Feudalism? is it Useful.

MinosTheBlack

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
17
Location
Calgary,Alberta, Canada
Has anyone found Feudalism to be a useful government? I've found it only slightly better then Despotism. Not good enough for a middle age government.
 
It's a great government if you find yourself on an ice planet. When all your cities can only be little towns, this is the government for you. However, it is a :nono: if you are a populous empire.
 
It is good if you plan to use it. If you pack your cities in densely and crank units then go on a rampage it can often knock out your neighbor during the Middle Ages. In its nerfed form it isn't a particularly effective late game government, but what do you want for a required tech?
 
Feudalism has better unit support than Monarchy if you build many small towns, which isn't a bad strategy to begin with. Feudalism also has pop rush, which Monarchy doesn't have. I think that is more useful when warmongering. The war-weariness is a real drag though.
 
Hurrying production by force is my biggest concern since I rely on my money to build up large armies. (kind of a newb tactic I think. By the time my armies are built my gold reserves are exhausted) I tend to use monarchy throughout most of the game. I just started Monarch difficulty and am having trouble doing this.

Would Feudalism be the best war-mongering government for the middle ages? or should I stick with monarchy for that time?:king:
 
Warmongering Governements:

Monarchy: Larger cities (more than ~20%), average economy (lots of Rivers), cities with growth potential, plan to stay in that Gov until the IA (Cavs are hard to build in small towns)

Republic: large cities, lots of Luxes, healthy economy, effective units (that is, you don't need many Riders to win, but lots of Longbows)

Feudalism: Mainly towns (typically coastal/ Jungle cities). That's the easy to see issue.
More interesting: You save the time to research one of that expensive Gov techs. On the higher levels, that can give you a huge advantage in striking when most of your opponents are still in Despotism, in fact 50 turns earlier in most cases! That's especially useful when you play a SCI Civ and get Feud for free, or when you have a mid/late Ancient UU and don't want to waste your GA in despotism, or if you head for a early MA UU. In other words, the perfect Civs for Feudalism are the Arabs, Mongols and at foremost Vikings.
 
Thanks guys I'm starting to see the advantages. its a required tech and it comes whith pikeman and Medieval Infantry. I can see how that makes it easier to aquire, since well you have to anyway. good unit support. I ignored this government and Facism since when I got C3C i really didn't need these extra two in my game plan. Now that I'm in Monarch I'll use them more often.
 
for the mostr part, however monarchy is my favorite pre-democracy government.
 
i use this gov all the time- i suggest that it is not for a builder type tho...on emperor-huge- if u target whomever has the great library or other wonder and gear ur strategy to knocking that civ into oblivion, u will get their tech (for a gov.switch) and their towns ..(or wait for democracy) pump out ur military, pop rush to keep ur towns small, and plan to war.
 
A thought I had on this government: workers should have no upkeep. Heck they are all indentured serfs(read: slaves) after all right?

That would at least make it interesting.
 
I feel the restriction to hold your cities small to benefit from the high free upkeep for small towns in Feudalism is a real nuisance.

As is forced labor! You will probably not be able to use it, because your towns are actually around size 6 max.

Money-rushing will usually work better.

You can build cities in an ICS style or nearly as densely packed, that close city placement has starting benefits has been proven. Then you can rush with lots of military units.

I still dislike this playstyle, but the point is:

You can do this all in Monarchy and you will not have war weariness - it is not really serious, but you will have it. And in small cities weary people are harder to please than in large ones, one entertainer kills effectively 1/6 of your production e.g.

Republic has commerce benefits and many claim it to be more useful than Monarchy at all and stay the whole game in Republic - depending on game level of course.

You should also not forget that small towns need longer to produce military units. This will somewhat be compensated by sheer number of towns.

Finally, Ision said it sucks - and I say it, too. :)

I think there are too few situations where it is actually useful, and you are somewhat forced to play towards Feudalism right from the beginning. Ugh - I do not like it.
 
I think that most of the apparent weaknesses complement each other.

The unhappiness is dealt with by keeping the town small which you also need for the best unit support and which is a result of pop rushing, which you would use for units since you aren't going to build many buildings in those tiny towns.
 
I find feudalism useful for a modified ocp .There's nothing like having a free 200 unit support in the early middle age's.
 
I've used it successfully until the industrial age with a few size 12 cities. If run well you can out produce and out research Republic/Monarchy but it is often of limited use. Powerful when things go right. Dreadful otherwise.
 
Back
Top Bottom