Order vs Autocracy?

[dukedike]

Every time I play domination game, I've never choose autocracy. In fact, I never choose it in any game I've played. I always choose order because I have problem with happiness and order can solve my problem instantly. My question is, Does autocracy is really better for domination game? I want to try it many times but as I say that unhappiness force me to choose order.
Ps. I normally play in immortal level and one or two AI have larger military army than me in that point.

 

[Unresolved]

Autocracy is a pretty weak tree. The one thing that a domination game needs is happiness and Order provides that better than Autocracy.

 

[The Recognition]

Autocrazy sounds like the name of a late seventies Soviet disco.

 

[dukedike]

Haha, my bad. Its 'autocracy'

 

[Jerman]

Every time I play domination game, I've never choose autocracy. In fact, I never choose it in any game I've played. I always choose order because I have problem with happiness and order can solve my problem instantly. My question is, Does autocracy is really better for domination game? I want to try it many times but as I say that unhappiness force me to choose order.
Ps. I normally play in immortal level and one or two AI have larger military army than me in that point.

IDK, Populism and The Finisher are good by everything else is lacking in my opinion.

 

[RealHuhn]

Autocracy is meant to played in combination with commerce, really. Cheaper military, cheaper courthouses, +6 happiness for every new resource you aquire through conquest.
With all those gold modifiers, bombers and nukes are dirt cheap.

Also, remember that you get culture for every city you capture. So you can get to the policy for +3 happiness per courthouse rather quickly which is just as good, if not better than order.

Overall, rushbuying 10 bombers with 3 promos each pretty much means game over. That's the real strength of autocracy.

 

[IkM]

Order is better. but, if you're going for domination victory, autocracy would be good choice.

 

[DarthSheldonPhD]

Agree with the conclusion that order is simply better than autocracy for domination games. Aside from the policies being better, order enables faith-purchasing GE's, which are ALWAYS extremely beneficial, whereas autocracy enables GG's and GAd's, both of which you'll end up with more than you could possibly know what to do with anyway during a dom game (save possibly Sweden).
Just to play devil's advocate though, autocracy can be fun for a few reasons:
1.)autocracy mixed with economics (another good dom choice) provides 2 cumulative policies which reduce the gold-purchase price of units. Both of these plus Big Ben enables purchasing tons of units every turn (and the maintenance is manageable due to the opener)
2.) the happiness bonus of order is a flat 1/city. If you set up your dominating empire as a tall/narrow empire (perhaps with a tradition 4-city opener) and later expand exclusively through conquest, the vast majority of your cities will be annexed spoils of war (if you're a control-freak like me, otherwise just leave 'em puppets). If this is your choice, you'll end up with more happiness than order as each annex will provide 3 extra happiness with a courthouse.
3.)The finisher does help substantially in wrapping things up.
4.)Just to do something different; seriously, other than deity games (and culture games), picking between the 3 industrial-era-unlocked SP trees tends to be more "icing on the cake" than really decisive measures, such as picking between tradition or liberty.

 

[dukedike]

Autocracy is meant to played in combination with commerce, really. Cheaper military, cheaper courthouses, +6 happiness for every new resource you aquire through conquest.
With all those gold modifiers, bombers and nukes are dirt cheap.

Also, remember that you get culture for every city you capture. So you can get to the policy for +3 happiness per courthouse rather quickly which is just as good, if not better than order.

Overall, rushbuying 10 bombers with 3 promos each pretty much means game over. That's the real strength of autocracy.

Realhunn, you said right to my mind cause I completed adopt the right side of commerce tree already. But one thing that still make me curious in autocracy ability is courthouse for happiness which you have to annex the city. So its make the cost of next SP far away. This is why many people use the strategy 'puppet every thing'. I think autocracy could be the most proper tree for domination if they change the way to get happiness bonus without relate to the courthouse.

 

[Unresolved]

You also need to consider how many social policies you need. You only need 1 SP in Order. You need 3 in Autocracy. In a domination game, you most likely won't be getting too many policies unless you're playing a really long game(>300 turns). And the fact that you get the happiness boost from Order 20-60 turns earlier than you would from Autocracy.

 

[Monthar]

Keep in mind that you don't have to puppet everything. Raze the cities that don't have wonders unless it has a resource you can't get from any other city. If you choose the raze option immediately upon capture it won't increase your policy costs. Thus, with the Autocracy opener each of those captured and razed cities will power you through the rest of the policies fairly quickly.

Also keep in mind that the AI just loves to spam out more settlers when it starts losing cities, so you could let it go found new cities just to capture and raze them for more culture.

Optionally instead of razing the cities, you could sell them to one of the other AI's and use the cash to buy more troops. Of course if you do sell to your next target, you could always capture them again for even more culture.

 

[dukedike]

Agree with the conclusion that order is simply better than autocracy for domination games. Aside from the policies being better, order enables faith-purchasing GE's, which are ALWAYS extremely beneficial, whereas autocracy enables GG's and GAd's, both of which you'll end up with more than you could possibly know what to do with anyway during a dom game (save possibly Sweden).
Just to play devil's advocate though, autocracy can be fun for a few reasons:
1.)autocracy mixed with economics (another good dom choice) provides 2 cumulative policies which reduce the gold-purchase price of units. Both of these plus Big Ben enables purchasing tons of units every turn (and the maintenance is manageable due to the opener)
2.) the happiness bonus of order is a flat 1/city. If you set up your dominating empire as a tall/narrow empire (perhaps with a tradition 4-city opener) and later expand exclusively through conquest, the vast majority of your cities will be annexed spoils of war (if you're a control-freak like me, otherwise just leave 'em puppets). If this is your choice, you'll end up with more happiness than order as each annex will provide 3 extra happiness with a courthouse.
3.)The finisher does help substantially in wrapping things up.
4.)Just to do something different; seriously, other than deity games (and culture games), picking between the 3 industrial-era-unlocked SP trees tends to be more "icing on the cake" than really decisive measures, such as picking between tradition or liberty.

I totally agree with you Darthsheldon. I know the advantage of economy and strength of the army is huge but when you have the long run war and got very unhappiness. I mean less than-10 which cause you problem with production you have to choose the path that can solve it immediately. If I choose the autocracy I face the suffering from unhappiness more 10 turns.

 

[azzaman333]

If you have a relatively small empire where you raze almost everything, autocracy might be better, but Order normally wins out.

 

[RealHuhn]

Agree with the conclusion that order is simply better than autocracy for domination games. Aside from the policies being better, order enables faith-purchasing GE's, which are ALWAYS extremely beneficial, whereas autocracy enables GG's and GAd's, both of which you'll end up with more than you could possibly know what to do with anyway during a dom game (save possibly Sweden).

Oh, we've come to a conclusion yet?

Wow, you guys really don't want to hear counter arguments, do you?

With your faith, you wanna buy great merchants and do trade missions. More gold for more bombers and ships. Unit spam usually isn't a great strategy in Civ5 but bombers, nukes and navy are an entirely different story. The more, the better. And if GMs become too expensive, priests are a good alternative to convert conquered cities to your religion for even more gold or happiness.

And no, Order policies aren't "better". You don't need factories because you rush buy an entire army in a single city. You don't need +25% more science because a) WW2 bombers and ships is all you need and b) annexed cities produce much more science than puppets anyway. Puppets have a 25% science penalty and can't fill scientist slots.
Compare that to -33% gold for rushbuying a bomber with siege 2 and auto repair. I'm pretty certain, a WW2 bomber only costs 375-425 gold after modifiers. That's nothing.

Realhunn, you said right to my mind cause I completed adopt the right side of commerce tree already. But one thing that still make me curious in autocracy ability is courthouse for happiness which you have to annex the city. So its make the cost of next SP far away. This is why many people use the strategy 'puppet every thing'. I think autocracy could be the most proper tree for domination if they change the way to get happiness bonus without relate to the courthouse.

Policy costs do go up but again, you gain massive amounts of culture (and gold) from capturing cities. Overall, you won't notice the rising costs. Capture Egypts capital and you almost gain a full policy by itself.

Also, there's no harm in razing smaller cities without unique luxuries. And stuff like theatres are cheap to buy due to commerce and possibly Big Ben anyway. Your core cities can focus on culture buildings because they don't have to produce military units.

 

[dukedike]

I forgot the option that we can sell the cities, we captured, to AI and after reconsidering the pros and cons , I think autocracy is real fun to play with. I have another question as its say build courthouse in the half usual of time that mean I can buy courthouse in the half prices right?

 

[Browd]

Nope, like other production bonuses (e.g., Stable for mounted units, Collective Rule for doubled production on settlers, Piety opener for shrines and temples, etc.) the bonus applies only when you build a courthouse.

 

[Walter R]

I've never (that I can remember) built a courthouse - I don't annex if I can't afford to buy one. Am I alone in this? Is this yet another area where I demonstrate my poor understanding of the game?!

 

[dukedike]

I've never (that I can remember) built a courthouse - I don't annex if I can't afford to buy one. Am I alone in this? Is this yet another area where I demonstrate my poor understanding of the game?!

You are not alone , me and -what I believe-most of player never build courthouse in normal situation . If annex, I buy courthouse that turn. Although half of unhappiness in annex city but the design of policy to built in half time but not half price, seem to be another downside of autocracy. If you buy the courthouse in full price while you got the police stat policy, IMO we can't get the maximum advantage of this policy

 

[azzaman333]

I've never (that I can remember) built a courthouse - I don't annex if I can't afford to buy one. Am I alone in this? Is this yet another area where I demonstrate my poor understanding of the game?!

I have a game I'm playing where I took a coastal city with unhooked Pearl and Whale, so annexing and buying the workboat(s) while slow building the courthouse worked out better. But typically a city I annex will have a courthouse bought almost immediately.

 

[dukedike]

Another bad thing of annex city is the National wonders which some available in late game wide empire. Many of them is a must built - ironwork, oxford etc. If annex city doesn't have those requirement buildings, we have a chance to miss those NWs in that game