Ok, I'll admit it - Monarchy Rules!

[Bamspeedy]

First time ever really using monarchy. Monarch level/huge pangea map/8civs. I always hated it, because commerce and research sucks compared to republic. But with v1.17f, it's better usually to not research at all, so science I set to 0%. I found out how useful those military police really are. With no war-weariness I could wage wars for hundreds of years, slowly taking cities one by one without worrying about war-weariness. I prefer this much more than my old tactic of massing 50-75 units at a border before declaring war, so war would end before war-weariness would really kick in.

I have over 100 cities, 399 units (all free). I have a 99% approval rating and rank #1 in all areas except literacy (no libraries), disease (lots of jungle yet to chop down), family size and military service. Built temples, courthouses, marketplaces, and banks in all my cities. Didn't need to worry about cathedrals, colleseums, libraries, etc, unless I really wanted the culture.

With a lower culture I have experienced the city flipping of conquered cities, that many have complained about (I decided to keep the cities instead of starving them down). It was only a minor nuisense for me. But why would a city flip that is 3 cities away from it's original civ?? I thought it would only be cities that were still near the capital and/or other towns of its culture (like if the city was engulfed by culture from nearby cities). Cities seemed to always flip if I had less than 1 military unit/2 citizens. (like 3 units in a size 7 city), and this was after the resistance was quelled. Everything would be fine up to size 6, but when it hit 7 = FLIP.

I'm making so much money that I have a net profit of over 1200/turn to rush buy improvements in the newly conquered towns. Treasury 100%, Science 0%, luxury 0%. And this is after the expense of 138 gold/turn to get allies and access two luxuries I don't have. I can always get the latest techs by selling my world map and 300-500 gold. If I suddenly decide I wanted to research something myself (in this case replacable parts), it would take me 12 turns (with science up to 70%), I switched over to democracy and it would have taken me 8 turns.

Democracy was making more money, but since I had been at war for so long, I went from 99% approval rating to 61%.

Beat the AI to the wonders I wanted (Pyramids, Sun-Tzu's, JS Bachs, Adam Smith's) by pre-building the palace, so being the first to a tech didn't matter. Since I wasn't helping the AI with research, it slowed down the tech rate and I was able to use my knights and cavalry for a lot longer time than I usually could.

 

[LordAzreal]

Yeah. Monarchy is seriously underrated (well it has been since the patch). I have become quite a superpower in the middle ages, by simply being a monarchy. I rule most of the large continent I am on (having already wiped out Germany and India), with the two civs left (England and Russia) only occupying minor peninsulas and cultural gaps left where I burnt down most of India (which wasn't really much at all).

If I had've been a republic, my economy would've been non-existant, as every unit must be paid for. Also, the few cities I actually took would've continually been a thorn in my side were it not for the military police that monarchy offers (damn resistance). In fact, most of my cities are in "We love the Emperor" mode (I am using the Romans), and don't look like they're going to change that good mood any time soon (even with my luxury rating at big fat ZERO). My many supplies of incense, ivory, silk and dyes acquired from my conquests really help give the marketplaces much more power than even cathedrals with the Sistine Chapel. Without monarchy, my expansion would've been cut short by resistance and war weariness, and I wouldn't have access to so many luxuries. Can you imagine what will happen when I switch to republic or democracy and give 10% to my luxury rating? I don't think that there will be anybody in the empire unhappy with my regime.

Not only that, but when I took some of the lesser cities, there was no resistance and in fact some of the foreign nationals were already happy and ready to contribute to a "We love the Emperor" celebration (as soon as my spare settlers/workers fill the population to 6). When I took London (in quite a fertile spot), I didn't even have to fill the population with settlers and workers before the two English nationals left in the village were a minority surrounded by Romans. Assimilation was short and sweet as London became a bustling, fully Roman city.

I am definitely sticking with Monarchy for quite a while, at least until I don't have to fight to continue the expansion of my power. Then maybe I'll consider democracy. I don't even want anything to do with communism anymore, as I am a strong advocate of human rights, and would rather be paying to hurry things rather than using forced labour.

Monarchy is definitely a government for people who want total control, but don't want to violate human rights by whipping the population into hurrying projects. And since it is now 40 turns before the people of a city forget that you whipped them earlier, the unhappiness caused by it becomes a huge thorn in your side when you rule most of the world.

However, if I am on a sizable continent by myself, I'll go for a republic early on, as the huge science lead will really pay off in the end, when I decide to expand my territory overseas. Then, I'll consider using monarchy. And stick with it until the dust settles, with my empire being the only survivors.

 

[chiefpaco]

Bamspeedy's ruling by Monarchy! Uh-oh! What next?

0 research rules the 1.17. It is possible to get ahead, but it's so much work...

Anyway, isn't it fun trying different ways to play the game?

Also, don't switch out. Be strong! Resist the democracy pull! Resist the Republic too! Your money-making Monarchy is Utopia. Grow the cities to Metropolis to support your flashy army!

One of my favourite Monarchy moves occurs when my war stalls because of heavy losses. Do I desperately try to sign a peace treaty? No. Take a few turns, rebuild, & continue the attack!

Now we'll have to work on converting eyrei to Monarchy . heehee.

 

[JoseM]

democracy is the best goverment... at least at the modern age... ur cities produce more and better.

 

[Tassadar]

i think the power of republic is when your are able to hav 3 luxuries, market place and bank, the money increse is tremendous and you can support large army, but before bank its difficult to built large army to go to war.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Republic is excellent when you have haapiness wonders and lotsa lux, and don`t plan on war. Otherwise, see Bamspeedy`s original post!

 

[eyrei]

I fight wars all the time in republic, and I never have much war weariness. Of course, the AI is always the aggressor, so my people understand that I must make them pay.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by eyrei
I fight wars all the time in republic, and I never have much war weariness. Of course, the AI is always the aggressor, so my people understand that I must make them pay.

Shouldn`t you have put the always and of course into "" ??

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Killer


Shouldn`t you have put the always and of course into "" ??

Sorry Killer. I don't quite follow.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

i'm first to mordern age and plan on going to war for a very long time.

persia, large map, 12 civs, emperor level.

i have damn near ALL the improvements in my core cities including the ones captured from england, germany and the sadly deceased aztec empire. england was destroyed under despotism and germany and the aztecs under republic.

the iroquois are huge and are my next target and i am getting computers in the next 5 turns to build research labs b4 mobilisation. the iroquois are still fighting with cavalry...

how long can i comfortably wage war against the iroquois b4 war weariness screws me up? the iroquois have lots of wonders and so resistance will be substantial unless their current war with the russians can force their population a bit lower (they are in communism).

i love republic because of the amortisation of benefits....lower war weariness than democracy but more economic benefits/happiness than monarchy....

 

[narmox]

Originally posted by LordAzreal
I am definitely sticking with Monarchy for quite a while, at least until I don't have to fight to continue the expansion of my power. Then maybe I'll consider democracy. I don't even want anything to do with communism anymore, as I am a strong advocate of human rights, and would rather be paying to hurry things rather than using forced labour.

I hope you don't capture workers (slave labors), pop-rush under despotism, nuke cities! Or gosh, even Military Police goes against human rights..

It's only a game btw When you pop-rush things, no real people die.. Electrons change a little, bits are modified by the thousands... But it does nothing against human rights, and certainly doesn't turn you into a blood-thirsty savage (no, waging centuries-long wars does that! ).

And please don't forget a little bit of your sense of humour while reading the above.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

precisely 13 turns....
i waged war against the iroquois for 13 turns before my pop gave in to war-weariness. i have at least a temple and a marketplace in every non-resisting city. my cities b4 the war all have temples,colloseums, cathedrals, marketplaces and banks. i kep at least 4 luxuries and
the luxury rate is 10%
i'm able to buy improvements cos i have a huge tech lead and so everyone else besides the iroquois is paying me something.
in addition i just captured smith trading from the iroquois.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Bamspeedy's ruling by Monarchy! Uh-oh! What next?

I figured you would get a kick out of that, Chiefpaco. I was thinking putting your name in the title to make dang sure I caught your attention.

I bet a monarchy could out produce (shields) a republic or democracy. As far as waste, your core cities would be the same (0 waste), your far flung cities the same (useless), but the mid- range cities would be the key. I think, although I haven't tested this, is that having those mid-range cities going in WLTK day would counter the corruption benefits of republic or democracy, and you won't need to build all those happiness improvements and start pumping out military units, sooner.

By staying in Monarchy the whole game, you might have an advantage over several of the AI non-religious civs, who switch back and forth between Democracy and Communism before and after every war. Imagine how many turns the computer would waste by going into anarchy all the time. Plus we all know what the AI does when in communism (greatly self-destructs itself).

how long can i comfortably wage war against the iroquois b4 war weariness screws me up? the iroquois have lots of wonders and so resistance will be substantial unless their current war with the russians can force their population a bit lower (they are in communism).

Depends who started the war (who the aggressor is). It also seems to me, that war weariness is the worst when you take massive losses. So if your not losing alot of units it shouldn't be too bad at all under Republic (I've actually seen it improve as war progressed, when I wasn't losing as many units). Especially considering your in the modern age and Iroquis still has only cavalry, you shouldn't have much of a problem. I've heard claims of wars under republic going on as long as 30+ turns before weariness kicked in real bad.

 

[chiefpaco]

Probably the best benefit of the Monarchy strategy is that it applies to the higher difficulty levels. I have heaps of trouble keeping up with the AIs' research in Emporer & would not care to think about trying it in Deity. Also, wars tend to last longer because the AI can produce more units.

I think I'd still build some libraries for the culture points. Especially if I were scientific.

Production is higher for a Monarchy but only if you leave your luxury slider alone. To take my citizens out of their clown suits, I jack up the luxuries 10%-20% under a Republic or Democracy to get back the lost production.

The other thing, since you don't have war weariness, you can just declare wars you don't intend to fight. Want to disturb some far-off civ? Declare war. You don't even have to do anything. I just wonder what kind of implications this'll have for multiplayer.

 

[Mr Adeoye]

I disagree communisim is by far a more superior form of government eevr since civ 2 days ,monarchy is far too primitive and simple.

 

[LordAzreal]

Originally posted by narmox


I hope you don't capture workers (slave labors), pop-rush under despotism, nuke cities! Or gosh, even Military Police goes against human rights..

It's only a game btw When you pop-rush things, no real people die.. Electrons change a little, bits are modified by the thousands... But it does nothing against human rights, and certainly doesn't turn you into a blood-thirsty savage (no, waging centuries-long wars does that! ).

And please don't forget a little bit of your sense of humour while reading the above.

Yeah I know. Every time I play, I look back and think "I wouldn't do it like this in real life". It is definitely just a game.

What I was trying to say is that pop rushing under despotism and communism is terrible even in a game because the people (or 'electrons', as you put it) remaining in that place will hold a grudge for 40 turns. This shoots the possibility of "We Love The King" right out the window. Since I can't stand corruption/waste, I do whatever is possible to minimize it (sure republic and democracy suffer less corruption, but there are negative factors which outweigh this in times of war). WLTK is one such technique used when rooting out corruption, as is relocating the palace to a more centralised location, building the Forbidden Palace on the next largest continent you occupy, etc.

So in a nutshell, I NEVER pop-rush or draft citizens as the negative aspects outweigh the positives (even with drafting. Conscript units are next to useless. I've seen regular longbows beat conscript infantry before. So what's the point? All it does is promote their longbows to elite). Of course, an emergency may require extra troops instantly, but you can avert such an emergency by building sufficient forces beforehand.

And as for slave labour. Unless I'm strapped for cash (slaves costing nothing to maintain), I won't use slave labour as it is inefficient and takes far too long to get things done.

 

[marshalljames]

I would hardly consider 10 to 20 percent to be jacking up the lux rate.
I have successfully waged war under democracy for long periods of time by always having lux set at 20%(We love the chief days happen all the time and continue) and always making sure the War is over there and not over here.
when the welove the chief days end(10 -20 turns) I raise the rate to 30.And So far In my current game(Shaka)this strategy has worked just fine waging war with democracy.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by LordAzreal


. . . I've seen regular longbows beat conscript infantry before. So what's the point? All it does is promote their longbows to elite). Of course, an emergency may require extra troops instantly, but you can avert such an emergency by building sufficient forces beforehand. . .

That will NOT happen if you've Edited the stupid original mod from Firaxis. Starting with gunpowder, units need to be much stronger than their ancient-era counterparts. Make whatever changes you need to prevent longbowmen from taking out even conscript infantry.

BTW, longbowmen should be a UU for the English; everyone else should have crossbowmen. Unfortunately, we can't add new units in the Editor without major hacking.

As for those conscript infantry, and other conscripts, they are useful for garrison work, putting down resistors, and fortifiied defense against a few wandering enemy units seeking to pillage.

 

[Bamspeedy]

And as for slave labour. Unless I'm strapped for cash (slaves costing nothing to maintain), I won't use slave labour as it is inefficient and takes far too long to get things done.

Yes, they are half the speed of regular workers, but think about this.... If you buy two workers for 60 gold (30 gold each and 2 is as effective as 1 regular worker). After 60 turns you have got back your investment PLUS any additional income they brought from roads they completed, production from mines, growth from irrigation, not costing you one of your own people, etc. So really you could see a return on the investment after 20 turns. I buy workers whenever I can.

 

[Grey Knight]

Originally posted by Zouave


That will NOT happen if you've Edited the stupid original mod from Firaxis. Starting with gunpowder, units need to be much stronger than their ancient-era counterparts.

Quite true. The combat model sucks badly. HP is much more important than A/D values. Even a vet warrior has a 35% chance to kill a tank. I honestly cannot think of any way to fix it without changing the formula.

Make whatever changes you need to prevent longbowmen from taking out even conscript infantry.

Oh, but here's one you have it wrong. You take a combat trained expert longbow shooter, pit him up against a civilian with a rifle, and I figure the soldier with the longbow will win 9 times out of 10. 8, if when the civilian drops the gun to surrender it fires (the civilian, of course, forgot to set the safety) and hits the soldier by chance!

Cheers,
Shawn