Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Catching up + Some thoughts - comments sought

[Stephen Hodge <stephenh@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Per Mathisen (permath@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > Besides, Communism as a government is way
> > to weak compared to the other governments as is.
> 
> It's stronger in Civ2 than it is in Freeciv (see below).
...
> This brings me to the strength of Communism in Civ2.  Not only is
> corruption the same in all cities (as in Civ1) -- it's also *greatly*
> reduced.  In my most recent game of Civ2, I played under Communism until
> the very end, when I shifted to Republic to pick some extra future tech
> and to force population growth with "We Love the..." days (this is the
> easiest way to score mucho points).  (The AIs were completely conquered
> except for a token city or two to keep the game going.)
> 
> Under Communism I had not a single bit of corruption *anywhere*.  I had
> Courthouses in many of my cities (from my Monarchy days), but the total
> lack of corruption surprised me.  And under Republic, I had to build
> more Courthouses to help control corruption (I had stopped building them
> under Communism -- they just weren't needed).

>From page 38 of the manual (paraphrased): no corruption under communism.

> The other strength of Communism is the production of veteran Spies.
> This doesn't apply to Freeciv yet, since Spies' veteran status isn't
> currently used (last time I checked, anyway).  I consider this a
> relatively minor feature, though, since I only use Spies in moderation.

Spies can be incredibly powerful and this advantage is not a minor one.
Other advantages of communism are that the first three units of a city
require no unkeep and units can impose twice the martial law (ie up to 6
unhappy citizens can be "pacified").

> Rizos Sakellariou (rizos@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > People with civI/II experience tell me that the Republic had disadvantages
> > that are not currently implemented in Freeciv. If this is true, isn't
> > perhaps time to start thinking about adding these?
> 
> The biggest disadvantage not currently implemented is the presence of
> a "Senate" which can overrule your decisions in matters of diplomacy.
> If an AI requests a cease fire, there's a 50% chance that your "Senate"
> will currently be controlled by pacifists who will go behind your back
> and sign a peace treaty even if you say "No".  Moreover, you can't just
> send the foreign herald away (as you could in Civ1) -- the "Senate"
> may meet with him/her in secret and sign a cease fire (or treaty?).

I find the main disadvantage of Republic, at least in the early game, is the
extra resources required to maintain units compared to Monarchy.

Regards,
Steve Hodge