Which form of Gov't is your favorite?`

[Gen. Rommel]

US is both.

The Senate and President are definately the good old Roman Republic, a head (well 2 consuls for Rome) and a Senate working together. The House on the other hand represents the representative democracy. But in reality, the Senate and Pres call the shots.

People hold little power within the U.S. representative governing body. It all has to do with the structural build-up of the government, which has essentially stayed the way it is for 200 years. In a true democracy, there would be absolutely no reason for a senate, yet it remains to this day in the United States. Maybe someday the power will truly be handed over to the people rather than a board of representatives.

But let's get back to the topic at hand. What's the absolute best civ government to wage war with in your opinion? I want people to weigh the pros and contras for this question.

My personal favorite would definitely have to be communism. I can't disregard the fact that my newly conquered cities will all suffer minimal amounts of corruption. Add to that the low support costs for units in commie govs and next to non-existant war weariness, you have the perfect warring state.

 

[psweetman1590]

Next to non-existant WW? Beg your pardon, but it's non-existant, period.

And as always, the gov I would choose for all out war (discounting such arguments about how late you get it, the tech being optional, having an extra revolution, and other such arguments) would depend on the state of my empire. If I were small, I'd choose either Monarchy or Fascism. If I were a huge power, yes, communism is the way to go. I prefer Fascism myself. You lose population when you first enter it, but come on, what is three population killed if the city is a 19? Wait ten turns, and population will be back. Double-time workers are excellent for restoring the roads your artillery/bombers destroyed. Unit support is so high that you should never be paying for your units. Corruption is better than monarchy (I think... I might have forgotten this), and Communism puts corruption where I want it least - in my core cities.

And by the way, it shouldn't really matter that your newly conquered cities don't have that horrible corruption either - it's your core that's producing 80% of the units anyways....

 

[Aceman101]

I like Monarchy. But I go for Republic when I don't wage much war and when I have enough luxery resources. I want more lux resources n Republic because war weariness.

 

[Sashie VII]

You lose population when you first enter it, but come on, what is three population killed if the city is a 19? Wait ten turns, and population will be back.

Or you can irrigate everything and let it grow back in one or two turns.

I like Monarchy. But I go for Republic when I don't wage much war and when I have enough luxery resources. I want more lux resources n Republic because war weariness.

I war a lot. And I haven't been in favour of Monarchy over Republic for a long while.

 

[Aceman101]

I war a lot. And I haven't been in favour of Monarchy over Republic for a long while.

The last time I was in Republic I waged war with one of my neighbours and there was a lot of war weariness but I was winning the war. In about 10 turns I conquered Rome. I think there was so much war weariness because I was the agressor. But before I conquered Rome I switched to Monarchy.

 

[Aabraxan]

I also wage war a lot and I do it in Republic. Being the aggressor doesn't help the WW situation, but it's not that big of a deal either. Were you losing lots of units?

 

[Sashie VII]

I try my best to keep my casualties minimum, but yes I do lose some units. I make an effort to start the fight a few turns before my forces invade, so that the intended target would spend some units attacking my ally first.

Just avoid a prolonged stalemate and things will be fine

 

[MAS]

Monarchy simply can't compete with Republic in any facet of the game except MPs. (I believe it has been shown somewhere that Republic with maximum war weariness, with the luxury slider pushed to ~40% or whatever it required to offset the war weariness, is the economic equivalent of the same civ in Monarchy. Any less war weariness, and Republic is better.).

To be honest, no, if that where the case, we wouldn't recommend monarchy for AW games.

At Max WW, monarchy is better.

 

[Sashie VII]

Well, monarchy has zero WW, and Republic has low WW (as seen in the editor). Any lower for Republic and it'll have zero as well.

 

[AznWarlord]

Uhh, I'd say republic can't compete with Monarchy.

You get no war weariness at all, sure you could push the luxury slider, but in Monarchy, you can use that tax for science instead. Military Police saves you from making entertainers, thus making better cities, plus you can support more troops, I recall Republic towns support 1 troop while Monarch towns support 2? Well, that means every new town you have in Monarchy will have 2 units to defend it instead of 1 for Republic. Monarchy is much safer, and productive than republic.

Summary:
You could produce units during war at no risk of civil disorder, while researching science at a normal rate and earning income as well. Military police add to the advantage, since you're gonna have the 2 units Monarchy allows as police for defense anyway, and new towns are better defended.

 

[Sashie VII]

you can use that tax for science instead

Republic gets commerce bonus and Monarchy do not. For every commerce producing tile, Republic gets you more gold than Monarchy. So with proper infra you can run tax and science as high or better than Monarchy.

Military Police saves you from making entertainers, thus making better cities

Notch up the lux and the citizens will produce gold to pay the lux.

plus you can support more troops

But those extra soldiers get stuck on police duty. Republic has no mp, so they can go the borders for war and defense. You can do with less soldiers in Republic, and the extra cash from Republic supports easily.

Monacrhy is much safer, and productive thn republic.

Republic is more productive, that's a fact. Republic has minimal corruption to Monarchy's problematic, and Republic gets commerce bonus as well.

just my 2c anyway

 

[AznWarlord]

Well, I don't shove units on as military police, although I do move excess ones to border cities i preparation. I just use the 2-3 recommended defending units to take place as police.

Also

Notch up the lux and the citizens will produce gold to pay the lux.

Thats if you enter we love the ___ day, which sometime doesn't always happen, I've move the luxury slider to 50% and the conten citizens get happy, but the unhappy ones usually do not shift.

God, the cities are always way too crowded, I hate it

 

[Tomoyo]

To be honest, no, if that where the case, we wouldn't recommend monarchy for AW games.

At Max WW, monarchy is better.

I never said it wasn't better. I'm just saying that purely economically, assuming that all tiles are roaded, etc., Monarchy and Republic are about the same at max WW. Monarchy does have other benefits (such as unit support (very important in AW) and the MP's, which are very useful in AW). There's a reason that in the Napoleonic scenario, no one recommends that France switch to Monarchy at the start (and it's not because of the Anarchy, which would be pretty short compared to the amount that you could gain through a change if Monarchy was what it was all chalked up to be).

 

[Sashie VII]

Thats if you enter we love the ___ day, which sometime doesn't always happen, I've move the luxury slider to 50% and the conten citizens get happy, but the unhappy ones usually do not shift.

You don't need WLTKD for that. And you don't need everyone happy, just enough so that happy=unhappy.

Let them shout and get mad, as long as they work.

 

[seanos08]

Republic as soon as I can get it. I don't switch unless I am religious or have overwhelming WW then I go Commie rather than Fascist. Democracy is nice but the WW is a serious problem for even a fairly non aggressive player like me.

 

[Aceman101]

I also wage war a lot and I do it in Republic. Being the aggressor doesn't help the WW situation, but it's not that big of a deal either. Were you losing lots of units?

Nah, I didn't lose hardly any troops. I bombarded the enemy's troops down then killed them with knights . I only had 2 luxes though.

 

[AznWarlord]

My big problem with Democracy is it's a pain to research, and when you do, it only supports one unit per city no matter size, so it means you only haveone free defending unit per city. Big problem if everyone hates you, which always happens to me. Unless of course you don't mind paying for units.

 

[meatwad4289]

large empires, usually need a good communist ruling.

 

[Aceman101]

I really dislike communism. Because they drag my core cities down and I can't build naval units as quickly .

 

[TheOverseer714]

I usually go from Monarchy to Communism. I have tried Republic, but couldn't afford enough military to not get picked on by the bullies. Guess you need to give in to demands until you can defend your country. I hate the luxury slider, but I need to use it more. Never tried Feudalism, or Fascism. I kinda miss the old Fanaticism government from Civ 2.