You didn't mention how Mercantilism is useful during the (often long) stretches of the mid-game where most other civs are running it, too. Also if you're doing the Caste System + Pacifism thing during Golden Ages to pump out Great People, then Mercantilism can be very worth it, and with the Pyramids, it's even more of a no-brainer move. Especially before Astronomy, the NET Commerce you get from foreign trade routes can easily be worth much less than the benefits you get from Mercantilism. I'm careful to say NET Commerce because of the aspect of Mercantilism that many players overlook: not only do you miss out on foreign trade routes, but when you're running Mercantilism, you deny your rivals the Commerce coming from your civilization as well. If you've made it to the mid-game and you've successfully conquered another civ or two, then smaller civs are basically leeching off your wealth with your plentiful trade routes, while you don't have as many trade routes to receive from them. The bigger you are, the worse the deal is for you, so if you switch to Mercantilism, you end up hurting your rivals more than you hurt yourself, meaning that on the balance, you're out on top. And by the way, you get to trade with your vassals anyway. Of course, in the late-game, State Property is usually much more powerful. And if you've carefully planned it out, the Mining Inc. + Sushi + Free Market combo is stronger still.
You're right about how Mercantilism does have a lot of good aspects going for it, and I think it's probably the most complicated one to figure out whether it's worth adopting or not. With the Pyramids, Mercantilism definitely has a lot of synergy because you can go Representation and Caste System. But it's also really important to have island cities to trade with if you're going Mercantilism, which can be difficult with the maps I've been playing lately (almost always Earth map, pangaea, or continents). The aspect of NET commerce is also a really good point - sometimes Mercantilism is worth adopting because it hurts your rivals more than it hurts you. Again, my playstyle doesn't usually lend itself well to this because I almost always play with 18 civs, and so cutting my cities off from foreign trade doesn't have as large an impact because my percentage of the total number of cities is smaller than if I only played with 9 civs for example. Also, I had no idea that you could still trade with your vassals with Mercantilism. That's cool, and definitely can make it a much better civic. I always turn vassals off because I think it makes the game too easy for conquering and doesn't really give a chance to smaller countries. This happens a lot in these tutorial videos where my game knowledge is skewed towards what I like to play, but I love how people leave comments and share knowledge from their perspective. It's been helping me grow as a player!
@@mediocreattempts1212 By the way, I'll take the opportunity to shamelessly plug the AdvCiv mod, which among other things, makes a seemingly small balance adjustment to Serfdom which suddenly makes it competitive with the other Labor civics: it gives +1 Commerce to all Farms and Plantations, while taking away 1 Commerce from Towns. In dry empires where you need a lot of irrigation following Civil Service, you can end up with many Farms, with a significant proportion of your economy dependent on this income, with the extra Worker speed synergizing with the labor requirement to build all those Farms. It's still commonly worse than Slavery or Caste System, but at the very least, it's more competitive than vanilla Serfdom, which is at best a Spiritual-only micro-optimization civic.
Get nationhood, build a whole bunch of farms around your capital, build the globe theater there, and have an endless supply of drafted riflemen and conquer the world
I don't think this needs to be done at your capital, any city will do if it has tons of food. I've had success in the past doing this with the traditional location for London in the Earth map in several of my playthroughs. Works well with slavery too.
I will say, I think it would have been cool if BTS added a random event where if you’re running Rep or Universal and you go to war that your Congress offers you Emergency Powers(basically, shift to Police State without Revolution/Anarchy) with the condition of “surrendering your powers(shift back to original civic, again with no Revolution)” at the war’s conclusion. And refusing leads to rebellions or whatever consequences programmed in. It’d give you a solid opportunity to play a Forever War scenario to keep Emergency Powers and roleplaying opportunities, but I can see how it’d be abused.
Honestly, I think there should be a lot more diplomatic consequences for different civics. Your freedom loving country can do all the trade in the world with the most repressive and slave-loving nation on the planet. I'm not a fan of random events, and I usually turn the off, but something in the game to add more consequences to your civics would be nice.
Hereditary rule military units might be very expensive on higher difficulty in competitive setups. But that is the only way to get unlimited Local happiness in the game as early as Monarchy is discovered. For example, in One City Challenge games(plus always war). Yes, you trade your gold in exchange of happiness. Combining with slavery, granary and barracks you can whip indefinitely say, catapults and counter unhappiness by keeping units in the city. Then, you use this stack of catapults or other units for war and with the city itself you have several options after that: 1) let an enemy(or even barbarians) captures the city and then re-claim it 2) build Globe Theatre to nullify un-happineess 3) just wait until the time fades the past and extra happy resources coming.
Just a remark there is only one way to get unlimited health in just one city - put the National park in it. Hereditary rule allows similar hapinness option in any city.
It can be really good with any smaller empires, but it also can be really good for trying to focus on building some wonders faster than a rival. Unfortunately, just too expensive most of the time.
@@mediocreattempts1212 So one strat I’m thinking of trying is running Bureaucracy if I ever run Mercantilism. Use the power and expansion of the Capital to makeup for the lack of foreign trade routes. *shrug*
@Jack Daone Ive done it on lower difficulties. On deity, it can be hard to defend yourself because the army you need to build costs too much in maintenance, but I have been thinking of playing a game or two to see if it's possible without just going for a cheesy diplo or cultural win.
I think you undervalue cast system (to be able to more or less starve down a city just in order to get out another Great people) and pacifism a bit to be fair. On higher levels and Diety specificly, Great people in order to bulb certain tech can really be crucial in a big amount of games to be honest. Getting Astronomy before everyone else (which can be really hard by just selfteching it without great people) that you can use to trade for all the other stuff that you will be behind the AI is important. Ofc it's depending on what kind of setup you run, for example you playing on Marathon and mainly world map maybe benefit more form other, but on random maps it will be an important factor.
That's a good piece of advice in order to quickly get a great person, or to get one you would've have gotten otherwise. In games that are less militaristic, I can see it being a good strategy. I do think on Marathon, it leans more towards Slavery for the extra production because units are relatively cheaper compared to buildings. But this is something I'd definitely like to try soon, especially with a Spiritual leader.
@@mediocreattempts1212 Absolutly, overall slavery is the more usefull and you use that in some extent every game. But I think in almost every game cast system can be of use as well. I also hold slavery higher overall, but when I watched your video I thought you kind of downgraded those two civics a bit hehe, bc they do for sure help out big time on many maps on higher levels.
In the early game you build the pyramids and gain Representation which is great early game , but then when do you change this in the later game ? In your opinion ?
I would move away from Representation when either the science bonuses stop being a big deal (I have the tech I need for whatever strategy I want, and it's time to switch to more production from Police State or Universal Suffrage), or when it's time to move away from a specialist economy: (1) workshops/watermills get really good with communism later in the game and can cause a shift; (2) maybe your cottages have finally developed into towns everywhere, so Universal Suffrage is more helpful; (3) you've spent a lot of time getting great people and now great people take a long time to get, so it's not as worth it to invest in a specialist economy anymore (a lot of the value of a specialist economy comes from bulbing great scientists, not just from beakers you get from running scientists).
I usually play on noble allow alliances no vassals require complete kills no space race mansa all ai slots filled and I never use slavery always a good game even if I don't win been playing forever best game since chess damn near. I try to stay a despot till I can change to police state and barbarian til serf decentralization and paganism til environmentalism and free religion sometimes I go back into barbarism when I get the tech advantage
Being in the correct civics at the correct times Is well worth the 1-2 turns of anarchy. A game is 500 turns long, even if you had 10 turns of anarchy it's 1/50. 2% is nothing. Even less if you were getting boosts that actually benefit you
@@Kralnor try it custom game let your civ be the only one that doesn’t use slavery ever require complete kills no vassals no space race all ai slots filled very interesting game always on earth 2
You didn't mention how Mercantilism is useful during the (often long) stretches of the mid-game where most other civs are running it, too. Also if you're doing the Caste System + Pacifism thing during Golden Ages to pump out Great People, then Mercantilism can be very worth it, and with the Pyramids, it's even more of a no-brainer move. Especially before Astronomy, the NET Commerce you get from foreign trade routes can easily be worth much less than the benefits you get from Mercantilism.
I'm careful to say NET Commerce because of the aspect of Mercantilism that many players overlook: not only do you miss out on foreign trade routes, but when you're running Mercantilism, you deny your rivals the Commerce coming from your civilization as well. If you've made it to the mid-game and you've successfully conquered another civ or two, then smaller civs are basically leeching off your wealth with your plentiful trade routes, while you don't have as many trade routes to receive from them. The bigger you are, the worse the deal is for you, so if you switch to Mercantilism, you end up hurting your rivals more than you hurt yourself, meaning that on the balance, you're out on top. And by the way, you get to trade with your vassals anyway.
Of course, in the late-game, State Property is usually much more powerful. And if you've carefully planned it out, the Mining Inc. + Sushi + Free Market combo is stronger still.
You're right about how Mercantilism does have a lot of good aspects going for it, and I think it's probably the most complicated one to figure out whether it's worth adopting or not. With the Pyramids, Mercantilism definitely has a lot of synergy because you can go Representation and Caste System. But it's also really important to have island cities to trade with if you're going Mercantilism, which can be difficult with the maps I've been playing lately (almost always Earth map, pangaea, or continents).
The aspect of NET commerce is also a really good point - sometimes Mercantilism is worth adopting because it hurts your rivals more than it hurts you. Again, my playstyle doesn't usually lend itself well to this because I almost always play with 18 civs, and so cutting my cities off from foreign trade doesn't have as large an impact because my percentage of the total number of cities is smaller than if I only played with 9 civs for example.
Also, I had no idea that you could still trade with your vassals with Mercantilism. That's cool, and definitely can make it a much better civic. I always turn vassals off because I think it makes the game too easy for conquering and doesn't really give a chance to smaller countries.
This happens a lot in these tutorial videos where my game knowledge is skewed towards what I like to play, but I love how people leave comments and share knowledge from their perspective. It's been helping me grow as a player!
@@mediocreattempts1212 By the way, I'll take the opportunity to shamelessly plug the AdvCiv mod, which among other things, makes a seemingly small balance adjustment to Serfdom which suddenly makes it competitive with the other Labor civics: it gives +1 Commerce to all Farms and Plantations, while taking away 1 Commerce from Towns. In dry empires where you need a lot of irrigation following Civil Service, you can end up with many Farms, with a significant proportion of your economy dependent on this income, with the extra Worker speed synergizing with the labor requirement to build all those Farms. It's still commonly worse than Slavery or Caste System, but at the very least, it's more competitive than vanilla Serfdom, which is at best a Spiritual-only micro-optimization civic.
Get nationhood, build a whole bunch of farms around your capital, build the globe theater there, and have an endless supply of drafted riflemen and conquer the world
I don't think this needs to be done at your capital, any city will do if it has tons of food. I've had success in the past doing this with the traditional location for London in the Earth map in several of my playthroughs. Works well with slavery too.
Police state plus Mount Rushmore plus jails = zero unhappiness from war.
I will say, I think it would have been cool if BTS added a random event where if you’re running Rep or Universal and you go to war that your Congress offers you Emergency Powers(basically, shift to Police State without Revolution/Anarchy) with the condition of “surrendering your powers(shift back to original civic, again with no Revolution)” at the war’s conclusion. And refusing leads to rebellions or whatever consequences programmed in.
It’d give you a solid opportunity to play a Forever War scenario to keep Emergency Powers and roleplaying opportunities, but I can see how it’d be abused.
Honestly, I think there should be a lot more diplomatic consequences for different civics. Your freedom loving country can do all the trade in the world with the most repressive and slave-loving nation on the planet. I'm not a fan of random events, and I usually turn the off, but something in the game to add more consequences to your civics would be nice.
Hereditary rule military units might be very expensive on higher difficulty in competitive setups. But that is the only way to get unlimited Local happiness in the game as early as Monarchy is discovered. For example, in One City Challenge games(plus always war). Yes, you trade your gold in exchange of happiness. Combining with slavery, granary and barracks you can whip indefinitely say, catapults and counter unhappiness by keeping units in the city. Then, you use this stack of catapults or other units for war and with the city itself you have several options after that: 1) let an enemy(or even barbarians) captures the city and then re-claim it 2) build Globe Theatre to nullify un-happineess 3) just wait until the time fades the past and extra happy resources coming.
Just a remark there is only one way to get unlimited health in just one city - put the National park in it. Hereditary rule allows similar hapinness option in any city.
I've never played one city, can you build Globe Theatre in that? Normally it requires you to have eight theaters.
I've found every civic has its time and place. Even pacifism.
As another poster pointed out, mercantilism has its uses. It can help boost production.
Bureaucracy’s best when you’re doing a Single City Run. Basically a must to makeup for the loss of additional cities.
It can be really good with any smaller empires, but it also can be really good for trying to focus on building some wonders faster than a rival. Unfortunately, just too expensive most of the time.
@@mediocreattempts1212
So one strat I’m thinking of trying is running Bureaucracy if I ever run Mercantilism. Use the power and expansion of the Capital to makeup for the lack of foreign trade routes. *shrug*
@Jack Daone Ive done it on lower difficulties. On deity, it can be hard to defend yourself because the army you need to build costs too much in maintenance, but I have been thinking of playing a game or two to see if it's possible without just going for a cheesy diplo or cultural win.
I think you undervalue cast system (to be able to more or less starve down a city just in order to get out another Great people) and pacifism a bit to be fair. On higher levels and Diety specificly, Great people in order to bulb certain tech can really be crucial in a big amount of games to be honest. Getting Astronomy before everyone else (which can be really hard by just selfteching it without great people) that you can use to trade for all the other stuff that you will be behind the AI is important. Ofc it's depending on what kind of setup you run, for example you playing on Marathon and mainly world map maybe benefit more form other, but on random maps it will be an important factor.
That's a good piece of advice in order to quickly get a great person, or to get one you would've have gotten otherwise. In games that are less militaristic, I can see it being a good strategy. I do think on Marathon, it leans more towards Slavery for the extra production because units are relatively cheaper compared to buildings. But this is something I'd definitely like to try soon, especially with a Spiritual leader.
@@mediocreattempts1212 Absolutly, overall slavery is the more usefull and you use that in some extent every game. But I think in almost every game cast system can be of use as well. I also hold slavery higher overall, but when I watched your video I thought you kind of downgraded those two civics a bit hehe, bc they do for sure help out big time on many maps on higher levels.
@@zypher1005 I hope I didn't downplay slavery too much. I think it's the most important civic in the game!
In the early game you build the pyramids and gain Representation which is great early game , but then when do you change this in the later game ? In your opinion ?
I would move away from Representation when either the science bonuses stop being a big deal (I have the tech I need for whatever strategy I want, and it's time to switch to more production from Police State or Universal Suffrage), or when it's time to move away from a specialist economy: (1) workshops/watermills get really good with communism later in the game and can cause a shift; (2) maybe your cottages have finally developed into towns everywhere, so Universal Suffrage is more helpful; (3) you've spent a lot of time getting great people and now great people take a long time to get, so it's not as worth it to invest in a specialist economy anymore (a lot of the value of a specialist economy comes from bulbing great scientists, not just from beakers you get from running scientists).
@@mediocreattempts1212 thank you that makes much sense
Your utopia sounds like it would be an absolutely horrid country to belong to IRL. :)
I usually play on noble allow alliances no vassals require complete kills no space race mansa all ai slots filled and I never use slavery always a good game even if I don't win been playing forever best game since chess damn near. I try to stay a despot till I can change to police state and barbarian til serf decentralization and paganism til environmentalism and free religion sometimes I go back into barbarism when I get the tech advantage
Being in the correct civics at the correct times Is well worth the 1-2 turns of anarchy.
A game is 500 turns long, even if you had 10 turns of anarchy it's 1/50.
2% is nothing.
Even less if you were getting boosts that actually benefit you
Noble is pretty easy once you get a decent grasp on the game mechanics. You could stay in the beginning civics and still win.
@@Kralnor try it custom game let your civ be the only one that doesn’t use slavery ever require complete kills no vassals no space race all ai slots filled very interesting game always on earth 2