Monarchy or Communism ?

[SorvinoBackhand]

Assuming Republic is not an option, which is a better government form for warfare - Monarchy or Communism?

[Rhothaerill]

It really depends on how you want to conduct the war. Communism is good for pop rushing units if you're low on gold and it has the added feature of reducing corruption in your far-flung cities at the expense of your core (not always a great thing IMHO ). Monarchy is the far better option if you have gold in the bank and don't want to mess with your core city's corruption.

[Last Conformist]

I prefer Monarchy of the two. Crippling my core cities by Communism is unbearable.

[vmxa1]

Why is Rep not an option, not researched? If you are concerned about WW, it is not a problem, if they start the wars and you have luxs.

[vmxa1]

Why is Rep not an option, not researched? If you are concerned about WW, it is not a problem, if they start the wars and you have luxs.

[Jon Shafer]

Monarchy or Communism?

Given these choices, I'd pick anarchy.

[asleepathewheel]

I would prefer monarchy over communism. I hate the whip, refuse to use it.

Maybe the new conquest govts will add some spice to the choices.

[David Murray]

Communism, unless you are already using Monarchy and aren't a religious civilization.

[Panag]

Originally posted by SorvinoBackhand
Assuming Republic is not an option, which is a better government form for warfare - Monarchy or Communism?

hi ,

communism without a doubt

have a nice day

[johncmcleod]

It depends on your game. Try out communism and if that doesn't work reload it and try monarchy. Communism should be better to make it realistic but the communal corruption hurts your core cities, where a lot of your military comes out of.

[Drake Tungsten]

I prefer Monarchy.

[Harovan]

Depends on the time and the map.

If waging war on the own continent, Monarchy is usually better, since to bring reinforcements is usually not a problem.

If the war is on another continent pre Flight, Communism can be cool, because it makes all conquered cities halfway productive and you can produce the units where you need them. Yes, it hurts your core, but if 20 conquered cities work with 1/3 efficiency, that's like having a 7-city core on the other continent, right next to the theater of battle.

After Flight, it's a matter of taste. I'd prefer Monarchy again.

[David Murray]

Provided you have built courthouses and police stations, the corruption your core experiences is only 4 or five shields (for production anyway, if I remember rightly).

The overall drop in corruption really does make up for this if you have a lot of cities ... in fact it more than makes up for it.

[TheArsenal]

For me, depends on a few factors. If I have a particularly spread out empire, perhaps on multiple land masses, and it looks as though I will be able to wage the war without having to rush any units: Communism.

Compact empire, or a war which may need some units quickly purchased: Monarchy.

To tell you the truth, I don't believe I've ever used the pop rush. For some reason, I can't get my mind around it.

[Turk Man]

Communism rule to Monarchy!

[gunkulator]

I've overused the whip in Despo and believe me, your citizens will remember for a looooong time. I won't trade production in my large core cities for the sake of small outlying ones. Communism is a bad deal. Let the AI waste time reasearching it.

[David Murray]

Originally posted by gunkulator
I've overused the whip in Despo and believe me, your citizens will remember for a looooong time. I won't trade production in my large core cities for the sake of small outlying ones. Communism is a bad deal. Let the AI waste time reasearching it.

You've obviously never experienced that great feeling when you capture a large enemy city, quell the resistance 3-4 turns later, and are then able to build a temple in about 7 turns.

Communism really does work when you are in the serious business of capturing lots and lots of cities. It's much easier to steal enemy technology as well - especially with research set at zero.

[vmxa1]

Why am I in a hurry to build a temple in the far flung captured metro? This late in the game, they do not have any tech for me to steal anyway, if they did it would not be hard to do or to trade for.

[David Murray]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Why am I in a hurry to build a temple in the far flung captured metro? This late in the game, they do not have any tech for me to steal anyway, if they did it would not be hard to do or to trade for.

Hi

Well, if that city was captured under Monarchy, you'd just have a big old city to starve which would never produce anything for you. You'd be as well to raze it and replace it with a small city of your own (which will take 30 or 60 turns to produce a temple depending on your civ traits). Perhaps it's just a personal preference but I love the idea of putting newly captured cities to work producing buildings so that in 20 turns or so they will be in a position to start pumping out tanks like everyone else. It really does feel 'communal' - that everyone (i.e. every city) is doing their best for the war effort! And when we're talking only a few shields off of core cities, those tanks and bombers are still being produced in 2 turns each. Who can complain?

[statusperfect]

Communism for the Evil-Empire factor.

[Cort Haus]

When not at war, religious civs can use communism to get some infrastructure up in remote cities, especially if the core cities have built everything, without requiring cash to rush-build. Once the temples / courthouse / mkt are built, switch back to Republic.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by David Murray
Well, if that city was captured under Monarchy, you'd just have a big old city to starve which would never produce anything for you. You'd be as well to raze it and replace it with a small city of your own (which will take 30 or 60 turns to produce a temple depending on your civ traits). Perhaps it's just a personal preference but I love the idea of putting newly captured cities to work producing buildings so that in 20 turns or so they will be in a position to start pumping out tanks like everyone else.

If you are talking about still being in Monarchy, then you are are talking about cities well below metro size and captured before the OCn is reached. You may not have even built the FP.
In that case I am with you, those can be productive.
I am talking about much later in the game, which is required as you will not have communism that early.
At this stage you are well past OCN have an FP and these are large cities or metros. They will be difficult to get more than 1-3 net shields per turn. You really should not waste time and money getting them to be productive.
Get a temple in over time and maybe let it do wealth or create a unit of some type. At this stage if you are under Monarchy, what can I say, it is not a good plan.

[gunkulator]

I prefer to capture early and raze later. Late in the game everyone hates you anyway. Once past OCN, every new city under Communism just makes your core cities less and less productive. Why spend the money on them at all?

Contrary to the designer's intent, I build colonies late in the game, not early, to get lux/res I need on another continent.

Razing a city requires no money for building and maintenance, no units for garrisoning, guarantees no culture flipping or recapture and you get a bunch of free slaves.

[johncmcleod]

It is strange that for empires spread out throughout the world with lots of overseas territory do better under communism rather than monarchy, which is what all those imperialistic European powers were in.

Maybe there should be a new government called imperialism with communal corruption. I know one shouldn't make a big deal about it but it would make the game much more real.

BTW what's this talk of 'enslaving' ships in C3C?

[Panag]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
It is strange that for empires spread out throughout the world with lots of overseas territory do better under communism rather than monarchy, which is what all those imperialistic European powers were in.

Maybe there should be a new government called imperialism with communal corruption. I know one shouldn't make a big deal about it but it would make the game much more real.

BTW what's this talk of 'enslaving' ships in C3C?

hi ,

well maybe they have put " piracy " into the game , .....

have a nice day