Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by lordsurya08, Jun 3, 2011.
Games are usually decided by the time you get get deep into the autocracy tree IMO.
Order is far stronger than Autocracy by leaps and bounds. I used total war once just to test it out, I was disappointed with total war.
its fine the way it is....
With any limited rather than permanent bonus, multiple tests are required, under different conditions, not just one.
It's largely a matter of opportunity cost, I guess. The analysis here seems to ignore the opportunity cost involved. Also, there needs to be compensation for it coming later.
I do think though that it's possible for it to be overpowered yet still rarely used. That is, it would be possible for it to be overpowered that 10% of times you actually do use it, but not useful the other times because you don't have time to utilise it.
for those who have never opened the Autocracy tree, even for the Achievement, I suggest you do so... not because it's particularly powerful, it's just a lot of fun.
You need to start off with a tall civ. 2-3 cities, and work through Tradition and Order. Warmonger as much as possible, but puppet everything. also, don't build up too much culture yet. Once you hit industrial, go all-out culture and plow through the tree. Then invade like crazy, especially once you get Total War.
It's a fun way to play the game at least once, especially if you get tired of freedom/rationalism/piety etc all the time. Of course, I'm sure Autocracy will get HUGE buffs in the upcoming patch. Especially getting rid of that stupid extra happiness in occupied cities policy. Seriously, who annexes their cities and then doesn't build a courthouse?
You disabled happiness. DO YOU NOT SEE THE PROBLEM WITH DISABLING A FUNDAMENTAL GAMEPLAY MECHANIC?
I disable happiness only in a certain type of mod I play. The advice that I gave will work with happiness enabled and unmodded.
By the time I would need Autocracy I have no use for Autocracy because I've already stomped the AI to the point they can't recover. It's a very niche policy tree. Whereas I can just go Order instead and get bonuses that will affect my empire for any situation, not just conquest.
Also, it's a funny policy tree because the better the bonuses in the tree, the less likely you are to complete the tree because of the extra culture costs for new cities. I also value Liberty for conquest which can't be available while in Autocracy.
A tradition/theocracy start for early SP's could definitely lead to a later autocracy push, as stated it is just very situational. The key is to wait to annex all your puppets until you get total war.
No it doesn't. You don't understand how critical the happiness issues are without having to invest in the piety and order tree.
Theocracy is such an important tech for warmongers that there's simply very little, if any way around it.
Autocracy comes wayyy too slowly, and overall investing in Liberty and freedom are better. Freedom allows me to get SPs quicker, which is huge as a warmonger, and Liberty allows me to get my empire up fast, early in the game.
TLDR: Autocracy is good, but there are better options out there.
i dont think a 33% and a 25% decrease would end up being used as 58%.
If we're talking dollars and start with a cost of $100 and take 25% off, we're down to $75. 33% off of that $75 takes us down to $50. a 58% decrease would have taken us down to $42.
Maybe someone into code could see if the discounts are added together before any calculations are made or if its one and then the other?
I think they're straight additive, ie, i do believe the 25% + 33% + 25% (Big Ben, Militarism, Mercantilism) result in a 1000-gold purchase cost unit only costing 170.
This part of Autocracy "works".
It's the rest of it that make it essentially the most stupid policy tree in existence.
For me the key thing that makes the tree unnattractive is that the happiness policy only affects annexed cities. Annexing is not widely done by warmongers because of the policy costs, and so this policy tends to have little to no effect most of the time. For those who have selected meritocracy earlier, this tree is now happiness-negative. So, you have a tree with great benefits for warmongering, but nothing for keeping in check the inevitable unhappiness that comes along with extended warmongering. That's why I personally don't use it, there's too much ying & no yang.
What about delayed starts (Game Era)? I never use them myself, so I don't know much about them. If you start in a later era, does the game automatically pick SPs for you? Does your Culture start off at 0? Or do you have a "bank" of culture points to pick your SPs with when you start the game? If the latter case is the way it works, you might be able to skip Tradition & Liberty and get Autocracy without much of a sacrifice. I don't know how late you can start a game, though, since I always start at 4000BC. I'll have to look into it when I get home from work.
big ben is additive but the policies are multiplicative with each other, so the two policies take off about 50%, big ben + mercantalism takes off 50%, big ben + militarism is 58%, all three take off 66.5%.
so for units, big ben is a lot more important than mercantalism if you're getting militarism, and having mercantalism and big ben minimizes the bonus of militarism to only 16.5% off base price (still 33% off modified price)
overpowered? its not even powerful.
Well, i just checked it out. I started a game in the Modern era on Standard speed and I had no SPs, but I had 500 Culture point to spend. That gave me enough to unlock Autocracy and take 4 SPs from it. So starting in a later era might make Autocracy a more viable option than it normally is.
Is it overpowered because it more easily generates wins than the other options? Your statement is decidedly qualitative.
Warmongering might actually be overpowered, by the way. Because you tend to not lose units in a war that's going well, the return on investment for a reasonably powerful military which you then use to beat down a couple neighbors is inordinately higher than the returns on investing those resources into economy, science, culture, diplomacy, etc.
That said, you should be able to win any wars you get into without policy support, so I'd rather put my policies into doing more with the cities I conquer than into conquering more cities.
Autocracy could be good if you are playing a losing culture game and need to change strategies, but I don't really see that happening.
Separate names with a comma.