Hereditary Rule vs Representation

[Marshall Thomas]

If you do not have any or many specialist, is there any reason to switch from a monarchy to a representative government? Civic upkeep is low for a monarchy and medium for republic. The plus two happiness for the six largest cities is not a consideration because you probably have at least two units in your six largest cities. If you have more(or any in your smaller cities), then happiness is better with Hereditary Rule. In the late game, I find myself sticking with Hereditary Rule- which is a bit un-realistic as most modern states either have no monarchy or their monarchs no longer have even a fraction of the power that they use to have. Am I simply missing something here? Even Universal Sufferage is not really an advantage over Hereditary Rule if you want to put most of your economy to research and not hurrying production. Are these the conclusions that most players come to? Would anyone please offer me an opinion on this? Thanks

 

[Goblin Fanatic]

You're reasoning is 100% correct if you indeed don't need specialists or gold-rushing.
But that's exactly a reason that you Civ4 allows to switch civics back and forth. There are different strategies for different situations. Myself, i found representation invaluable when playing a philosophical leader and making my cities food powerhouses. Then it beats representation hands down.
Suffrage is on other hand good if you have a lot of gold and need to fight a war or have even more gold. Generally, Hereditary civic is indeed good if you have many towns, many units, cottages instead of farms and don't need to hurry. Otherwise it won't pay off.
Do you play on very high difficulty or not? And don't you need to use gold-rushing when in war?

 

[Strauss]

I have the same view as you. I only switched to Suffrage in my first Monarch game, when I needed to buy loads of units to get domination before Egypt would win the Space Race. In my second Monarch game however, I didn't have the time pressure anymore and stuck with Hereditary Rule again.

I haven't used Representation in ages. For my playing style it's only useful when you get it very early (with Pyramids), when the small amount of extra research specialists get still makes a notable difference and you don't have many cities yet. Later, the amount of beakers you need gets very high and the specialists' extra research no longer makes a big difference. Hereditary Rule allows for bigger cities which are more useful IMO.

So yes, I come to the same conclusion as you, although I do think that it really depends on playing style. I'm sure there are players who find Representation and Suffrage very useful.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Thanks for your quick response. I play on monarch difficulty as Frederick- philosphical and creative. I would probably use sufferage gold rush if at war, but I've been at peace for a while. You mention building lots of farms- if you have the philosphical trait and build many farms, then is representation an improvement over hereditary rule? I'm wondering whether or not I'm doing something wrong by not having many specialist by the time I research constitution. It's just that by this time in the game, my workers have the ability to improve all the tiles that surround my cities- even lumbermills. If I take my city population off the tiles for the purpose of being specialist, it is a large price to pay in food- therefore city growth. I'd really like to learn how to use specialist effectively. I think that specialist/great persons, along with the new promotion rules, are the best new aspects of Civ 4.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I agree with Strauss. Representation is good if you get it early via the Pyramids, but not very useful otherwise. The balance is askew because if it's too good then the advantage of the Pyramids will be overwhelming. This is why (as far as I know) Representation was weakened in 1.61, but this makes it relatively pointless when you get it the normal way.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

Originally, Hereditary Rule was medium upkeep and Representation was low upkeep. Now it's been reversed, and I think it is a mistake which renders Representation almost useless. I don't use any mods except the official patches, but is there an easy way to mod this back to it's original civic upkeep?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yes there is a fairly easy way. Not exactly sure how, but check in the Creation and customization forum.
However, Representation v. Hereditary Rule is basically

Specialists v. Happiness

By the time you get Constitution you should have (or be close to having) Mercantilism... which Is truly worthwhile in combination with Representation. (Representation + Mercantilism is definitely better than HR+Decent if you have sufficient happiness)

Now Outside of Mercantilism, Representation is only worthwhile with some degree of a specialist strategy... It works well with a Science Specialist City (National Epic and Oxford... because that means that each scientist there instead of giving 7.5 Research after multipliers, gives 15 research after multipliers)

given that it costs maybe about 0.5 gold / city more than HR, it is worth while if you have sufficient happiness in your cities and at least 1 specialist for every 6 cities.

Now if you are going for a heavy Cottage Strategy, then US will be better (unless you have very New Cottages)... as long as you have sufficient happiness

 

[DaviddesJ]

By the time you get Constitution you should have (or be close to having) Mercantilism... which Is truly worthwhile in combination with Representation. (Representation + Mercantilism is definitely better than HR+Decent if you have sufficient happiness)

But you'll also have Free Market, and HR+FM is usually better than Rep+Merc.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

That depends on the population of your cities... if you have many High population cities (and so do your Trading partners) Then HR+FM is better than Rep+Merc.

On the other hand if your Friends are all running Mercantilism [or you don't have thaty many Friends], or you have a lot of smaller cities, then Mercantilism is better.

This is because the yield of a trade route depends on the population of the cities it is between, and with 1.61 Mercantilism means that there are no foreign trade routes to OR from your cities.

Then throw in the SoL and Representation Definitely becomes worthwhile.


The fact is there are a number of Combo civics based on Terain development

Specialists [Farms]=Representative, ??, Caste, Merc/Environ, Pacifism

Cottages =US, FS/Bureaucracy, Emancipation, ??, ??

The choice be tween those two groups of Civics depends on the Cottage v. Specialist balance of your economy

HR, FM, OR/FR= Generic Improvement Civics

PS, Nationalism, Vassalage, SP, Theocracy=Military Civics

 

[Marshall Thomas]

So it is true that building many farms makes a big difference in your ability to create specialist and great persons? Why are lots of cottages compatable with running universal sufferage? Why are hereditary rule and free market compatable with Generic Improvement Civics?

It sounds as though reprentation can be effective if it is combined with other appropriate civics.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Farms=Food... needed for Specialists

US=+1 Hammer With a Town
FS=+2 Commerce With a Town
(they have other benefits , but only get those towns.. ie mature cottages)


Hereditary Rule helps regardless of how you are developing (unless you have a small city with lots of resources the extra happiness can at least let you put off building some buildings, sometimes it allows you to stay productive)

Free Market is a Generic boost in commerce

For the 'complete list'
(Develped refers to buildings/city)
(Poppulation refers to /city)

Hereditary Rule... best unless one of the others special conditions are met
Representative... best if specialists (that is what it bonuses)
US...best if towns (that is what it bonuses)
PS... best if in long drawn out wars*

Vassalage...War civic
Bureaucracy... best for Small early empire
Nationalism...best for emergency situations/if none of the others apply *(Large, minimally cottaged empire)
Free Speech... best for Large, cottaged empire

Slavery...best for Low population empires
Serfdom... best if nothing else applies*
Caste... best if high numbers of specialists
Emancipation..best if Cottages, or unhappiness problems (from Others with Emancipation)


Mercantilist... best in Developed Low population empires (and in combination with specialist Civics)
Free Market.. best in Developed High population empires
State Property.. best in undeveloped empires
Environmentalism...best for some unique High population empires*

Pacifism..best for Specialists*
Free Religion..best for multi-religion empires
Organized religion... best for general Development
Theocracy..War Civic


* This civic is probably rarely used as it is fairly specialized.

 

[player1 fanatic]

I pretty much agree with first poster.

And personally, I think Representation got overnerfed with patches.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

When you build the Forbiden Palace(which you cannot do without several courthouses), I suppose that State Property becomes completely obsolete. I play on a huge, terra map- so the Forbiden Palace is always build in the new world. If I'm not running state property, the construction of the Forbiden Palace saves about 70gp per turn! At this point Free Market is definately best. Like a previous poster wrote, state property is best for underdeveloped nations(nations without many courthouses). In my games, the completion of the Forbiden Palace is by far the best single thing that I can do for my economy.

 

[KiOwA_25]

I find that when my empire grows to a certain size, State Property saves me more gold in maintanence than Free Market gains me in commerce, even with courthouses, the Forbidden Palace and yes, Versailles.

Yes, many of my cities are heavily-developed metropolises.

The bonus to food for watermills and workshops is usually just gravy, but it makes great watermilling out of river cities.

 

[MrCynical]

When you build the Forbiden Palace(which you cannot do without several courthouses), I suppose that State Property becomes completely obsolete

Not at all. The forbidden palace significantly reduces distance maintenance costs, but it by no means eliminates them. State property eliminates tehm completely, and so is still useful. Hence the Forbidden Palace is irrelevant when running state property, but not vice versa.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I find that when my empire grows to a certain size, State Property saves me more gold in maintanence than Free Market gains me in commerce, even with courthouses, the Forbidden Palace and yes, Versailles.
.

Except Free Market commerce also gives you Science not just Gold. also you need widespread Banks/Markets/ Griocers... as well as Science Buildings to make it truly beneficial, not just courthouses. Because buildings help Free Market commerce, but not State Property savings.

 

[KiOwA_25]

Factor in the difference in Upkeep costs between Free Market and State Property. Going from Medium to None is nothing to sneeze at, methinks.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Factor in the difference in Upkeep costs between Free Market and State Property. Going from Medium to None is nothing to sneeze at, methinks.

Medium to Low... definitely Sneezable (State Property was nerfed in the patch)

 

[KiOwA_25]

Oh yeah, Low Upkeep for State Property since 1.61. My bad.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

To determine if I should use state property or free market, I usually look at my city distance maintanance cost. Then I think of an average amount of a single trade route for most of my cities. I multiply this by my number of cities. After which I compare the two. I'm really not sure if this is an accurate way to compare the two civics. It seems over-simplified. Would anyone please offer some thoughts on this? Thanks