Monarchy or Communism?

[vmxa]

You just spend way too much time in despotism going for Feud. If you are playing below DG the AI is not going to be have tech in time for anything after the AA. As a warmonger I will go Monarch and not switch to anything.

When I become a behemoth, why would I care about communist? The game is long over, so do whatever you like. At levels like Emp or less they are probably not going to learn Commie for me to steal or trade, at least in time to matter.

I have no interest in Nat as I race to Infantry skip another optional tech. Never need to mob or draft at any level anyway.

You are going to get 8 turns of anarchy switching as a behemoth,maybe 9 turns. Really that makes sense? To gain what? A few more cities slightly less corrupt? What do I care about that? How many turns off a cav or a tank will that give me and why would I need it?

I have armies do smash anything I want. Oh wait, you are not going to tell me you are religious civ and gave up a good trait are you?

Look CAII will tell you commie is more productive at a later stage of the game. It does not tell you how much that is going to cost you to become communistic. I have had 511 towns in a 250x250 AWE and never felt the need to get out of monarchy. Just let those towns farm away and techs will come racing in.

The core will make enough units to fill those armies that keep showing up. I then will not have to go around trying to spend time build crap like police stations to turn that 18 shield town into a 20 shield town, just so it can do nothing as I do not need it to build or do anything except farm.

I canot recall ever going to mob outside of an SG. Same for drafting, but I know I have done it once or twice long long ago. Not use commie since, well I do not know when.

 

[vmxa]

I often get those for free in a trade or when I make peace.

Two things:

warmongers do not make peace very often

they have to have those techs to give them and they seldom have them below Emp and not all that often at emp.

 

[vmxa]

Just to see what the situation may be loike I looked at a training game on Monarch. I think it was AWM. This should be a reasonable guideline about commie and the AI as it is at Monarch level and is a training game, so some players will not be super experienced.

The game ended in the late 1600's as I recall and the AI did not get close to communism research. That is about what I would have expected. They in fact did not have a single IA tech, again about what you would expect.

My point is that I do not see how you can expect to get communism from the AI at levels like Emp or less, they just cannot do that well. Island games, maybe so as it will take me longer to get to them and kill them.

Really massive maps like 200x200 or more, again maybe so as it takes more time to hunt them down. Maybe not, if you made the map tech cost ratio on par with the std size maps.

 

[scratchthepitch]

I tried monarchy once. Didn't care for it and never bothered researching the advance after that. I usually try for the republic "slingshot". The only later government I like to use is communist. Republic for when the empire is small with small military. Communist if the corruption and unit cost of a large empire start to weigh it down too much or wars cause too much unhappiness.

 

[del62]

Surely a large kingdom in republic means you will have low unit support

Edit : Large empire, of course Large Kingdom and republic is a bit of an oxymoron

 

[RickFGS]

You just spend way too much time in despotism going for Feud. If you are playing below DG the AI is not going to be have tech in time for anything after the AA. As a warmonger I will go Monarch and not switch to anything.

How so? If i ignore Monarchy i will get Feudalism after researching Construction probably...

When I become a behemoth, why would I care about communist? The game is long over, so do whatever you like. At levels like Emp or less they are probably not going to learn Commie for me to steal or trade, at least in time to matter.

You can become a behemoth against human players/AI above emperors before feudalism? Why even waste production in trying that? Is it not better to upgrade units after having MDI´S? and possibly Knights even?

I have no interest in Nat as I race to Infantry skip another optional tech. Never need to mob or draft at any level anyway.

I always use Mobilization, sometimes i even ignore Factories, afterall i can kill everyone on the map after i´m Commie + Mobilization + Golden Age + Drafting ability.

You are going to get 8 turns of anarchy switching as a behemoth,maybe 9 turns. Really that makes sense? To gain what? A few more cities slightly less corrupt? What do I care about that? How many turns off a cav or a tank will that give me and why would I need it?

I never lose 8 turns in anarchy, i always interfere in the IBT sequence and slow that down to 4/5 turns if i´m not religious, when i aim to play Feud-Commie, i tend to choose a religious civ with agri/ind bonus as second trait.

I have armies do smash anything I want. Oh wait, you are not going to tell me you are religious civ and gave up a good trait are you?

No, i´m not religious most of the times, in fact may favorite are Industrial and Seafaring traits, i don´t even like to play Agri because i find it makes the player weaker on the long run, because he gets used to an easy growth.

Besides, i use Feudalism for a reason, i build my army on the outer ring, as i sated, in the CxCxC towns, you can easily see that i whip them for production, but not from scratch, i use shortrushing to build what i need. They can grow back during anarchy, i also use a lot of workers. My money is spent 3 ways: Upgrades, Research or Stealing Techs, in that order, depending on how the game goes.

Look CAII will tell you commie is more productive at a later stage of the game. It does not tell you how much that is going to cost you to become communistic. I have had 511 towns in a 250x250 AWE and never felt the need to get out of monarchy. Just let those towns farm away and techs will come racing in.

True, i can´t argue there, but, that is valid aganist the AI, if you are facing a human behemoth player in Monarchy, while he is Commie and skilfull (meaning he uses Mobilization) you´re as good as dead.

The core will make enough units to fill those armies that keep showing up. I then will not have to go around trying to spend time build crap like police stations to turn that 18 shield town into a 20 shield town, just so it can do nothing as I do not need it to build or do anything except farm.

True, but, if the map is huge and against human players that will probably be limiting, of course against the AI, that is valid, as they usually throw away their units like paper waste.

Also, the powerfull stuff is the policeman specialists, not the Police station properly.

I canot recall ever going to mob outside of an SG. Same for drafting, but I know I have done it once or twice long long ago. Not use commie since, well I do not know when.

I guess i don´t play against the AI as much as i would like, i tend to play hotseat/PBEM games against human players, so Monarchy is very good at an early stage, but the player always seem to get trapped in a vicious cycle of low amount of units, no ability to whip and little money for short rushes, since there is no trade bonus, but the money as to be spent in research, feudalism can support everything, whip what it needs (and it doesn´t need much) and just overrun neighbours to a behemoth size, preparing for the change to Commie later on, since Feudalism will get behind in the tech race.

The problem is if the Monarch player gets in the same continent as the Feudalism player, he will just get creamed if they both have a good gameplay skills.

In overall i agree using Monarchy as soon as possible from start in a AAW scenario is the way to go, i´m just stating that the usage of Feudalism to warmongering can be efective if you aim to change to Commie later, of course, you should have tech partners and agreements going on to avoid beeing tech ********, and again, the huge feud empire always makes the other AI´s/human players friendly to me, why? i wonder?

Also, i don´t agree that religious trait is a waste of trait, you get no anarchy, thus you can change governments easily, but you get cheaper religious buildings (temples/cathedrals), as a Feudal government, this trait actually works very well, a cheap short rush whip for temples on borders give me the breathing room i need against human invasions and steals space from the AI, not to mention it´s a warning sentry net on its own, and makes people hapier from all the warmongering. In core cities i don´t even whip, i just build from scratch in 2/3 turns allowing me to concentrate my production in what really matters, warriors/chariots and galleys, catapults can be whipped.

Lastly, a feudal gov allows for a huge workforce of workers and combat settlers going around (something that Monarchy fails miserably), the police limit of 3 is perfect to sentry all those units waiting for upgrading, ok, its the same as Monarchy, but the monarchs are spending their money on researching and unit support (not to mention all that luxuries parties to make the people happy), while Feudal is spending only on research.

So for me, Feudal is a sort of all or nothing gamble, but that fits well on my focused style of warmongering.

 

[vmxa]

Anything I ever say is always based on non modified game and not MP. So few players every play MP that is not germaine.

The way you lose out by going for Fued and ignoring Rep/Mon is you cannot get to the Middle Age to get Fued, until you learn all the required techs in the AA. You could have learned either Rep or Monarchy without learning a number of techs.

That means you spent a lot more time in despotism, than you had to. MP tactics belong in the MP forum or at least let us know that is what you are talking about.

 

[vmxa]

"I never lose 8 turns in anarchy, i always interfere in the IBT sequence and slow that down to 4/5 turns if i´m not religious."

No idea what you are talking about here, but it sounds like cheating to me. I would not want to have you in any game, if you think i is fine to circumvent game mechanics. Again, if you are going to offer MP advice, do at least tell everyone you are refering to MP.

Had I known that was the format, I would not even have read the post.

 

[RickFGS]

"I never lose 8 turns in anarchy, i always interfere in the IBT sequence and slow that down to 4/5 turns if i´m not religious."

No idea what you are talking about here, but it sounds like cheating to me. I would not want to have you in any game, if you think i is fine to circumvent game mechanics. Again, if you are going to offer MP advice, do at least tell everyone you are refering to MP.

Had I known that was the format, I would not even have read the post.

No cheating, just use the "what´s the big picture" option when you discover Feudalism, that way you are interfering in the IBT sequence, because you are acessing the domestic advisor while the game is still loading the shields output. You can then rush things by scrolling the cities and revolting while still in the IBT sequence trough the domestic advisor, the game will then proceed to anarchy, but the turns of anarchy will count as one already gone, efectively diminushing your anarchy for at least one turn, most cases, this "manouver" tends to achieve anarchies of 4/5t of lenght, no cheating involved whatsoever, it´s just how it is.

My tactic is valid for human and AI players alike.

 

[RickFGS]

Anything I ever say is always based on non modified game and not MP. So few players every play MP that is not germaine.

The way you lose out by going for Fued and ignoring Rep/Mon is you cannot get to the Middle Age to get Fued, until you learn all the required techs in the AA. You could have learned either Rep or Monarchy without learning a number of techs.

That means you spent a lot more time in despotism, than you had to. MP tactics belong in the MP forum or at least let us know that is what you are talking about.

AI´s tend to develop a lot of that other techs you state, plus, Monarchy or Republic are quite expensive to research even in the ancient age, i always find myself easier to achieve all the other AA techs then to research Mon/Rep even at full speed...

My money usually goes for Construction, trades nails me CoL, Currency and Monotheism in most cases...

 

[vmxa]

What can I say? Everything I said is demonstrable, just look at the scores of game in the forum and the SG's. What you have said makes no sense and does not match any games I have played or read. I have never seen a a massive empire get 4 or 5 turn anarchy in revolt. What size empire are you talking about?

You do not become a behemoth by killing off one or two AI's. At least not what I would call a behemoth.

If you had this big empire playing a human they would just surrender. The AI will not be helping you get the late AA techs, it will either be too weak and slow at lower levels or you will be too slow at higher levels.

You make contradictory statements, first not religious and then you say you use religious and AG on the games that match the given parameters (going commie and warmonger).

I don't care about MP I only care that you are telling players to go commie and that is not a good plan, unless you are going for some HoF run or for giggles. You are free to use any scheme that suites you and best of luck to you.

 

[RickFGS]

You are absolutely right, i will try my luck on some HOF and SG games then, i have to prove my ways on the field.

I recognize that beeing Monarchy and Republic is the most common and proven way and achieves a lot of high scores in the game, and i´m in no way saying that they are a bad choice, i´m justsaying that for some particular type of players, maybe Feudalism is best... I´ll have to prove it otherwise to back my words, wish me luck, you are welcome to join and give advises to whenever you see me make some bad decisions.

You recomend any SG, HOF in particular?

 

[vmxa]

There is a list of SG games for training games that is pretty well done by Aabraxan. Just look for the level you are interested in and the type of game. Most are probably AW games though, but not all.

HoF I stay away from as they all require you to use special maps to get to those scores and often to get an SGL very very early.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=344235

 

[Spoonwood]

There is a list of SG games for training games that is pretty well done by Aabraxan. Just look for the level you are interested in and the type of game. Most are probably AW games though, but not all.

HoF I stay away from as they all require you to use special maps to get to those scores and often to get an SGL very very early.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=344235

That's generally if you want to get 1st place on the table. There do exist empty tables, tables with a few entries, and tables with 7-9 entries, but still have an open spot. There do exist variant games in there also (OCC, 5CC, not sure about AW), though admittedly the HoF isn't all that great at seeing how someone will do with an "average" or "weak" start... the XOTM competitions do a better job with that.

 

[RickFGS]

Thank you both, i will dig in this.