Peaceful Authority

[bonniepbilly]

I'm sure there's already a discussion (or several ones) on this, but I couldn't find it.

Don't you think Authority is too versatile for the first 100 turns, and rewards both an aggressive play style, and a peaceful one (except for barb camp clearing)? Especially due to the left side of the tree.

Wouldn't it be more interesting if the player was forced to invest more into warfare?
As it is, if I pick Authority I feel like I can easily adapt to the map and neighbors, while with Progress I will be much stronger if I don't go to war early and am able to develop peacefully.

Forcing the play style sounds bad (as it limits options), but it could make the initial policy tree pick more meaningful. It feels weird to me to pick a tree called Authority and be able to sit on 5 units for a long time.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Recursive]

Authority really depends on the extra Science and Culture from killing units and capturing cities in my experience.

 

[tothePAIN]

Authority has no science or culture until it’s fifth policy, and then only 2 culture per city, if you aren’t killing units or taking cities. Peace is bad for authority. No more culture or science.

 

[CrazyG]

If you don't go to war progress is so much better. 3 science per city is a lot.

 

[stii]

I don't agree I think progress is awful enough that peaceful authority is fine compared to it. You do get some science and culture by getting another city much quicker, plus a bit from barbs.

I think waiting until muskets to attack is generally fine.

 

[Stalker0]

I don't agree I think progress is awful enough that peaceful authority is fine compared to it. You do get some science and culture by getting another city much quicker, plus a bit from barbs.

So just some rough numbers to put out there for comparison. Lets assume a nice 7 city peaceful expand play, very common when I do peaceful wides myself.

So progress is going to make 21 SPT from its trade connections. Imperialism will get 240 science total from its new cities. Progress will overtake that science in a meer 11 turns. And from then on authority has to kill a 21 strength unit every single round to keep up (and it gets higher once % multipliers start kicking in). Now if your warring that's one thing, but even on my most barb heavy starts (and I've definately had the hordes), I can't see you consistently maintaining that quota.

Culture wise its a similar story. the +10 culture per buildings will start to beat the +2 CPT in general, but especially once the first era scaler kicks in. Now the wild card is CS tribute, I do think authority gets the culture jump on Progress in the middle of the tree, and will get a culture surge at that point....but longer term....Authority just runs out of steam. The tribute yields start to pale compared to just friend and allying cultural CS.

I think people also underestimate the worker bonuses of Progress. A quick example, if your repairing a pillaged terrain, its 3 turns normal, but only 2 for Progress. Anytime your moving into forest, progress workers move 2, regular move 1. Not to mention Progress will have its first worker faster than the other types in most cases. Those extra improvement turns start to add up.

So I agree with CrazyG here. Authority has a strong start, but if you don't keep feeding the engine with war it just runs out of steam. Progress will just keep on trucking. Is it doable? Absolutely. Is it optimal? Not really.

 

[stii]

But Imperialism is 2nd policy while 3science per city is 5th? or at least much much later. So authority is better early and whenever you fight anyone, so it seems like there is a pretty narrow time period where progress has better bonuses. 21science will be dwarfed by killing units during a war.

And this is best case for progress, sometimes you will get attacked and then authority will generate plenty of culture and science early on while you defend.


Authority has plenty of tools for expanding and building up lots of cities, getting a free settler and a static production boost on every city helps little cities become useful far more quickly. Some of the bonuses are useless in peaceful play but the stronger ones are strong enough that it is fine without an early war.

 

[Stalker0]

But Imperialism is 2nd policy while 3science per city is 5th? or at least much much later. So authority is better early and whenever you fight anyone, so it seems like there is a pretty narrow time period where progress has better bonuses. 21science will be dwarfed by killing units during a war.

Normally the 3 science is 3rd in games I play, and of course Progress gets science as its capital grows as well, though I think imperalism gets stronger bonuses initially. Now as you say, if Authority is warring then yes the science for unit kills can be a big deal...but the discuss is peaceful Authority. No one is questioning Authority is good when warring, but the argument was that its better than progress while at peace, and I just don't see that both on paper or in my experience.

 

[stii]

Normally the 3 science is 3rd in games I play, and of course Progress gets science as its capital grows as well, though I think imperalism gets stronger bonuses initially. Now as you say, if Authority is warring then yes the science for unit kills can be a big deal...but the discuss is peaceful Authority. No one is questioning Authority is good when warring, but the argument was that its better than progress while at peace, and I just don't see that both on paper or in my experience.

Well the OP said first 100 turns. Not never waring ever. Seven cities all connected in the first 100 turns is not going to be easy to do

 

[CrazyG]

An interesting note is that ancient ruins can be really favorable to progress, since you collect if a ruin gave you a free tech.

But Imperialism is 2nd policy while 3science per city is 5th? or at least much much later. So authority is better early and whenever you fight anyone, so it seems like there is a pretty narrow time period where progress has better bonuses. 21science will be dwarfed by killing units during a war.

I take the 3 science per city 3rd by default and build a city connection immediately. Usually that takes me from 8 to 14.

I'd be interested in seeing an authority game that stays at peace till muskets, I've struggled a bit with authority recently and I've been 'rediscovering' progress.

 

[stii]

An interesting note is that ancient ruins can be really favorable to progress, since you collect if a ruin gave you a free tech.


I take the 3 science per city 3rd by default and build a city connection immediately. Usually that takes me from 8 to 14.

I'd be interested in seeing an authority game that stays at peace till muskets, I've struggled a bit with authority recently and I've been 'rediscovering' progress.

Might be worth doing another collaborative game, we could at least start from the same point.

It generally isn't the plan to hold attacking for so long but if you are surrounded by enemies taking cities earlier can be tricky. I have done it a reasonable number of time but I don't think random saves/screenshots would be that useful.

 

[CrazyG]

Might be worth doing another collaborative game, we could at least start from the same point.

It generally isn't the plan to hold attacking for so long but if you are surrounded by enemies taking cities earlier can be tricky. I have done it a reasonable number of time but I don't think random saves/screenshots would be that useful.

Sure I'll join in. Any ideas for a good civ choice?

 

[DeAnno]

Hmm. I think any civ with an early UU should be disqualified, the long peace should feel natural. Perhaps a civ that struggles with production but has some science or culture benefits to help cover peaceful Authority's weaknesses? Netherlands, Poland, or Portugal maybe?

 

[Stalker0]

Portugal maybe?

I think Portugal is a fine choice. I play Portugal both Progress or Authority and tend to do well either way with her. Also she tends to war later which helps the peaceful push in this one.

 

[tothePAIN]

It should be a Civ without an early UU and a reason to wait, but a civ that would want to go authority because long term, the civ expects to war. So I’d say Assyria or France, civs that need to war to use their UA to its potential long run but that lack a early UU.

 

[CrazyG]

I'm not sure I would agree that France is a good pick for progress. I'll play Assyria or Portugal as progress happily though.

 

[stii]

I like Portugal best for this, an average civ which doesn't lean towards either side.

Is it worth using the newest beta? or would a more stable version be better, not sure how long ago the last non beta was.

 

[Stalker0]

I like Portugal best for this, an average civ which doesn't lean towards either side.

Is it worth using the newest beta? or would a more stable version be better, not sure how long ago the last non beta was.

I think the new spy system is too much in flux, and yeah still a little buggy.

 

[DeAnno]

I dunno, I think the old system might be different enough that the lategame on old patches is less relevant. Science is more important now. The last few patches before spying weren't perfect either, if we did the most recent we would need to do something about the minefields for one.

I would support just going with the current patch. Less trouble to do it that way too.

 

[bonniepbilly]

Happy to join as well, thanks all for the feedback.
To be clear, I don't expect peaceful authority to be on par with progress, but still pretty competitive (while much better if there's an early war).