Monarchy vs. Republic

Knecht · August 11, 2002, 12:26

I have always aimed for the Republic on my way to Democracy but have lately been considering reseaching Monarchy as a quicker way to get Despotism behind me and thus gain the advantages of irrigation sooner. With the Republic, you gain additional commerce on squares that already have it but you lose more to corruption and waste. Is this a wash? Should I forget about the Republic and get to Monarchy as soon as possible (and also possibly get other techs like Currency earlier as well)? Or (because Monarchy to Democracy is such a long trip) should I go for them both? Is there any accepted wisdom on this issue?

Lord Merciless · August 11, 2002, 13:01

The key to winning in Civ3 is the constant warfare. You need to have GLs, free workers, and resources to build up your civ, and to weeken AI civs at same time. To fight wars, you must be in Monarchy.

Speaking of corruption, the Republic is not any better. So I will ALWAYS use Monarchy as opposed to Republic.

Theseus · August 11, 2002, 13:30

There are some differences that matter, given certain circumstances.

Here are the differences tht I can think of:

* Free units:
Monarchy - 2 for towns, 4 for cities, and 8 for metros.
Republic - none.

* Military police:
Monarchy - up to 3.
Republic - none.

* War Weariness:
Monarchy - none.
Republic - some (level 1).

* Corruption:
Monarchy - some (level 2).
Republic - less (level 1).

* Tile bonus (not sure if I know this well):
Monarchy - none.
Republic - yes... I believe it is +1 gold for cities and +2 gold for metros.

So, if you are committed to a large military, Monarchy goes a long way.

If you have a large empire, and a smallish military (what are you thinking?), then Republic can pay off.
___________________________

Re the other original question:

I believe that Currency is probably the most important non-military tech in the game. Prioritize it.

alexman · August 11, 2002, 13:48

Lord Merciless is right. Republic and Monarchy have virtually identical corruption.

The tile bonus a big one though. +1 commerce from any tile that already produces one (for metros, cities, and towns alike). It's like a golden age in commerce, compared to Monarchy!

Of cource, all that extra money gets wasted on unit support and luxuries, unless:

1) You have a small military
2) You have access to at least 2-3 luxuries

These two factors are what determine whether to go to Monarchy or Republuc for me.

lockstep · August 11, 2002, 13:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
* Corruption:
Monarchy - some (level 2).
Republic - less (level 1).

Actually, the difference between 'nuisance' corruption (Republic) and 'problematic' corruption (Monarchy) is negligible.

Quote:

* Tile bonus (not sure if I know this well):
Monarchy - none.
Republic - yes... I believe it is +1 gold for cities and +2 gold for metros.

It's +1 gold for every worked tile that already produces gold (i.e. either roaded or with a bonus ressource). This can make for a huge difference in commerce income.

EDIT: Alexman obviously hit the 'submit reply' button faster.

I-iZ-1337 · August 11, 2002, 21:22

Republicz iz wikedz if j00 wantz t00 g0 th33 scienz r00t3z.. forz 3arl33 spazeshipz it roxxorz a11 otherz optionz. If j00 iz goinz th33 conquezt approachez j00 n33dz monarch33z f0rz n0 warz w33r33nez.

Arrian · August 12, 2002, 10:11

Theseus,

As I discovered in my "game of ultimate power" Monarchy corruption is pretty much comparable to Republic corruption - it's just that you have a huge drop-off in total commerce generated. But, like you point out, you don't have to pay for your armed forces. I was supporting huge numbers of units, had well-placed Palace & FP, and most of my "core" cities were on rivers or lakes, meaning they were all size 12 and generating a fair amount of trade.

The only time I really debate between republic and monarchy is if I'm playing a non-religious civ. If I'm religious, I can just switch whenever. If I'm not, this is a big decision. I've gone both ways with it. First, in the aforementioned GoUP, I went with Monarchy and had a lot of success with it. In my most recent Chinese warmongering rampage, I went with republic... and had quite a bit of success with that. WW was hardly a factor, because large numbers of Riders can tear through an AI empire pretty quick.

-Arrian

lockstep · August 12, 2002, 10:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
I was supporting huge numbers of units

Hmm ... What was your approximate ratio of units (including workers) per city a) at a time when you were in a 'builder' mode and had no short-time plans for war b) at a time when you had amassed units to go out for conquest?

Arrian · August 12, 2002, 10:34

lockstep,

Hmm, not sure. The only time I was really in full "builder mode" was between the conquest of France and the invasion of America. That wasn't a very long time.

I was at war for most of the game. Archer attack on England, horse/sword attack on India, then Japan. Riders to finish Japan and start on France. Cavalry to finish France and destroy America and all but 1 city of the Iroquois.

I remember that going into my war with Japan I was actually slightly over the "allowed" number of units, so I had to pay for some of them. After finishing Japan, I don't think I paid for my units ever again.

I have a lot of saved games, so I could check the exact numbers for you.

-Arrian

Arrian · August 12, 2002, 10:40

Ok, I checked my old "Ultimate Power" thread, and I had posted two F3 screens in there...

420AD:

87 units/68 allowed (19gpt in support). Looks like 69 were actual military units, and 18 were workers.

1465AD: 191 units/218 allowed. Not sure about workers vs. military units.

-Arrian

lockstep · August 12, 2002, 10:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
lockstep,

I have a lot of saved games, so I could check the exact numbers for you.

-Arrian

That would be very helpful. Actually, I'm tinkering with the idea to give Republic and Democracy unit support costs of 2 instead of 1, but link this with a small number of free units. (The idea is that a Rep/Dem in 'builder' mode should have somewhat more gold than in the standard setting, but a Rep/Dem amassing units should have a bigger strain on its economy.) Your numbers – although you chose Monarchy - would provide some hints what actual numbers of free units for Rep/Dem would be balanced - 0/1/2, 1/2/4, etc. (For Monarchy and Communism, numbers of free units are 2/4/8).

Arrian · August 12, 2002, 11:08

Lockstep,

Do you want me to give you the numbers from each save, or would you like me to post the saves themselves?

-Arrian

lockstep · August 12, 2002, 11:11

Hmm ... I always wanted to analyze saves from an expert player's game.

Yes, I'd like you to post a few examples (builder mode vs. amassed units).

Arrian · August 12, 2002, 11:23

Flattery will get you everywhere

When I get home, I'll dig up some saves and post 'em in the old UP thread. Like I said, though, I don't think I had a true "builder" phase. By the time I turned on the French I was pretty much building and warmongering all at once. I was strong enough to do both.

-Arrian

lockstep · August 12, 2002, 11:26

Thanks in advance. And it would be nice if you could provide a link to the saves in this thread.

lockstep · August 13, 2002, 09:50

Arrian, I checked your 1275AD save. Awesome game - I was especially impressed with the city of Beijing producing 26 shields in the middle age!

Okay, now for some 'builder mode' stats:

You have 51 cities, of which 19 are level 1, 32 are level 2 and (naturally before Sanitation) 0 are level 3. For Monarchy, this results in 166 free units (19*2 + 32*4).
You have 142 units (2.8 per city) and therefore don't pay any support. 33 units (0.7 per city) are Offensive Land, 63 (1.2 per city) are Defensive Land, 16 (0.3 per city) are Other Military (BTW, this includes leaders ), 30 (0.6 per city) are Settlers/Workers.
You have also captured 44 Workers (0.9 per city). As they are working at half speed, this is equivalent to 22 built workers, and I'd be interested in how many additional workers you had built without these 'prisoners of war'.

I also took a look at your 'newjapan' save, and the figures and ratios are quite similar.

For 'amassed units' stats, I'd like to take a look at an 'Ultimate Power' game save from about 1AD - shortly before you unleashed your Horsemen/Swordsmen hordes on India.

BTW, does anyone besides me think that 8 free units per metropolis (standard setting for Monarchy/Communism) is somewhat unbalancing? Wouldn't 6 free units be more appropriate?

Arrian · August 13, 2002, 10:17

lockstep,

I think you may be right about the unit support for metropoli... 6 would probably be better.

Unfortunately, I only have saves for 3450BC, 420AD, 800AD, 940AD, 1275AD, 1465AD, and 1685AD. I got hit by "one more turn" syndrome and failed to save the game between 3450BC and 420AD.

I may, however, be able to find a save of the beginning of one of my horse rushes from a different game. I'll have a look tonight.

I also have a newer Chinese game that may actually have been more "powerful" than the UP game, but I didn't do my standard military buildup. I did end up with comparable numbers of troops, but the ratios will be off because of the incredible boost I got from buying workers from the AI. During my "early war" stage, most of the AI's have 5 cities, and I'm on 11. I do have a save from then, though, and it may be what you're looking for.

-Arrian

lockstep · August 13, 2002, 10:27

One thing that struck me as odd was your low ratio of defenders per city (1.2). I can only guess that you feel your 'home continent' is finally save from being invaded by whatever AI is left, and that your defenders-per-city ratio was higher when your empire was smaller.

About the captured workers ... do they replace any workers you would have built otherwise?

Arrian · August 13, 2002, 11:18

lockstep,

Actually, I didn't really need as many defenders as I had. Yes, my homeland was safe from invasion. The coastal cities could have kept their defenders, with the inland ones giving up theirs. Keep in mind that some of my defenders were in France, protecting my attack troops and garrisoning Paris. The real ratio of defenders to cities is more like 1 to 1. My attack forces were just coming back up to strength in 1275... they had been severely weakened by the intial attack on France (Riders vs. Mustkeers... ack!).

Hmm, extra workers.. yes, I probably would have built extras (and did, during the RR binge) had I not had the slaves. Dunno how many, because I don't really calculate out "I need X number of workers." Then again, I had those slaves because I conquered my neigbors. Without that conquest, I would have had a much smaller empire, with less need for workers.

-Arrian

lockstep · August 14, 2002, 06:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Hmm, extra workers.. yes, I probably would have built extras (and did, during the RR binge) had I not had the slaves.

How about adding 2 foreign workers at a time to a city and building 1 worker in the city? 10 shields for 1 pop point doesn't sound too bad to me, and with the numbers of your 1275AD save you still wouldn't pay support for the additional units.

Arrian · August 14, 2002, 09:15

Quote:

Originally posted by lockstep

How about adding 2 foreign workers at a time to a city and building 1 worker in the city? 10 shields for 1 pop point doesn't sound too bad to me, and with the numbers of your 1275AD save you still wouldn't pay support for the additional units.

Heh, never occurred to me. This was the first game where I used Monarchy extensively, so I was still thinking "slaves are good, they're free!" Not that it really mattered, though. I never really felt a lack of workers.

-Arrian

Kindbud · August 14, 2002, 14:47

I was reading this interesting thread and was struck that I had never captured another civ's worker (or any other unit FTM). How is it done in Civ III? In Civ II you needed to bribe but that doesn't exsist here.

Thanks

dawidge · August 14, 2002, 15:43

You can buy them, if they have workers *in* their capital, but usually you capture them by attacking them (They surrender immediately to your troops as you occupy the square) or taking a city that has them (again, they immediately become yours), or by razing a city when you take it (excess population is converted to workers).