Tier 2 governments

[Myomoto]

In vein of the other thread, what tier 2 government (Monarchy, Merchant Republic, Theocracy) do you usually pick, and why?

I find myself going close to 50:50 between merchant republic and theocracy. I mainly aim for diplomatic and science victory (Merchant Republic) or cultural and religious victory (Theocracy).

I find that the heavy emphasis on production for a science victory pairs well with aid emergencies for a diplomatic victory as well, so I usually pair those two victory types. The emphasis on economic policies in merchant republic lets me run science and either trade/production boosting policies. I will usually do some light domination, like picking up a few neighbouring cities with a casus belli/joint war declarations.

For a cultural victory, I will usually always try to found a religion as well, for the tourism bonus from shared religion. If I don't meet a lot of religious resistance, I will usually spin it to a full religious victory. Religious games also benefit from a lot of wonders, which fits nicely with the cultural aim, and the discount on faith buying combined with the huge faith yields from governors in Theocracy makes it very easy to faith buy great artists and writers (especially with the Oracle wonder) to quickly fill out great work slots.

I barely ever go for Monarchy, usually only just to pick up the inspiration for Castles, and because it comes naturally before Theocracy, but I will rarely if ever stay in it for more than a few turns. The bonuses of Monarchy are honestly just a mess in my opinion. It boosts envoy gain rate, so that would indicate a diplomatic victory focus, but it has 3 red cards, which would seem to be for warfare/military buildup. Then for some reason, it has an even more random bonus of additional housing per level of walls in a city?

I got a lot more respect for Autocracy in the discussion in the last thread (apart from its terrible legacy card), and I think I've definitely been undervaluing that government, but I would really be interested to hear a similar defence of Monarcy as a main tier 2 government.

 

[Deadly Dog]

I use them almost the same way, MR for civs strong in science/gold and Theocracy for those with faith/culture strengths. I also only stay in Monarchy on the way to Theocracy, but I really do try to milk those card slots especially if I'm trying to build walls or units while also upgrading others or stockpiling resources. Veterancy is a card I might have up for whole eras at a time when I have a coastal bias.

So while I don't stay in Monarchy I do like it for the time I use it. Red cards are powerful but I don't need them all the time, so Monarchy is my time to get a lot done in terms of upgrading and building units and defenses. The inherent bonuses of Monarchy don't really factor into my decisions, but while active sure they help a bit.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

My most preferred way is Monarchy-- Merchant Republic --Theocracy route. Sometimes I'll skip one of them.

 

[Myomoto]

I would also like to pose another basic question in general: Should tier 2 governments have unique policy cards like the tier 3 governments?

Personally I would like to maybe see one economic and one military policy card locked to each of the governments. Serfdom and Chivalry/Feudal Contract all feel like cards that should be locked to Monarchy. Also, why does Merchant Republic get 2 wild cards? Monarchy would be a lot more attractive if one of its 3 red cards became a wild card.

 

[Kibikus]

Theocracy when I go for a religious victory/have a faith economy, Merchant Republic in all other situations.

Poor old Monarchy needs a bit of rebalancing imo, it's a bit of a mess right now. Couple of things I'd like to see changed:

• Firstly, and I think most obviously, change one of the military policies to a wild card one. This will immediately make Monarchy more viable in a lot of situations. Yes, sometimes you need 3 military policies, but not all the time, and this will offer some flexibility.
• I don't mind the extra influence points, it makes Monarchy useful for situations where you want to take control of city-states. If the other bonuses are changed, I think this one can stay as is.
• Extra housing from walls is not very good. I don't tend to build walls in all my cities, and I don't tend to build up to Renaissance when I do. And the bonus is not that significant to make me start building them all over the place. Not to mention the fact that you lose the housing when you switch away from Monarchy. I think Firaxis could change this bonus in several different directions. They could lean on the diplomatic aspect, they could give it some military bonuses - combat strength, unit resource cost reduction, movement speed, etc., they could give it something related to culture, etc. I guess thematically it should represent the fact that power was concentrated in the hands of one person, which meant things happened quickly, without much deliberation, for good and bad.

 

[kaspergm]

50 % Theocracy (if I have a religion and expect to do a lot of faith-buying of buildings and/or units), 50 % Merchant Republic (because of slots and all-round bonus), 0 % Monarchy (because, why?).

 

[Pietato]

I always go Monarchy first, only swapping to Classical Republic if I missed the policy card wonders. 3 military cards are fine now (+1 movement/harbour building/maintenance/unit production/wall production/amenities/pillaging) and the extra envoys are needed to stay ahead of the AI. The wall thing sucks, but is not completely useless.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Usually I go to Merchant Republic unless if I am playing a game where I end up acquiring more faith than gold I'll go Theocracy.

 

[leandrombraz]

Most of the time, I got through Monarch before I move to Merchant Republic or Theocracy, sometimes I go directly to Merchant Republic. The only constant is that Monarch is only adopted as a temporary government. I never stick with it, though I might prolong my stay if I'm making heavy use of military policies.

 

[tedhebert]

It depends if I'm playing a faith economy game or not. Theocracy can be good in most religious games. Still I,d say 70% of the times I'll go merchant Republic. personal tastes, I like the diplo and economic civ cards a LOT more than military ones. So choosing to be strapped with 3 military slots with Monarchy (50% of them) Is close to never an interesting choice for me; plus the bonus s...ks big time. Who builds medieval walls anyways ?

 

[Lord Lakely]

I beeline for Merchant Rep, and stay there indefinitely. I go Monarchy with warmongers and Theocracy with religious civs though.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I nearly always go for Monarchy, but then again, it's usually just as a stepping stone in order to get Theocracy or some of the wonders, so I wouldn't really say that I'm "going for it".
Theocracy/Merchant Republic are the ones I'm interested in, usually a 50/50 split depending on my victory goal.

 

[NukeAJS]

Yeah, monarchy is usually a government that I'm in for just a couple of turns. It's usually so that I can stack the -50% gold upgrade and -50% strategic resource upgrade cards together. Maybe run +100% walls at the same time and switch lots of cities to ancient walls.

The exception is Poland. Poland's changing a military slot to a wildcard makes monarchy much better. It's still a all-over the place (more envoys and ... housing from walls???) but if you don't plan on faith-buying a lot of things or building many districts, it can be a solid choice for them.

 

[acluewithout]

I got a lot more respect for Autocracy in the discussion in the last thread (apart from its terrible legacy card), and I think I've definitely been undervaluing that government, but I would really be interested to hear a similar defence of Monarcy as a main tier 2 government.

Monarchy is the weakest of the three governments, looking just at card slots and bonuses, but it's perfectly okay the way it is, and is perhaps a little underrated.

As @Pietato has pointed out, the card distribution is perfectly good. Indeed, the cards distribution can be very good if you're warmongering. The Divine Right Civic also unlocks very useful cards, so you're often already unlocking Monarchy anyway, and the particular Civic for Monarchy comes fairly early. I find the Wall bonus kind of cute. You've also got production bonuses for Walls at that point, and Monarchy has an extra Military Slots, so your investment building the Walls for the Housing isn't that huge (and, hey, you get free walls for the trouble!). But, no, it's not a particularly useful bonus, and the other Tier 2 Governments have better bonuses overall, although situationally it can be useful.

The real advantage of Monarchy is that all the Tier 2 Govs are basically Leaf Techs, and of those various Leaf Techs Monarchy comes soonest and comes with a very valuable Civic that you want anyway. So, while Monarchy arguable isn't as strong as the other governments, it comes sooner and is "good enough".

I do have games where I just take Monarchy to get my Tier 2 Government faster, and then push on through the tech tree without worrying about the other Governments. I'm not pretending that's the most efficient way to play, but I think that's the underlying design and it works well enough, IMHO.

So, yeah, Monarchy is fine. Certainly isn't "a mess" and doesn't really need any tweaks, although perhaps Medieval and Renaissance Walls need some better secondary bonuses to make them more interesting / worth getting overall (there's only so much defensive bonus you need for Cities, and the Tourism bonus isn't hugely powerful).

 

[monikernemo]

I think early monarchy is good for era score boost. I think the diplomatic quarter buffs monarchy to some extent, so it might be worth playing monarchy if you unlock some auxillary slots early via potala palace or forbidden city.

I think Theocracy is only good if you faith purchase extensively, for instance rock bands and naturalists or if you have grand master chapel. Otherwise even if you have the means to purchase great people, I don't think it's worth getting theocracy; in which case merchant republic is still the best due to boosts in district construction and the most flexible slot arrangement. Last point to note is that mokshas faith purchase district is not discounted by theocracy.

 

[CoconutTank]

The T2 gov't choices I find to be more painful than the T1 choices. I don't like the slot distribution on any T2 govts.

I usually stick with Monarchy since it's not a leaf civic as others have mentioned, so I'm sort of obligated to get it anyway. The first red policy is Conscription and is likely staying there forever (at least until Levee En Masse replaces it). The second red policy is likely Veterancy, esp if I've settled mostly near the coast. The third red policy I have the most trouble with. Feudal Contract to spam Xbows I guess? I'll double back for Professional Army eventually, and Logistics will be a big welcome. But +housing from walls is not an exciting bonus, and is not an exciting legacy policy either, since it's thwarted by Urban Defenses. Overall, Monarchy feels like Autocracy 2.0 (and Gothic Architecture also coming from Divine Right kind of hints at that I guess, along with the housing bonus to go "taller"). And just like with Autocracy, the lack of yellow policy and purple slots is always really painful.

I haven't played with Theocracy as much, though I'm doing it more often now due to trying Eleanor + Voidsingers. 2 red and 2 yellow is kind of pleasant, and a closely contained religion could turn Wars of Religion into a virtually consistent +4 Combat Strength, which is kind of enticing. Religious Orders being a yellow policy is kind of sad though. Even if the faith boosts could be useful in other ways, Theocracy feels too religion focused for me to want to pick up that often. I also don't like Theocracy's legacy policy that much (+religious strength, +faith from citizens w/ governors), but I think it's still better than Monarchy's legacy policy.

Merchant Republic has a nicer policy distribution than the other 2 govts; it at least has 2 purple slots instead of 1, so it always has more flexibility than the other 2 T2s. I still would like at least Alhambra for another red slot (I'd like Forbidden Palace too, but Alhambra is easier to get at this point). Merchant Republic also has better bonuses and a better legacy policy than the other 2 T2s. However, going into Merchant Republic has a big lean on water and delays going up the rest of the civic tree. If I get reliable access to Niter and can make water matter, I'll beeline Exploration to get Press Gangs and spam Frigates, which gets Merchant Republic at the same time. Otherwise, I usually don't get Merchant Republic as often as Monarchy.

 

[Socrates99]

I don't look at monarchy as tier 2. It's more like tier 1.75. You get it on the way to theocracy and much faster than merchant republic. The three military slots can be pretty good at this stage for promoting chariots to knights and archers to crossbows. Knights need iron and are expensive so you can slot both discount cards while having a spare to run a production card or conscription if your army is expensive. Archer to crossbow is almost prohibitively expensive without the discount and I generally refuse to promote them without it slotted.

Can't think of the last game I've played where I didn't use monarchy for a while. Maybe if I were a hardcore maritime civ I could see rushing merchant republic as a better path. At the same time I can't imagine staying in monarchy once the others are available.

It's ok with Poland because of the added flexibility but with them I'm usually building the GMC and a lot of holy sites so I can faith buy hussars so theocracy winds up being the better pick.

 

[Equilin]

i used to beeline MR (old habits from their old bonuses) but now i feel their bonus quite bad (the card slot distribution is great) so it's more monarchy>theocracy now (i can live with 3 red cards especially if i have to build harbors&lighthouses, otherwise discipline/conscription works because huge maps always have many barbs, and that's talking about peaceful situation).
I choose to not build T2 government building, instead saving 2 of those for T3 governments. It's not that powerful anyway, and i rarely need that 1 extra governor title.

 

[cylenalag]

I personally find Autocracy’s wonder building or Classical Republic’s GPP more important than Monarchy’s benefits (though three red cards is attractive) and would rather skip Monarchy altogether and move on to either Theocracy or Merchant Republic, and usually the former. Faith-based incomes seem a bit more intuitive than gold-based incomes for me lately, so I can definitely appreciate Theocracy’s discounted faith purchases. I just wish it worked with Moksha’s district buying, but that would probably be too much.

 

[hhhhhh]

One thing that I don't understand in the Tier 1 thread is many people seem to talk like they only pick one.

Switch your government often and whenever necessary. On the turn you switch government you can change your policy twice which is handy.

For Tier 1 what I usually do is, Autocracy first (and chop 3 woods for the Pyramids), then Classical Republic, and save Oligarchy for potential wars.

For Tier 2 I do Merchant Republic first, and if I have a good faith economy I will switch to Theocracy. If not I will save Theocracy to the point when I want to spend lots of faith (to buy Rock Bands) and even go like Communism -> Theocracy -> Democracy, to save on faith purchase.

IHMO Government switch in VI is a little too easy and thus cheesy. Yeah I'm aware existence of anarchy. But if a player can go Communism -> Theocracy -> Democracy without any pain you know something isn't quite right.