Quick Answers
- Thread starter Padma
- Start date
- Status
Potatoe985
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2004
- Messages
- 30
does destroying a civ cause a rep hit?
Yup.
.
Only with those civs that you or the civ you've destroyed have met. If you're certain that you haven't met anyone and the other civ hasn't met anyone then you can break every deal in the book and then destroy them and nobody is the wiser!Potatoe985 said:
Mistfit
Deity
Are you sure it causes a rep hit in all cases? I seems to me that if I honorably declare war, breaking no treaties, and wipe them off the planet, I don't get a rep hit.
if you modify terrain (specifically clear jungle, marsh or forest), but you haven't yet researched the tech that reveals the resource underneath, will the resource disappear?
for example, if i clear all my marsh, forest and jungle before i research replaceable parts, will i be guaranteed no rubber (since rubber only appears on marsh, forest and jungle)?
for example, if i clear all my marsh, forest and jungle before i research replaceable parts, will i be guaranteed no rubber (since rubber only appears on marsh, forest and jungle)?
Nope, the rubber/other resource will still stay there. 
You don't have to live with those jungles for thousands of years, just cut 'em down!
Edit: Crossposted with Mistfit. And, yes, welcome to CFC jemberly!
You don't have to live with those jungles for thousands of years, just cut 'em down!Edit: Crossposted with Mistfit. And, yes, welcome to CFC jemberly!
Mistfit
Deity
Welcome to CFC jemperly...
No the resourse is attached to the tile the jungles or marsh is an overlay. Of course they can disappear if the sourse depleates itself.
Nice cross post....in the same min
No the resourse is attached to the tile the jungles or marsh is an overlay. Of course they can disappear if the sourse depleates itself.
Nice cross post....in the same min
Grille
panel insect
What Mistfit and Ginger said. Depletion (chance) would only be triggered if you know the respective tech and have a road on that tile. But rubber won't deplete anyways (coal and oil could be affected on jungle/marsh, though).
Then again, I never noticed a re-appearance of coal or oil on wetlands, same with uranium on forest tiles.
Then again, I never noticed a re-appearance of coal or oil on wetlands, same with uranium on forest tiles.
I'm currently at war (they each declared) with about half a dozen Democracies. I'm Communist, but although I have the entire western hemisphere and they are a bunch of little countries they are keeping slightly ahead of me in tech because they research different techs and trade while I'm stuck with one every 4 turns. My question is this: Korea just went into anarchy, presumably because of WW as I have destroyed hundreds of units and they have dozens more perched in my territory (formerly Spain) (This is an unmodded game but the land masses turned out astonishingly like Earth, and I control N. and S. America and four luxary rich fortress cities in the Eastern continent that I took from Spain). So if Korea turns to an unrepresentative govt, will they instantly be free of the effects of WW, leaving no particularly good reason not to make peace with them since they're out of reach and using RoPs to reach me, or will there be lingering unhappiness? If they go through anarchy and rebecome a Democracy or become a Republic, will they carry over the WW?
The war weariness increasing/decreasing over time is always calculated and persisted, no matter what government the civ is in. It's just ignored if the civ is currently in a no war-weariness government.
Mathilda
Queen
Hello all!Could you explain to me the facination for Republic for choice of government.
I like palying as Monarchy (it's good to be queen!) PTW monarchy level and have tried rebuplic only once I think. The gpt went down the... due to unit cost I presume.
However it seems on reading CFC that a lot of players favour republic.
Republic gives one extra base commerce in every square producing any commerce. For a well-run empire, that's extra one extra base commerce for every citizen in the empire. Magnify that with marketplaces, banks or libraries, universities and that's a TON of extra commerce -- easily hundreds even in the early middle ages. The cost is unhappiness concerns with no MP and military upkeep costs.
Unhappiness is easily dealt with through luxuries and trading (for people playing on upper levels, acquiring luxes is cheap *and* the AI civs will have built the necessary roads and harbors in most cases). If luxes are unavailable, the lux slider is your friend. Unit upkeep costs are typically dealt with by disbanding unneeded militia in core towns or going and bonking some heads to get unit costs under control. Also, paying an extra 50 gpt for units when you're getting an extra 200 gpt from the commerce bonus is a small price to pay.
Typically, I can get more beakers AND more gpt income with a higher lux setting and a lower science setting in Republic than in my typical empire in Monarchy. The commerce bonus is just huge.
My guess is people with too few workers (most people) prefer Monarchy, because the commerce bonus also helps if the square is already producing at least one commerce (e.g. has a road). Good corruption fighting also pays back better with Republic than with Monarchy.
Welcome to CFC! And the Republic/Monarchy question is an eternal debate.
Arathorn
Unhappiness is easily dealt with through luxuries and trading (for people playing on upper levels, acquiring luxes is cheap *and* the AI civs will have built the necessary roads and harbors in most cases). If luxes are unavailable, the lux slider is your friend. Unit upkeep costs are typically dealt with by disbanding unneeded militia in core towns or going and bonking some heads to get unit costs under control. Also, paying an extra 50 gpt for units when you're getting an extra 200 gpt from the commerce bonus is a small price to pay.
Typically, I can get more beakers AND more gpt income with a higher lux setting and a lower science setting in Republic than in my typical empire in Monarchy. The commerce bonus is just huge.
My guess is people with too few workers (most people) prefer Monarchy, because the commerce bonus also helps if the square is already producing at least one commerce (e.g. has a road). Good corruption fighting also pays back better with Republic than with Monarchy.
Welcome to CFC! And the Republic/Monarchy question is an eternal debate.
Arathorn
Welcome to CFC, Mathilda 
Monarchy is an EXCELLENT choice for a Warmongering game! (Win by Conquest.)
Monarchy is an EXCELLENT choice for a Warmongering game! (Win by Conquest.)
denyd
Emperor
Mathilda:
First off welcome to CFC
Let me describe all the governments:
Anarchy: The worst there is with 100% corruption, no production, food penalties, slower workers and no rushing of projects
Despotism: Just plain bad in most areas with food & shield penalties, high corruption and whip rushing of projects
Feudalism: Only good for lots of small cities has corruption though not as bad as despotism allows for a reasonably large military, but as cities grow costs jump for support and can only whip rush.
Monarchy: Best choice for the early warmonger, similar corruption as Feudalism, yet unit support grows instead of shrinks as cities grow and can cash rush projects.
Democracy: The best for a builder. No unit support is only drawback, but workers are faster, corruption is minimal and commerce ($$) has a bonus. A late Industrial Age powerhouse government. In the late Industrial Age, this is the place to be unless there are war clouds on the horizon. If you have to fight make the wars quick and a blood free as possible. Try to get lots of allies and have them do the warring for you while you research to the stars.
Republic: All around the best choice for a government. More corruption than democracy, but less than Monarchy. Get the same commerce boost as Democracy but no worker bonus. You have to watch you military size as units can get expensive. You can wage longer and bloodier wars (particularly if you can get Universal Suffrage).
Each government has it's strengths and weaknesses and each has a niche that is the right place for it. If you happen to be religious, then switching between them is the best option. Democracy for peace time, moving to Republic if war breaks out then to Monarchy/Communism if the war drags on. However, if you aren't religious then the anarchy periods can be real killers on science & production, so it's best to get to one tech and stay there and Republic is the best early tech so that's where most of the players go for.
I should note that I've never gone to Fasicsm so I don't know much about it and my turns in Communism are very few so I'm not a fair evaluator of that type either.
There is an excellent write up by SirPleib comparing Monarchy to Republic, if I can find it, I'll post the link here:
Edit: Looks like I typed way to slow to get this in first and Arathorn said it better than I.
First off welcome to CFC
Let me describe all the governments:
Anarchy: The worst there is with 100% corruption, no production, food penalties, slower workers and no rushing of projects
Despotism: Just plain bad in most areas with food & shield penalties, high corruption and whip rushing of projects
Feudalism: Only good for lots of small cities has corruption though not as bad as despotism allows for a reasonably large military, but as cities grow costs jump for support and can only whip rush.
Monarchy: Best choice for the early warmonger, similar corruption as Feudalism, yet unit support grows instead of shrinks as cities grow and can cash rush projects.
Democracy: The best for a builder. No unit support is only drawback, but workers are faster, corruption is minimal and commerce ($$) has a bonus. A late Industrial Age powerhouse government. In the late Industrial Age, this is the place to be unless there are war clouds on the horizon. If you have to fight make the wars quick and a blood free as possible. Try to get lots of allies and have them do the warring for you while you research to the stars.
Republic: All around the best choice for a government. More corruption than democracy, but less than Monarchy. Get the same commerce boost as Democracy but no worker bonus. You have to watch you military size as units can get expensive. You can wage longer and bloodier wars (particularly if you can get Universal Suffrage).
Each government has it's strengths and weaknesses and each has a niche that is the right place for it. If you happen to be religious, then switching between them is the best option. Democracy for peace time, moving to Republic if war breaks out then to Monarchy/Communism if the war drags on. However, if you aren't religious then the anarchy periods can be real killers on science & production, so it's best to get to one tech and stay there and Republic is the best early tech so that's where most of the players go for.
I should note that I've never gone to Fasicsm so I don't know much about it and my turns in Communism are very few so I'm not a fair evaluator of that type either.
There is an excellent write up by SirPleib comparing Monarchy to Republic, if I can find it, I'll post the link here:
Edit: Looks like I typed way to slow to get this in first and Arathorn said it better than I.
Mathilda
Queen
Thankyou for your answers and what a warm welcome.
I like those drums Eman.
I am definately a warmongerer, I just can't quite see what else I could be doing in the game to keep it interesting. Also just can't leave any town undefended. I guess I'll have to get over that. That lonely warrior in the metropolis isn't going to be much good when modern armour is rolling around.
Arathorn - pretty convincing, I'll have to give it another go, play a test game as one of the religious civs. I seem to go back too often to my all time favourite the Chinese and that anarchy is too much to deal with more than once.
Denyd - nice summary of the different options, for C3C I presume. Haven't got that yet, have to wait till b'day next month.
Thank you again,
Mathilda
I like those drums Eman.
I am definately a warmongerer, I just can't quite see what else I could be doing in the game to keep it interesting. Also just can't leave any town undefended. I guess I'll have to get over that. That lonely warrior in the metropolis isn't going to be much good when modern armour is rolling around.
Arathorn - pretty convincing, I'll have to give it another go, play a test game as one of the religious civs. I seem to go back too often to my all time favourite the Chinese and that anarchy is too much to deal with more than once.
Denyd - nice summary of the different options, for C3C I presume. Haven't got that yet, have to wait till b'day next month.
Thank you again,
Mathilda
Mathilda, you're right on the anarchy. More important, probably, than the final choice of government is picking one and making it work. Either can work (I think Republic works better in most but not all circumstances) very well, but waffling between the two is a surefire recipe for disaster. A well-run empire in Monarchy will look different from a well-run empire in Republic, but either is sufficient to win a game. I'm an inveterate Republic booster, too, so take my arguments with a bit of salt. I suggest you download a save from a well-run succession game (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=67&x=15&y=9) where the players are in Republic and see its benefits. Not having C3C means you'll have to look to some older games, but they're all there, just sometimes hard to find....
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=54625 might be an OK place to start, if you have PTW. We discuss some Republic/Monarchy decisions there, too, so you can get more perspectives.
Arathorn
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=54625 might be an OK place to start, if you have PTW. We discuss some Republic/Monarchy decisions there, too, so you can get more perspectives.
Arathorn
I think Monarchy is an underrated govt. Combining no WW with paid rushing rather than forced labor is excellent. If you have a large empire the corruption becomes intolerable in the provinces, but in many ways Monarchy is more flexible than the other govts if you're cramped for space.
By the way, Russia and the Iroquis have been waging a losing war on me for about 20 turns now. They are Democracies and keep sending large numbers of units which end their turn on my soil and are then destroyed. They both declared the war without provocation, and they do not have Universal Suffrage (I do). A similar situation forced Korea into anarchy and Fascism many turns ago. Yet the Iroquis and Russians are able to produce a steady supply of cannon fodder and keep up in the tech race. Neither is spectacularly well endowed with luxaries and neither has any Wonders that reduce WW. Any idea what gives and how I can drive them into revolutions?
The only thing I can think of is that I have not been able to attack either on their own soil, is this an essential part of WW? Because I hadn't touched Korean soil when they collapsed. In a few turns the weak nations between us which have given them ROP treaties will run out of peace treaty and then I will start my marches on Moscow and . . . Niagra Falls?
By the way, Russia and the Iroquis have been waging a losing war on me for about 20 turns now. They are Democracies and keep sending large numbers of units which end their turn on my soil and are then destroyed. They both declared the war without provocation, and they do not have Universal Suffrage (I do). A similar situation forced Korea into anarchy and Fascism many turns ago. Yet the Iroquis and Russians are able to produce a steady supply of cannon fodder and keep up in the tech race. Neither is spectacularly well endowed with luxaries and neither has any Wonders that reduce WW. Any idea what gives and how I can drive them into revolutions?
The only thing I can think of is that I have not been able to attack either on their own soil, is this an essential part of WW? Because I hadn't touched Korean soil when they collapsed. In a few turns the weak nations between us which have given them ROP treaties will run out of peace treaty and then I will start my marches on Moscow and . . . Niagra Falls?
CaptainPete
Chieftain
Re. Republic vs. Monarchy:
When I get to the stage of having my first revolution and choosing between these (I only have the "vanilla" version so I don't know about Feudalism) I always find that I'm not "ready" for Republic. I don't have enough income to pay for unit support and I can't afford to lose the military police effect so I always go for Monarchy which gives me time to build marketplaces, banks, cathedrals etc. and hopefully even Smith's Trading Company so I can make the transition straight to Democracy. I used to go for Republic but always lost out on research when I had to increase the tax rate to avoid negative gpt.
@a4Phantom: Do they have Bach's Cathedral or Sistine Chapel? They can have a big effect on happiness.
When I get to the stage of having my first revolution and choosing between these (I only have the "vanilla" version so I don't know about Feudalism) I always find that I'm not "ready" for Republic. I don't have enough income to pay for unit support and I can't afford to lose the military police effect so I always go for Monarchy which gives me time to build marketplaces, banks, cathedrals etc. and hopefully even Smith's Trading Company so I can make the transition straight to Democracy. I used to go for Republic but always lost out on research when I had to increase the tax rate to avoid negative gpt.
@a4Phantom: Do they have Bach's Cathedral or Sistine Chapel? They can have a big effect on happiness.
- Status
Similar threads
