Going to Monarchy

[vincenzo]

I am in the midst of a revolution and there is now anarchy before I can get the Monarchy going.
I see that ther is smoke coming out of my capital city. What can I do about that?
Are there any steps I should take to speed this up, or do I just let the anarchy run its course?
Thanks

 

[Renata]

You can't speed it up. You can find out how long it's going to last by going to your domestic advisor (F1) and just clicking on 'more' until she says something about the number of turns left in anarchy.

As for the smoke, you'll have to go to the city screen for your capital and assign some of your citizens to be entertainers until the anarchy is over. You should do this, because a city in civil disorder (the smoke) for too long will start losing its improvements.

Renata

 

[Jamesds]

Anarchy is unstoppable, unless you are a religious civ, which means Anarchy is only one turn. It lasts for a random number of turns, I think 6-10 normally.

The smoke from your capital is only a civil disorder happening.

Have fun on Civ3!

 

[Jamesds]

I forgot to add, civil disorders are lethal at times, they can destroy city improvements as Renata said, so do keep it happy. It's a good idea to have built temples before going into anarchy, to keep the happiness up

 

[Padma]

Here's an "oldy but a goody"

Soren confirmed (way back in February) that the length is always between 1 - 5 turns on a random basis, with an additional 0-3 turns depending on number of cities, producing a range of possibilities of between 1 and 8 turns.

 

[farting bob]

the minimum is 2 in a non-religious civ, padma.
but it should definitly not last longer than 8. over 6 and your abit unlucky i think.

 

[Padma]

Originally posted by farting bob
the minimum is 2 in a non-religious civ, padma.

Are you sure, FB? I think I remember an early game, before I learned to "settle, settle, settle", where I had a tiny civ (3-5 cities) when I transitioned to Republic from Despotism, and the anarchy lasted only 1 turn (and no, I wasn't Religious). Granted, a one-turn anarchy for a non-Religious Civ would be *rare*, but I think it's possible.

but it should definitly not last longer than 8. over 6 and your abit unlucky i think.

Actually, with a Large civ, according to Soren, you would have 4-8 turns of Anarchy, so 6+ wouldn't be that uncommon. I know I've seen 7 with a large Civ, myself.

 

[DiamondzAndGunz]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that the minimum for a non-religious civ is only 1 as well, although it is pretty rare. Kinda like 8 turn anarchy being really rare as well.

 

[Carbon_Copy]

Here's a quick way to fix any civil disorder problems while you are in anarchy. When you first choose to revolt, go into your city screen (double click on the city). Put your left hand by the right arrow key on your keyboard and point your mouse at the center city square on the city screen. Click the city square and the AI will arrange your tiles and specialists so that you don't go into civil disorder. Then press the right arrow and click on the city square for the next city, and cycle through like that until you've gone through and adjusted every city. Then when you come out, just do the same thing again to reassign your tiles for production. You may have to manually reassign tiles after you are done with that if the AI chose something stupid for your city to be working.

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by Carbon_Copy
Here's a quick way to fix any civil disorder problems while you are in anarchy. When you first choose to revolt, go into your city screen (double click on the city). Put your left hand by the right arrow key on your keyboard and point your mouse at the center city square on the city screen. Click the city square and the AI will arrange your tiles and specialists so that you don't go into civil disorder. Then press the right arrow and click on the city square for the next city, and cycle through like that until you've gone through and adjusted every city. Then when you come out, just do the same thing again to reassign your tiles for production. You may have to manually reassign tiles after you are done with that if the AI chose something stupid for your city to be working.

Or, turn the govenor on for happiness. This will do the same thing automatically. I prefer to use the guv to control happiness.

 

[MadScot]

Originally posted by Turner_727
Or, turn the govenor on for happiness. This will do the same thing automatically. I prefer to use the guv to control happiness.

It's also much faster to open the governot once, select manage moods to all cities (I usually also hit emphasise food, to make sure the AI doesnt starve me accidentally) and close the window. Going through each city for a large civ would be a pain.

 

[Carbon_Copy]

I wrote my earlier post under the assumption that you are not using governors (since the orignal posters' cities were falling into disorder, it would seem he wasn't using the governors either). I suppose if you had the governors on they'd do this by themselves, but the governors do such a lousy job of running your empire in general I wouldn't advise turning them on for that or any other reason besides multiplayer where you might not have the time to deal with cities as you might like to do in single player. For any situation other than anarchy, you are much better off paying attention to the happiness situation in your cities and adjusting the luxury slider to take care of problems than letting your governor add entertainers. And if you have them off, it's actually a lot simpler to deal with this than I made it sound, you just zoom to your capital and alternate right arrows and clicking on the city tile until you cycle through every city, then do it again the turn you come out of anarchy. Not really a big deal compared to some of the things you do.

 

[Turner]

What is the difference from turning on the govenors to have them control happiness, and going to your capital city, clicking on the city, and have the computer decide where to put your workers? it's the same thing, only by using the govenor I don't have to worry about doing it every turn - something I would forget to do.

I don't use the govenor to pick what my next build is, I always make sure I choice the next one. If I let the govenor do it, I would end up with some wonder in a city that wasn't able to produce it, or my FP right next to my Palace. Of course, some people wouldn't mind that, but I like to keep my palace in the first city I found, just because I don't want to lose the culture it generates.

 

[Carbon_Copy]

I'm not sure if you are referring to turning the governor on just for the duration of the anarchy or if you're talking about leaving the governor on all the time. If it's the former I guess that's one way to do it but I personally never touch the governor, so I posted a way to adjust your tiles quickly coming in and out of anarchy without having to use it. And you'd only have to cycle through twice, once on the first turn of anarchy and again to undo it when you're out, not every turn.

If you're talking instead about leaving the governor on to manage happiness all the time, I would say that you could do much better handling the day-to-day happiness issues yourself than leaving it to the hands of the AI governor. Anarchy is a special case, of course.

 

[Turner]

Maybe I'm just a little slow today, but I still don't see what's better by going and clicking on the city square inside each city view and having the computer pick what squares to work, as opposed to turning the govenor on and having it done automatically.

Whatever.

I do run with the govenor on for the entire game. It keeps my cities out of disorder, which I find very troubling, and it takes a way from game play for me to be constantly running around to each city to make them happy.

You've shown him your way. I've shown him mine. Perhaps he'll choose your's, perhaps mine. The point of the matter is that now he has, at the time of my writing this, three different ways to handle civil disorder while in anarchy. I would say that we've answered his questions, and let's just leave it at that.

So, vincenzo, sorry for jacking your thread. Hope that one of us was able to give you some advice that helps you out.

 

[BillChin]

Disorder means there are more unhappy citizens than happy ones. I like to assign the governors to manage happiness, especially when it is time to change governments. Another way to deal with disorder when the government is restored is the luxury slider on the F1 screen, but will not help during revolutions because there is no money being collected.

Temples, luxuries, coloseums, marketplaces (if more than two luxuries), cathedrals, and certain wonders help with happiness. Military units help under despotism, monarchy and communism. One reason that cities go into disorder during the revolution is that garrisons have no happiness effect under Anarchy.

As for using governors, it is true that a player can often micromanage to get an extra shield or two. However I believe most novice players will improve their games more by spending their time learning and practicing big game concepts rather than micromanaging a large empire (more than ten cities). A novice player that uses the governors can probably play two or three times as many games and learn faster. Same goes for workers, once a player gets more than about ten workers and out of despotism, a player might do better in terms of time and learning by using Shift-A.

Again, time is often the limiting resource because of the length of time a single Civ III game can take when micromanaging every city and directing every worker. More games played often means more learning, more so than micromanaging cities and workers.
+ Bill

 

[Alexnm]

Bill, I have to disagree. In order to master Civ, you have to learn the intricacies of city management. The governors can be useful at the lower difficulty levels, but if you want to play on anything above Regent you have to learn how to manage your city. Important things depend on this knowledge, like the timing for building a wonder, creating a turn advantage, how to maximize production or gold using city improvements and reassigning workers to city tiles...

If I would be a novice player (meaning that I'd never had played anything Civ-related before), I'd need to learn how to play first, and this includes the mechanics of the game (how this thing is done, what I can and cannot do in the game), then I guess that using governors would not be a bad idea. But if someone already has some experience with civ games, then I'd suggest him/her to try and manage his/her own cities; only then they'll be able to master the game and win at higher difficulty levels.

Just my 0.02.

 

[vincenzo]

Thanks for the help everybody. I made it through the anarchy in 4 turns. But a few turns later I went into civil disorder again.

One question about the suggestion of clicking the city center when in city view. Does that tell the AI to do what is necessary to make people happy? Does it change the squares they work on as well as make entertainers?
Thanks

 

[BillChin]

Originally posted by Alexnm
Bill, I have to disagree. In order to master Civ, you have to learn the intricacies of city management. The governors can be useful at the lower difficulty levels, but if you want to play on anything above Regent you have to learn how to manage your city. Important things depend on this knowledge, like the timing for building a wonder, creating a turn advantage, how to maximize production or gold using city improvements and reassigning workers to city tiles...

I agree and disagree. I believe the early game is important and micromanaging (both citizens and workers) has a large benefit during the first 100 turns or so. However, once a player gets to about ten cities and changes out of despotism, the returns start to diminish and a player can spend a lot of time for small benefits.

As an aside, I use governors a lot (press G at the city screen). Again the key exceptions are the early game and building a wonder where micromanaging can make a significant difference. I also tend to micromanage a few core cities within a large empire, but the bulk of cities are run by governors. As for playing Regent level, I routinely win on Emperor difficulty. I am often in the top 20% of players in the Game-of-the-Month adjusted scoring. Perhaps by micromanaging everything I can move up a few more notches, but my time is worth something, and micromanaging all game long may double or triple the amount of time I need to devote to each game.
+ Bill

 

[jack merchant]

Originally posted by vincenzo
One question about the suggestion of clicking the city center when in city view. Does that tell the AI to do what is necessary to make people happy? Does it change the squares they work on as well as make entertainers?
Thanks

In a word, yes. It wil assign entertainers as needed and change the tiles worked to (predominantly) food tiles. It won't do much for the productive capacity of your city but it will keep it from going unhappy.
A better way of keeping your cities from going unhappy is often using the lux slider, but that doesn't work under anarchy.

On the governor discusion: the only time I use the governor is when I have just captured a city and there are lots of resistors. I assign a governor to those cities to keep them from rioting when the resistance ends and resistors become unhappy citizens. This lessens the chance of their flipping back to their original owners and allows you to rush something there a turn sooner (I fire the governor after the resistance has ended).