The best time when to use Communism

epics · April 3, 2003, 01:12

I know that there are many threads about corruption and calculations of it but I would like to know when it is the best to change to communism. How many cities do I have to have for the communism to be more efficient than democracy?

Killazer · April 3, 2003, 12:54

When you have 30+ cities on a regular size map communism isnt too bad. Also the distance from capital-cities and fpalace-cities. Basically when you have a very large empire communism is very good. Unit support, no war weariness excellent for large wars.

Nor Me · April 3, 2003, 17:06

The main reason I've changed to Communism is when I'm about to get a lot of cities or land away from my core that can be made to rival it quickly. Don't switch to Communism if you have a well placed palace and FP.

Theoretically, a large Communist empire (we're talking 100-120 cities on Standard/Emporer) could outproduce a non-communist empire 3 times the size. But only if you had a courthouse and police station in every city and every city was over 50% corrupt. Generally it's easier to win than build one though so it would never be worth it.

Communism is much worse if you have more improvements in cities close to your Palace/FP than further away.
In practice, Palace/FP placement and the shape of your empire is more important than the number of cities in deciding whether Communism is worth it.

Jarvin · April 3, 2003, 17:29

When you've decided you want to be a filthy, commie bastard.

Seriously though, if you are a large empire, and in an extended war, thats the only real good time to switch, to end war weariness when you're too big for monarchy.

Also, if your country is ridiculously huge, i dont know an exact number, but if you have too many 1 shield, full grown cities at the edge of your country, you might consider switching.

MPatton · April 3, 2003, 17:54

what adantages does communism have over Monarchy. I tried communism and I had to raise my tax rates to 60% to stay green. This is in regular Civ3 not PTW. Besides running constantly at 30% taxes and 4 or 5 turns a civ advance is dang good. So why would I want any other gov than monarchy if I am the warmonger type. And I have tanks starting in 1750. I also generate a 235 cash surplus. I am however about 50% corrupted though

pedrojedi · April 4, 2003, 00:04

Communism is good for long wars, specially in conturbated scenarios like my AU207 game, where 9 or 10 civs are advancing in war with each other, and there's nothing that shows that it will change in the next 10 or so turns...

A fast development of far cities is another example of good-using communism... But I think it really shines when you have a religious trait, and you can change form democracy to communism like you're doing some slight fast change. Nothing like a good people who loves you and your ministers hehehe.

epics · April 4, 2003, 00:41

So generaly if I have concentrated cities the democracy is better, but if I have many cities far away from tha Palace/FP in different places on the planet communism might come in handy. I can live with that

THX

Jarvin · April 4, 2003, 05:41

And if you plan to go to communism, never forget to build those courthouses and police stations in all cities. It makes all the difference.

Wazell · April 4, 2003, 06:01

Yes, communism is exceptionally good when you go settling another continents and you have already created the two spheres around FP and Palace where democracy/republic outproduce communism. One strategy to consider with vast empire of 1 production cities are careful palace jumps, if you can afford it: under democracy move your palace around, building courts and police in all currently productive cities, then move on. When done, rush the palace to place where it's most profitable and switch to communism. This makes the most effective far-flung empires quickly.

pedrojedi · April 4, 2003, 10:32

The concept of palace switching is nice, but it only requires a good huge patience!

The only problem of communism is its not good rushing way: consuming citizens for shields hurts too much, and the next 20 turns with sadness doesn't help much either.

AzTecA GoD · April 6, 2003, 22:42

Communism is a great way to rid yourself of foreign citizens porblems. Pick a religious civ, and when you have succesfully stoped resisters, you can burn of the population with communism. This is very effective because you can get a courthouse with the pop you used to rush it, and just go back to Monarchy the next turn.

Communism will only help you if you try and expand to every part of the map, so making use of every tile close to your palace and FP is extremly important if you don't want to use communism. This may mean making cities between bigger cities, it will mean sharing tiles, but will prove more beneficial.

And also, communism was mistreated in Civ III. In CIV II you suffered no corruption at all, meaning you could expand forever and never lose any production. But one must keep in mind that communism is one of the most advanced governments in all time.

-Ronald

Daz · April 7, 2003, 06:38

Ahem.... im my recent game, on a huge map, where I conquered 20 or so cities on different islands, i decided to give Communism a try. I remembered my total income, research and production, waited 5 turns and...voila.. I was very dissapointed. I didnt get nearly as much money, research was also halved, and my best producing cities lost their productivness.

I did gain something on maintenance, but thats it.
My opinion: use it ONLY if democracy is presenting too much of a problem with war weariness. I can hold the war weariness under control, so I keep democracy....

pedrojedi · April 7, 2003, 10:39

Without the Universal Suffrage, WW comes early and tough and all wars must be surgical. It's nice and beautiful to see, but that's a lot of logistical work... And sometimes everything goes down because the (rather, so much) stupid AI does not want peace, and you have a prolonged war in your hands.