ETW Economics: payback times

[mbrasher1]

I was struggling with what to build first as various nations, and decided to figure out payback periods for various investments. This is useful, since it helps you make a profit faster, and can therefore afford more awesome units.

Some of the figures are difficult to reconcile, since there is some variability. For example, each buildable site can result in a different addition to province wealth (weavers in Luxembourg provide more wealth than those in Spain, eg). Certain farmland is much more productive, etc. I have also used a tax rate of 33% to determine returns. A higher or lower rate will not change the relative results (ie, with a lower tax rate, a port will still be a more attractive investment than a road.

So on to the results.

Basic structures pay back the best, so it is good to get them in

Port 1 -- 5-8 turn payback (not including trade routes)
Port 2 -- 20-26 turns (not including trade bonuses)

Weavers 1 -- 5-8 turns
Weavers 2 -- 14-20 turns
Weavers 3 -- 48 turns

Farms 1 -- 6-7 turns
Farms 2 -- 20-29 turns
Farms 3 -- 11 years
Farms 4 (negative return)
Farms 5 -- a very long time

Vineyards 1 -- 4-5 turns

Gem mine 1 -- 5 turns
Gem mine 2 -- 16 turns

Silver mine 1 -- 4 turns
Silver mine 2 -- 33 turns

Iron mine 1 -- 5 turns
Iron mine 2 -- 45 turns

Gold mine 1 -- <3 turns
Gold mine 2 -- 27 turns

Logging camp 1 -- <3 turns
Logging camp 2 -- 23 turns

Road 1 -- 39 turns
Road 2 -- a freaking long time

Plantation 1 -- 2-4 turns*
Plantation 2 -- 5-10 turns*
Plantation 2 -- 6-12 turns*

Indiaman -- 2-4 turns

Plantations and trade ships are special cases, since their benefits can differ each turn.

*Plantations are odd because they give you a return on the taxes on wealth generated, as well as 100% of the trade income. Assuming that the commodity is worth 15, and a basic plantation produces 15 sacks or loaves or whatever, you get 225 income from trade, and a further 75 income from the tax on wealth. Plus, plantations often give a bonus, of 20%, 50% or 100% of production, so you can get up to double of the trade AND tax income. Plantations can also be subject to unsold production, which lowers the returns, and they can also be affected by blockades, which affects both their tax and trade income generating capability. Also, commodity prices tend to decline, so if you build lots, it can depress prices. I cannot figure out why there is a plantation bonus, but there is. It is one of the only higher level buildings worth building.

Indiamen are unique in that they cost about 600 plus 50/turn for upkeep. They carry trade goods, and can easily pay for themselves in a few turns. Each trade area has 5 slots. Assuming an active, alert single player, you can get 4 in Brazil, 4 in Ivory Coast, 2-4 in Madagascar and 1-3 in the East Indies, and more everywhere if you are the Dutch or Brits. Lets say you can get 12 of the 20 trade slots with 5 Indiamen apiece. That is 60 Indiamen costing 36,000 to construct. The more you invest, the smaller your return will be. But that is OK, because the returns are still better than roads or other higher level structures.

Farms are also a special case, in that the higher level buildings are mainly built to manipulate the happiness levels. The Farms 3 gives a good return, but comes along with -1 happiness for the lower classes. This malus is eliminated in Farms 4 and changed to a bonus for the upper classes in Farms 5.

Given these results, a player trying to build the strongest economy would build basic structures everywhere, and as many Indiamen as possible. Then building up the weavers and ironworkers structures give decent payoffs. Higher level plantations are good provided that you have the trade agreements to properly benefit, and a large enough navy to protect your trade income.

Questions still to answer -- How does the plantation bonus occur? How do trade slots affect trade income?

[Rothe]

Don't underestimate the cumulative effect of wealth over the whole campaign.
You get a cumulative income of W * (n^2+n)/2
where W is wealth gained from the improvement per turn
n is number of turns from the building.

Same goes for enlightenment inventions, but they are even better cause you can multiply the effects with number of regions.

It seems that wealth bonuses are better in the long term, but worse short term than straigth up bonus income.
So, payback time seems long, but after you get there, the benefits start to be better and better over time.

I definitely upgrade roads etc. if there is more than 50 turns left in the game.

[anweRU]

Farms are also a special case, in that the higher level buildings are mainly built to manipulate the happiness levels. The Farms 3 gives a good return, but comes along with -1 happiness for the lower classes.

Only if you are an evil absolute monarch.

I agree with Rothe. Do not underestimate the "+x per turn addition of wealth to town wealth". The miracle of compound interest will make this portion larger than the straight up addition for buildings you construct early on.

[mbrasher1]

Yeah, I agree on the basic roads. It gets you +3/turn. But on the others, they cost 2x and 4x, but get you only +1 extra each. So it takes 95 turns (nearly 48 years) to get to payback on Roads 2 and 134 turns (67 years) to get to payback on Roads 3. The problem is that you have so many other better investments early with a faster payback and better annual "dividend" and also by the time one gets payback from higher level roads, one has usually won the game.

I do agree that the compounding effect of wealth should not be underestimated. That is one reason why ports, weavers, smiths, roads, factory research and as mentioned, enlightenment techs can create huge wealth in the long term.

[Devastatin Dave]

Dumb question...but...

If you put more than 1 trade ship into a trade post, do you get more $?

[anweRU]

Yes. You will get more money. However, the number of bales you get per ship decreases. 1 ship gives you 20 (on hard), then 2 ships give you 37 or so, etc. There is a thread out there about the analysis. IIRC, after a while it stabilizes around 12 or 13 bales per ship.

[Eusebius86]

Also, you want to research farms early on for the population boost, and because they will prevent food shortages. I believe farms also cause more towns to pop up faster.

[anweRU]

Yes. Farms increase the population growth rate. Once you've researched all, the population boost is impressive, and new towns pop up at an amazing rate in my newly conquered territories (3 turns / town). I research farm enclosures first, and start boosting my population ASAP. Economic domination is the name of the game, and faster town growth = more factories, universities, etc., earlier.

As for roads: I will build paved roads as soon as I can. Economic benefits are a minor concern, troop movement rate is most important.

[Marquis of Roland]

Yea the metal roads for troop movement. IMO it doesn't really matter if it takes so many turns to pay itself off; I mean, after 40 or so turns are you really worried about money? :laugh4:

By the 1760's my treasury was so large, I could lower all tax to zero and at the same time go to war with every surviving nation for the next 100 years and I'll still have about 1 million left over. :2thumbsup:

[anweRU]

GB 1735, conquered almost all American territories, except the Dutch, Inuit, Plains Nations and the Huron at the NW corner (the latter three to be remedied by 1740). Also northern India, Persia & France.

~ 70k/turn net income. I've upgraded all economically feasible buildings, farms and plantations. So now I am upgrading the poor/very poor ones to use up my funds. I could attempt to buy territories I suppose, but outright conquering them is more fun!

Once you've developed economically, money is no longer a concern. I could survive off of my taxes if I had to. So I might as well upgrade everything (even the very poor towns & ports) to the maximum possible level...

[Quillan]

About 1770 in my GB campaign, I was paying 80-90k per turn to maintain my army, 60k per turn to maintain my fleets, and still making over 100k per turn in profit.

By the way, on the cumulative gain per turn, it appears the tax burden is relative. With the same tax rate, I've seen a tax burden of 2 when the province was new and undeveloped but 50+ once a bunch of improvements had maxxed out. Still, the cumulative effect of +x per turn to town wealth in the region is impressive when you give it enough time.

[Subotan]

I love the way the economy works in this game, with it being a matter of policy, rather than random cities setting their own rates. I feel like an Economist! Not only is it a unique idea, but it works really well.

Thanks CA. :2thumbsup:

[Servius]

Use my Excel tool. I made it precisely for this purpose (to determine how many turns it will take for a particular building in a particular town and region to break even). There are MANY factors involved in the calcs but if you don't mind taking the time to fill some raw data, this Excel file will do all the calcs for you. It even figures in the effects of technological advances!

http://www.unc.edu/~pcaldwel/ETW - Great Britain.xls

That's the one I'm currently using for my GB campaign, though you can delete what I have put in, or just add to it. PM me if you have any questions.

[antisocialmunky]

Wow some ETW praise. Doesn't happen very often.

[Liberator]

I love the way the economy works in this game, with it being a matter of policy, rather than random cities setting their own rates. I feel like an Economist! Not only is it a unique idea, but it works really well.

Thanks CA. :2thumbsup:

Well, if you would be an Economist (like I am :juggle2: ), you would want the economy to be much more sophisticated,
for instance
- abandon the old-fashioned system of "trade agreements" altogether. Trade would be done by merchants (automated), not by states. As long as two nations are not at war with each other, there would be (at least some) trade between them.
- the states could raise tariffs on imports instead and get their share of trade in that way, far more realistic IMO

[Fisherking]

Dumb question...but...

If you put more than 1 trade ship into a trade post, do you get more $?

Yes you do Dave but it is not of as much value as the first.

I have not seen if you get differing amounts for different types of trade ships but an India man for instance will get you 20 Ivory and a second will give you a total of 30, so it is better to get as many spots as you can to max the benefits to the ships and then put on one or two more when you have the time and money.

[Subotan]

Well, if you would be an Economist (like I am :juggle2: ), you would want the economy to be much more sophisticated,
for instance
- abandon the old-fashioned system of "trade agreements" altogether. Trade would be done by merchants (automated), not by states. As long as two nations are not at war with each other, there would be (at least some) trade between them.
- the states could raise tariffs on imports instead and get their share of trade in that way, far more realistic IMO

A system of tariffs? Interesting...Exchange rates/inflation/unemployment would all be interesting to add as well, although we probably won't see that until another engine.
Oh, and I'm studying Economics at college :beam:


Wow some ETW praise. Doesn't happen very often.

You've got to be positive. Otherwise, you don't enjoy the game.

[Liberator]

there was no unemployment in these days, because there was no dole ~;)

[dopp]

The wealth of the individual town (wealthy, prosperous, growing, etc) affects the amount of cash an improvement generates, right? I always built church schools and universities on new towns and save the wealthy town slots for industries.

[Feanaro]

You've got to be positive. Otherwise, you don't enjoy the game.

It works for me. I critize the game quite harshly, especially outside fan-based forums like this one, and I play it every night. First, I get to enjoy the good parts of the game. Then I get to complain about the bad parts. Who doesn't love a good :furious3: now and then? :laugh4: That probably won't work for people who can't enjoy something and hate it at the same time though.

[antisocialmunky]

You've got to be positive. Otherwise, you don't enjoy the game.

I do, I was making fun of the general forum atmosphere.

@Dopp, does anyone really know how town wealth works? Never really paid too much attention or noticed any effect. I've heard it fluctuates as well.

[anweRU]

The wealth of the individual town (wealthy, prosperous, growing, etc) affects the amount of cash an improvement generates, right? I always built church schools and universities on new towns and save the wealthy town slots for industries.

That is correct. Unless CA changes new town wealth status always being very poor in a future patch, that is the way to go.

i have a habit of knocking down wealthy-prosperous universities, temples and inns as soon as I can, after I rebuild the equivalent in a very poor town. You only need six universities at most anyway. You can always go to the building browser, and see the wealth that would be generated by the replacement industrial building before you knock down a building.

@ ASM:
Just use the building info tab to see it for yourself.
- Plantations do not show the effect of wealth. You need to see the town wealth section in your capitol city to see its effect. Meager = x1, Abundant = x2 (max.). i.e. an abundant lvl. 1 plantation actually generates 30 bales instead of 15. The multiplies for the other three levels of plantation wealth in between are 1.25, 1.5 and 1.75 IIRC.
- Towns & farms: you'll see the amount of wealth generated directly in the building tab. Again, the highest level of industrial building generates twice as much wealth as the very poor town. Upgrade wealth amount also scales. The +x to town wealth modifier remains the same, regardless of town wealth.
- Mines: Both the initial wealth and the upgrade wealth scale with the mines prosperity. e.g. the Columbian silver mine actually is a much better investment than the two gold mines in that province.

[Subotan]

there was no unemployment in these days, because there was no dole ~;)
Heh. Well, it would be fun to watch Spain's economy slowly get trashed as they mined more and more gold from South America.

[MikeV]

Well, if you would be an Economist (like I am :juggle2: ), you would want the economy to be much more sophisticated,
for instance
- abandon the old-fashioned system of "trade agreements" altogether. Trade would be done by merchants (automated), not by states. As long as two nations are not at war with each other, there would be (at least some) trade between them.
- the states could raise tariffs on imports instead and get their share of trade in that way, far more realistic IMO
EU has the notion of inflation, with the rate going higher as a country imports more gold. Since CA are busy copying EU's look & feel, they might want to imitate this feature, too.

The trade system in the :TW series has always been rather too abstract. This one has some interesting possibilities. It would be nice to see more of a separation of government and guild / merchant activity. The "world market" (idea borrowed from HoI, among others) could be more dynamic. Trade routes and trade good movement could be more detailed, and more visible. And trade resources / unit logistics (iron and gunpowder, especially) could be a touch more realistic -- but it would require a much higher fidelity logistics/supply model.