View Full Version : A few general noob questions.
Note: I played MTW extensively so I'm not a total noob, I'm just trying to get adjusted to the changes in RTW. Also, I'm playing RTR, but that shouldn't matter since these are very general questions.
1. Occupy, enslave, exterminate - what exactly do each do, why should I do them, and when?
2. Why does some of my heavy cavalry just charge and then fall back. Is it meant to be like that? It's extremely annoying when I'm trying to cut down routing warbands.
3. Which units get to do the turtle shell manuever thing? I can't wait!
4. Can someone point me to advanced diplomacy tactics? I want to really force someone to give me half their lands and half their treasury while I grin menacingly.
Well that's all I can think of. Thanks in advance.
Dutch_guy
07-11-2006, 18:01
1. Occupy, enslave, exterminate - what exactly do each do, why should I do them, and when?
If you take a city and are low on money then extermination is your best bet. Enslaving the populace will send about half (?) of the current population to other cities who have a governor in them, you also plunder some of the cities riches - but don't get as much money as you would if you exterminate. When you occupy the city you don't deport the populace, nor do you kill them. You get a modest amount of loot and keep the current Population.
So, you should exterminate if the city is simply too big (i.e. you fear the squalor penalties) or if you need the cash. Or if you fear you can't hold the city and don't wish to give the enemy a large tax-base back.
You enslave if you need the population directed to other core (governed) cities - who then might be able to upgrade to a higher level of city.
You occupy if you don't want the populace to suffer needlesly and like the idea of being able to tax the lot of 'em. As you know, more people equals more tax revenue. Generally it's smart to occupy low populated cities (otherwise you might wait a decade to finally upgrade the city) or even cities of the same culture as you.
2. Why does some of my heavy cavalry just charge and then fall back. Is it meant to be like that? It's extremely annoying when I'm trying to cut down routing warbands.
They do that, why is not really known. Although it might be because certain members of the unit are lagging behind the main bulk of the unit - which confuses the persuing AI. To circumvent this problem, you should simply order your heavy cav. to move (run) to a position in front of the routing unit. They will cut down the routing unit if they move through it.
3. Which units get to do the turtle shell manuever thing? I can't wait!
Only late Roman Legionares have that ability, and only in Rome total War (not in Barbarian invasion). So you're going to have to wait until the Marian Reforms before you can use the Turtle formation.
4. Can someone point me to advanced diplomacy tactics? I want to really force someone to give me half their lands and half their treasury while I grin menacingly.
Well the diplomacy isn't exactly good in this game, however there is a certain exploit which allows you to rip off the AI. What you do is send them your Map Information, The AI loves to have it (why is a mystery) and 'll pay insane amounts of money to get it. When I say insane, I mean it. Ask them 10K and they'll do it. Experiment with asking more, you won't be disappointed. IIRC, in some patch, this exploit was addressed, which patch made it impossible I don't really know.
Other than that exploit, you should check the Diplomacy guide, stickied right here in the Colosseum[1].
Hope that helped!
[1], apparently it isn't here anymore, however this is where you can find it (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=36993)
:balloon2:
vastator
07-11-2006, 18:15
1. Small populations are generally easier to manage, so just occupying a settlement can give you public order problems. Enslavement is useful early on, as you get a population bonus to your settlements with goverenors. Extermination is good for generating a quick profit, and for keeping newly captured cities from going into immediate revolt later in the campaign.
2. Not sure about this one. I agree it's annoying when your cavalry suddenly wheels aways from fleeing routers instead of chasing them down.:wall:
3. In the Imperial campaign (I don't have BI) only post-Marian legionaries can form testudo, but you can modify hastati and principes to do the same by adding "testudo" to the formation line in export_descr_unit. This is historically accurate, as I've found references to testudos as early as the siege of Aquilonia in 293 BC.
4. Have a browse around this site - there's quite a bit on the use and abuse of diplomacy.:book:
Hope this is helpful.
I generally occupy a city if it is from the same culture as my own: in that case there will only be temporary loyalty problems (no culture penalty) and it won't impair the towns economy. Enslaving is useful for larger towns of other cultures as it transports half the population to towns where there will be no or less culture penalty. It also increases the cities trade potential, as slaves provide an extra trade resource for twenty turns, but the halving of the population does decrease tax and trade income a bit. Extermination is only for when I am in urgent need of cash, when I anticipate huge unrest (Egypt is the obvious example for Roman players) or when I don't intend to occupy the city in short run. Killing the population may give you some quick cash now, but it will also severely reduce the town's income for some time.
Conqueror
07-11-2006, 20:26
Enslaving doesn't really hurt taxes, since the population decrease in the captured settlement equals the population increase in your governed settlements. So you get less taxpayers in once city and more taxpayers in other cities (the game doesn't break population into slaves, peasants, nobility, etc - it's all just generic mass of people). Basically the only situations when you'd want to Occupy instead of Enslave are A) the city you captured is close to reaching next size category or B) none of your governed cities can bare any population increase ATM due to low public order.
Remember that you can control which of your towns will receive the slaves by removing governors from unwanted destinations before you assault the soon-to-be-yours city. You can move them governors back into those towns after the act.
4th Dimension
07-11-2006, 22:30
I don't know about you but if I enslave a city it has a larger population ie. I need to set taxes lower and also it seems to me that how much of town profit is taken away for your armies salaries depends on population so smaler pop smaler pay.
I don't realy know about this last one but in my games if I wanted to make a Economy powerhouse from a newly captured setelment, extermination is the way. I haven't spoted any problems with that plan.
The Spartan (Returns)
07-11-2006, 23:30
Note: I played MTW extensively so I'm not a total noob, I'm just trying to get adjusted to the changes in RTW. Also, I'm playing RTR, but that shouldn't matter since these are very general questions.
1. Occupy, enslave, exterminate - what exactly do each do, why should I do them, and when?
2. Why does some of my heavy cavalry just charge and then fall back. Is it meant to be like that? It's extremely annoying when I'm trying to cut down routing warbands.
3. Which units get to do the turtle shell manuever thing? I can't wait!
4. Can someone point me to advanced diplomacy tactics? I want to really force someone to give me half their lands and half their treasury while I grin menacingly.
Well that's all I can think of. Thanks in advance.1. occupy=takes settlement without doing anything. good on small settlements (village, town, large town) enslave= 2 fourths (i think) of the settlements population is set to your governed cities. (usefulness on minor cities and higher) exterminate=massacres 2 thirds of the settlement gets more money from looting (very useful. use on minor cities or higher or/and cities with a different culture)
2. heavy cavalry is useful on any light infantry except on big units. such as warband has a bigger unit size than other units. if you charge into them, your cavalry will be outnumbered and will lose. (at least on warbands. cant confirm. plus warband have a spear. even though in ther unit descriptions it doesnt say spear bonus against cavalry they still have a small bonus against cavalry. this is true)
3.early legions, legion cohort, first early, first legion, praetorians, and urbans can have testudo. including silver legions.
4. try looking in froggy's rtw guide. (it has advanced diplomacy tactics)
hope that helps! :2thumbsup:
Thanks guys, very helpful.
Oh, one more thing I forgot.
End or Continue battle? I usually Continue and kill everyone. If I just end it will I get the same result - no more enemy army on the campaign map?
The Spartan (Returns)
07-12-2006, 02:48
If I just end it will I get the same result - no more enemy army on the campaign map?if you continue and you kill most of them; yes no mre enemy on campaign map.
Sorry, this is off topic, how the heck do you play 1152 hours of COD Graphic?
A few hours a day for a year-and-a-half.
Severous
07-12-2006, 07:15
Re 2. Sometimes the routers you are chasing are split up. The 'centre' of the unit is where your cavalry attack. If there are no enemy there it can look like they are not attacking. (This is a feature of V1.5..not sure about earlier versions)
I always kill routers in open battle. Gains a little more experience. In a city I might not kill routers and instead end the battle early so I dont have to fight them i the plaza.
A tip helpful for the decision whether to enslave, exterminate or occupy a city: When the window with the coice pops up, you can still scroll the strategic map in the background (at least this is te case with patch 1.5, not so with 1.2). Scroll until you can see the city status display. If the city is red (assuming you´ve attacked with a full-stack army), it´s best to exterminate, you´ll get rid of most of the troublemakers. Enslaving might not be enough, if the city is in the red. Enslaving can be used when te city is in the blue or yellow and I´d only occupy if the city is still green after the conquest.
Its worth noting that if you are a Roman Faction or one of her allies and you choose enslave then 25% of the enslavment goes to the SPQR capital i.e. Rome.
Occupy, enslave, exterminate depends on how much resistance you are willing to put up with versus how much you value a city as a base to build up.
Exterminate (and to a lesser extent enslave) will rid the troublemakers but causes problems because the city can't tech up and can't replenish troop levels that well.
And enslaving doesn't increase pop levels as expected. I'm not sure if its a bug from 1.0 or just in 1.5.
I decide on what I want the General to be remembered for and play to that character type rather than "whats best" in the situation. For example if I am Carthage and I capture an actual Roman town (i.e. in Italy) then I exterminate coz the only good Roman is a dead Roman!
But if I am liberating a city from an un-natural Roman occupation then I occupy or enslave these brothers to the cause depending on where they are.
Otherwise all I would ever do in every game I played is enslave to keep the tax base high since long term benefits outweigh all others!
PS: I always plan to pillage my way thru Italy, usually from the bottom of the boot up (i.e. to siege, capture, exterminate, sell all buildings available and move on to let it rebel). But what actually happens is I siege, capture and keep the town since it boosts my empire so much. Just a soft touch i guess.
A tip helpful for the decision whether to enslave, exterminate or occupy a city: When the window with the coice pops up, you can still scroll the strategic map in the background (at least this is te case with patch 1.5, not so with 1.2). Scroll until you can see the city status display. If the city is red (assuming you´ve attacked with a full-stack army), it´s best to exterminate, you´ll get rid of most of the troublemakers. Enslaving might not be enough, if the city is in the red. Enslaving can be used when te city is in the blue or yellow and I´d only occupy if the city is still green after the conquest.
Good tip - thanks.
Enslaving doesn't really hurt taxes, since the population decrease in the captured settlement equals the population increase in your governed settlements. So you get less taxpayers in once city and more taxpayers in other cities (the game doesn't break population into slaves, peasants, nobility, etc - it's all just generic mass of people).
You are right about this. I was just looking at the conquered cities situation.
I don't know about you but if I enslave a city it has a larger population ie. I need to set taxes lower and also it seems to me that how much of town profit is taken away for your armies salaries depends on population so smaler pop smaler pay.
I don't realy know about this last one but in my games if I wanted to make a Economy powerhouse from a newly captured setelment, extermination is the way. I haven't spoted any problems with that plan.
It is true. Army, agent, and family upkeep are divided equally over the population, so big towns pay more. However, the income-labels below the cities are rather misleading: they make it seem that the big cities are losing you money. They aren't. Often these are the workhorses of the economy, but because they are so densely populated they also have to pay the bulk of the army upkeep. By exterminating you reduce population, thus this partical city has to pay less for the army upkeep, but other cities have to pay more, and the exterminated city also loses a big chunk of income.
gardibolt
07-13-2006, 21:21
Enslaving doesn't really hurt taxes, since the population decrease in the captured settlement equals the population increase in your governed settlements. So you get less taxpayers in once city and more taxpayers in other cities (the game doesn't break population into slaves, peasants, nobility, etc - it's all just generic mass of people). Basically the only situations when you'd want to Occupy instead of Enslave are A) the city you captured is close to reaching next size category or B) none of your governed cities can bare any population increase ATM due to low public order.
While that's the truth early on, once cities are large, adding population has diminishing returns. It's not a uniform amount of money per taxpayer, so you really do have to be careful about which cities have governors, or you will end up with less net tax income.
Sometimes I marvel at how complex the game can be. :book:
A few hours a day for a year-and-a-half.
Wow that is pretty sad man.
Conqueror
07-14-2006, 09:57
While that's the truth early on, once cities are large, adding population has diminishing returns. It's not a uniform amount of money per taxpayer, so you really do have to be careful about which cities have governors, or you will end up with less net tax income.
Sometimes I marvel at how complex the game can be. :book:
Yeah, it matters which cities the slaves are sent to. Ideally you send them to places that have very good public order and low corruption (check governor traits). In such cities you can afford to keep taxes high despite the added population from the slaves. This is likely not the case in the newly conquered city, as it's likely to have much unrest (meaning you'll need to keep taxes low at least for a while).
Obviously, the slave population is far more valuable in high-tax settlements than in a low-tax settlement, although corruption is also a factor. Another thing to consider is the settlements' ability to feed the added population: if they're pushed over their limits then they'll end up with negative pop growth (meaning that the transported population begins vanishing, while it might not do so in other settlements). This primarily depends on farms and squalor. The more governed settlements the slaves are distributed to, the less of a problem this will be.
Enslaving has a bug. I remembered tests showed that there was _no_ population increase for slavery beyond the first initial round.
gardibolt
07-14-2006, 16:21
No, you're thinking of something different. The testing (which I took part in) showed that while enslaving moves people around the map just fine when you enslave, there's also supposed to be a "slave trade" function that increases the population for 10 turns or so. It's that slave trade function that doesn't work. You get the initial enslavement, but there isn't any slave trade boost.
roman pleb
07-14-2006, 17:30
No, you're thinking of something different. The testing (which I took part in) showed that while enslaving moves people around the map just fine when you enslave, there's also supposed to be a "slave trade" function that increases the population for 10 turns or so. It's that slave trade function that doesn't work. You get the initial enslavement, but there isn't any slave trade boost.
Yeah. It's the slave resource that is available in some provinces. It is supposed to give you a population bonus increase, but the studies showed
that it didn't do anything.
:wall:
Wow that is pretty sad man.
Eh, screw you?
lol, i didnt really mean to insult you man, sorry, i am just saying that is al little weird.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.