Slashing the enemy's income

[Cazbol]

I've been fighting Spain for quite a while. Their king is a very skilled general and thrashed me twice when I confronted him. He also assembled most of his troops in one large army, leaving most of the provinces vulnerable to invasion. This lead to their being surrounded in Valencia with a little over 1500 men, and no other provinces to support them except Sinai which gives 90 florins in income. They don't even have any trade since they're well blockaded.

I'm trying to avoid an assault on Valencia because I know I'll be spanked if I do, and most of my forces are busy elsewhere fighting Novgorod. I therefore only have defensive forces around Valencia.

Now I see that the Spanish are producing even more units in Valencia. What I don't understand is how they can support such a large force, including a lot of high quality cavalry with such meager income. Has anyone tried to starve the enemy of funds to reduce their numbers and got any tangible results?

Cazbol

[hoom]

Er, are you sure those new good quality cavalry units aren't heirs?

With only one province, any new heirs will appear in that province as new good quality cavalry...

It costs more maintenance, but there is no limit to how far into debt you can go, so they can keep breeding forever...

[Exile]

Judging by their lack of trade routes and 80% farm upgrades in lousy farm provs, the AI doesn't know much about economics http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif . I never tried starving them of funds quite like you are doing, but I agree with the previous responses. That calvary might be heirs and I know from exp that you can run up a huge deficit.

Maybe try sending in a couple armies of mercs or bribing one of the Spanish armies (if not commanded by an heir). Maybe waves of assassins could cut short the ruling lineage. Last resort, keep them bottled up by keeping strong armies around them. Eventually they'll attack you if your armies aren't very strong.

[Basileus]

They might have had alot of money before loosing their provinces 200k-300k florins will last a while hehe, or it might just heirs like the other said.

[SmokWawelski]

Quote[/b] ]It costs more maintenance, but there is no limit to how far into debt you can go, so they can keep breeding forever...

So are you guys saying that the economy model in MTW is flawed? If I can go into debt and still produce/build, what is the point of taking care of the economy? Or is it that I cannot build, but can produce and support my armies through loans (hence negative income) forever
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Any economy major out there?

[rasoforos]

SmokWawelski actually going into debt and still producing and building is quite realistic. In fact it IS the case since most countries prefer to sustain budget deficits , thus being in bebt ( sometimes more than their annual GDP) . Even when a government is really deep in debt they can still buy stuff since they are the ones who create the money....so they just print some more money and buy whatever they need. This of course causes inflation but when a country is that deep in (beeep) who cares http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

concerning the firstquestion , i think as well that there is some cind of cheat since the computer doesnt seem to run out of money , i d love to have a spy option where i could see how rich a country is ( ROME TW developers do you hear thaaat? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )

[Exile]

I'm an economics major http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif but the point about debt in the game was misunderstood I think. You can't build or train when you're in debt. however, units don't disband because you can't afford support costs and buildings don't downgrade, etc.(like in some other games). Heirs will appear when they mature, regardless of finances. Either your enemy has heirs maturing or had some florins saved up, as other members have mentioned.

[rasoforos]

1) hello fellow economist http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif ... this could be the beggining of the economists clan :P
2) well i am sure that during those unstable times all kings had vast personal wealth , and since the heirs are needed the king probably put his hand deep in his pocket and pays for a set of kinghts.
3) about units not disbanding. it was a common tactic to pay people with land when money was scarce. the proniai allagion (akritai) was a case , they were given land instead of money so they can have a pesonnal army.
4) about the fact that the units do not downgrade....well you got me there , this is unrealistic.

[SmokWawelski]

Quote[/b] ]SmokWawelski actually going into debt and still producing and building is quite realistic. In fact it IS the case since most countries prefer to sustain budget deficits , thus being in bebt ( sometimes more than their annual GDP) . Even when a government is really deep in debt they can still buy stuff since they are the ones who create the money....so they just print some more money and buy whatever they need.

Very true. However I cannot agree that this should be true when talking about the medieval times. I would rather excpect great problems with having any income/taxes collected at all. During the rebellion of Husites (?) in HRE, the emperor could not rise large enough army to defeat them because of his inability to collect taxes, so he actually had to fight outnumbered, and eventually wait for them to split due to internal differences without any majow military victory (only major losses http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif).

Army that does not get paid usualy turns into looting mercenaries sooner or later, and this I think should by used in game to deplete a surrounded army (like in our case) over time. After all, the time we are talking about did not know yet national armies or nations as we know them today and economy was working much simpler...

National debth therefore is the discovery of later times, I am not sure but in the US the debth was not "allowed" for the national government up until 100-150 years ago (I am from Europe so might be wrong here about the time)...

Oups, got to go back to fixing computers now, this unit was "tested" enough for net connectivity (the realities of working-class economics...)


http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[rasoforos]

SmokWawelski actually you got me here , i forgot an important aspect of medieval economy. If i am not mistaken most of the conutries were using gold and silver standard for their currency which means that a coin actually was worth its value. This system ( although you can still cheat and mix less precious metals in the coins ) doe not allow the government to sustain its debt and createand distribute money that easilly. Concerning the states i think you are correct since if i remember properly they were based on gold standard about 150 years ago ( you could actually take your dollars to the bank and they would give you their vale in gold).

[solypsist]

enemy factions do run out of money, and you can gauge this by checking your border provinces with the Inn. Once the enemy factions starts going deep into debt, it starts disbanding units, which will show up as mercenaries; when all of the sudden your Inns are full of available mercs, you know your opponent is out of cash and is selling things off to continue buying new units.
the enemy cannot deficit spend (ie spend money it doesn't have), so there's no "cheating" involved on this level.

[Cazbol]

Since my original post I have checked a little closer and taken Sinai. Checking the income for Valencia and the upkeep of all Spanish troops there, I can see that they're only losing about 200 florins a year. The new units weren't heirs so they must have had some reserves.

Since the people of Novgorod are quickly depleting my own reserves, thanks to a war and 3 little invincible longboats, I'll have to send the surrounding armies into Valencia and prey for a miracle. Even if I lose I can take comfort in not having to pay the salaries of those slain.

Cazbol

[jas]

Quote[/b] (solypsist @ Jan. 02 2003,13:08)]enemy factions do run out of money, and you can gauge this by checking your border provinces with the Inn.
I find another useful clue to be: when they stop paying ransom for the troops I capture off them. Usually seems to mean their economy is in trouble and not be related to the quality of troops or number of nobles for re-sale. Although presumably they could go into debt to pay the ransom like the player can, they just don't seem to like doing it.

[Exile]

Ack I have been lured into an economics discussion. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif The US govt fiscal policy was 'no deficit' as recent as the 1960s. It wasn't until Volker became the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and shifted the Fed's target from interest rate to money supply that started a chain reaction in which the US political views shifted over the 1970s and early 1980s to see the possible benefit of the govt running a deficit if the economy is soft. Of course Keynes was onto this many years earlier. The US public just needed some tough love to learn the lesson http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

As early as the latter Roman empire, govts were reducing the precious metal of their coinage when the need to make more money arose. Inflation did its part in eroding what was arguably the greatest empire ever. I can't think of any medieval examples, they were likely to borrow and get over their head in debt that way and then have an conveniently timed inquisition to seize the property of 'heretics'.

I am grateful MTW is not complex in it's financial management of empire. I enjoy talking economics, but a computer game? *shudders* Give me armies and castles

[rasoforos]

i dissagreeeee i want more economics in this game. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif . i believe that money making was very important at that time , and it caused all of the wars..."the byzantines would do anything to hold to egypt and control the sea and get rid of pirates" ...."the crusades had 1/4 possibility to end up in constantinople" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif . it should be customisable but the economics of the game is WAAAYYY to simplistic although it played a great role in history from the begining . ( From the war on Troy , to Phillip discovering gold in macedonia and and making it into a war machine , to the 'Oil wars' that we ll soon see).

[TheViking]

I think he have a good warchest. I usually have more then 500k florin in mine. But with just 100k i do just fine. He might have the same

[rasoforos]

well sometimes you can make so much money its not interesting anymore. especially when you pass the million.

[SmokWawelski]

Million ? Are we talking USD here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif ? I am in whatever it is you are doing Ras

[rasoforos]

SmokWawelski if i was making a million green ones per year now there would be a 1.2 patch believe me http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ...but i got a million in my medieval treasury if you want some money ( you ve got to give me a princess to marry though)

[ToranagaSama]

PMFJI to the economics lesson, but didn't medieval kings "borrow" funds, often for war purposes, from "money lenders"? I can't recall any specific examples, but have recollections in my "general knowledge bank" of several kings thru history being in debt to "money lenders. Often this was a cause for war.

Also, I believe, to a significant degree, this fact is a root part of the "historical" animosity, in Europe, toward Jewish people. As most of the "money lenders" were Jewish. Consequently, this led to the "Pogroms" (sp?) of european history and to the expulsion of Jewish people from many areas of Europe.

Killing and running off those you owe money to is a great method of "debt reduction".

[Lehesu]

Do not question the AI, Grasshopper. Their ways are strange.