Capitalist Democracy vs Communism

Bear · May 30, 2002, 16:22

Which is best?

Capitalist Democracy - producing large amounts of money. Having a small but up to date and highly mobile army. Having a group of well built up core cities which are highly productive. Being able to raise a large number of troops very quickly.
Good for long term, as production, tax and science are quite high.
Not so good for happiness, but when it is high it is VERY good - +1 population for cities celebrating "We love the Prime Minister/President"

Communism - producing moderate amounts of money. Having a large army, not very mobile and difficult to modernise quickly. Having some of your cities with good infastructure (but not brilliant), and some very unproductive and not well built up. Being able to raise a moderate number of troops quite quickly.
Not too brilliant for long term, as production, tax and science rates are not as high as in Democracy. Also miss out on +1 population per turn for Cities celebrating "We love the Prime Minister/President

Add on your thoughts.

Kuciwalker · May 30, 2002, 16:23

Actually, our armies will stay very modern, because we have Leo's.

Space05us · May 30, 2002, 16:54

In all of my games Democracy has been very good for income and science, Fundamentalism produces the best armies and some good income but very poor sciences rate, and Communism produces a good inbetween; a decent sized army, good income and moderate science rate.

I don't really see any point in changing to democracy for a long while if our science keeps advancing at the rate that it is.

also all armies are mobile regardless of government. It all depends on the techs a civ has.

shade · May 30, 2002, 17:04

at this moment the situations is as follows

Commie=best way to advance and have an army and whoop some butts to oblivions in this hostile world

Demo= more money but our butts get kicked to kingdom come because we have ~0production, ~ barely an army

Shade

civman2000 · May 30, 2002, 17:05

And how are cities better in democracy? They both have no corruption. Many of the things dealing with military seem to imply higher production in democracy, but it's the opposite because unit upkeep costs are higher in democracy.

Gen. Hancock · May 30, 2002, 17:52

If we were to bring all of our troops back onto our own civilizations soil then we would not have a problem with getting a can of whoopass opened on us because we would have a good system of defense built up.

Also with Democracy we would have more money to be able to handle the higher unit upkeep costs

Join the APC (Apolyton Capitalist Party)

Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock
Commanding II Corps
Union Army of the Potomac

Space05us · May 30, 2002, 18:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Gen. Hancock
If we were to bring all of our troops back onto our own civilizations soil then we would not have a problem with getting a can of whoopass opened on us because we would have a good system of defense built up.

Also with Democracy we would have more money to be able to handle the higher unit upkeep costs

Quote:

Originally posted by Bear
Capitalist Democracy - producing large amounts of money. Having a small but up to date and highly mobile army. Having a group of well built up core cities which are highly productive. Being able to raise a large number of troops very quickly.

It doesn't look good when two members of the same party have conflicting views on the same subject. And the thing about having more money making it possible to have more troops is from Civ 3, in Civ 2 it requires shields, from the untis home city, for upkeep

shade · May 30, 2002, 18:14

rushbuildcosts
1shield = 4 G (and that's the cheap version when you are building improvements)
1shield= 7G this is for a unit

Believe me when I say I have been rushbuilding >250.000 G last month...I know what I'm talking about,It's to early for us to go Demo.

Shade

Immortal Wombat · May 30, 2002, 18:21

COMMUNISM

Kuciwalker · May 30, 2002, 19:01

The dialectic states the the dictatorship of the proletariat is inevitable.

H Tower · May 30, 2002, 20:33

Communism!

we need a new position in the government. Gulag commander

Kuciwalker · May 30, 2002, 21:15

I volunteer (if I don't get my position as Head of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB).

Dr. Nick · May 30, 2002, 22:20

We cannot allow these men to conspire against the workers! We must purge our nation of political dissent and make them useful to our nation in the best way they can serve our glorious trans-national cause! To the salt mines of Astrakhan!

cavebear · May 30, 2002, 22:42

With the number of military units we have right now, *and* need for tech research, our only viable form of government is Communism. And I say that acknowledging that I am usually a Democracy at this point in the game.

This may come as a suprise to most of you, but I think we are in trouble. Yes, we are leading well according to the Powergraph. But the AI civs are going to start allying and trading techs rapidly soon. We have not made a lot of progress against the Egyptians, and the Americans are untouched. The Babs and Carths are unknown to us. The Indians are potentially potent.

Our great challenge in the next few sessions will be to find a way to rdfuce the threat from the the civs we are *not* actively attacking. One way to do this is to increase our outpost cities (by establishment and rush building, or by conquering) to form tight groups of cities that can start to carry on war to all the other civs. Or we can focus on democracy and development to try and gain a tech and gold edge beyond what we have now.

Just some food for thought.

At the moment, I favor Communism and surgical war to keep all the other civs down. But we will have to get Ironclads and act quickly when we get them. Fortunately, we have Magellan's and those extra 2 moves per turn can make a difference.

So, thoughts?

H Tower · May 31, 2002, 00:02

we have to see how far ironclads will carry us. it seems a little strange to put so much faith in a unit i normall end up by passing because destroyers are just around the corner. but once we get ironclads, we'll go a long way to determining how well this game goes. we have a slight tech advantage, but it won't last unless we keep adding cities, by conquest or otherwise

Mr. President · May 31, 2002, 02:47

I despise communism in real life but it's fun for the Democracy Game. I say keep it.

Bear · May 31, 2002, 04:56

People seem to be thinking I am saying "Change to Democracy! NOW!"

Well, I'm not.

The nation is in no fit state (what with war etc) to become a capitalist democracy - but if we start to pave the way now (improving city buildings, new roads, irrigation etc) it could be, one day.

Besides, if we improve our infastructure it can only be good, can't it? Whether we're a Democracy or Communist..

JCP · May 31, 2002, 08:40

In our situation, ther is no other way than Commie.

In the future, after reduction of main threats, if we may balance military units in various cities, why not a democracy age, with luxury tax improvement, so we grow by WLT*D ?

With SoL, we'll return at communism ias soon as a war is inevitable.

-Jrabbit · May 31, 2002, 08:46

Compared with SuperIronclads (vets w/enhanced movement), Destroyers suck.

Once we have them, we will need to extend the number of turns that they remain the dominant force on the board. During this period, they are virtually unsinkable.

Space05us · May 31, 2002, 13:06

Quote:

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Compared with SuperIronclads (vets w/enhanced movement), Destroyers suck.

Once we have them, we will need to extend the number of turns that they remain the dominant force on the board. During this period, they are virtually unsinkable.

Destroyers can move faster... a lot faster

H Tower · May 31, 2002, 13:08

Quote:

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Once we have them, we will need to extend the number of turns that they remain the dominant force on the board. During this period, they are virtually unsinkable.

how do we do that?

cavebear · May 31, 2002, 16:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Space05us

Destroyers can move faster... a lot faster

Well, yes. But the Ironclads would move 6 squares, and that's not shabby. The 2 extra squares are the only advantage Destroyers have. The A/D and hitpower are the same.

Space05us · May 31, 2002, 16:44

I know, I have the lovely little poster that they give us for free on my wall. It's actually helpful.... when you're not playing the game and don't have easy acess to the civilopedia

cavebear · May 31, 2002, 17:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Space05us
I know, I have the lovely little poster that they give us for free on my wall. It's actually helpful.... when you're not playing the game and don't have easy acess to the civilopedia

I find the chart way more informative for techs. But they could have given the Destroyer *some* battle improvement over Ironclads. 2 Firepower of 5 attack strength...

Space05us · May 31, 2002, 17:06

i thought the little poster is the chart?... it has the tech tree and all of the terrain, resource, and unit info

Xenozod · May 31, 2002, 19:39

Communism is the only way we can keep up in the game at the moment. I would like to think that we could become a democracy in the future, increasing money, science, and production, but I will not be a fool and think we can do it right now. You just can't do what we are doing in a democracy.

cavebear · May 31, 2002, 20:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Space05us
i thought the little poster is the chart?... it has the tech tree and all of the terrain, resource, and unit info

The Civilopedia on the top text menu bar also has very good information. Some people prefer that.

Space05us · May 31, 2002, 20:18

it's for when I'm not in the game... ie when Im at the forum and I want to write something about a unit or advance it's easier to look at the poster than to go into the game

atawa · May 31, 2002, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Xenozod
Communism is the only way we can keep up in the game at the moment. I would like to think that we could become a democracy in the future, increasing money, science, and production, but I will not be a fool and think we can do it right now. You just can't do what we are doing in a democracy.

We can just go fundi after railroad and destroy our enemy's by say 1900, but then the game would be over

Space05us · May 31, 2002, 21:20

we can always play another democatic game after this one