Fascism... when is it ever useful?

[Snarkhunter]

The corruption model in the game is way overdone. Some government types are more susceptable to corruption than others, but you cannot escape it. I figure that republic, democracy, and monarchy are probably the lowest, and it gets worse from there.

Historically, western monarchies were extremely corrupt; it was the basic model of governance, as the central authority had comparatively few dedicated minions of its own to carry out its wishes. You could think of it as a franchise operation, in effect, with the franchisees being given license to exploit rather freely. This state of affairs persisted until monarchies evolved into constitutional monarchies, then slowly dissipated. (On the whole; 19th century French constitutional monarchies evinced a relatively high level of corruption until the Debacle of 1870, when everyone--well, most everyone--got tired of it for good.)

kk

 

[dexters]

forms of governance historically is much more varied than what we have in Civ3. Civ3 is just a big picture approximation of the differering types.

 

[anaxagoras]

The corruption model in the game is way overdone.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this was a conscious design decision to prevent a runaway civ from too easily conquering the world. Obviously, runaway civs still happen, and conquering the world is still more than possible. However, it is a darn sight slower than it would be without a corruption model to at least partially balance things.

 

[timerover51]

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this was a conscious design decision to prevent a runaway civ from too easily conquering the world. Obviously, runaway civs still happen, and conquering the world is still more than possible. However, it is a darn sight slower than it would be without a corruption model to at least partially balance things.

I sort of thought that, but that does not mean that I have to like it. I always reserve the right to complain, because I care about the game. If I did not, I would not be complaining. That is also why I have not tampered with the corruption slider, but focused on workarounds to reduce the effects. So far, they are working pretty well. Keeping things to less that a 50% level, but watching how many cities that I have.

 

[dexters]

AI civs can also go fascist to keep up with the joneses if they are small and have large powerful neighbours.

This just happened in my current Epic game with only dominaiton /conquest checked off.

 

[timerover51]

AI civs can also go fascist to keep up with the joneses if they are small and have large powerful neighbours.

This just happened in my current Epic game with only dominaiton /conquest checked off.

Hmm, that poses an interesting thought. If you set the worker production for depotism to 200%, could you keep the AI permanently in that, while you proceed to other, less corrupt, forms of governments? Yes, their workers would build improvements faster, but would that balance out the massive increase in corruption, and the depotism penalty. Might have to play with that one a bit. Since I have a very hard time justifying the 200% production rate in fascism, I have boosted democracy, republic, and monarchy to 200% as well. However, setting them at 150% and then reaching Steam Power, where you should get the productivity boost, not Replaceable Parts, which is far too late in the tech tree, would probably work just as well. Eli Whitney was making muskets with replaceable parts about 1800, long before Steam Power.

 

[timerover51]

Historically, western monarchies were extremely corrupt; it was the basic model of governance, as the central authority had comparatively few dedicated minions of its own to carry out its wishes. You could think of it as a franchise operation, in effect, with the franchisees being given license to exploit rather freely. This state of affairs persisted until monarchies evolved into constitutional monarchies, then slowly dissipated. (On the whole; 19th century French constitutional monarchies evinced a relatively high level of corruption until the Debacle of 1870, when everyone--well, most everyone--got tired of it for good.)

kk

Clearly, Snarkhunter, you have not lived near Chicago or in Illinois. "Pay to Play" is the name of the game. That is why I regard the corruption model as overdone. Another name for corruption in a democracy is "pork barrel".

 

[dexters]

Hmm, that poses an interesting thought. If you set the worker production for depotism to 200%, could you keep the AI permanently in that, while you proceed to other, less corrupt, forms of governments? Yes, their workers would build improvements faster, but would that balance out the massive increase in corruption, and the depotism penalty. Might have to play with that one a bit. Since I have a very hard time justifying the 200% production rate in fascism, I have boosted democracy, republic, and monarchy to 200% as well. However, setting them at 150% and then reaching Steam Power, where you should get the productivity boost, not Replaceable Parts, which is far too late in the tech tree, would probably work just as well. Eli Whitney was making muskets with replaceable parts about 1800, long before Steam Power.

i don't think its the worker speed but the unit support and military police happiness as well as no war weariness that forms the major consideration when the AI switches gov.

I see no point in keeping AI in despotism, they have enough challenges staying in one of the more advanced governments. I'm actually thinking of a way to tweak fascism to make them stronger for the AI and not so self destructive to use.

 

[Snarkhunter]

Clearly, Snarkhunter, you have not lived near Chicago or in Illinois. "Pay to Play" is the name of the game. That is why I regard the corruption model as overdone. Another name for corruption in a democracy is "pork barrel".

True, but irrelevant. The corruption in Stuart England or 18th century France makes Chicago look like a Sunday School picnic. If you haven't looked at the eras in detail, any standard history should suffice. Or I can recommend a book or two, the most recent being an account of how the British were so desperate after the Glorious Revolution they had to evolve a more effective system. Or you can entertain yourself with Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle: fictional, but pretty well researched, IMHO. Of course, it is also about 2800 pp worth. . . .

And while pork barrel spending may be wasteful, it doesn't follow that it is corrupt; generically, at the national level it is spending earmarked for a particular area or particular project, not for a particular vendor (although it certainly can be).

kk

 

[del62]

However, setting them at 150% and then reaching Steam Power, where you should get the productivity boost, not Replaceable Parts, which is far too late in the tech tree, would probably work just as well. Eli Whitney was making muskets with replaceable parts about 1800, long before Steam Power.

Replacable parts need only be two techs after steam power, and steam engines were around before 1800

 

[silver 2039]

Fascism is my favorite war time government. I generally prefer the authoritarian governments since I'm almost always at war.

 

[axehaxe]

Communism is for Large empires (talkin 20 + cities minimum)
Fascism is good to use if you are in deep trouble. (less than 10 cities which are all industrial metros producing lots of pollution) This way you can join your workers up to make up for the population loss on switching to fascism and use a minimum amount of workers to do all the work.

 

[Spoonwood]

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this was a conscious design decision to prevent a runaway civ from too easily conquering the world.

Didn't the game designers (also) want something other than ICS to become optimal? I mean, in civ II, there exists little question that ICS gave you an optimal configuration... settlers cost you only 1 population point and corruption didn't cause much of a problem. I thought they increased settler cost and increased corruption so that ICS became less viable.

 

[dexters]

Didn't the game designers (also) want something other than ICS to become optimal? I mean, in civ II, there exists little question that ICS gave you an optimal configuration... settlers cost you only 1 population point and corruption didn't cause much of a problem. I thought they increased settler cost and increased corruption so that ICS became less viable.

I don't think it's mutually exclusive as their corruption forumulaes has both rank and distance corruption.

Both punishes large runaway empires.

 

[The Lemon]

For me, i always went into Fascism whenever i was about to declare war. This way the large I can have the large military and also from all the pollution/ bomb raids, the 200% worker bonus gets my land back the way it was.

 

[DaOne]

hi,
i m sorry if you find any mistakes in my language....
well,
Fascism is for those who are at war.(say 6 against 1).
u know good offence is the best defence.
i was at war against six civilization, i had to switch to fascism which allowed me to create a large amry to stand against those civilization, which help me take on each of them simultaneously well almost, i defeated three civ i.e Rome, Persian and Hittites and guess wat i won a domination victory
thanks to my large army....

 

[Death_Machine]

Although, a game with Germany as Fascist might not be allowed in Germany.

That statement is pretty damn funny.

 

[Rodrig0]

But how could Fascism be a better war govt. than communism? I always switch to communist as soon as I get it, and never bother with Fascism. I prefer "big" unit support with many cities, than HUGE unit support with fewer cities. For me the biggest advantage of communism is the comunal corruption. This way even the most remote city can be productive, all I have to do is fill it with workers, put up a factory in 10 turns (maybe less if I whip, but then, what's the point? joinig workers to kill them later? guess not), and all those seemingly useless settlements can contribute to the war effort. And of course, no war weariness... very useful to counter the "1 redlined conscript rifle killed me 6 cavs" effect. Just keep killing, your people will support you.

 

[Argetnyx]

This is all stupid, what negatives? I use fascism all the time. My strategy is Despotism, Feudalism, Fascism. It might be my way of making war.
I am a strategist and I usually build up all invading units (usually Panzers) to strategic points, I need Fascism to support all of the units for the time to build up the amount i need to cripple my enemy into submission.

 

[Taras Bulba]

My strategy is Despotism, Feudalism, Fascism. It might be my way of making war.

OOH! A Feudalism user. PLEASE, let me know what the benefits are of Feudalism. I've never known anyone who uses it, nor anyone who really likes it.

Do tell


PS-I agree with your Fascism ideas, I use it all the time too