Communism

[RepZ]

Why does everyone hate communism? I find that it allows me to simultaneously deploy a huge army, continue science development and get cash. In republic and democracy a huge army decimates your production esp. of small cities. Plus it is trivial to keep people happy. I rarely have to build temples and coliseums. Plus you get no corruption and no senate interference.

Democracy is great when your army is small and defensive and you want to grow like crazy, but I find if I don't keep the pressure on the AI, they will come knocking on my door and either sneak attack me or found new cities right almost on top of mine. Very annoying.

 

[CharlieChuck]

Over the years I always ended up in communism, but the large amount of additional trade you can get under democracy is why i think most people prefer that?

funnily enough i've just been reading this thread http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=20984 which has some very interesting points.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Communsim is a great form of government. The main drawback it has is that it tends to come into the game later.

For those who can manage a Power Democracy there is no reason for changing to Communsim, but, for those who may have problems with it, Communsim is the way to go.

 

[ElephantU]

Good thread, CharlieChuck. A bunch of the "great players" of old contributed to that one.

RepZ, Commy is a better form of Monarchy, but you have to go through Demo to get to it and it is much better to learn to manage a powerful Demo that grows and trades like crazy than to slow down with Commy. But then, if you are already stuck in a drawn-out war with several more powerful opponents it is probably the way to go. The key is to get ahead early and keep developing faster via the Mon-Rep-Dem path. If you don't want to use the advantages of trade then Commy is again the best fall-back.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

If you don't want to use the advantages of trade then Commy is again the best fall-back.

You can get the extra trade in Communism through celebrations. And celebrations are easier in Communism than they are in Republic/Democracy because of the ease with which you can pacify unhappy people.

What you do not get is the rapid growth that comes with celebrations in Republic/Democracy. Having city size go up by one every turn is extremely powerful and at the same time extremely hard to manage.

 

[Ace]

Communism is a good learning tool and a fun way to play conquest games, but, once you master the power democracy, you won't want to play in communism any more. The only real advantage it has is the ability to build vet spies, but this can be overcome in PD by using your spies to sabotage ai units to gain vet status. (and you don't have to be at war to do it.) With proper management and preparation, a PD will run rings around all other government types.

 

[Tortosa]

communism is great just for the fact that I don't have to listen to some silly senate

 

[TzarMikhail]

i LOVE communism! i just switched to it as a matter of fact in my game last night. im ALWAYS the russians and i tend to play only on the large world map. usually meaning that my empire turns out to span from europe to the pacific and everything in between.
my goal is always to take land fast and grow before i focus on anything else. growing rapidly enduces science output and more cities mean your overall stronger anyways so expanding at the right rate is the best way to start. however, later in the game when my russian empire is large and im monarchy or repulbic i start to have a number of revolts in each city over the size of 6 or 7 so switching to communism, especially if im in wartime, smooths a large empire out and keeps everything in managable ranges.
production is average, science is average, and attitudes are above average. militaqry support is great.

communism really depends on what type of player you are. for me im an expansionist, so communism is the government i hold my breath for.

ive had successful democracys on the same games and it just doesnt give me the freedom to rule that i like

 

[neutrino]

I think Communism is a decent government to switch to, if the human player (HP) plans to go through a lengthy world war, which involves hordes of military units traveling far away from their homes.

In small wars (i.e., capturing just one or two enemy city -- limited and specific objectives), there is no need to switch away from Republic/Democracy. Chances are, the HP will have met his objectives before interference from the Senate.

Theoretically, the HP can launch major military expeditionary operations with Democracy (but short of world war), but his civilization has to be pretty wealthy -- need to build improvements reducing unhappiness. (i.e., Temple, Coliseum, Michelangelo's Chapel, J.S. Bach's CAthedral, Women's Suffrage)

Fundamentalism may be preferable for the final world war once the HP no longer needs to accumulate a lot of science.

 

[Ace]

There is nothing theoretical about it. If you have a well-developed democracy going, you can fight a major conflict with no problems, except for the senate. And if you have a spotless reputation, the United Nations, and a little luck, you can beat up on the AI to your heart's content with no problems. You trade and fight at the same time. The cash flow from the trade allows you to rush build all the military you need, as well as the necessary city improvements to keep the citizens happy.

Remember, Marketplaces, banks, and stock exchanges each increase your base coins and luxuries by 50%. Check out the threads re: "Power Democracy" on this site. There are lots of good tips there on how to wage war in democracy.

 

[neutrino]

The bottleneck with Democracy at war is the Senate. Even with the UN and spotless reputation, the Senate will impose cease-fire soon or later. Hardly the kind of inconvenience I would like to put up with if I were on the verge of seriously crippling or wiping out an enemy.

Yeah, it is doable, if the HP is willing to put up with stop-and-go pattern of Democracy at war which can be time-consuming.

 

[Ace]

Worst case scenerio, the senate enforces a cease-fire and the AI sneak attacks you a couple of turns later. After this happens two or three times, the senate will go along with wiping out the offending AI civ. And, in democracy, you have enough coins that your spies can just buy the ai cities, since the ai does not like to fight in democracy, it will usually switch to commie or fundy, which is a tipoff that it is going to attack you. And when you get the ai down to just its capitol city, just wait for the next Oedo year, declare a revolution, wipe it out, and switch back to demo.

You can also use the emisary ploy to avoid diplomatic contact after capturing a city, if your not playing in MGE.

 

[neutrino]

I have Civ 2 TOT.

I usually resort to the 'emissary trick'. At best, this allows me a few more turns to pursue my personal war, but soon or later the Senate meets the enemy and signs cease-fire behind my back.

Bribing enemy cities ...... that I resort to as well, if I need to capture a well-developed city to be used as a future staging area. Unfortunately, the AI is not very good at city zoning, so I get pretty picky about which enemy city to bribe. (On the other hand, if my objective is complete conquest, then I do not care!)

Sometimes, I also try to provoke the AI to break cease-fire by exaggerating military build-up close to its cities. However, I have noticed that sustained incursion of my own forces into the enemy's city zones could result in the overthrow of my Democracy, if I ignore the Senate.

 

[Ace]

Yes, the senate will cause your government to collapse if an AI asks you to remove your troops from its city hexes and you refuse.

A better way to entice the AI to sneak attack you is to put a freight or two into its city hexes. The AI just cannot resist killing 'harmless" freight. Sometimes you can do the same thing with an engineer, too.

Another trick is to use partisans. These units, apparently, do not cause diplomatic contact when they approach AI units.

 

[neutrino]

I think a major downside of Communism is it arrives pretty late. (It would have been much more useful, had it arrived much earlier.) Heck, a player will have Republic, Democracy, as well as Fundamentalism by the time he researches Communism. The only useful aspect of Communism (insofar as I have played in the past) is that all spies built under it gets automatic veteran status. Otherwise, Fundamentalism would be more useful in an all-out final war (up to 8 units can be fielded without support ... yeah, baby!); in such a case, a player is not likely to worry too much about collecting too little science beakers.

Though it is tougher, I like Democracy at war. I think a lot of the difficulty inherent in this has more to do with what a player has to do before getting into wars as a Democratic power. (While a player can switch to Communism or Fundamentalism to wage wars in a hurry, that is not likely to be the case with Democracy.) Not to mention the superior trade under Democracy means bigger treasury, and it is much easier to wage wars in the long run with fat purse.

 

[Ace]

You can get Communism much quicker by building the Statue of Liberty as soon as you get Democracy. That wonder lets you pick any type of government available in the game, weather you have researched it or not.

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

You can get Communism much quicker by building the Statue of Liberty as soon as you get Democracy. That wonder lets you pick any type of government available in the game, weather you have researched it or not.

If you've got the statue, there is another option if you don't mind sullying your reputation a bit. You could stay in Demo, use the Emissary's ploy (Capturing cities with partisans to prevent initial contact before EP can be invoked), and on the off-chance you get some other form of contact that results in senate interference, just have a quick Revolution, declare war, and let the Statue set you back to demo the next turn with your war still going.

 

[neutrino]

I think the harder part of Statue of Liberty is that, by the time I can build it, it faces competitions from other high-priority wonders -- i.e., Magellan's, Michelangelo's, J.S. Bach's, Copernicus', Isaac Newton's. Chances are, one or more CPs will be in position to build any one of these high-priority wonders.

 

[Ace]

Shucks, it was only a suggestion on how to get to commie faster, not a recommendation. I have not built the statue in a long time. It is easier to get it by capturing the AI city that builds it if you really must have it. And the only real reason to get it is for the 20 points if your going for a high score.

(By the time its available, you should already have most of the wonders you mentioned. )

 

[neutrino]

Yeah ..... let one of the CPs complete a wonder, then perform a hostile takeover later on. Very useful tactic at times to acquire a wonder like the Liberty, which does not have to be built in one's own SSC for its maximum exploitation.