Road every worked tile asap,oilfan said:
Get marketplaces asap,
get cities to size 7 or higher,
dont be aftraid to use the lux slider, and aquire luxes at all cost
Most useful government
- Thread starter b-rizzle
- Start date
Get marketplaces asap,
get cities to size 7 or higher,
dont be aftraid to use the lux slider, and aquire luxes at all cost
sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
1) Republic
2) then commie since I always seem to get into long drawn out wars..
2) then commie since I always seem to get into long drawn out wars..
tR1cKy
taking over the world
Beware of Republic in higher difficulty levels. I concede that up to Monarch it may be better than Monarchy, if you plan your strategy wisely you can wage war without being attacked once and without having a single enemy unit in your territory. In such a situation, war weariness can be a non-issue, since your war is pretty much over before any significant WW effect shows up.
I've just finished a Monarch level game with Persia. Well, i went for Monarchy as usual but i've been left with the doubt that in Republic i could have done better. Why? My campaigns were rapid and effective. My units were attacked less than 10 times in the whole game. I've almost never had an enemy unit in my territory. Probably in Republic i wouldn't have suffered war weariness penalties as well, and the lux slider would have been enough to compensate for the lack of military police.
However, in Deity (and above) things are far different. You are at war for the most part of your game. Enemy attacks are frequent. Harassers in player's territory are the norm. Kill zones are often necessary to lure approaching enemy troops into attacking in unfavourable territory (for them, of course). And having a war last long is often a useful strategy to weaken a republican or democratic enemy with war weariness penalty. All those tactics listed above have the side-effect of raising your war weariness very quickly. If you're in Republic you may be hit quite hard. If you're in Monarchy, you can live happily in such a situation as long as you want.
I've just finished a Monarch level game with Persia. Well, i went for Monarchy as usual but i've been left with the doubt that in Republic i could have done better. Why? My campaigns were rapid and effective. My units were attacked less than 10 times in the whole game. I've almost never had an enemy unit in my territory. Probably in Republic i wouldn't have suffered war weariness penalties as well, and the lux slider would have been enough to compensate for the lack of military police.
However, in Deity (and above) things are far different. You are at war for the most part of your game. Enemy attacks are frequent. Harassers in player's territory are the norm. Kill zones are often necessary to lure approaching enemy troops into attacking in unfavourable territory (for them, of course). And having a war last long is often a useful strategy to weaken a republican or democratic enemy with war weariness penalty. All those tactics listed above have the side-effect of raising your war weariness very quickly. If you're in Republic you may be hit quite hard. If you're in Monarchy, you can live happily in such a situation as long as you want.
SJ Frank
Spamalot Co-court
Well, at least in C3C, having enemy in my territory raises my WW by only 1 point per turn, so there is no need to worry about that. Getting attacked is the biggie, but I have a warring style that avoids it most of the time.
After declaration of war, I would always wait for the AI troops to come to me. While in my territory, with mobility at my advantage and bombardment support, I could always avoid being attacked.
I do not start my offensive until the AI unit flood slows down to a trickle (i.e. they have used up all of their stored units, and is sending freshly produced units only), and not until the AIs have established their reinforcement route. Once I knew which route they are taking to attack me, I simply send my SoD into their territory on a different route. This way, my SoD never meet their offensive units head on.
It is much slower advancing this way. I would even retreat my SoD if I can't get it through to my target city without being attacked. So in this battle plan, avoiding WW is actually more important than taking cities. I ususally take no more than 2 cities per 10 turns this way, but I do get to fight 20, 30 turns without raising the lux slider.
I don't think it is the optium battle plan for most people, but it is something that I have gotten very comfortable with. I think it goes to show that if you make certain things a priority, and plan accordingly, then you can achieve that goal.
After declaration of war, I would always wait for the AI troops to come to me. While in my territory, with mobility at my advantage and bombardment support, I could always avoid being attacked.
I do not start my offensive until the AI unit flood slows down to a trickle (i.e. they have used up all of their stored units, and is sending freshly produced units only), and not until the AIs have established their reinforcement route. Once I knew which route they are taking to attack me, I simply send my SoD into their territory on a different route. This way, my SoD never meet their offensive units head on.
It is much slower advancing this way. I would even retreat my SoD if I can't get it through to my target city without being attacked. So in this battle plan, avoiding WW is actually more important than taking cities. I ususally take no more than 2 cities per 10 turns this way, but I do get to fight 20, 30 turns without raising the lux slider.
I don't think it is the optium battle plan for most people, but it is something that I have gotten very comfortable with. I think it goes to show that if you make certain things a priority, and plan accordingly, then you can achieve that goal.
tR1cKy
taking over the world
For sure, it's slow. And it seems quite uneffective when you go up in difficulty levels. The AS can build new units dirt cheap, and the flow of enemy attackers may never dry up. OTOH, friendly units are quite likely to be attacked.
Sure they dry up. It goes from 50-80 units/turn to 10-15. That's dried up and you can go on the offensive. As you go up in difficulty levels, the extra commerce of Republic becomes even more important -- I'd almost say critical for the average game.
About the only time Monarchy is even close to Republic is under maximum war weariness with units fairly significantly outnumbering what you can afford and you have few commerce-improving buildings. Or if you're too slow to get roads and your land is terribly unimproved.
Republic except Always War
Monarchy for Always War
Communism if you're large but not yet fully in charge and/or you're religious
Rest -- never
Arathorn
About the only time Monarchy is even close to Republic is under maximum war weariness with units fairly significantly outnumbering what you can afford and you have few commerce-improving buildings. Or if you're too slow to get roads and your land is terribly unimproved.
Republic except Always War
Monarchy for Always War
Communism if you're large but not yet fully in charge and/or you're religious
Rest -- never
Arathorn
thetrooper
Misanthrope
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 9,098
Arathorn is posting again! 
Much appreciated.
Much appreciated.
tR1cKy
taking over the world
This goes against my personal experience. But probably we are talking of 2 different things, republic in conquest is different from the same government in vanilla/ptw.Arathorn said:
In my early days, i switched often to democracy. Now i'm usually in monarchy until the end of the game and, yes, there's less money income, but not too much to be defined "critical". I've won a space race in deity and was able to achieve the technological lead in the early industrial age. It's just a little more difficult, but it can be done.
I strongly disagree with that. Judging from my past experience, once war weariness starts to hit, the commerce bonus is quickly negated by the amount of money that must be spent with the luxury slider. And even in that situation, you are quite likely to lose the WLKTD in many cities. More corruption -> less income!Arathorn said:
While in monarchy, i've been able to research modern age techs in 6/7 turns, and i got 1000+ gold per turn surplus. Good only for always war?!?
SJ Frank
Spamalot Co-court
tR1cKy said:
My feeling is that Republic is stronger in C3C, due to the added unit support, but that's not the major reason why your experience is so much different from mine. I think the culpit is the change to FP in C3C. In vanilla, I could conquer my neighbor, move the capital, and become almost twice as strong as before. That's not possible anymore in C3C. Here, it doens't matter how much I conquer, I'm no more than 20-40% stronger, and that's not enough to offset the difficulty level penalty.
In C3C, I have never been able to take a tech lead and hold it, unless I just went ahead and conquered everybody, of course
Hince the need to change warring style and avoid WW. Warring in Republic is not a race against time. Most of the times, I feel like I need to drag the war out for as long as possible. It came from experiences from Always War games. I knew how devastating war is to AI's growth, so if I could fight and grow at the same time and they can't, then I'll come out ahead.
@Arathorn
Good to see an old veteran around
The extra income each citizen produces in Republic can be used to keep that person happy, even under maximum war weariness.
Consider a size 12 city with a marketplace, bank, 0% science, roads in every square, and let's say 0 river squares. For example, we'll give the civ 3 luxuries, though it doesn't matter much.
Monarchy: Base commerce is 26 (2*13). Base happiness is 5 (emperor or higher level, so 1 born happy, plus 4 from luxes). Say you have 2 MPs (cancelling out free unit differential), so 7 happy. The town needs 5 more happy. Those will cost at least 5 gold. To make monarchy look better, say it's all lux tax. Monarchy needs 20% to get the town happy. Leaves 21 commerce. Doubles to 42.
Republic: Base commerce: 39 (3*13). Max war weariness, so happiness is -7 (5 as above -12 for war weariness). Need 19 happiness from lux tax. 50% lux leaves 20 commerce. Doubles to 40.
Very tiny edge to Monarchy in EXTREME conditions.
Change the parameters a bit and Republic looks a bit better. Give the town a temple and cathedral in both cases (+4 happy faces).
Monarch: Still needs 10% lux. Leaves 23 commerce doubled to 46.
Republic: Needs 15 happy from luxes, or 40%. Leaves 23 commerce doubled to 46. Same commerce.
End the war. No war weariness.
Monarch: Still 21/42 or 23/46, depending on other happiness.
Republic: Lux tax goes way down, to 20% in the first case (7 happies needed, 8 provided), leaving 31/62 commerce. Second case 10% luxes work (3 happies needed, 4 provided), so commerce is 35/70.
BIG win for Republic.
Stacking the deck for Monarchy, you can make it marginally better, maybe as much as 5 commerce better in a realistic case. General case for Republic is far FAR better than Monarchy.
Also, note in both cases, the Monarchy example has MORE shields dedicated to the town (MPs) than the Republic case.
Arathorn
Consider a size 12 city with a marketplace, bank, 0% science, roads in every square, and let's say 0 river squares. For example, we'll give the civ 3 luxuries, though it doesn't matter much.
Monarchy: Base commerce is 26 (2*13). Base happiness is 5 (emperor or higher level, so 1 born happy, plus 4 from luxes). Say you have 2 MPs (cancelling out free unit differential), so 7 happy. The town needs 5 more happy. Those will cost at least 5 gold. To make monarchy look better, say it's all lux tax. Monarchy needs 20% to get the town happy. Leaves 21 commerce. Doubles to 42.
Republic: Base commerce: 39 (3*13). Max war weariness, so happiness is -7 (5 as above -12 for war weariness). Need 19 happiness from lux tax. 50% lux leaves 20 commerce. Doubles to 40.
Very tiny edge to Monarchy in EXTREME conditions.
Change the parameters a bit and Republic looks a bit better. Give the town a temple and cathedral in both cases (+4 happy faces).
Monarch: Still needs 10% lux. Leaves 23 commerce doubled to 46.
Republic: Needs 15 happy from luxes, or 40%. Leaves 23 commerce doubled to 46. Same commerce.
End the war. No war weariness.
Monarch: Still 21/42 or 23/46, depending on other happiness.
Republic: Lux tax goes way down, to 20% in the first case (7 happies needed, 8 provided), leaving 31/62 commerce. Second case 10% luxes work (3 happies needed, 4 provided), so commerce is 35/70.
BIG win for Republic.
Stacking the deck for Monarchy, you can make it marginally better, maybe as much as 5 commerce better in a realistic case. General case for Republic is far FAR better than Monarchy.
Also, note in both cases, the Monarchy example has MORE shields dedicated to the town (MPs) than the Republic case.
Arathorn
tR1cKy
taking over the world
Arathorn, i still have to check all this (i will soon) but there seems to be an error in the premise:
Aren't you mixing "happy" and "content" together? Lux gives happy faces, MP content ones. The city mood should be 4 happy, 3 content, 5 unhappy. And this means that i need only 1 happy or content face more, not 5. A third mp should do the job.
Since all that is needed is (# happy)>=(# unhappy), it doesn't matter whether the happiness given makes unhappy content or content happy.
Size 12 town in monarchy in Emperor+ will naturally be 1 content, 11 unhappy. 4 "happiness" from luxes makes the first happy, then the second content, and the second happy, then the third content, giving 2 happy, 1 content, and 9 unhappy. 2 MPs make 2 happy, 3 content, and 7 unhappy. But that's equivalent, in the sense of how many additional happy faces must be added, to 3 happy, 1 content, and 8 unhappy. Both need 5 more "happy" factors to avoid a riot. It doesn't matter whether you have 12 content or 6 happy and 6 unhappy, the town won't riot, and equivalent "happy" factors will get you to the situation. While there is a distinction between moving from content to happy and unhappy to content, it doesn't matter for anti-rioting, only for WLT*D. I'm only concerned with preventing riots.
NB: One lux happy face will make a content citizen happy if possible. If not, it will make one unhappy citizen content. It does NOT make an unhappy citizen content. Happiness from lux tax works the same way. MP can only make unhappy content. But they all provide one "happy". As long as "happy">=0, the town won't riot.
If you don't understand the basic mechanisms of riot prevention, I don't find your opinion on governments relevant or well-grounded, at all.
Arathorn
Size 12 town in monarchy in Emperor+ will naturally be 1 content, 11 unhappy. 4 "happiness" from luxes makes the first happy, then the second content, and the second happy, then the third content, giving 2 happy, 1 content, and 9 unhappy. 2 MPs make 2 happy, 3 content, and 7 unhappy. But that's equivalent, in the sense of how many additional happy faces must be added, to 3 happy, 1 content, and 8 unhappy. Both need 5 more "happy" factors to avoid a riot. It doesn't matter whether you have 12 content or 6 happy and 6 unhappy, the town won't riot, and equivalent "happy" factors will get you to the situation. While there is a distinction between moving from content to happy and unhappy to content, it doesn't matter for anti-rioting, only for WLT*D. I'm only concerned with preventing riots.
NB: One lux happy face will make a content citizen happy if possible. If not, it will make one unhappy citizen content. It does NOT make an unhappy citizen content. Happiness from lux tax works the same way. MP can only make unhappy content. But they all provide one "happy". As long as "happy">=0, the town won't riot.
If you don't understand the basic mechanisms of riot prevention, I don't find your opinion on governments relevant or well-grounded, at all.
Arathorn
tR1cKy
taking over the world
Ok, i checked, and the happiness mechanism works as you say. I was wrong. My fault. However, your analysis covers only the rioting problem, not the whole issue of Monarchy vs. Republic.
First, you don't take into account the WLKTD, which is a relevant factor, since it reduces corruption. With mp, cities under monarchy are more likely to go into WLKTD, while cities under a republic won't.
Second, your precise calculations go astray when corruption is considered. What if the city is 50% corrupt? It needs the same amount of money devoted to luxury to avoid riot, but the percentage of luxury spending must be higher.
Third, corruption or not, republic needs a higher percentage of luxury spending than monarchy to avoid riot. And since this percentage is the same for all the cities, it's quite likely that some cities won't need all that luxury spending to keep the population under control, and this causes a waste of money.
Choosing to ignore some aspects of the problem in order to have your point prevailing over mine is not 100% correct...
... and this is far from being 100% correct.
EDIT: my coverage is incomplete as well, since it doesn't take into account the use of clowns. But at this point things get quite complicated.
First, you don't take into account the WLKTD, which is a relevant factor, since it reduces corruption. With mp, cities under monarchy are more likely to go into WLKTD, while cities under a republic won't.
Second, your precise calculations go astray when corruption is considered. What if the city is 50% corrupt? It needs the same amount of money devoted to luxury to avoid riot, but the percentage of luxury spending must be higher.
Third, corruption or not, republic needs a higher percentage of luxury spending than monarchy to avoid riot. And since this percentage is the same for all the cities, it's quite likely that some cities won't need all that luxury spending to keep the population under control, and this causes a waste of money.
Choosing to ignore some aspects of the problem in order to have your point prevailing over mine is not 100% correct...
Arathorn said:
... and this is far from being 100% correct.
EDIT: my coverage is incomplete as well, since it doesn't take into account the use of clowns. But at this point things get quite complicated.
Actually, it only lowers waste. But WLKTD is pretty rare at the upper difficulty levels. If you have the 6+ luxes to do that, the same is already won, and your govt. selection is no longer really an issue.
Yep. That's a valid point. Corruption changes things some. More corrupt cities tend to be smaller (founded later), in general, and you have more games to play, however. Corruption changes things, but not too significantly.
Sometimes, but the point is that Republic gives a whole heckuva lot more commerce than Monarchy, more than making up for the difference in lux tax (e.g. my first example, where 50% lux tax in Republic is almost equivalent to 20% lux tax in Monarch). 30% lux under Republic gives more cash than 20% lux under Monarchy. Also, since Republics produce so much more commerce than Monarchies, you can often keep lux tax the same and get the additional happy faces you need for a Republic, simply from the commerce bonus.
True, there is some inefficiency in Republic. But with roughly 33% more commerce to begin with, a small inefficiency isn't a big deal. Worst case for intelligent play, ~10% of the commerce is lost to inefficiency, leaving an ~20% commerce gain for Republic, in general situations. Not counting not needing shields sunk into MPs or the lower corruption.
Actually, it is. Note the key word I. Other people can (and probably do) find different than I, but I am 100% allowed to form my own opinions, and your telling me otherwise doesn't change that. My goal in this is to help others learn from our discussion.
Arathorn
