Discussion in 'Civ3 - General Discussions' started by gamemoth, Jan 14, 2004.
seems not bad for war
adolf liked it, but now that i'm in charge of the glorious germanic peoples, it's time to unleash the awesome power of commienism.
I use it.
i used it as a peaceful government. i had to upkeep lots of units because my neighbors where loads more powerful then i was and they started declaring war on smaller nations. i totally destroyed their military (and cut their empire into 2, but the war is still on) with aircrafts. theyre the craziest thing. well, either way, its not the best peaceful gov cause its science rate sucks. i use to be advanced ... once upon a time ...
I used it in a long war to take full control of a continent. It was great for that but after that the cities will never be close to productive due to the assimilation rules; the science is also kind of slow in it. I reccomend switching to democracy after a facist war.
I really like Fascism for warmongering!
I prefer using Communism for WarMongering, heck, just plain Mongering in general, because it allows my cities to be far more productive. I haven't really tried fascism yet, I did try it once, but the population that you lose at the begnning is just not worth it.
I don't notice that much of a pop-drop when I switch to Fascism.
I use fascism in the early industrial age to get the worker bonus. If you want to build lots of railroads asap there is no better gov.
I've been thinking about it. Maybe the next time I play a religous civ. I hate 8 turn anarchies. . .
Fascism is wonderful when it comes to warmongering.
I like Fascism as well (just in this game!).
You have to be aware, though, that you will loose some 20% of population when you switch. OTOH, most of your towns will be at size 12 then, so you will cover up with those losses really soon.
Since rushing works with citizens, you don't have to care that much for your money so you can cover the economic losses at least a bit - and, of course, you don't have to pay your military, well you almost don't have...
Nevertheless, you should take into account that switching will cost you another 7-9 turns of anarchy (if not playing a religious nation). So the decision about switching or not really has to be considered in a careful manner.
I use C3C's Fascism government regularly for a game that includes lots of warring. If peace was declared at or after 2000, then I'd probably stay in Fascism quite happily and productively till the end of the game. Unless I was Religious, in which case I'd change to Democracy.
Fascism is great for peace because:
1. When you have a lot of metropolises, you can shift your unit upkeep money to science, and get a great science rate
2. 200% fast workers means quick roads and railroads
3. It's the best war-time government (No war warryness, high unit upkeep, fast workers for rebuilding), so you don't have to stage a revolution for a war.
It's pretty sweet. My workers build the roads to support my SoD, my enemy's workers turn into infantry to support my war of aggression against their homeland. I also like the pop drop in my newly conquered cities (less starving required to get to 1pop)
Communism is better for Offensive warfare.
You will hardly notice the difference in support and you dont have to bother about starving conquered cities because of some horrible xenophobic trait.
Having not played the fascist gov't, I have a question. If when you switch to fascism, are your size 1 cities destroyed? If you conquer a size 1 city that has at least one cultural expansion, is the city still automatically destroyed?
No, city remains. Interesting question, what happens to pop 1 and pop 2 cities when change to fascism. Note if you try it, starving cities takes forever and may make a strong disincentive for this govt
I find the xenophobic trait useful in fascisim because it straves down the pop of newely conquered citites and reduses chances of culture flip.
They stay... obviously the starvation is calculated by a percentage of appr. 20%. 2 pop * 0.2 = 0.4 => 0
Separate names with a comma.