Do I Set Up A Trade Empire Or Take Oven The World

[Terrax]

Assuming the patch will be out before the end of the year, I plan on starting my 2nd cmpaign soon. I've been reading the necesities of Trade, and it's got me to thinking about my tactics. Apparently theres a lot of Floren to be made in trade. So tell me if I'm wrong.

I'm going to be the Egyptians. Say I take all the territory up to and including Spain, then the Mideast, and also the islands in the Med. That leaves most of Europe and Asia. Should I set up trade with all the allied/neutral nations and sit and make money/upgrade for a long period of time, or continue to expand and try to take the rest of the world?

I know for a fact I over extended myself in the 1st campaign, so I'm going to pace myself, even if I don't sit and upgrade.

[maroule]

basic tempo is conquest - consolidation/trade - conquest etc. It gets contradictory however in the end game, when the remaining factions all decide to take you down (no more trade then). But yes, trade easily gets you more than 10k per turn...

[Rnold]

trade in order to conquer and vice versa, in other words.

[Terrax]

Damn, no wonder the 1st campaign took so long (about 35 hours playing time) and was so DAMN frustrating. I didn't build a single ship until I needed to get to the island provinces.

[Rosacrux]

I don't know about trade, but oven is certainly a hard thing to clear. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Lord of the Isles]

The short answer is: it depends. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

While there are some ways of playing a campaign that are guaranteed to get you into trouble, that still leaves many different strategies that can all work (most of the time at least). Some people are builders by nature, like me, and tend to go for (in rough order):

- expand into rebel provinces
- build up troop producing facilities and trade infrastructure
- keep building/trading while taking advantage of opportunities to expand
- once you get to around 200,000 banked, go for it

I don't know if 200,000 is a sensible amount; it has worked for me along with a big infrastructure to churn out troops. And once trade revenues kick in I like to build up agriculture too, to provide income when trade disappears in the endgame. Just remember that money is necessary so get it from somewhere and build up a reserve. I choose trade partly because of the side effect of a large fleet: being able to control the seas for military purposes.

Others prefer to rush and try for the earliest possible win. You can role-play to an extent too, setting yourself targets that reflect your country's historical aims or make self-imposed restraints for things you aren't allowed to do (e.g. expand beyond X province or attack power Y). Playing GA instead of conquest is role-playing to an extent.

You can take advantage of any quirks of the game (like those who train their armies and increase cash by provoking rebellions and then confiscating the rebel's estates). Or you can refuse to take advantage of these.

And you can mix-and-match any of the above. It may have its problems (I haven't yet been able to finish any of my campaigns) but what a game MTW promises to be.

Quote Originally posted by Terrax:

I'm going to be the Egyptians. Say I take all the territory up to and including Spain, then the Mideast, and also the islands in the Med. That leaves most of Europe and Asia. Should I set up trade with all the allied/neutral nations and sit and make money/upgrade for a long period of time, or continue to expand and try to take the rest of the world?
[/QUOTE]

In addition to the strategic possibilities I've mentioned, there are tactical considerations. For example, I wouldn't go for North Africa/Spain first were I the Egyptians. Your lines of communication will be stretched to a thread of provinces at a time when you have no navy to transport troops quickly by sea. And there's more money to be had in the Middle East. But I'm sure it's possible.

For a better example, consider Byzantium or Spain. Despite being a trader/builder, my first task with those countries is to gear up for a quick war against Turkey/Almohads. The one against Turkey is to slow down their expansion by razing or keeping Rum, that against Almohads to kick them out of Spain for good.

And another example: even when building up you should be prepared to take advantage of opportunities to expand when they occur. That can be a neighbour who loses a province to rebels: quick, grab it by bribing or attacking. It can be (when a Catholic) being ready to pounce when someone gets excommunicated and you can attack them without the Pope throwing a wobbly.

That was the long answer. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

[Niccolomachiavelli]

Under no circumstances should you make yourself dependant on trade. I've accomplished what you want to do with Egypt (and a bit more). Trade is great for early buildup, before you're at war with everyone, but eventually the AI will saturate parts of your shipping lanes with uncatchable ships. Trade will be crippled, especially if they are too far off to conquer (thus neutralizing their ships). However *do* put ships everywhere you can, so as to transport your troops wherever they may be needed, and to connect your king to your captured territories so they dont revolt. Have fun, I always thought Egypt started out the best (geographically anyhow).

So here are some ways to manage your money without trade, later in the game:

Build tons of farms and economic upgrades while you have the money from trade routes

Build only as big an army as you need to defend what you have

When your ready to attack, and only then, build up an offensive army and make the attack quick, so you wont have to support your new army for too long and bankrupt yourself

Leave the Almohads alone and let Spain crush them (they've dont it in all 5 games I've had as Egyptians). As soon as the Almohads are gone, have an offensive force ready to catch Spain off guard before they Crusade you, which they will.

Wait till the Byzantines seriously weaken the Turks and take them out. Or, vice versa. The eventualy goal being to capture the area up to and including constantinople.

Push the horde into that big territory just above and to the right of the black sea (i think). You'll see what I mean

Anyhow, in this way you should be able to expand to all the important choke points and evaluate your position from there.

[andrewt]

As the Egyptians, you have the capability of creating as big a horde as the Elmoheads. Only reason the computer doesn't do it is because the Egyptians have more borders to defend than the Elmos and the Turks and Byzantines are stronger than the Spanish and Aragonese at the start. That and Egyptian AI is more peaceful and Elmos have rebel lands nearby.

I take out the Turks early using Egyptians. Their lands have rich farmlands which are useful into getting into ships. They also allow you to build Armenian Heavy Cavalry and Armenia gives +1 valor bonus.

Antioch has the best trade goods bar none. Constantinople is only second. Tripoli and Egypt are also among the highest ranked in terms of total trade value of goods.

[Alrowan]

i follow this basi plan

1. early conquest till i own 1/3
2. slow conquest and trade empire till i own 1/2
3. inland conquest and trade till i own 2/3
4. final conquest