Potential patch idea....

[LittleRaven]

I'll be honest, I tend the restart a new campaign once I become the strongest faction, so I haven't actually had much experience with the late game yet.

But it sounds like it involves a lot of exterminating populations.

Now, that's perfectly in keeping with the time period and I don't really have a problem with it, but it does seem like there should be some use for the other buttons once in a while.

The reason that exterminate is so popular is because once a city has the buildings to build high level units, people don't matter any more. A village of 600 will turn out Urban Cohorts perfectly fine, as long as it has a big enough barracks. You only need the population to build the buildings.

What if that were changed?

What if a certain level of population were required in order to keep high level buildings active? The buildings wouldn't go away, but they would not function completely, either. A city barracks in a small town would only produce level 1 infantry, instead of level 3.

I don't know if this is possible or not. I'm sure it would require a patch. I'm not even sure this is a good idea. But it does seem a little strange when I can march into Athens, (as Sparta) slaughter it and reduce it to 1500 people, then start pumping out some of the most advanced units avaliable on the continent. Would gameplay be helped or hurt by requiring population as well as buildings to construct units?

[CBR]

Well I do find it a bit counter intuitive that the best strategy is to have small cities. So IMO something needs to be changed.


CBR

[Jambo]

Yes, in the late game there really isn't any point in occupying or enslaving the population. Plus the best option then also gives you the best financial reward - hardly a difficult decision. If the financial rewards were reversed then this would help towards making this decision a little more challenging..

E.g.
Occupying:
High financial reward + difficult to control high population town.

OR

Exterminating:
Low financial reward + small, easy to control profitable town.

[CBR]

Does trade income have anything to do with population? IMO it should. You should get lots of money if you loot and pillage a city but the income from it should be low afterwards.


CBR

[Kraxis]

Yeah... it doesn't make sense that a small population can trade as much as a very large one. I mean how much can they buy, how much can they sell and how much can they produce? Apparently quite a lot. And then it is strange that their effectiveness falls as the population grows. ~:confused:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

What if a certain level of population were required in order to keep high level buildings active? The buildings wouldn't go away, but they would not function completely, either. A city barracks in a small town would only produce level 1 infantry, instead of level 3.

I don't know if this is possible or not. I'm sure it would require a patch. I'm not even sure this is a good idea. But it does seem a little strange when I can march into Athens, (as Sparta) slaughter it and reduce it to 1500 people, then start pumping out some of the most advanced units avaliable on the continent. Would gameplay be helped or hurt by requiring population as well as buildings to construct units?
I agree. IMHO, gameplay would improve making large Empires much more difficult to hold. At least taking into consideration present-day squalor and discontentment.

[Orvis Tertia]

I think that the exterminate option should cause major damage and downgrading to the structures in the city, to represent the looting and pillaging. That would make you take a second look at whether to wipe out a population.

[Longasc]

Good ideas, indeed!

[Ktonos]

Well occuping does have -long term- financial reward by taxing. Now, I totally agree that with extermination some buldings go down as well. Sacking would be a better term.

[ChaosLord]

Well, exterminating has to be akin to razing/sacking, I mean the citizens won't line up nice and orderly for you to kill. I'd imagine lots of burning/pillaging and the like is done. This does sound good though, Occupy and loots nets most cash, Enslaving nets half that, and Exterminating gives barely any.

Theres also a good method you could use as to what buildings would get damaged. Have it so any buildings normally requiring a higher level of pop are damaged to 99%, that way theres alot spent in repairs if they do it. Exterminating should be the exception when conquering, not the rule as it is now. This could be potentially unbalancing if a player ran around doing it to AI and abandoning regions, but then again theres lots of exploits people can choose wether or not to use.