1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Monarchy or Feudalism

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by CivBound, Mar 12, 2005.

  1. justanick

    justanick Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    876
    Location:
    Germany
    Communal corruption would give it some use until proper communism becomes available. Still it will have a hard time competing with republic. Making all civs religious for lower anarchy durations and making all government techs mandatory for entering the next era might shift the balance.
     
  2. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,645
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    Perhaps some kind of production bonus comparable to the commerce bonus of Republic?
    Or a military bonus like +50% combat bonus for all units.
     
  3. vorlon_mi

    vorlon_mi Just One More Turn

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    730
    Location:
    Chelsea, MI
    I was all set to make a case for buffing Feudalism's commerce to match Republic. One could then avoid building Aqueducts, and pop-rush in cities by rivers to keep them under 6. Combine that with a near-ICS settling pattern and you can create a formidable army of swords and archers. If you have better commerce, you might be able to afford upgrading them to MDI and longbows.

    But then I asked myself, "would I be willing to delay the switch out of Despotism *for the entire Ancient Age* just to get to Feudalism"? No, I answered. The key thing that would have to change about Feudalism is how early it becomes available in the game. If it were available with (say) Currency, Mathematics, or Map Making, I might consider it. If it stays a Medieval tech, and I've settled a lot of sub-size-6 cities, then the subsequent revolution from Monarchy -> Feudalism will induce a long period of non-productive anarchy.
     
  4. Quintillus

    Quintillus Archiving Civ3 Content Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,204
    Location:
    Columbus
    +50% combat bonus would be overpowered. Medieval Infantry being as powerful as Berserks, Pikemen being better than Musketmen, both being far cheaper. It would make Feudalism good... but arguably too good.

    What about a unique building for Feudalism, like how Communism has the Secret Police HQ? Maybe make a Levy building that would produce a Pikeman or Medieval Infantry every x turns in cities where it is built? Or a capital-only (requires Palace) building that generates a Knight every y turns? That would simulate the feudal levy system in a way, while also making it more enticing. Of course you'd have to make use of them to avoid going over the unit support cost, but that would just encourage war with some neighboring feudal lords.

    Balance would be a tricky thing to get right (50% more units would be nearly as overpowering as 50% stronger units), but I suspect with tweaking, the right balance could be struck.
     
  5. Empiricus

    Empiricus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Messages:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    In case you guys are all Sid level players, I admit I have no idea how things are balanced up there.

    But playing on Monarch, Feudalism is perfectly competitive and doesn´t need a boost. I have occasional fun spamming small towns, then spamming units and steamrolling a large continent. Think historical Russia under Catherine.
     
  6. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,645
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    Yes, it may be "competitive" compared to Republic or Monarchism, but is it actually "better" than the two? Or to ask it the other way around: would you perhaps have been able to do the same steamrolling under Monarchy/Republic as well? If yes, then there is no reason to switch from your earlier government to Feudalism: why suffer through a second anarchy period (that could be 8 or 9 turns long...), if you only get to a government that is competitive to your previous government? In order to justify a second anarchy, would would really have to get a government that is superior to the one you had before. Otherwise you are just wasting up to 9 turns of production, growth and income for nothing...
     
  7. Empiricus

    Empiricus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Messages:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course not better in every respect. But certainly better at saving money with many small towns and a mass army.´

    My feudal civs do not produce much money. What gold they have they get from conquests. And, of course, feudalism goes well with religion, then the anarchy problem won´t pop up.
     
  8. 777

    777 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    906
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Fin
    On my latest game I also found similar use for feudalism. I think that with forced labor and town unit support it's not a bad choice for war strategy.
     
  9. DamImLookinGood

    DamImLookinGood Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2015
    Messages:
    35
    I prefer Feudalism, it's all about making lots of cities, keeping them small, drafting or forcing citizens to make workers, explorers and warriors when necessary. Or just have them make workers continuously every ten turns, as long as they get 2 food a turn.

    Then, at the base, you have only a few cities with a large bit of land. These are your only productive cities under Feudalism, the rest are just to increase unit support, securing resources and producing workers. Not to mention covering more territory that may have resources pop up in the future.
     

Share This Page