that's the exact trade off
Of course, if you have copper or horses in the capital's cultural domain, it's a lot easier to do so
.
Hereditary Rule - do you use it much?
- Thread starter LlamaCat
- Start date
Of course, if you have copper or horses in the capital's cultural domain, it's a lot easier to do so
.slobberinbear
Ursine Skald
Due to inflation and city maintenance costs, there's more incentive than ever before to have big cities. Anything that lets you have a higher population is a good thing. Monarchy / Hereditary Rule can do the job. Is Representation better? It's certainly easier to manage and gives you the bonus beakers. But HR can allow you to grow way beyond the +3 happy faces of Representation, if you have the health for it, the workers to develop the tiles, and cities that can pump out fast garrison units. I concur with the previous poster in that the extra units can also boost your power rating to help in your diplomacy.
Even if you're going for a partial SE, going for HR instead of Representation isn't a bad deal depending on the situation. The less happies you have, the more valuable HR becomes. So if you don't have a lot of happiness producers, HR is for you. On the other hand, if you have 3 or 4 or even 5 happies in the BCs, then HR loses much of its appeal comparative to Rep, though it's still better than the base gov.
As you increase in difficulty level, HR's easy to produce happy faces become more and more valuable. How can you possibly say "no" to the ability to produce a happy face for 2 rounds of production?
As you increase in difficulty level, HR's easy to produce happy faces become more and more valuable. How can you possibly say "no" to the ability to produce a happy face for 2 rounds of production?
I've always found it hard choosing between going for Monarchy or something like Maths/Currency/Calendar, but normally the Currency route wins because the AI used to love the religion techs, so the pre-reqs could be easily traded for. Now they seem much less inclined to choose the religion techs over worker techs, I've been trying to see how to best get Meditation and Priesthood early without delaying the other techs too much. I don't try to get the Pyramids very often, unless my traits or starting position make it seem like a good idea, it's a lot of hammers to justify early on, so I use HR for a long time in most of my games.
From the few BtS games I've played so far it's getting built later than I'd expect, but the GW is being built a bit earlier.
From the few BtS games I've played so far it's getting built later than I'd expect, but the GW is being built a bit earlier.
you can easily get Pyramids on at least 50% of your games even at higher levels... of course the issue is whether it's optimal to build even this powerful wonder in every game. I probably build it too much. but whether you can do it... there's no question of that up to Monarch at least.
budweiser
King of the Beers
After I get some worker techs and at least one SR tech like BW, I go to writing and then use the power of my libraries and a scientist or two to research HR usually taking the faster religious techs. You can crown yourself king by about 1200 BC. Lately I've been taking the slower ones and surprised myself the other day when I popped judaism. I almost never found that religion.
Hereditary Rule is one of my favorite civics. I don't go for the Pyramids unless I'm industrious, spiritual, philosophical or I have stone, and even then it's not a given. Obviously the benefits of those traits are faster construction with industrious, the ability to freely switch civics with spiritual and philosophical because representation meshes well with specialist economies. Then again I am playing a game today with Izzy and I found stone just outside my capital. I hooked it up early and used it to build Stonehenge but then I neglected the Pyramids for awhile, eventually losing out to Kublai on the other continent. It didn't bother me much though because I probably would have just gone for HR anyway, and monarcy was worth researching since I had 3 wines nearby. I find myself in HR for over half the game usually because it's such a long trip to representation.
If I want the Pyramids, I get them, almost always. Then again I'm almost always playing someone Industrious and seek out Stone and Marble ASAP. Monarch/Standard/Normal.
obsolete
Deity
As a SSE/WE strategist, I must stand by Rep. However, I do on rare occasion still switch to HR because of diplo reasons. It seems that most do not.
i actually prefer hereditary rule over them all, because once you have very productive citites, they can produce units very fast and counter to an unhappiness problem. plus chances are you have an average of 2 units per city at least i do) which is better than representation.
obsolete
Deity
A problem with filling your cities with those units is
#1 It takes time to make all those units when you could be using those resources for something else
#2 You must pay maintenance fees for those units. You are not really getting those happy faces free of charge.
#1 It takes time to make all those units when you could be using those resources for something else
#2 You must pay maintenance fees for those units. You are not really getting those happy faces free of charge.
sylvanllewelyn
Perma-newb
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 2,023
I use it slightly more liberally than most. 3 archers per city rather than 1 is always good against the random barbarian, and the increased production is worth a lot more than 1 gold maintenance. In isolated starts, it's the one secret to success, and I'm really surprised it's still a secret.
obsolete
Deity
Depending on the civics you're running, that cost can be much more than just a penny each.
Do you know how to read, seriously? Someone posted earlier whether getting Pyramids in 50% of games meant you are not playing higher levels. I was merely addressing this point, and then posted the question whether it's beneficial in all cases... I acknowledged that it's not always beneficial. But if you go back to the original poster, you will see that is was... ME. And the original question is about Hereditary Rule.
So it would sort of become a balance between paying the upkeep of military units, and investing in the
slider, right?
vicawoo
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 3,226
#2 is a problem, and it means you have to be careful.
#1, well, I was thinking the other day, I could build a temple for 80 or a warrior for 15. Don't have to research drama or calendar early. And what if you don't have pyramids (if you do, skipping monarchy is almost a no brainer), just keep your cities at size 3?
LlamaCat:
Regardless of that, there's really no point in getting snippy.
And yes, I can read. Thank you for asking.
I think that the context of the post you're responding to is the reverse, actually. If you can snag Pyramids in 50% of games, then shouldn't you be playing at a higher level?
In many ways, that's a relevant question. If you're NOT being forced to give up on the Pyramids because it would be too inefficient, then doesn't that mean that you're not playing at a high enough level?
I suppose another way to phrase the question would be: "If you snag the Pyramids in 50% of games and don't lose because of such an action, shouldn't you be playing at a higher level?"
My response is only in the nature of qualifying it in this sense. I could have typed a response this long in the first place, but I did think that it was obvious enough.
Regardless of that, there's really no point in getting snippy.
And yes, I can read. Thank you for asking.
I think that the context of the post you're responding to is the reverse, actually. If you can snag Pyramids in 50% of games, then shouldn't you be playing at a higher level?
In many ways, that's a relevant question. If you're NOT being forced to give up on the Pyramids because it would be too inefficient, then doesn't that mean that you're not playing at a high enough level?
I suppose another way to phrase the question would be: "If you snag the Pyramids in 50% of games and don't lose because of such an action, shouldn't you be playing at a higher level?"
My response is only in the nature of qualifying it in this sense. I could have typed a response this long in the first place, but I did think that it was obvious enough.
Again... I just don't understand where this question is coming from. Why do you assume I am not playing at a high enough level?
I never said I was WINNING all my games, I merely said I was building Pyramids in about half of time (and who knows how accurate that is, just my estimate). In fact I even acknowledged that this is probably not the best strategy, as I do not always win my games and am quite challenged at Prince and sometimes Noble levels right now. If I start winning most games at these levels, yes I will move up. But this issue is sidetracking from my original question. I'm just not sure how you got on this path. Since when does building the Pyramids, a wonder that comes at the very beginning of the game, guarantee victory? Wouldn't be much of a game if that were the case.
The point is I was probably using it as a crutch for getting Representation so early and wanted to hear some other ideas for HR. And I've gotten some very good responses. But these attacks about my playing level or whatever are just out of left field. There's plenty of reason to get snippy.
so back to my earlier post: Beelining toward the Pyramids and building it before the AIs is very doable in most games up to certain levels, if you really put your goal toward it. You simply sacrifice many other things if necessary... even building a second city, if you really want to. And I've done that in some games, at the severe cost of early expansion.
But it's a completely separate issue whether this means the game I am playing is too easy or winnable overall.
