% efficiency after the removal of it, while Monarchy was at 67% and Democracy was at 69%. This might be cause from the fact that I generally build the FP near a point where without a courthouse, the city has 95% corruption, but with a courthouse it has less corruption. This causes an area of overlapping affects, which means some of the potential of improvement is lost. I suspect the loss will be identical between Monarchy and Communism if an ideally placed FP was used- one that has zero area of overlapping influence.
- Build Times. The time to build improvements under communism that you would not normally build is minimal. It consists of building courthouses in your 14 core cities, the palace, forbidden palace, and 6 cities around each. (at least with how I layout cities) I would have already built courthouses in all other cities that aren't at 95% corruption, because you can generally build courthouse, temple, aqueduct, and marketplace. in less time than a temple, aqueduct, and a marketplace due to production improvements from the courthouse. The 14 cities take 4-5 turns for the most part. For the cities that are at 95% corruption, I will money hurry as many courthouses as my bankroll will allow the turn before I switch- keeping $1000 so that it collects interest. After I switch I will then build courthouses in the city's that don't have them yet. Since the cities are no longer at 95% corruption, I can build the courthouse, and a few improvements in the time it takes you to build one improvement.
- Size is important. Until you are at 2x optimal cities, production should be identical. Rounding, terrain improvements, and city placement would cause it to not be identical though. I suspect that the further over 2x the more noticable communism's benefits become- up to a point. SirPleb's test illustrates this. With over 10x optimal cities you reach a point were the average corruption for all your cities is 95%. At this point ANY government is better than communism. You aren't at this point at 6x optimal cities, as my game illustrates. Previous to the "95% corruption everywhere point" you will reach a point where, while you are producing more overall, it is so low in each individual city that it is in practice useless. Having 100 cities producing 2 shields isn't better than having 10 cities producing 10 shields and 100 producing 1. This point will also vary due to individual tastes and play styles though. I enjoyed the 46% corruption everywhere in my game. I also wouldn't call enough cities to cover 80% of the land mass on a huge, 60% water, pangea map a low number of cities. If you play a dense build game though, communism isn't a good choice though.
- Poprushing. Pre-Metropolis, I generally limit poprushing to "required" building improvements. Required are an aqueduct, a marketplace, and a hospital. At some point a temple will be produced to push the boundry out to 21 tiles as well. I generally will only poprush these if growth exceeds production. ie: A yellow 6 while building the aqueduct, unhappy people while building the marketplace, a yellow 12 while building the hospital, or stuck growth because of still being a 9 tile city. The 4 MP go a long ways overcoming hurt feelings from the aqueduct. The marketplace covers itself after one turn, you just need to make sure it isn't left revolting. Same with the hospital, just join enough slaves to work all tiles and make everyone happy. Post-Metropolis, I try to keep them a few population points below max. This keeps them producing everything that they can produce- shields, commerce, and population. Should I need something NOW, I poprush and add enough workers, changing them to entertainers to maintain complete happiness. This maintains WLTKD. Should a massive invasion occur (or I decide sporatically to have a huge Conscript Infantry/Mech Infantry invasion) where I need to draft from a lot of cities to repel the attack I have another tool at my fingertips listed in next section, happiness. Another plus is that for 10 shields worth of worker I receive 20 shields of rushed unit, while it takes 80 shields worth of commerce. Though shield/food/commerence exchange rates can't actually be taken literally, as it can depend on a lot of things.
- Happiness. There are 2 areas where communism excels at happiness. The one listed previously in this thread is the 4 MPs. Much better than Democracy and only 1 better than Monarchy. What does 1 better mean? Well, should you be good enough to have dominated the game by the 1400AD(NO, I am not that good . . . yet! ) and are milking the game, you can't use temples for the duration to make up the difference because you will have a culture win previous to 2050AD. Of course there are other ways to compensate, but ONLY one does have an impact. The second area where communism is better at happiness is the luxury slider. It works at a city level. When you put the slider to 10%, it goes to each city and moves 10% of the uncorrupted commerce to happiness, each unit of commerce producing a smiley. So under Monarchy, that 10% adds 3 smileys to your core cities and less as you move outwards. Your furthest cities receive ZERO smileys from it. You have to move the slider all the way to 30% before it produces 1 smiley at your most corrupted cities(while it produces 10 smileys in your core cities), the second smiley comes at 80%. What this means at a practical level is that in areas where happiness is easiest to compensate for by building improvements, it produces the most happiness, in areas where it is the most difficult to build improvements and most likely to culture flip, it provides the least improvement- needing at least 30% before it provides any. In contrast, 10% in my game produce a smiley in every metropolis, 20% provides 2. Draft two people from every city, go to 20% luxury to compensate.
- Research. Yes, it is faster with Democracy and Republic. 6 turn unknown research is the best I have achieved with Communism while I have hit the 4 turn roadblock several times with Democracies. The entire tree can be researched even under Cheiftain with it's slow speeds though. Just take out anyone that is building something you don't like
-Distributed Corruption. It does suffer when trying to build non-rushable big ticket items. ie: wonders. Though I have always managed to build Longevity, the one I want, if I try for it.(Some times I haven't managed to get through the tree quick enough for it to be worthwhile.) Just take out anyone that is building something you don't like :O
-Victory Conditions: It is mostly geared towards combat type finishes, though it is the second best choice for diplomatic victories. Only Democracy is less shunned than Communism and it comes in second- along wih all others except Democracy- for favored governments.
Summary: Communism's ability to use population as a very effective production method, better smiley production/control, and relatively equal/better (results vary) production makes it a very viable government. (Did you think I was going to say best? That depends too much on play styles and circumstances.) I do find it very useful when, after researching it, I expect a lot of combat, will want to develop conquered areas, and am trying for a high score. I think that more test cases need to be done in a controlled fashion so that different aspects can be determined. Why are our results so different? Is it terrain affecting it? Or is his test empire too small? Or perhaps Communism is only effective on huge maps? At what optimal city multiplier does corruption go to 95%? Is that on all size maps?
Chiefpaco, if you managed to get this far
, I plan on using a test map of seeded, railroaded, and irrigated grassland to try and answer some of the above questions.
Bamspeedy
CheeseBob
MuddyOne- Interesting facts, and good study. But here are some thoughts I have:
1. Think of all the shields you spent building all those courthouses.
2. Think of how many shields you would spend building factories in every city, whereas other governments only need them in a few cities.
3. Same goes for making science/commerce more efficient by building marketplaces, libraries, etc. Let's say in a Monarchy a core city is making 20 gold (0 corrupt), they would get +10 gold/turn from building the marketplace. The same city in communism would make, say 10 or 12 gold, the marketplace would only benefit that city by 5 or 6 gold/turn. And then you have to subtract out the maintence costs. Ok, you you might get Adam Smith's to pay for the marketplace, but what if you don't? And think of the libraries, etc.
Does the F1 screen (or whatever system you used) reflect the multiplying effects of these building?
Would spending all of these shields, building these improvements, be better in the long run, to make up for the better gain they have later in the game?
You are right about the luxury slider. But in other governments the high-corrupt cities won't make a difference at all whether or not they have a WLTK day (they will still be at 95% corruption), so I only adjust it for the productive cities that need it. Basically with the super high-corrupt cities, I don't bother building any improvements at all. With blanket corruption in all your cities, does WLTK day have any real effect in communism? Might want to test that out.
You may beat the AI to spaceship on Chieftain or Warlord, but no way will you ever do it on the higher levels with a communist, unless every single AI civ is also communism, IMO.
1. Think of all the shields you spent building all those courthouses.
2. Think of how many shields you would spend building factories in every city, whereas other governments only need them in a few cities.
3. Same goes for making science/commerce more efficient by building marketplaces, libraries, etc. Let's say in a Monarchy a core city is making 20 gold (0 corrupt), they would get +10 gold/turn from building the marketplace. The same city in communism would make, say 10 or 12 gold, the marketplace would only benefit that city by 5 or 6 gold/turn. And then you have to subtract out the maintence costs. Ok, you you might get Adam Smith's to pay for the marketplace, but what if you don't? And think of the libraries, etc.
Does the F1 screen (or whatever system you used) reflect the multiplying effects of these building?
Would spending all of these shields, building these improvements, be better in the long run, to make up for the better gain they have later in the game?
You are right about the luxury slider. But in other governments the high-corrupt cities won't make a difference at all whether or not they have a WLTK day (they will still be at 95% corruption), so I only adjust it for the productive cities that need it. Basically with the super high-corrupt cities, I don't bother building any improvements at all. With blanket corruption in all your cities, does WLTK day have any real effect in communism? Might want to test that out.
You may beat the AI to spaceship on Chieftain or Warlord, but no way will you ever do it on the higher levels with a communist, unless every single AI civ is also communism, IMO.
1) Would have already been spent in any productive city except the centermost 14. They will pay for themself over their livetime. In non-productive cities it winds up being more efficient than paying to hurry the courthouse, aqueduct, hospital, mass-transit.
2) If I didn't find cleaning pollution so troubling, I would only build factories In the very best locations throughout my empire, not in every city.
3) I build marketplaces for the 0 culture cost smileys, the extra commerce isn't bad either. I would build them without the extra commerce though. Note that by the time I can go communism, I already know if I have Adam's. It isn't a "I hope I can get it" issue. I don't always go Communism, it is situational.
The F1 screen does show the impact of various improvements.
Does WLTKD have any affect under communism? I will check that as part of my test, but WLTKD, similar to commerce with marketplaces, is a extra benefit- a pleasant side affect. My goal is to maximize score. If I am doing my math correctly, a fully happy city in grassland produces 83 points. One that is at the brink of revolt produces 62 points. Multiplied by the number of 95% corrupt cities comes to a fairly high number. Becuase of this I will be building all of the same improvements, except for courthouses, regardless of the government type. I feel that I can optimize the cities the fastest with communism.
"You may beat the AI to spaceship on Chieftain or Warlord, but no way will you ever do it on the higher levels with a communist, unless every single AI civ is also communism, IMO. "
I'll take that as a challenge I have to assume beating them all down to 1 city and doing so won't count
After I do some of the research it should make the task easier.
2) If I didn't find cleaning pollution so troubling, I would only build factories In the very best locations throughout my empire, not in every city.
3) I build marketplaces for the 0 culture cost smileys, the extra commerce isn't bad either. I would build them without the extra commerce though. Note that by the time I can go communism, I already know if I have Adam's. It isn't a "I hope I can get it" issue. I don't always go Communism, it is situational.
The F1 screen does show the impact of various improvements.
Does WLTKD have any affect under communism? I will check that as part of my test, but WLTKD, similar to commerce with marketplaces, is a extra benefit- a pleasant side affect. My goal is to maximize score. If I am doing my math correctly, a fully happy city in grassland produces 83 points. One that is at the brink of revolt produces 62 points. Multiplied by the number of 95% corrupt cities comes to a fairly high number. Becuase of this I will be building all of the same improvements, except for courthouses, regardless of the government type. I feel that I can optimize the cities the fastest with communism.
"You may beat the AI to spaceship on Chieftain or Warlord, but no way will you ever do it on the higher levels with a communist, unless every single AI civ is also communism, IMO. "
I'll take that as a challenge
I have to assume beating them all down to 1 city and doing so won't count After I do some of the research it should make the task easier.
chiefpaco
Emperor
rgh, had my first post deleted accidentally.... anyway, I'll keep it brief cause I haven't had a chance to take a look at your game close enough yet. I will though. A couple of things:
- Your test is on chieftan level & mine is on Emporer. Not sure how much it will affect the comparison, but on your game, Emporer raises the corruption 10% in every city, according to a 200 city Communism in Alexman's corruption calculator. It might affect communism a bit more because the other govts also deal with distance while Communism only fight #cities, which is what is modified by difficulty level.
- You're playing with a Commercial civ and I was not. I don't think this matters because of Alexman's analysis, but I cannot be totally sure.
- I'm surprised the FP had an affect on Communism. I didn't think it did nor did Alexman. I can't add one to my game instantly, I don't think, so I will double-check your game.
Here is my game if you want to take a look. Just to be fair.
- I can't get a response from the file upload feature now. So for now, I'll just attach the communism/monarchy 1.21 saves zipped.
- Your test is on chieftan level & mine is on Emporer. Not sure how much it will affect the comparison, but on your game, Emporer raises the corruption 10% in every city, according to a 200 city Communism in Alexman's corruption calculator. It might affect communism a bit more because the other govts also deal with distance while Communism only fight #cities, which is what is modified by difficulty level.
- You're playing with a Commercial civ and I was not. I don't think this matters because of Alexman's analysis, but I cannot be totally sure.
- I'm surprised the FP had an affect on Communism. I didn't think it did nor did Alexman. I can't add one to my game instantly, I don't think, so I will double-check your game.
Here is my game if you want to take a look. Just to be fair.
- I can't get a response from the file upload feature now. So for now, I'll just attach the communism/monarchy 1.21 saves zipped.
SirPleb
Shaken, not stirred.
Just catching up on my reading. Fascinating thread! Looks like Communism is sometimes better than others. FP having an effect in Communism is surprising but I guess it makes sense, in trying to balance things out, overall corruption/waste is reduced by FP. The numbers as affected by FP look a bit odd though. Looks like perhaps the larger factor by far is the difficulty level, I guess that might explain the rest of the differences showing up here?
Cheifpaco, Your map looks like a good distribution of terrain types, so I don't think Geography is the cause of our discrepancies. The large amount of area of your core area is coastal, which should actually favor communism, since most of the highly corrupted cities don't include much coastal. I did notice that very few cities are at 95% corruption though. Also several of the cities are not very developed- ie: still developing aquaducts ect.
It is at an earlier stage than I would switch to communism. I normally like a good number of cities to be at 95% corruption- even if a courthouse were to be added to them. While a "good number" I have always just done by feel, I suspect it is around 1xoptimal cities. I generally have the terrain more developed, and cities at 12 as well.
I do think that it shows that Communism isn't very good when at low optimal city multipliers- something a previous poster was showing support for.
SirPleb, I think there is a point where Communism starts to out produce Monarchy, and most of the desrepancies depend at when (optimal city multiplier wise) you compare. I wasn't aware that the different difficulty had different corruption calculations though, so this point will move depending on difficulty level.
Outstanding production areas could cause result swaying as well. If several areas have 10 grassland/10 mountains, 6 grassland/14 hills or similar low population/high output places it will sway which is better. If most are core- monarchy will always out produce, if most aren't core- communism will be benefitual earlier.
I have been building my test cities, but haven't managed to get them to the breakeven point yet. I did notice an interesting point though. With one city and a courthouse, communism has corruption. I was expecting it to be 0 corruption. I'll probably be done building after the weekend- so will give partial findings on Monday. I will then deconstruct the empire piecemeal to give more precise findings.
It is at an earlier stage than I would switch to communism. I normally like a good number of cities to be at 95% corruption- even if a courthouse were to be added to them. While a "good number" I have always just done by feel, I suspect it is around 1xoptimal cities. I generally have the terrain more developed, and cities at 12 as well.
I do think that it shows that Communism isn't very good when at low optimal city multipliers- something a previous poster was showing support for.
SirPleb, I think there is a point where Communism starts to out produce Monarchy, and most of the desrepancies depend at when (optimal city multiplier wise) you compare. I wasn't aware that the different difficulty had different corruption calculations though, so this point will move depending on difficulty level.
Outstanding production areas could cause result swaying as well. If several areas have 10 grassland/10 mountains, 6 grassland/14 hills or similar low population/high output places it will sway which is better. If most are core- monarchy will always out produce, if most aren't core- communism will be benefitual earlier.
I have been building my test cities, but haven't managed to get them to the breakeven point yet. I did notice an interesting point though. With one city and a courthouse, communism has corruption. I was expecting it to be 0 corruption. I'll probably be done building after the weekend- so will give partial findings on Monday. I will then deconstruct the empire piecemeal to give more precise findings.
chiefpaco
Emperor
I've taken a deeper look at your game, MuddyOne and will offer these observations:
- Communism performace suprised me. With 203 cities, corruption is better than I thought, and I don't really have to look at your game but refer to Alexman's corruption calc to prove it.
On Chieftan level, a large map, a Communist city amongst 203:
- 79% corruption.
- 55% with a courthouse
- 41% with WLTK
- 33% with a police station too
Start adding factories and plants to that and you have the appearance of very little corruption. Splendid game, I must admit. The beefed up courthouses since my last study surprised me because I am not used to the improved performance.
- I won't doubt Communism would be superior to any other government form in your game. I don't need to look at a Democracy save to say that it would perform worse. With that many cities, I'm sure only a few dozen or so would be great producers.
A few reasons why your Communism case seems to work:
- WLTK. I am sure it affects your waste too. Maintaining a WTLK is pretty significant, as shown. While it has a small effect on other govts, it shines in Communisms. 4 MPs can help quite a bit to make it. Also, excess cash can go towards entertainment since you don't need it for rushing. You had a 80% luxury rate, I believe.
- Very large but spacey empire. I am sure you are picking up so many cities in Communism that would not be productive in a Democracy. With courthouses, all 203 can be decent.
- High populations. You can probably mask unhappiness a lot easier with size 30 cities because excess people can entertain the working citizens. Hence, WLTK can be generated earlier.
A few new issues I haven't solved:
- Happy people. You have all the happiness wonders and all the luxuries. Your people love you and your lux slider is at 80%. It surely is easier to maintain a WLTK with all these. I've since learned that population helps Communism but wonder if you didn't have all those lux & wonders I wonder what it would look like. Though, those high populations can offset that.
- Your highest shield city, Avignon 2, makes 25 shields and loses 30 shields to waste. How well would you be able to compete for wonders given stiff competition? How would you win the Space race? I am with Bamspeedy on this point.
- If possible, I'd rather debate smaller empires, because it might be easier to compare and it also matters. Not that you haven't presented a great Communism, but the govt hardly matters in the game right now. I think we agree that small empires do not favour Communism and that is when I think the govt choice is most critical because then it would affect winning and losing. The fact that Communism is good for a large empire loses its charm because one can assume at this point, the game is basically won.
I still have the these concerns plus the reservations on pop-rushing and maintaining WLTK. Plus I am still concerned on the science rate of Communisms and the time it takes to get Courthouses and maybe Police Stations set up. Biggest of all, the other governments' powerhouse cities will be able to spit out wonders and SS parts much quicker.
However, I believe there is hope for the Communist player who maximizes population, city size, and area, strives for WLTK, and builds corruption-reducing improvements. A tough challenge, IMHO.
- Communism performace suprised me. With 203 cities, corruption is better than I thought, and I don't really have to look at your game but refer to Alexman's corruption calc to prove it.
On Chieftan level, a large map, a Communist city amongst 203:
- 79% corruption.
- 55% with a courthouse
- 41% with WLTK
- 33% with a police station too
Start adding factories and plants to that and you have the appearance of very little corruption. Splendid game, I must admit. The beefed up courthouses since my last study surprised me because I am not used to the improved performance.
- I won't doubt Communism would be superior to any other government form in your game. I don't need to look at a Democracy save to say that it would perform worse. With that many cities, I'm sure only a few dozen or so would be great producers.
A few reasons why your Communism case seems to work:
- WLTK. I am sure it affects your waste too. Maintaining a WTLK is pretty significant, as shown. While it has a small effect on other govts, it shines in Communisms. 4 MPs can help quite a bit to make it. Also, excess cash can go towards entertainment since you don't need it for rushing. You had a 80% luxury rate, I believe.
- Very large but spacey empire. I am sure you are picking up so many cities in Communism that would not be productive in a Democracy. With courthouses, all 203 can be decent.
- High populations. You can probably mask unhappiness a lot easier with size 30 cities because excess people can entertain the working citizens. Hence, WLTK can be generated earlier.
A few new issues I haven't solved:
- Happy people. You have all the happiness wonders and all the luxuries. Your people love you and your lux slider is at 80%. It surely is easier to maintain a WLTK with all these. I've since learned that population helps Communism but wonder if you didn't have all those lux & wonders I wonder what it would look like. Though, those high populations can offset that.
- Your highest shield city, Avignon 2, makes 25 shields and loses 30 shields to waste. How well would you be able to compete for wonders given stiff competition? How would you win the Space race? I am with Bamspeedy on this point.
- If possible, I'd rather debate smaller empires, because it might be easier to compare and it also matters. Not that you haven't presented a great Communism, but the govt hardly matters in the game right now. I think we agree that small empires do not favour Communism and that is when I think the govt choice is most critical because then it would affect winning and losing. The fact that Communism is good for a large empire loses its charm because one can assume at this point, the game is basically won.
I still have the these concerns plus the reservations on pop-rushing and maintaining WLTK. Plus I am still concerned on the science rate of Communisms and the time it takes to get Courthouses and maybe Police Stations set up. Biggest of all, the other governments' powerhouse cities will be able to spit out wonders and SS parts much quicker.
However, I believe there is hope for the Communist player who maximizes population, city size, and area, strives for WLTK, and builds corruption-reducing improvements. A tough challenge, IMHO.
Chiefpaco, the slider was changed the last few turns when another science would not have been produce. It was generally 80-100% science. I got lazy micromanaging happiness But the luxury slider is a benefit under communism because it affects your cities roughly equally. The sisten(sp) chapel does help tremendously, poprushing would be hampered a lot without it and very cutailed without all the luxuries. The high populations can maintain WLTKD without all of them- except for a certain growth period- unless you hamper the growth rate by converting workers to entertainers. A lot of the catherdrals were actually added near game completion to boost culture. It was my first attempt at a 6 condition win. UN failed
A prebuild of the last component, along with terraforming for optimal shield production, will solve the production side of the Space Race. Researching quickly enough will be the key in winning the Space race. Would I win against a human player? Probably not- unless I attacked them to weaken them enough. Communism is best suited for attacking victories, though culture wins, even though counter to what I like about communism, would be quite doable by pumping out a lot of quickly made culture in the large number of OK producing cities, pop-rushing slightly to even speed further.
I would be more than happy to discuss smaller empires. I choose the one I did because I had it zipped. I generally delete saves upon completion so it was the only one I had. I had to restart my test map though so I won't have any figures for a day or two. Your map is at the point where Communism starts to pull ahead. As you expand from that point it will slowly pull further ahead. Is the increased overall production worth the diffused production? The answer depends on play style and goal trying to achieve. I do consider that you intend to grow since we are comparing monarchy to communism, otherwise a switch to republic if you forsee a lot of wars, or democracy if not would be in order. Once I get some numbers it will be easier to analyse further.
I plan on doing the same testing at deity next. If it caps out too early I probably will discontinue testing. I don't want to spend a lot of time developing stategies and tactics for something that isn't viable at the highest levels of game play.
About your however, look at how many of the conditions are replicated if you are trying to achieve hghscores. Maximize population, strives for WLTKD(maximum happy workers), and area. Maximum city size achieves most population for a given number of tiles as well.
But the luxury slider is a benefit under communism because it affects your cities roughly equally. The sisten(sp) chapel does help tremendously, poprushing would be hampered a lot without it and very cutailed without all the luxuries. The high populations can maintain WLTKD without all of them- except for a certain growth period- unless you hamper the growth rate by converting workers to entertainers. A lot of the catherdrals were actually added near game completion to boost culture. It was my first attempt at a 6 condition win. UN failed A prebuild of the last component, along with terraforming for optimal shield production, will solve the production side of the Space Race. Researching quickly enough will be the key in winning the Space race. Would I win against a human player? Probably not- unless I attacked them to weaken them enough. Communism is best suited for attacking victories, though culture wins, even though counter to what I like about communism, would be quite doable by pumping out a lot of quickly made culture in the large number of OK producing cities, pop-rushing slightly to even speed further.
I would be more than happy to discuss smaller empires. I choose the one I did because I had it zipped. I generally delete saves upon completion so it was the only one I had. I had to restart my test map though so I won't have any figures for a day or two. Your map is at the point where Communism starts to pull ahead. As you expand from that point it will slowly pull further ahead. Is the increased overall production worth the diffused production? The answer depends on play style and goal trying to achieve. I do consider that you intend to grow since we are comparing monarchy to communism, otherwise a switch to republic if you forsee a lot of wars, or democracy if not would be in order. Once I get some numbers it will be easier to analyse further.
I plan on doing the same testing at deity next. If it caps out too early I probably will discontinue testing. I don't want to spend a lot of time developing stategies and tactics for something that isn't viable at the highest levels of game play.
About your however, look at how many of the conditions are replicated if you are trying to achieve hghscores. Maximize population, strives for WLTKD(maximum happy workers), and area. Maximum city size achieves most population for a given number of tiles as well.
Trinity
Brains, Beauty & st b*tch
I'm currently in this Republic/Communist dilemma. I've been a Democracy for about 100 years. I have 80 cities on a huge map. I've been at war for 80 of those 100 years. I don't start the wars. I get attacked. War weariness is setting in after about 3 turns now. Under democracy your people just want to surrender.
I'm playing France and I've got a huge religious civ being a royal pain in the butt. Always looking for an excuse for war. He moves a stack of infantry into my territory. I tell him to leave, he declares war. It never fails, just as I'm about to break their backs, my civ goes into disorder and I end up with 50% of the population as entertainers. My cities starve because people would rather riot and demonstrate than produce food. I settle the war. My people are happy. This same butthead drops a stack of infantry next to a border city in my territory. I tell him to leave, he declares war. Over and over again.
So last turn I decided to say screw it and went into anarchy.
Is Republic that much better than democracy on war weariness? Or should I go Communist or Monarchy?
I'm playing France and I've got a huge religious civ being a royal pain in the butt. Always looking for an excuse for war. He moves a stack of infantry into my territory. I tell him to leave, he declares war. It never fails, just as I'm about to break their backs, my civ goes into disorder and I end up with 50% of the population as entertainers. My cities starve because people would rather riot and demonstrate than produce food. I settle the war. My people are happy. This same butthead drops a stack of infantry next to a border city in my territory. I tell him to leave, he declares war. Over and over again.
So last turn I decided to say screw it and went into anarchy.
Is Republic that much better than democracy on war weariness? Or should I go Communist or Monarchy?
chiefpaco
Emperor
Trinity: at the point that you are already war wearied and can not take it any more under Democracy, you may want to go to Monarchy or Communism to lose that problem. Republic's war weariness is maybe half of Democracy so you would have less war weariness, but it will continue to build. I might suggest Monarchy over Communism if switching from Democracy, assuming you had a good Democracy core of cities set up. Also, while under Democracy, you may want to sacrifice some science research in favour of entertainment tax to keep your citizens working.
MuddyOne: I'm starting to think that under 1.21, Communism might apply to more circumstances than previous patches. I agree with you that with irrigation and time, even my game could show a better Communism.
I see the entertainer/growth dilemna. I wonder if there would be an optimal city size for Communist empires.
If one was going for a high score, I think Communism might be the ideal government:
- distributed luxury taxing
- production in each city to build the happiness and cultural improvements
- highest military police
MuddyOne: I'm starting to think that under 1.21, Communism might apply to more circumstances than previous patches. I agree with you that with irrigation and time, even my game could show a better Communism.
I see the entertainer/growth dilemna. I wonder if there would be an optimal city size for Communist empires.
If one was going for a high score, I think Communism might be the ideal government:
- distributed luxury taxing
- production in each city to build the happiness and cultural improvements
- highest military police
Trinity
Brains, Beauty & st b*tch
Well, I had it all nicely and neatly planned. I was keeping an eye on my Domestic Advisor about the anarchy. After a few turns she told me we'd have the government under control in 2 turns. Great. I'll save next turn, and see what things look like. Wrong. I get the choose government screen at the end of the current turn.
I hadn't seen your post, so I chose Republic. It is absolutely the wrong government for my empire. I'm way too big. I'm on a huge map, and have about 90 cities. I couldn't deal with the corruption and even more war weariness. Communism would have been the way, but the British had rocketry already, and I'd never be able to keep up for a space victory.
At least with communism, I'd be able to pop rush settlers in conquored cities to eliminate resistance.
I decided to roll back from 1930 to 1904, defeat Persia again, and just abandon the rock out in the middle of the ocean that I got from Greece when I eliminated them. The Iroquois have a stack of infantry inside city limits. Asking them to leave caused the last war. It's a Falkland Islands situation. It isn't worth fighting over. They can have the bloody buggerin' rock. There's nothing on it anyway. No resources whatsoever.
Too bad you can't simply build an A-bomb.
I hadn't seen your post, so I chose Republic. It is absolutely the wrong government for my empire. I'm way too big. I'm on a huge map, and have about 90 cities. I couldn't deal with the corruption and even more war weariness. Communism would have been the way, but the British had rocketry already, and I'd never be able to keep up for a space victory.
At least with communism, I'd be able to pop rush settlers in conquored cities to eliminate resistance.
I decided to roll back from 1930 to 1904, defeat Persia again, and just abandon the rock out in the middle of the ocean that I got from Greece when I eliminated them. The Iroquois have a stack of infantry inside city limits. Asking them to leave caused the last war. It's a Falkland Islands situation. It isn't worth fighting over. They can have the bloody buggerin' rock. There's nothing on it anyway. No resources whatsoever.
Too bad you can't simply build an A-bomb.
Chiefpaco, in your advise to Trinity, you do make a good point. Communism isn't generally a good "switch to" government from Democracy or Republic. So if playing as a religious civ, switching to deal with war weariness, Communism results probably will be disappointing. It won't definately be a poor producer, but it you optimized city spacing (packing a lot of cities in 95% corruption areas), and other things that optimize for centralized corruption, it will be a poor producer.
Only problem with optimal city size would be optimal for what ?
41 if trying for population/score If production was the goal it would depend a lot on terrain and number of happiness producers. Best results would probably be obtained by maximizing mines- while maintaining WLTKD. So not every square would be mined, several would be irrigated to provide entertainers.
There is a spot during the growth that workers exceed the number of happiness producers and overflow population doesn't exist yet, so you fall out of WLTKD. At least without sisten chapel/cathedral combination. Not sure if the combination overcomes it or just delays it. It comes fairly early- in metropolis terms- in the growth so doesn't last too long. Varies by city, but around 16-18 it starts and continues until around 24-26 pop. These are just by memory though- I was playing- not testing- at the time
Final got the map built out, so I will destruct it tonight to get production comparisions at differnt number of cities. It consists of 2-6 ring cores with minimal overlap. The FP is placed 80 diagonal squares to the east of the Palace. The minimal over lap consists of 4 or 6 cities in the 6th ring that hit the other 6th ring- 2 or 3 to the east, 2 or 3 to the west(it spans the entire map). It covers 5272 squares. An average huge map has 5120 land squares, requiring 4096 squares for a domination win.
Monarchy at this coverage is vastly superior. Enough so in fact that I am beginning to wonder whether the unrealistic map will always favor monarchy. Well, results will tell tommorrow.
Only problem with optimal city size would be optimal for what ?
41 if trying for population/score
If production was the goal it would depend a lot on terrain and number of happiness producers. Best results would probably be obtained by maximizing mines- while maintaining WLTKD. So not every square would be mined, several would be irrigated to provide entertainers.There is a spot during the growth that workers exceed the number of happiness producers and overflow population doesn't exist yet, so you fall out of WLTKD. At least without sisten chapel/cathedral combination. Not sure if the combination overcomes it or just delays it. It comes fairly early- in metropolis terms- in the growth so doesn't last too long. Varies by city, but around 16-18 it starts and continues until around 24-26 pop. These are just by memory though- I was playing- not testing- at the time
Final got the map built out, so I will destruct it tonight to get production comparisions at differnt number of cities. It consists of 2-6 ring cores with minimal overlap. The FP is placed 80 diagonal squares to the east of the Palace. The minimal over lap consists of 4 or 6 cities in the 6th ring that hit the other 6th ring- 2 or 3 to the east, 2 or 3 to the west(it spans the entire map). It covers 5272 squares. An average huge map has 5120 land squares, requiring 4096 squares for a domination win.
Monarchy at this coverage is vastly superior. Enough so in fact that I am beginning to wonder whether the unrealistic map will always favor monarchy. Well, results will tell tommorrow.
chiefpaco
Emperor
We agree that Communism does take careful planning and it may work out well with the careful planning. Up to now, I don't know of too many definitive guides to developing a great Communist empire, but that was why I participated in this thread, even months ago.
By optimal size, I guess I was trying to figure out when to favour growth over WLTK. Citizens working on growth may not be entertainers and it may be more difficult to generate a WLTK. For me, I assumed it may be in the 14-16 range mainly to achieve Metropolis status (extra Unit support and monetary bonuses) while using some entertainers while my cities have a little overlap. I've since learned to use a bit more irrigation in my games to achieve something closer to this. Perhaps if I revisit my game, I could take a bit of effort to make this so.
Better than map testing, I am considering taking a look at dealing with mere percentages using alexman's corruption calculator. Using a set # of cities with average or arbitrary distances away from the capital might work, and provide a quick and non-game dependent way to judge. It would be more mathematical than observing and less time consuming. Still thinking about it though...
By optimal size, I guess I was trying to figure out when to favour growth over WLTK. Citizens working on growth may not be entertainers and it may be more difficult to generate a WLTK. For me, I assumed it may be in the 14-16 range mainly to achieve Metropolis status (extra Unit support and monetary bonuses) while using some entertainers while my cities have a little overlap. I've since learned to use a bit more irrigation in my games to achieve something closer to this. Perhaps if I revisit my game, I could take a bit of effort to make this so.
Better than map testing, I am considering taking a look at dealing with mere percentages using alexman's corruption calculator. Using a set # of cities with average or arbitrary distances away from the capital might work, and provide a quick and non-game dependent way to judge. It would be more mathematical than observing and less time consuming. Still thinking about it though...
Trinity
Brains, Beauty & st b*tch
IMHO, Communism is fine for chieftan and maybe warlord level. I've been able to do this. At regent or higher, you can't keep up with democracies in scientific research unless you allocate 90%. Even with Monarchy and research at 80% you will still get messages that you are a backward people from your science advisor. Then you can't have happiness upgrades.
To have successful communism, you need the following:
1. Smiths Trading Company and a marketplace in each city.
2. Wall Street and a bank in each city.
3. Temple or Library in each city.
4. University in each large city.
5. Factory in each high shield producing city.
Now you are ready to go and wage war with impunity. You should be able to support a very large military and have decent production.
You need the first two before you even think about going communist. You can't afford any more happiness upgrades than those listed. The maintenance is too high. You will have to cut your scientific research to 80% and you may be able to stay even with everyone else, depending upon the size of your empire.
Cashflow is irrelevant except for espionage missions. Those are very expensive, so it is unlikely you will use them except for finding out military sizes. Just make sure you don't run in deficit.
Now the game will compensate. If you go communist, everyone will be in democracy. This is why it is impossible to keep up in research under communism.
If you are republic or democracy, your religious civs will try to wage war against you and be communist, just to keep your citizens war weary.
However, unlike democracy, under communism, you can afford to form MPPs.
Monarchy is superior because you can maximize production and your treasury in cities around your Capital and Forbidden Palace. You need large Metropoli around them. You still get the lack of war weariness and can better defend yourself if attacked.
The advantage of communism during war is that you can pop rush in newly conquored cities to reduce resistance. Under democracy, you can't afford the time to keep enough units in a city to quell resistance, so it's best to take them, then abandon. You take less of a rep hit when you abandon than you do when you simply raze the city.
To have successful communism, you need the following:
1. Smiths Trading Company and a marketplace in each city.
2. Wall Street and a bank in each city.
3. Temple or Library in each city.
4. University in each large city.
5. Factory in each high shield producing city.
Now you are ready to go and wage war with impunity. You should be able to support a very large military and have decent production.
You need the first two before you even think about going communist. You can't afford any more happiness upgrades than those listed. The maintenance is too high. You will have to cut your scientific research to 80% and you may be able to stay even with everyone else, depending upon the size of your empire.
Cashflow is irrelevant except for espionage missions. Those are very expensive, so it is unlikely you will use them except for finding out military sizes. Just make sure you don't run in deficit.
Now the game will compensate. If you go communist, everyone will be in democracy. This is why it is impossible to keep up in research under communism.
If you are republic or democracy, your religious civs will try to wage war against you and be communist, just to keep your citizens war weary.
However, unlike democracy, under communism, you can afford to form MPPs.
Monarchy is superior because you can maximize production and your treasury in cities around your Capital and Forbidden Palace. You need large Metropoli around them. You still get the lack of war weariness and can better defend yourself if attacked.
The advantage of communism during war is that you can pop rush in newly conquored cities to reduce resistance. Under democracy, you can't afford the time to keep enough units in a city to quell resistance, so it's best to take them, then abandon. You take less of a rep hit when you abandon than you do when you simply raze the city.
Similar threads
