Cult of Personality? Seems bad to me.

[PaleJackal]

The requirement to be at war with a common foe seems like a relatively rare situation, unless the strategy is to give the AI lots of resources/stuff to declare war on a common foe?

 

[Callonia]

Dude, the autocracy bloc had like what, eight friends with me. And every single one of them was at war with same foes as me. Insane Tourism stacking went on whether I wanted it or not. THey dow'd on same target as I did because they are weaklings for picking order or freedom lol.

Just get rid of the world of weaklings who went order and freedom and win a tourism victory on the world full of successful autocratic governments holding military parades and wahoo!

it was literally an Diplomatic+Cultural+Domination Victory in a Culture victory!

 

[PaleJackal]

Ah, so I guess the trick is to get a bunch of other nations to go Autocracy with you?

Though I must say that what you describe seems like a case of "win more" rather than winning a game you would otherwise lose.

My original thought was: what if it gave +15-20% tourism to nations you weren't at war with? Or do people think that it's routinely useful as is?

 

[PhroX]

Dude, the autocracy bloc had like what, eight friends with me. And every single one of them was at war with same foes as me. Insane Tourism stacking went on whether I wanted it or not. THey dow'd on same target as I did because they are weaklings for picking order or freedom lol.

Just get rid of the world of weaklings who went order and freedom and win a tourism victory on the world full of successful autocratic governments holding military parades and wahoo!

it was literally an Diplomatic+Cultural+Domination Victory in a Culture victory!

Yeah, the Autocracy CV seems to be aimed at a hybrid playstyle of domination and culture, rather than the traditional Liberty style "sit in a corner spamming GWAMs". Regardless of which VC you're going for, Autocracy involves the military (well, except space, but why would you go Auto for space?) Much like AutoDipV encourages you to build up a good sized army and go threaten the CSs into voting for you, AutoCV aims to eliminate those who oppose you while simultaneously influencing your friends.

 

[Myomoto]

It stacks for every common foe you have, so if you're at war with two common foes it's a 100% boost in tourism. It takes a bit of work, but it can be absolutely insane under the right circumstances.

 

[Babri]

Getting HUGE boost for jumping in other people's business is a big buff IMO.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[Maxym]

It stacks for every common foe you have, so if you're at war with two common foes it's a 100% boost in tourism. It takes a bit of work, but it can be absolutely insane under the right circumstances.

I don't think this is correct, I'll double check but I am pretty sure I m at war with two of Gajah's foes in the lst gotm and I am getting 100% tourism modifier but 50% comes from trade and OB, only 50% from cult of personality.

Still a very useful tenet and yielding 400 tourism per turn right now to the only target I care about ( a friend with an army and empire to big to deal with militarily ATM ) if I snag the games it will be close to 1k just from the cult, not bad

And yes to get most out of it you need to put in some work to make sure your "friend" is always at war with your enemies or vice versa.

 

[sadpickle]

I went Auto in a quasi Diplo/Dom/Science game (it was Emperor, don't judge me); I was in a war and the first person to pick a policy, and I had been using Order basically every game until then. Wound up winning a diplo victory (simply because I was the map's JP Morgan, pulling in some 200+ gpt, and the UN came along before I could dom my way to victory). Got a nifty achieve for it though (diplo win with auto).

 

[Vidszhite]

I don't think this is correct, I'll double check but I am pretty sure I m at war with two of Gajah's foes in the lst gotm and I am getting 100% tourism modifier but 50% comes from trade and OB, only 50% from cult of personality.

Still a very useful tenet and yielding 400 tourism per turn right now to the only target I care about ( a friend with an army and empire to big to deal with militarily ATM ) if I snag the games it will be close to 1k just from the cult, not bad

And yes to get most out of it you need to put in some work to make sure your "friend" is always at war with your enemies or vice versa.

Oh, it stacks all right. I witnessed it myself. It doesn't display a +100%, it displays two +50%. It stacks with however many foes there are, and you don't even need to fight. I once got it triple stacked, and the most cultural civ in the game was under my sway in no time at all. Autocracy is not passive at all, but in the hands of a skillful player, it is easily the best at what it does.

 

[Doktor Vic Tim]

Just a quick little question. What makes a foe a common foe? How many wars must I wage for someone to become a common foe?

 

[Callonia]

Just a quick little question. What makes a foe a common foe? How many wars must I wage for someone to become a common foe?

Just one war. The more of the boost it gives depends on how many units you kill.

There's a reason why a hostile Netherlands went friendly after I killed 100+ iroquois units. xD

Basically the more you can kill the better it is. It also fades away too. If no deaths has been occurring on the enemy's side from your units. And it fades away over time in peace too.

 

[Doktor Vic Tim]

Just one war. The more of the boost it gives depends on how many units you kill.

There's a reason why a hostile Netherlands went friendly after I killed 100+ iroquois units. xD

Basically the more you can kill the better it is. It also fades away too. If no deaths has been occurring on the enemy's side from your units. And it fades away over time in peace too.

Ah, so common foe is a foe that not only you have, but others as well? Such as, if I don't like the Ottomans, and the Dutch doesn't either, does that mean we have a common foe?

Sorry, some definitions can be a bit awkward at times for me.

 

[Browd]

It is not enough that both of you dislike a particular civ. There is a positive diplo modifier if you denounce an AI that another AI has already denounced, but that is not "fought against a common foe." To get that modifier, both of you had to have been at war with the same AI.

 

[Gort]

Yeah, this tenet is rubbish. Freedom gets +33% all the time, on everybody. Autocracy's tourism tenets don't stand a chance.

 

[PhroX]

Yeah, this tenet is rubbish. Freedom gets +33% all the time, on everybody. Autocracy's tourism tenets don't stand a chance.

CoP can get +100%, even +150%, on the people that matter. I'd say that's pretty more useful that +33% on everyone, given that everyone includes the civs I'm intending to destroy and thus is wasted.

I mean, of course, if all you're doing is hiding in a corner peacefully spamming GWAMs then it's not much use, but with the right strategy it's massive.

 

[Gort]

CoP can get +100%, even +150%, on the people that matter. I'd say that's pretty more useful that +33% on everyone

I find constant bonuses to be far more useful than potential ones. Your scenario requires there to be other Autocratic civs (not so unlikely) who also like you despite your likely warmongering (getting more unlikely) as well as those Autocratic civs being in a war with you (and more unlikely again), and then they have to be in multiple wars with you to get the 100%/150% you've used in your example.

I find a constant 33% bonus way more useful than a 50% one I have to jump through a ton of hoops to get, in the same way as I'd rather have a pay rise than a lottery ticket.

 

[Babri]

I find constant bonuses to be far more useful than potential ones. Your scenario requires there to be other Autocratic civs (not so unlikely) who also like you despite your likely warmongering (getting more unlikely) as well as those Autocratic civs being in a war with you (and more unlikely again), and then they have to be in multiple wars with you to get the 100%/150% you've used in your example.

I find a constant 33% bonus way more useful than a 50% one I have to jump through a ton of hoops to get, in the same way as I'd rather have a pay rise than a lottery ticket.

Keep in mind that increased tourism is more exploitable for a Autocracy civ than a freedom one as the latest patch helps to reduce conquest penalties when conquering a civ you have high tourism with.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gort]

Keep in mind that increased tourism is more exploitable for a Autocracy civ than a freedom one as the latest patch helps to reduce conquest penalties when conquering a civ you have high tourism with.

Of course, you only get the increased tourism with people you're NOT conquering. Freedom is actually better for your scenario, since it gives you bonus Tourism with the people you ARE conquering. For your scenario to work, you have to be in a joint war with some guys, then turn around and attack them. Not out of the question, of course, but it's yet more hoops to jump through, and while you're arranging those hoops Freedom is happily pumping out its extra Tourism with everybody in the world.

 

[Matthew.]

I find constant bonuses to be far more useful than potential ones. Your scenario requires there to be other Autocratic civs (not so unlikely) who also like you despite your likely warmongering (getting more unlikely) as well as those Autocratic civs being in a war with you (and more unlikely again), and then they have to be in multiple wars with you to get the 100%/150% you've used in your example.

It's not as bad as you make it sound. War-mongers often have a low war-monger hate flavor, and similar ideologies seem to hold a lot of weight. They also will go to war with just about anyone for a few pennies.

It is funny, because those same war-mongers you hate in the early game end up being your best buds in the late game. Atilla always has my back. Surprise DoW? Here Atilla, have one of my seven copies of cotton to help me out. Oh, I just sacked the enemies capital and we are still best buds? Sweet!

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I find constant bonuses to be far more useful than potential ones. Your scenario requires there to be other Autocratic civs (not so unlikely) who also like you despite your likely warmongering (getting more unlikely) as well as those Autocratic civs being in a war with you (and more unlikely again), and then they have to be in multiple wars with you to get the 100%/150% you've used in your example.

I find a constant 33% bonus way more useful than a 50% one I have to jump through a ton of hoops to get, in the same way as I'd rather have a pay rise than a lottery ticket.

1. They don't have to be Autocratic
2. They don't have to like you..... in the example of a 3 way war

Rome, China, and Egypt all hate each other and are all at war

If Rome has "Cult of Personality"

it gets
+50% tourism with China because China and Rome are both at war with Egypt
+50% tourism with Egypt because Egypt and Rome are both at war with China

(of course if Rome is at war with Egypt and China it misses out on the Open Borders/Trade Route tourism bonuses, so its not the best to just declare war on Everybody... but you do want to encourage wars between the Cultural leader and other civs... then you declare war on the other civs)