When to get out of Despotism

[creamcheese]

I recently had an opportunity to really give Feudalism a good test out. I was playing Babylon on a Huge Map total Pangea.

Feudalism as Babylon you should be going for 100k culture! Lots of little towns with temple, cathedrals, libraries, and universities. You get all four half price as Babylon.

Feudalism is basically good at 100k victories. You get lots of small towns (good in feudalism) and build lots of culture in all. you can poprush things (culture is unaffected by unhappy people, just make sure they don't riot) and WW isn't as much of an issue for a peaceful victory. Despotism work okay for 100k as well, but has tile limit.

 

[Spoonwood]

I have used this tactic before

I call it the 'what am I waiting for?' tactic and can be implemented at any point. The map-size is the crucial factor as to when to do it however and this is why Cavalry (and getting to it first) is such a huge factor for civ3. As someone else noted, you can research Horse Riding 2/1/2 as the last tech of the ancient world and then have Cavalry just 7 techs later 6/3/3. Cavalry will then be the dominant military unit until tanks (so far ahead in the tech tree that games often don't even get that far).

As soon as Cavalry is gained, and if you're the first to get it, this tactic is almost screaming in your mind every turn from then-on in. With the correct use of cavalry you don't even need armies or any other units, you can literally wipe out another civ in one turn if you plan it meticulously and their towns are closely knit. maybe two or three turns if they are a bit more spread out. Of course it depends how cruel the rolls are also (cough cough).

You may not need armies or other units, but if you're playing as a Republic, then armies can help a lot. If you mainly fight with armies either 1. you win almost every battle you fight, so long as you don't lose too many cities to the AI, you basically have no war weariness or 2. you can rather quickly learn when to fight and not fight with armies. So, the war weariness problem of Republic evaporates rather quickly. You can also 3. pillage a lot with armies to make the AI's attacks harder. This, of course, assumes that you didn't have significant war weariness before Military Tradition as you would in an Always War game. Armies, and to a lesser extent artillery, can very quickly make any concerns about war weariness evaporate rather quickly.

 

[Buttercup]

You may not need armies or other units, but if you're playing as a Republic, then armies can help a lot.

I'm fully aware of this, they help rather a lot with any government type. I have 9 in my current campaign and I've also lost 4, I also have two spare that I'm waiting to fill with modern armour and another being made.

If you mainly fight with armies either 1. you win almost every battle you fight, so long as you don't lose too many cities to the AI, you basically have no war weariness

My latest battle in said campaign went as follows: In order to speed up my journey from Flight to Modern Armour I switched from Monarchy to republic for two or three techs. Once I got to Modern Armour (8 turns until discovery) I hatched a plan to take out one of my neighbours while I waited for Modern Armour to get learned then I was going to switch back to Monarchy and PRODUCE.

I proceeded to annihilate said neighbour (approx 25 well spaced towns/cities) with a target for victory in 4 or 5 turns. [Please note, all my towns/cities/metropolises have 7 luxuries and a marketplace and a temple as standard]. [Please also note I did not wish to use the Luxury Slider as this would destroy the point of switching to Republic to gain that extra turn or two in tech completion].

Anyway, everything went as planned and in 5 turns the Koreans were no longer listed at the Foreign Affairs screen. But... you know what, just in those few turns ALL of my metropolises were at breaking point (and none of them over 25 citizens big). Literally starving if I added any more entertainers to them. I must have lost no more than 10 units the entire campaign (notably, one tank failed to kill a spearman and one elite cavalry army died when it attacked a 3hp Infantry which didn't drop a single hit point) and the AI civ captured two of my towns (one by an auto-reclaim) which I retook the next turn. And that was too much for Republic...

So, when you say 'you basically have no war weariness, I'm sorry, but LOL - maybe you're talking about a different game?

or 2. you can rather quickly learn when to fight and not fight with armies. So, the war weariness problem of Republic evaporates rather quickly.

See above.

You can also 3. pillage a lot with armies to make the AI's attacks harder.

I find it much more effective to just walk into their cities with them. But yes, my Infantry Army did sit on their rubber supply if that's what you mean

This, of course, assumes that you didn't have significant war weariness before Military Tradition as you would in an Always War game.

I had engaged in no battles under republic prior to this battle and all previous battles were fought under Monarchy which has no war weariness. Also, I always thought war weariness reset to zero after you declared peace?

and to a lesser extent artillery, can very quickly make any concerns about war weariness evaporate rather quickly.

I can't say I've ever bothered with artillery. Is this another micro-micro-management of Republic by any chance? Bomb them, shell them and bombard them until you finally move your one tank in to finish them off? rather than just building 5 tanks to do the same job? in order that you don't lose units in-case a citizen gets sad? My, what a palaver.


[On the plus side, I decided to take a break and am about to win a Huge Regent 80% Archipelago using Republic. I have one town, two cites and a metropolis and am just about to hit the 20,000 culture score for one city. Not a single fight the whole game with just 60 turns to go until victory. Wonder if it'll invade me at the last minute?]

 

[Spoonwood]

You lost two towns, which causes a significant amount of weariness. Just because you use the luxury slider at one point, that doesn't mean you'll always use it. You generally want to minimize revolutions... so, in other words, except in exceptional cases it works out best to have only 1 revolution per game, from Despotism to either Monarchy or Republic. So, if you get weariness in a Republic, and have to use the luxury slider, Republic overall will still probably work out better for commercial reasons, because of the other times when you don't need the luxury slider as much (especially on a huge map).

If you have a problem losing towns, pillage at their borders with armies, so their units have to land near your territory before they can attack you (playing as Spain you would use Conquistador armies). Then you either clear out their units, or if you can't for some reason disband the town, or give it away to someone else (i. e. avoid city captures like the plague). Using artillery, in general, can work out slowly with say cannons. But, with artillery proper and "combat settlers" things can go quicker. Shelling their units down to low hitpoints before attacking, increases your win ratio generally, and also keeps your units healthier. Also, any units which end up in your territory before the end of a turn, once you have a basic rail network up, can usually get bombarded down low via cannons (or at least most of them, or at least the heaviest defense ones). So, battles become significantly easier, and the chance of an elite winning goes up, since they attack weaker hitpoint units in general.

 

[Buttercup]

You quote:

so long as you don't lose too many cities to the AI, you basically have no war weariness

I quote:

the AI civ captured two of my towns (one by an auto-reclaim) which I retook the next turn.

You quote:

You lost two towns, which causes a significant amount of weariness.

So which is right, your first quote or your second?

 

[PaperBeetle]

I had engaged in no battles under republic prior to this battle and all previous battles were fought under Monarchy which has no war weariness. Also, I always thought war weariness reset to zero after you declared peace?

Not quite that simple. The game still counts the war weariness points that you accumulate in monarchy, it just desn't express the effects. When you switch to Republic, you suddenly get all that war weariness showing.
And note that it takes a full 20 turns of peace for war weariness to reset.

I can't say I've ever bothered with artillery. Is this another micro-micro-management of Republic by any chance? Bomb them, shell them and bombard them until you finally move your one tank in to finish them off? rather than just building 5 tanks to do the same job? in order that you don't lose units in-case a citizen gets sad? My, what a palaver.

I'd say that the standard approach is to lean more heavily on artillery as you fight at higher levels. Use of artillery is about reducing the number of units you lose. Not just because of war weariness, but because you just don't want to be constantly replacing your units. With higher level AI producing units faster than you, simply throwing units at them is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Anyway, everything went as planned and in 5 turns the Koreans were no longer listed at the Foreign Affairs screen. But... you know what, just in those few turns ALL of my metropolises were at breaking point (and none of them over 25 citizens big). Literally starving if I added any more entertainers to them. I must have lost no more than 10 units the entire campaign (notably, one tank failed to kill a spearman and one elite cavalry army died when it attacked a 3hp Infantry which didn't drop a single hit point) and the AI civ captured two of my towns (one by an auto-reclaim) which I retook the next turn. And that was too much for Republic...

All that doesn't mean a whole lot. Sure losing cities causes a lot of WW-points, but I don't think this is the main cause of your WW problem. (As an aside, cultural flip don't cause WW. Auto-reclain=cultural flip?) I suppose you were attacked a whole lot? Each one of those attacks causes 2 WW points, and it does not matter if you win or if you lose. It is kind of gaga. It means, it is possible to never lose any units, or even never lose a single hit-point, and still get tons of war weariness.

Not being attacked is a tricky, tricky art. It makes you jump through all kinds of hoops. And not only if you don't want to have a lot of war weariness, but also if you just don't want to lose your war happiness.

I can't say I've ever bothered with artillery. Is this another micro-micro-management of Republic by any chance? Bomb them, shell them and bombard them until you finally move your one tank in to finish them off? rather than just building 5 tanks to do the same job? in order that you don't lose units in-case a citizen gets sad? My, what a palaver.

Not palaver. Sometimes you just cannot afford many casualties. You'll get this micro-micro-management no matter what if you want to take on one or several opponents with a nominally much stronger military than your own.

 

[Buttercup]

And note that it takes a full 20 turns of peace for war weariness to reset.

Thanks, that's something I didn't know. I had lost 1 town about 13 turns prior to invading Korea due a surprise attack from the AI (the third of the game) which I quelled in approximately 4 turns. So for this specific example, we have 2 towns lost and one lost 13 turns prior to the invasion. Does that make a massive difference?

With higher level AI

When you dudes give great advice, which you often do, can you please specify the level you are talking about. My discussion is regarding an example from a Regent game. If you want to wax lyrical about the benefits of artillery for Deity games, feel free, but be careful not to confuse the readers who are thinking you might mean on Regent when in fact you're just dropping random hints about Deity

 

[Buttercup]

Each one of those attacks causes 2 WW points

Now THIS is the kind of information which should be in the civilopedia.

Auto-reclain=cultural flip?

Yup

I suppose you were attacked a whole lot?

Not really. All my casualties came from attacking losses and they only actually attacked me about 10 or 11 times. it was just a process of taking cities that were 3 squares deep (and I was using tanks mainly (the armies about half strength after the second wave of assaults) so I had to keep waiting to be in range why it even took 5 turns. I didn't fancy using my cavalry until the last push as I knew THAT would sustain many casualties as cavalry versus Infantry is about even/slightly weaker. So I lost about 15 Cavalry in the final push, but it didn't count that turn as they were destroyed that turn causing immediate peace.

It is kind of gaga.

Yup

Not being attacked is a tricky, tricky art. It makes you jump through all kinds of hoops.

LOL

 

[creamcheese]

When you dudes give great advice, which you often do, can you please specify the level you are talking about. My discussion is regarding an example from a Regent game. If you want to wax lyrical about the benefits of artillery for Deity games, feel free, but be careful not to confuse the readers who are thinking you might mean on Regent when in fact you're just dropping random hints about Deity

Advice about artillery really applies to all levels. While you can win on regent without it, you can win much more easily with it. Think of it as a way of attacking the AIs units without risking anything of your own. For example, if I attack a city on a hill defended by muskets with my cavalry force, I might lose a few before taking the city (defensive bonuses are killer). If I use my cannons to redline (reduce to 1 hp) all of the city's defenders, I will probably lose none, and can then go on to the next city with exactly the same size force. It doesn't seem like all that big of an advantage until you consider the need to replace all the cavs you lose, if you don't have to, that is shields you could use to build a university or bank (or whatever, like more cavs to conquer a different enemy). Every cav you lose costs you significant production. Artillery saves many, many units over the whole game.

 

[Buttercup]

you can win much more easily with it.

I'm not really trying to diss the use of artillery and I agree, when I have used it then it has made assaults much easier. I'm probably coming over more argumentative because of the way my posts are being answered, in that I'm discussing my current predicament and the issue of war weariness and, while it's nice to speculate on ways to prevent war weariness, it's not really the discussion I was having or the point I was making.

For this campaign I have been in Monarchy (I got Zulu - Military, expansionist as my random civ...) and so used my time-honoured tactic of non-stop unit production and tech-lining for assault troops to counter any slowness in tech discovery. Only one civ was out-pacing me and once you get to Modern Warfare their advantage here ends. All I have to do is defeat this one civ in the next 175 years and I will have at least guaranteed a points victory if nothing else.

When attacking is your primary concern building comes second on the priority list anyway and when you have nothing to build then it doesn't really matter if lose troops or not. I often use wealth rather than build police stations or factories even if I'm at peace. (though for this campaign I'm tempted to build some production enhancements just to finish off the last civ in-case I've got my timing wrong).

I highlighted the case of what happened when I switched to Republic for a few turns and a war I partook in during that period as an example of why I get so put-off from playing a Republic and why I'm not totally enamoured with the higher levels (Monarch+). If merely positioning your troops in enemy territory while you wait for them to get in range causes war weariness, and defending and winning a defence with defending troops then that's quite obviously absurd.

Yes, that's the game and there are ways round it, but it doesn't hurt to highlight how absurd it is. So it's a bit frustrating when you highlight the absurdity and all people do is say 'you can get round it if you do XYZ' because it appears they are not admitting that it's absurd but rather just telling me stuff I already know but choose not to bother engaging in- because I think it's absurd.

I'm going to try and get a screen-shot of my current status in the game, it's quite a funny state of affairs and then ask for some advice on how best to proceed, to which I will then not be irked by any kinds of suggestion, government type of weaponry type, as I'm kind of stumped how to take down the last civ needed to assure victory, it's kind-of an impasse situation.

Shall I post the screen-shot on this thread if I figure out how to do it or start a new thread? (and if I start a new thread, which forum or thread should I post it to?)

 

[creamcheese]

I highlighted the case of what happened when I switched to Republic for a few turns and a war I partook in during that period as an example of why I get so put-off from playing a Republic and why I'm not totally enamoured with the higher levels (Monarch+). If merely positioning your troops in enemy territory while you wait for them to get in range causes war weariness, and defending and winning a defence with defending troops then that's quite obviously absurd.

Yes, that's the game and there are ways round it, but it doesn't hurt to highlight how absurd it is. So it's a bit frustrating when you highlight the absurdity and all people do is say 'you can get round it if you do XYZ' because it appears they are not admitting that it's absurd but rather just telling me stuff I already know but choose not to bother engaging in- because I think it's absurd.

I'm going to try and get a screen-shot of my current status in the game, it's quite a funny state of affairs and then ask for some advice on how best to proceed, to which I will then not be irked by any kinds of suggestion, government type of weaponry type, as I'm kind of stumped how to take down the last civ needed to assure victory, it's kind-of an impasse situation.

Shall I post the screen-shot on this thread if I figure out how to do it or start a new thread? (and if I start a new thread, which forum or thread should I post it to?)

Well switching governments more than once was part of the problem, barring being religious or having a really good reason, most civs should stick with monarchy/republic for the whole game after they get them. 2-9 turns of lost production is not worth the benefits of a slightly more optimal government.

It may seems absurd to you, but it seems realistic to me. Populations hate long, bloody wars, and manging their unhappiness is part of fighting. That said, war weariness basically functions as a method of limiting the strength of the commerce bonus. Without it, republics would run away with the game every time. As it is, war weariness mitigation is a small price to pay and republics are still quite strong.

As for another thread, you should start a new topic probably (either here or in strategy and tips, doesn't matter that much). You should, most importantly, post a save. You do that with the "manage attachments" button below in "additional options". Just pick out your save in your save folder and upload it. That way people can look at your game and give you tips on all manner of game mechanics. Title the thread something relevant and ask for whatever advice you need. Note that you will probably get lots of general advice and peanut gallery comments a well.

 

[Spoonwood]

You quote:

I quote:

You quote:


So which is right, your first quote or your second?

They aren't in conflict. Though practically everyone loses towns from time to time, it comes as a good goal to not lose towns ever (or absolutely minimize towns lost). I really don't know how much weariness you had. It's really not that big of a deal to raise the luxury slider 10% or 20%, since it only lasts for that war usually. Also, changing a few citizens into specialists isn't necessarily a big deal. Only the highest level of weariness is when things really start to hurt.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Now THIS is the kind of information which should be in the civilopedia.

Most of this info can be found here:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/war_weariness.php
Spoonwood linked to the article already, but I'll do it again in case you missed it. It is a really good article. And yeah, the civilopedia doesn't breathe a word on any of the details.

Not really. All my casualties came from attacking losses and they only actually attacked me about 10 or 11 times. it was just a process of taking cities that were 3 squares deep (and I was using tanks mainly (the armies about half strength after the second wave of assaults) so I had to keep waiting to be in range why it even took 5 turns.

Chalk up 20 WW-points minimum. Add another 16 points(?) for the lost city (the flipped city doesn't count), add 2 points for every units that you lost during attack or that retreated. I think you can easily get up to 60 points based on that. Hmmmm. That is about first to second level of war weariness (25-50%) if you started the war, or about "zeroth" to first level if you were attacked. I think you said you were sneak attacked, right?

Doesn't sound like all that much to me. On the other hand, metros are fairly sensitive when it comes to war weariness. That is because the number of unhappy faces that you get is calculated based on the size of a city. And with 25% (i.e. first level) of WW a size 20 metro will get 5 unhappy faces, which is quite a lot already. (On the upside, metros get more out of war happiness too. Each source counts as 25% so that you'd get 5 happy faces in a size 20 metro.)

I didn't fancy using my cavalry until the last push as I knew THAT would sustain many casualties as cavalry versus Infantry is about even/slightly weaker. So I lost about 15 Cavalry in the final push, but it didn't count that turn as they were destroyed that turn causing immediate peace.

Cavalry vs Infantry is not even! Not even close. Infantries have a defense value of 10, which is amplified by all the various defense bonuses. A city (size 7-12) adds 50% for example, if the units is fortified there is another 25%, terrain between 10% - 100%, and then there are radar towers, walls, civil defenses, rivers. A fortified (+25%) Infantry in a city (+50%) on a hill (+50%) defends at 10*(1+0.5+0.5+0.25)=22.5 against a cavalry's attack of 6.

 

[Richie0]

as soon as i research republic. (monarchy if i'm playing a millitaristic civ with both iron/horses early). if a settler/worker is about to finish, then i'll wait one turn then revolt.

usually i have to put the science slider down to 20%-30% (from 70%-80%) and disband most of my warriors/scouts (keep the vets/elites for upgrades).

once you get 10-15 cities up though, the unit support gets less crippling and the commerce boost kicks in due to your cities not producing any more settlers and having a chance to grow.

 

[shl7070]

I prefer to prepare myself in advance before the switch. I know that I'll lose half f my military so I need a secure core,at least one river/lake city beyond 6 population and knowlege of mathematics. I need the mathematics to quickly get either currency or construction to raise income and lower the unit support. Aquas or markets may be even rushed ASAP with money accumulated in despotism.
In an extreme case (just 3 games) I switched to monarchy, solved the wars, got some infrastructure and then switched to republic. Double switch is wasteful in turns but there are situations in which I want republic for long term but see I can't afford it for 30+ turns due to large army that I can't disband. Better switch to monarchy now then wait in despo for republic switch window. The switch can happen after enough cities get aqueducts to support the military.

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

Monarchy? For me only if I'm dying for some irrigation. The switch to Republic comes down to commerce, for me it takes a majority of my core cities above 6 with Marketplaces, and that is only going to happen after I have finished my early expansion.

 

[rollo1066]

Any other government is an improvement so in general as soon as practically possible. The only exception might be if one has lots of small towns and few luxeries and little or no cash you might try to get to Feudalism Asap and forget about Monarchy or Republic but I don't think this would be a good strategy very often.