Authority Vs. Progress?

[Minh Le]

My whole point here is Authority is a wide tree, so IMO it just needs a little bit more to compliment wide play (a little need reduction?), as the instant yield is less valuable the wider you grow as compare to progress. Thats all. But it seems like my play style is what needs to be fixed so I dont have anything more to ask .

 

[CppMaster]

Nope, Progress is wide tree. Authority is a war tree.

 

[Owlbebach]

My whole point here is Authority is a wide tree, so IMO it just needs a little bit more to compliment wide play (a little need reduction?), as the instant yield is less valuable the wider you grow as compare to progress. Thats all. But it seems like my play style is what needs to be fixed so I dont have anything more to ask .

I think Authority is not wide, it is more like build 5 cities and capture the rest and keep them as puppets.

 

[Zanteogo]

Nope, Progress is wide tree. Authority is a war tree.

Exactly. You can war without actually holding cities. Burning down cities, or just not taking cities in the first place is a valid early war strategy.

Authority to me is one of the strongest trees because it allows you to bully early game. Taking the other civs settlers and workers, plus pillaging the heck out of them will put them way behind to the point they never become a real threat.

Progress allows you to build wide early and will give a nice long term pay off, assuming you don't get destroyed by your neighbor who took authority.

 

[DonStill]

I don't know, I like to go Authority, try to grab Earth Mother, then Diligence. Crapping out buildings left and right, even more so if you're England and have some steam mills. It's probably not optimal but I love being able to build stuff quick then transition to units and back again.

 

[ShadedSkies]

Exactly. You can war without actually holding cities. Burning down cities, or just not taking cities in the first place is a valid early war strategy.

Authority to me is one of the strongest trees because it allows you to bully early game. Taking the other civs settlers and workers, plus pillaging the heck out of them will put them way behind to the point they never become a real threat.

Progress allows you to build wide early and will give a nice long term pay off, assuming you don't get destroyed by your neighbor who took authority.

What's wrong with puppets? No penalties except like 1 unhappiness and you still get some yields as well as a fairly robust city that you can activate once it's no longer terrible. I think the only time I would raze a city is if I'm playing China to double dip on bonuses for conquering and then settling the spot.

 

[Rekk]

Puppets cost you gold (because they consume more than they make) and lower your military threat level (increased number of cities, but no increased supply).

 

[Phuc Nguyen]

With Authority, you’re expected to be always at war because wars are your main source of yields. But if you fail to snowball really hard then you will slowly fall behind to the point of never catching up. Another downside of Authority is it has no synergy with Statecraft or Artistry, except Fealty while Fealty is a really weak tree imo.

With Progress, you have a weak early game. It’s not good for rushing early wonders, it’s not good for pumping out settlers, units. But if you can settle 7+ cities in good spots on standard map, defend yourself well then you will have a strong mid-late game.

Anyway, choosing Authority, Progress or Tradition needs to be taken in consideration of strengths, weaknesses of the specific Civ you’re playing and your game plan. I tried Mongol with Progress once and failed horribly haha.

 

[Owlbebach]

Authority is it has no synergy with Statecraft or Artistry

Authority has perfect synergy with Statecraft. Diplo and war come together. Statecraft gives you lots of gold to support army and lots of production from City-States

 

[Phuc Nguyen]

Authority has perfect synergy with Statecraft. Diplo and war come together. Statecraft gives you lots of gold to support army and lots of production from City-States

Maybe you’re right. I will try it next time. Intuitively I think Authority encourages you to bully and capture CS while Statecraft tell you to befriend with them, that’s why I don’t think they don’t work well together.

 

[amateurgamer88]

Maybe you’re right. I will try it next time. Intuitively I think Authority encourages you to bully and capture CS while Statecraft tell you to befriend with them, that’s why I don’t think they don’t work well together.

Authority doesn't encourage you to capture CS. You benefit a lot more from bullying a CS over and over again and you can't do that if the CS is a puppet of yours.

As for Authority going into Statecraft, that's certainly doable but it's situational for sure. I don't know know how the yields compare if you ally CS or if you bully CS though. For instance, I played Austria where I went Authority and then Statecraft. Authority allowed me to survive against the Celts who are dangerous early game while Statecraft just works well with my UA. There are instances where the two can work well and, to be honest, I took Statecraft most often now and Artistry next. Fealty just feels meh overall.

 

[CrazyG]

I'm going to throw an opinion out there. Artistry and Statecraft are excellent because as a group, the community overbuffed them. People have been advocating the merits of Fealty for a long time. Artistry is excellent and has been excellent for a long time.

and capture CS

Capturing city states is something that is rarely a good idea in my experience (unless you are Mongolia).

 

[Phuc Nguyen]

I'm going to throw an opinion out there. Artistry and Statecraft are excellent because as a group, the community overbuffed them. People have been advocating the merits of Fealty for a long time. Artistry is excellent and has been excellent for a long time.

Capturing city states is something that is rarely a good idea in my experience (unless you are Mongolia).

Yeah Mongol is my go-to when I want to play a domination game because I like the mechanic of hit and run that Mongol has and its OP Khan. That’s why I think Statecraft has no synergy with Authority, but for other Civs, it makes sense.

Fealty is a really weak tree that I almost never choose and the times that I chose it, it always made me regretting of choosing it more. Only the bonuses from the opener and the completion of the tree are good. All 5 branches of the tree are really meh, especially the last one where you get bonuses from the TR with more advanced Civs. In VP, wars happen all the time and sending out TR hoping for its safety is too risky.

 

[Owlbebach]

I'm going to throw an opinion out there. Artistry and Statecraft are excellent because as a group, the community overbuffed them. People have been advocating the merits of Fealty for a long time. Artistry is excellent and has been excellent for a long time

I think it is mainly because of other changes balance is a very fragile thing. Again i think it is mainly due to Religions nerfed quite hard. Investing a lot in Religion does not benefit you much anymore and Fealty itself is an investment into Religion. Also Specialists were nerfed, which makes +1 culture/science on specialists on Artistry/Statecreaf more valuable AND extra food from Fealty less valuable. Thats it, not changes for Fealty, but it suddenly became crapp

 

[chicorbeef]

Yeah Mongol is my go-to when I want to play a domination game because I like the mechanic of hit and run that Mongol has and its OP Khan. That’s why I think Statecraft has no synergy with Authority, but for other Civs, it makes sense.

Fealty is a really weak tree that I almost never choose and the times that I chose it, it always made me regretting of choosing it more. Only the bonuses from the opener and the completion of the tree are good. All 5 branches of the tree are really meh, especially the last one where you get bonuses from the TR with more advanced Civs. In VP, wars happen all the time and sending out TR hoping for its safety is too risky.

I sometimes regret not picking Fealty due to the Nobility policy. +100% Production towards Castles/Armories and an easy, fast +1 Happiness per city is great. +100% Production towards two buildings, means, in practice, it's similar to getting one of them for free. If I had a policy that gave the production equivalent of free Armories everywhere (or you can devote that Production to a University or something) I'd say it's pretty good. +1 Happiness per city (this alone is pretty good), and +3 Food, stacked with the Monastery's +3 Food and the scaler's +1 Food for a total of +7 Food per city from just two policies is great imo. Burghers certainly pulls its weight, if you have semi-permanent WLTKD, it's +15% Production towards everything and double Border Growth (great as Authority) which is pretty good. +5 Food/+15 Defense per city is strong too imo.

The issue I have is with Divine Right/Serfdom...Divine Right is one of the weakest policies in the game and Serfdom isn't far behind. I think, if Fealty should be buffed, it's these two policies.

 

[Owlbebach]

it's similar to getting one of them for free.

Problem is it is getting 1 of 2 useless buildings for free

 

[chicorbeef]

Problem is it is getting 1 of 2 useless buildings for free

Fealty buffs Castles enough to make them a core building, worth delaying other stuff for. Armories are not useless to begin with. In fact I would stretch a bit and say Castles in your homeland can help free up a lot of troops and protect Puppets.

 

[Phuc Nguyen]

I sometimes regret not picking Fealty due to the Nobility policy. +100% Production towards Castles/Armories and an easy, fast +1 Happiness per city is great. +100% Production towards two buildings, means, in practice, it's similar to getting one of them for free. If I had a policy that gave the production equivalent of free Armories everywhere (or you can devote that Production to a University or something) I'd say it's pretty good. +1 Happiness per city (this alone is pretty good), and +3 Food, stacked with the Monastery's +3 Food and the scaler's +1 Food for a total of +7 Food per city from just two policies is great imo. Burghers certainly pulls its weight, if you have semi-permanent WLTKD, it's +15% Production towards everything and double Border Growth (great as Authority) which is pretty good. +5 Food/+15 Defense per city is strong too imo.

The issue I have is with Divine Right/Serfdom...Divine Right is one of the weakest policies in the game and Serfdom isn't far behind. I think, if Fealty should be buffed, it's these two policies.

Agree with some of your points, but for a civ that is always warring, your happiness is hard to control already, I don’t think food is that good since you really don’t want to overgrow.

 

[chicorbeef]

Agree with some of your points, but for a civ that is always warring, your happiness is hard to control already, I don’t think food is that good since you really don’t want to overgrow.

Work all the specialists you can then. Including ones you might not normally work like Merchants (those will give WLTKD for those Burgher bonuses). Work those Civil Servants in the Chanceries. Work more Mines/Villages.

 

[Gazebo]

I sometimes regret not picking Fealty due to the Nobility policy. +100% Production towards Castles/Armories and an easy, fast +1 Happiness per city is great. +100% Production towards two buildings, means, in practice, it's similar to getting one of them for free. If I had a policy that gave the production equivalent of free Armories everywhere (or you can devote that Production to a University or something) I'd say it's pretty good. +1 Happiness per city (this alone is pretty good), and +3 Food, stacked with the Monastery's +3 Food and the scaler's +1 Food for a total of +7 Food per city from just two policies is great imo. Burghers certainly pulls its weight, if you have semi-permanent WLTKD, it's +15% Production towards everything and double Border Growth (great as Authority) which is pretty good. +5 Food/+15 Defense per city is strong too imo.

The issue I have is with Divine Right/Serfdom...Divine Right is one of the weakest policies in the game and Serfdom isn't far behind. I think, if Fealty should be buffed, it's these two policies.

I'm with @chicorbeef on this one. My light touch balance to Fealty in the latest beta isn't doing it for Fealty, it needs a bit more. I'd rather not touch Statecraft/Artistry.

G