Anarchy

Prince · June 30, 2002, 08:36

Well first of all, I think anarchy is either the wrong name for that period when switching governments, or Civ III is doing a bad job at representing 'real' forms of government (or not-so-government). Almost everything is halted during Civ anarchy; production, income, research, growth, and so on. I understand that after a 'revolution' there will be a time of chaos (which should certainly not take as long as it does in the game, unless you're playing a religious civ I believe), but the 'real-life' chaos that would follow after such revolution doesn't even come anywhere close to what happens in the game (unless it's done really messy of course). Well now, I'm not complaining, I've spent a whole lot of hours on Civ, still having fun doing so, but I noticed this before after being seriously crippled by anarchy, whilst in fact it's ideas are not that bad if well thought about. Wondering what your opinions on this are.

Having said that, it takes too long to switch governments anyhow

jdd2007 · June 30, 2002, 11:54

your point...?

Wittlich · June 30, 2002, 11:55

I believe he doesn't like the term "Anarchy" for the period of unrest between governments....

Prince · June 30, 2002, 15:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Wittlich
I believe he doesn't like the term "Anarchy" for the period of unrest between governments....

Well now since we're all being thrown to death with complaints about things like a spearman destroying a tank, I thought I'd bring up a new one

Thrawn05 · June 30, 2002, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Prince

Well now since we're all being thrown to death with complaints about things like a spearman destroying a tank, I thought I'd bring up a new one

... . . . . . . . . .

Just kidding. If you don't like the term, rename it.

Prince · July 1, 2002, 06:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

... . . . . . . . . .

Just kidding. If you don't like the term, rename it.

Smart one, hadn't even thought about that yet. Sorry

fittstim · July 1, 2002, 09:25

Quote:

Originally posted by jdd2007
your point...?

Is it me or does just about every "first response" over the past couple of weeks sort of belittle the person asking the question?

I understand Prince's comments to be:

1) bad choice of a name (addressed by Thrawn05)
2) period of rest is too long,
3) effects of anarchy are too crippling.

I believe the period of unrest is randomly generated but the effects can be minimized through creative (some would say deceitful) use of the game editor.

vondrack · July 1, 2002, 10:04

Quote:

Originally posted by fittstim
I believe the period of unrest is randomly generated but the effects can be minimized through creative (some would say deceitful) use of the game editor.

AFAIK, it is not generated randomly - the better your culture, the shorter the unrest period is. In my last game, playing Germans, I was done with the republic to democracy transition in 3 turns, I think (I was somewhat surprised to see the gov selection popup so soon - I expected something like 5-6 turns, which is my usual unrest period length). That seems very acceptable to me.

fittstim · July 1, 2002, 10:50

It's definitely possible that culture plays an important roll in determining how long the period is but I still have to say that I believe there is some element of randomness involved. At least there was in CivII and it seems logical in any case.

I've had periods of anarchy that last anywhere from being over in the same turn to lasting what must have been 10 turns (I lost track since it was so frustrating).

And the period of anarchy of switching gov'ts can be doubly annoying as you watch 50-100 of your cities suddenly erupt in revolt (which also during the latter stages of a huge game can mean a single turn lasts 3+ hours).

Papa Chubby · July 1, 2002, 10:58

In Civ2 you could not form a government as long as there was civil unrest in any of your cities. Does this not also come into play in Civ3. At least I have never formed a government in Civ3 when one of my cities was going down in flames.

Christantine The Great · July 1, 2002, 11:56

When you go into Anarchy, it's quite likely that all but the hyper-happy cities will go into civil disorder, so no.

It's a part of the process, so everything's frozen.

Kingof the Apes · July 1, 2002, 12:11

That's why I like religious civs.
1 turn Anarchy, who can argue with that?

alva · July 1, 2002, 13:44

When changing goverments i usually put the city governor into action. One of the only times i ever use him, but the for this purpose he is doing the job

Inverse Icarus · July 1, 2002, 14:19

the word anarchy refers to a lack of government.

now, modern day anarchists believe that anarchy could be a suitable government (or lack their of) for society, but i think firaxis just meant it to be a period fo a "lack fo government".

if you want to rename it, i'd call it "Upheaval".

Prince · July 1, 2002, 14:52

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
the word anarchy refers to a lack of government.

now, modern day anarchists believe that anarchy could be a suitable government (or lack their of) for society, but i think firaxis just meant it to be a period fo a "lack fo government".

if you want to rename it, i'd call it "Upheaval".

I just called it nonsense

Anyway, it usually lasts 4-10 turns in my games, and it bites. When I finally got my democracy running, I was running valuable turns behind in the tech. race, had my Universal Suffrage wonder change to a Coastal Fortress (what had gotten into my governor??) because France beat me to it by 1 turn, and besides that it took me just 1 hour to get all my cities content and back again. And then I'm forgetting starvation.

vondrack · July 1, 2002, 16:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Prince
I just called it nonsense

Anyway, it usually lasts 4-10 turns in my games, and it bites. When I finally got my democracy running, I was running valuable turns behind in the tech. race, had my Universal Suffrage wonder change to a Coastal Fortress (what had gotten into my governor??) because France beat me to it by 1 turn, and besides that it took me just 1 hour to get all my cities content and back again. And then I'm forgetting starvation.

Well, but then, it was rather bad planning. Never switch governments if you are building an important great wonder. That was one of my first lessons learned with Civ3... Also, the turn you allow anarchy to break up, go through all your cities and switch off as many worked tiles that produce mostly shields/commerce as you can. Shields and commerce is lost to the anarchy anyway, so all you care about is food. And as for food, produce only enough to keep the cities from starving, no need for any actual growth during anarchy... it just makes things more complicated...