1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Fascism vs Communism

Discussion in 'Civ3 Strategy Articles' started by Ision, Mar 12, 2004.

  1. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    The below article is based on vast ‘generalizations’, and is NOT intended to suggest a hard ‘fixed’ set of parameters. I fully acknowledge at the onset that every player can relate a specific and detailed scenario in which the below assertions do not apply. That said, the intention of this article is to give players a ‘general’ overview to help make a proper choice between a Fascist and Communist government.

    Fascism is at its best 'after' you have a large number of your core cities as metros. The free unit support of 10 is enormous. It is the better choice for the player that has had a slow start and finds that war is inevitable or necessary in order to win the game. Fascism also tends to be superior for the player that seeks to expand his empire ‘continentally or locally’, but not worldwide. By this I mean a more limited ‘warmonger’ whose war aims are less ambitious. This player may actually be seeking a space race or culture victory – but wants or needs a war and/or some resource access/denial to ensure the victory. Lastly, Fascism is also superior for the player perfectly content with his mid-sized empire – but seeking to engage his rivals in ‘scorched earth’ wars of ‘razing cities, destroying infrastructures, razing wonders, and thus slow his rivals progress without actually having to conquer him. Fascism tends to be the superior warmongering by ‘destruction’ choice.

    Communism is the superior totalitarian government for those who already have a large number of cities and thus far exceed their OCN. Commie is better as a pre-hospitals totalitarian government choice for a player that has already done extensive warmongering, and has been in Monarchy government since the Ancient Age. This player has already committed himself to a warmonger’s victory, and while on occasion going Fascism may help initially – he can already foresee that ‘long term’ Commie is the better value. Lastly, and surprisingly to many players, Commie is superior for the warmonger that finds he will be unable to achieve his dom/conq victory in time to win. His massive empire and production will allow him to prevent his rivals from achieving any of the victory conditions and thus ensure his histograph victory. If nothing else, his military dominance will ensure via ‘nuclear war’ that no AI can achieve a victory. *(be careful: the UN vote is the perennial exception that can bite a failed world conquest). Communism tends to be the superior warmongering by ‘absorption’ choice.

    As a simplistic guideline choosing between Fasci and Commie comes down to:

    1. if you have a large empire and have decided to pursue a dom/conq victory - Commie - reason: SPHQ reduction of corruption, and given a sufficient number of cities production totals will exceed fascism.

    2. if you have a tight 'borg' style city spacing - Commie - reason: free unit support for city is identical to metro ('6') therefore you may be able to forego building hospitals as an option, and the SPHQ corruption effects.

    3. if your going totalitarian out of 'need', to survive an AI dog-pile or WW has become critical and your intention is to be back in demo as soon as practical - Fascism - reason: higher free unit support and ‘nuisance’ corruption are superior to communal when total city numbers are lower. Also, the SPHQ wonder build would tie up a cities production in a critical moment and would then be lost anway upon your return to Demo.

    4. if your a small to mid-sized empire that has decided on warmongering - Fascism - reason - superior production and science than commie when your starting off small *(once larger you may find a need to go from fascism to commie)

    5. if your a peaceful builder looking for space race or culture win, fighting only defensive wars – BUT, WW is wearing you down and you just can't get out of those wars - Fascism – reason: CORE CITIES production of spaceship parts, wonder buildings and nuclear weapons are usually superior, also science research to new techs tends to be slightly superior

    Summary: The large empire ‘go Commie’, small to mid-sized empire ‘go Fascism’ is a truism almost always, but remains an oversimplification. Fascism tends to be the better choice for those ‘reacting’ to critical events. Communism tends to be the better choice for those that wish to ‘initiate or control’ events. The reason you’re seeing AIs consistently go Fascist is simple: because on average at the dawn of the Industrial Age the AIs have mid-sized empires engaged in wars – in other words, because going Fascist makes sense. In those games I have played in which a large KAI emerges before Industrial Age, I have noticed that they choose Communism over Fascism – in this respect the AIs choice is surprisingly similar to the one a human player would make. The large number of Fascist AIs is the result of AI performance ‘parity’, and not a programmed preference.

    Ision
     
  2. Longasc

    Longasc Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    I share your observations, however I had no scenario that would favor Facism in my latest games.

    To point 5 I would add that short defensive wars in Facism will cost you lives - 2 citizens each, which might be counterproductive. But well, only religious civs can afford switching Govs on any occasion.


    On a side note, is it not an irony that Facist States once the grow really large will do better in Communism... ^^
     
  3. Longasc

    Longasc Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    BTW, Ision, I never found use in Feudalism so far.

    A comparison WHEN to switch to WHICH government (Monarchy, Republic, Feudalism) - would be also very interesting.

    Feudalism - Little One's Facism? :)
     
  4. ArmPilot

    ArmPilot Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Western PA; Eastern USA
    Feudalism has WW so i don't think its that similar to Fascism.
     
  5. ducki

    ducki Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    Messages:
    44
    Feudalism's WW is similar to Republic.
    Plus you get MPs.
    Plus, if you keep your town size under 7, 5 supported units. 2 for MPs, 3 to fight a Republic-length war. It's pretty easy to wage a war and keep WW at bay with size 6 towns.

    If you can fight a war in Republic, surely you can do so in Feudalism with such high troop support and MPs for contented citizens.


    Thing is, the development model for Feudalism is the opposite of both other Ancient Governments - you want small towns, as many as you can pack onto the map. And you can still grow a couple big enough to build larger improvements/wonders without completely killing your troop support as long as you keep a lot of small towns around. You really have to plan for it, though.
     
  6. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    Feudalism is a near worthless government. It is purely a 'niche' government - it's one and only value being in a case where; A. you have had a slow start, B. most of your cities are very small (below size 6) and not on rivers, and C. you are currently at war or can strongly foresee a neighbors imminent attack.

    On the other hand, what most CIVers forget is that this is exactly what the designer’s intended – a ‘niche’ government for unusual or poor starts. CIVers tend to think that it should be yet another ‘viable’ alternative to Rep/Mon – that was never the intent of the designers.

    Personally I would never go to this Government even if A-B-and C were occurring. I would still choose Monarchy and the 1 gold unit cost over the 3 gold unit cost of Feudalism. Even in the ‘niche’ capacity that this Gov was intended – it fails. At 2 gold support or a 5-3-1 (instead of the current 5-2-1) free support, Feudalism would work as intended.

    Ision
     
  7. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    Please try to keep this thread focused on topic. That topic being FASCISM and COMMUNISM. I fully understand the questions on Feudalism - but would rather that those be addressed in a separate post. I put a lot of time and work into my articles - so I respectfully ask that we stay on topic.

    Ision
     
  8. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    6,075
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Ision. Why would one use either of these 2 governments at the lower levels of difficulty (emperor and below)? Personally I tend to either go to Republic/Democracy for a builder game or use Monarchy until the late middle age or early industrial? You can fight short wars to avoid WW or in a worse case scenario under Democracy and an aggressive war 8 luxury resources and a few wonders (Universal Suffrage, Sistine, JS Bachs) and the luxury sliders can allow you enough time for a decisive victory before WW kicks in. One can usually seize these wonders if needed and the AI is usually happy with a peace offer after 5-10 rounds. Are they better if you have a bad start or somehow fail to expand in the earlier ages.

    Perhaps a bad habit to get into but Democracy seems to good most of the time (unless religeous).
     
  9. Longasc

    Longasc Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    Hi Zardnaar, give Communism a shot.

    The productiviness increase if you really have a large empire - a whole continent on a huge map and going for domination - is incredible. I really had no other choice in my latest game with the Celts - corruption/waste in Democracy are the lowest of all governments, yes, but still it cannot beat Communism in case of going for world domination on a really large map.

    As I tend to conquer, Communism is for me.

    People going for destruction would do better with Facism as Ision pointed out.

    Maybe because Facism is also highly corrupt if you exceed your OCN many times, you are left with many useless cities - the same applies to Democracy.

    Only Communism can make those cities really productive. It is now far better than pre-Conquests communism.

    I found Facism up to now never an option for my conquer-and-keep style.

    Ision wanted to stay this thread focused on communism vs facism, but I simply must add that I really never found any use for Feudalism. He is probably right, it is good if you had a really bad start, probably without water. But it is an utterly special government that fails even in its niche.

    There were already some discussions about this, I would really like some expert players to add their thoughts to Feudalism in another thread. Did they ever use it to success, to something that Monarchy could not do better?


    I think Ision said it all - I think one should remember that switching to Facism kills people in the beginning, so you should be really sure if for quick wars Communism is not better if you plan to switch back to Democracy.
     
  10. CIVPhilzilla

    CIVPhilzilla Reagan Republican

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    4,714
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Another great article by Ision. Thank you!
     
  11. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    CIVPhilzilla,

    your welcome

    Ision
     
  12. kb2tvl

    kb2tvl King

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    954
    Fascism is great for times when you have 4 ~ 6 rings from your capitol but once you get into the 6 ring and beyond you are looking at much more corruption than commie.

    Commy is great if you have large cities that are spread out with good land spread out over long distances or on different islands.

    Feudalism can be good if you space cities a distance of 3 and 5 and disband the cites at a distance of 3 later. This can transistion into other govts and if you pull feudalism as a scientific civ, it may be better to be at war and not bother building aquaducts for quite a while.
     
  13. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    Zaard,

    I often get the question you posed by PM - the " why would you ever go Fascist/Commie when Demo is sooo much better - just plan your wars ect..... "

    At the risk of sounding harsh - or accusatory ( and I do not mean to be at all!) the only possible way that that statement can be made is if 1 or more of the following is being done by a player:

    1. he is playing at a difficulty level that he dominates so well - that he no longer really fears the AI to any real extent - and can manipulate it at will. he already knows from the onset that he will get Sistines, JS Bachs, and Universal Sufferage. He already knows that he will never be in a situation where he is the target of a huge dominate AI or being attacked by 2, 3 or more CIVs -

    2. He is not trying to win as a pure warmonger in the least amount of time. The player has taken a 'bite by bite' cautious approach to warmongering. Nice - safe - and assured, BUT it never breaks records for persoanal best, and it never really test the players actual skills at fighting. It is in reality NOT a warmongers approach at all - but rather a 'I want to do it all appraoch" build - war - and wonder dominate. I have no problems with people playing with this style -enjoy! - BUT, by doing so you will reamain in the dark about Monarchy/Fascism and Commie.

    3. Both Fascism and Communism are clearly superior to Demo (for war) when you are playing at a level where your winning percentage is not in the 90 to 99% range. In this case you will encounter situations were the benefits of these Governments over Demo are obvious and glaring. Also, even if I were to go down to a level I totally dominate - Commie is STILL superior for world conquest. All things being equal - a Commie empire that has doubled or tripled the OCN limit WILL outproduce, out-research and out-fight a Demo one. So even if you DO completely dominate at the level your playing - Commie will almost always win a conquest victory faster than demo -

    Ision

    PS: as to 'why' at all at the lower levels - well if you just moved from cheiftan to warlord and the game is still 'competitive (you do not dominate it totally) - then the examples I gave are no different than player that has just moved from Monarch to Emp, or Demi to Deity - in reality there are NO lower levels. A lower level is whatever level that you can dominate. The fact that I can win at deity has not changed the fact that my struggles at this level are approximate to the ones I had when first moving to warlord and regent. At deity I am being out-rexed and out reseached early by the AI - that was also the case when I FIRST moved from warlord to regent. At deity often no matter what I do when trying play peacefully - I am often embroiled in a war that I can not get out of - so I go fascist to keep building while fighting much better. If warlord is still a challenge - the same will still apply.... If changing to Fascism when your being dogpiled is NOT better than Demo- the problem is not that Fascism 'sucks'- the problem lies is in avoiding the levels where it won't 'suck' anymore.
     
  14. alexman

    alexman King

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    778
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Nice overview of the differences of the two governments. However, in practice, Communism is almost always a better choice than Fascism.

    In my experience, the free unit support makes no difference in the Industrial Age. Unless your play style involves keeping large numbers of defensive units as garisson, (not exactly the best shield investment, IMO, except maybe in MP), you will not pay unit support for either of these governments. Even if you do pay for more unit support in Communism than in Fascism, Communism's reduced corruption makes it still worth it to be a commie.

    Unless we are talking about a truly miniature 'empire', Communism is still better than Fascism in this situation. But in this case, war weariness is going to be manageable and players really should be using the Republic. Republic gets some free unit support, has low war weariness, and is also an excellent peace time government that will get you to Alpha Centauri without the need to spend any time in Anarchy.

    I don't agree here. With Fascism, it does not matter whether you keep your conquered cities or not. Corruption in your core will be the same no matter what. If anything, you gain free unit support by keeping the conquered cities. On the other hand, conquering new territory under Communism will increase corruption in your old cities.

    The SPHQ is actually a small factor that magnifies the difference between Communism and Fascism, but Communism is already better than Fascism, except for the smallest of empires.

    Communism is actually not that great for a 'borg' style build. The advantage of 'borging' is that you get low distance corruption at the expense of rank corruption. But with communism, you get a flat distance corruption no matter where you place your cities, so you lose that advantage! Also, to take full advantage of Communism you need to build many more city improvements than for Fascism, so many small cities will have a harder time building them than fewer large ones. The ideal empire shape for Communism is a spread-out empire, but with low city density. Archipelago, for example.

    Again, I have yet to see an empire in the Modern Age that is better under Fascism than under Communism. You would need a very small empire (under half the OCN) for this to be true.

    I have not seen a Communist AI that knows the technology of Fascism in C3C, but if what you're saying is true, it's great news. If we use the editor to strengthen Fascism, the AI might have a chance.

    By the way, please don't take my comments as an attack on your excellent article. It's just that I have spent some time studying the balance between governments and I thought I was in a good position to comment.
     
  15. Zardnaar

    Zardnaar Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    6,075
    Location:
    Dunedin, New Zealand
    Be as harsh as you want. My problem is I usually am aggressive early on but in the late middle ages/early industrial run out of opponents to fight as I hate fighting intercontinental war without transports and carriers to go with them. Also if you don't fight you can often lead the tech race on the lower levels so you can just what until tanks and bombers and then go to war since railroads will speed up your war effort- no 10 turn marches just to get to the front lines. I do like Communism with a large empire though.
     
  16. Longasc

    Longasc Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    Alexman made the the point regarding corruption in Facism vs Communism. :)

    I agree that I found Communism usually the better wartime government, too.

    There are some more things regarding the AI:

    Facism is a way for the AI to self-destruct - some Players noticed. I did not see this too much, but what happens to a Facist State?

    E.g. Democracy under attack, AI switches to Facism.

    Boom, 2 citizens less in every city. Then the AI habit of WHIPPING a lot.

    But on higher levels, it is likely to produce MORE units. Will the high unit support of Facism not benefit the AI greatly???

    I think that Facism is not bad for a human player, but Communism might be better often!

    But how about the AI, sitting on a island or small continent or having around 30-40 cities territory on a huge map?

    If it is military strong, corruption is not so much of an issue with a FP with this size, Facisms high unit support may be a blessing.

    The other thing is, in modern times the AI wastes lots of units on cities until they are captured or all attackers dead - no great use of artillery there, known problem.

    But this makes for a culture problem: They do not capture destroyed and bombed cities with 3-6 people left, they capture size 8-12 cities. Now get there 4-6 people to be of your nationality until you get some culture. This is a drawback.

    For the workers, Facism is godly. The AI is not great in working the right tiles or even choose the best possible way to use a tile, e.g. mine or irrigate.

    With faster workers it gets not smarter, but it will at least improve more tiles because work is done faster!


    1.) - So I ask: Is Facism a government that is good for the AI? Would it do better in Communism, assuming the 30-40 densely packed cities on a huge map? -

    2.) - Or is Facism the way of self-destruction for AI govs? -


    I know this thread was about the benefit for players, because I think badly improved cities and tiles of certain AIs make them good for Feudalism, the government I highly disregard - for my playstyle at least.
     
  17. kb2tvl

    kb2tvl King

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    954
    This won't happen unless the ai is specfically modded and then the AI will irigate at least half of the tiles.
     
  18. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    I disagree. I have played games where in late Industrial and the Modern Age the 10 unit free support of Fascsim has been a godsend - and had that support been less my demise assured.

    My scenario assumes a long state of war - in which case even the low WW of Republic will no longer suffice and begin to come apart. Also, given a sufficiently aggressive Military challenge from an AI or AIs - the free unit support of Republic will not suffice.

    Agreed, a small factor - but a factor nvertheless. Also, though I did not state it again - i had already stated previously that Commie was superior to Fascism for the total world conquest player - the communal corruption of a large empire being far stronger than the nuisence corruption of a large empire.

    I stand corrected!! - thanks


    I have seen it, and have played as one. It depends on your situation. As a fascist state - fending off AI attack while pursueing a frantic space race attempt - Fascism served me well.

    I have seen it - both un-modded (it is far rarer then) and modded (modded to ensure that both Commie/Fascism and SPHQ are all available with the same tech - totalitarianism).

    Thanks for your input - it is ALWAYS welcome.

    Ision
     
  19. Ision

    Ision Master

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    452
    Longasc,


    to answer number 1 is very difficult - on the one hand yes - especially if they are on brink of destruction from dogpiles. they have been at war, they are small to mid-sized, they need faster workers and Military police, their situation may be desparate - on the other hand, on average the AI would benefit far MORE from Communism - long term - especially if they are the ones winning the war and expanding. But, AIs do not 'think' long term. The AI will simply respond to its immediate need.

    again - remember that the AI is already self-destructing when it chooses to go Fascism or Commie. So the change IS for the better. Notice that the AI WILL stay in demo for as long as possible and NOT switch to fascism if peaceful or for as long as possible when at war. The AI unlike the human does not have a 'warmonger' strat or 'peaceful builder' strat. It simply computes whatever is the most beneficial Gov at the time and then continues to act based on its aggression level and current status with the other AIs.

    notice too, that an AI in demo, in mid industrial will NOT automatically change to fascism/commie the moment it is at war. it will stay demo as long as possible - and switch when it can no longer sustain it. I have seen level 5 agression AIs stay in Demo for 30 to 40 turns of war while in demo - BUT, only because the AI was being fed 4 or 5 luxuries from me, and tons of gold from me - this proves that the AI prefers representative Govs at ALL times over totalitarian ones - it also proves that there is NO AI 'conquer the world - so Commie is better strat'. Notice that large powerful Republic or Demo AIs that declare war - do not do this after they have changed to Monarchy/Fascism/Communism - the change is only made after WW and /or combat losses have made this a must.

    What is needed is 1 of 2 things - perhaps both. A better Fascism that is not only a 'in case of fire break glass gov' but can also serve like communism as a legitamate large empire threat, or at the least a fascism that is stronger economically.

    Ision
     
  20. Brewster

    Brewster stays crunchy in milk

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,095
    Location:
    Victoria, Canada
    I wish I read this thread before switching governments in my current game. I chose Facism because I heard many people say it is the best govt for warring, but after reading this, I may switch over to Communism to give that a try (gotta love religious civs).

    Thanks for the informative article.
     

Share This Page