Most worthless province? - Post your opinion!!

[ReiseReise]

Greetings everyone,

In the spirit of the "Most valuable province" thread, I ask the opposite question:

What is the most worthless, useless, dangerous, or otherwise undesirable province in the game?

I anticipate some responses for Arguin but I hope to focus on provinces that are bad because they have a poor economy, constantly rebel, are always under attack, etc., rather than just impossible to get to.

[_Tristan_]

I would nominate Ajaccio... It is generally the target of all Italian factions, the French, Moors and even Spain and Portugal...

Added to its relatively poor economy that makes it one of the most worthless in my opinion...

[Old Geezer]

But, the more worthless a province is the more valuable it is, because you can give it to the Pope! Then, assuming you were smart enough to convert it to a city if it was a castle, after selling off all improvements except the church, you can get it to rebel. Recycling is so green.

[Zim]

There's a North African province, the first one west of Tunis I think, that seems to be a magnet for attacks by sea from Italy and Iberia, and has little economic potential ad a low growth rate. I'd rate it second most worthless in its region after the one Tristan mentioned, Ajaccio, which is attacked by even more factions.

Inverness has also been pretty worthless in my games, unless I'm playing Scotland and turtling (in which case it's useful until I conquer my first other castle). It has a low growth rate and doesn't make much money even if converted to a city, and is in a pretty poor position to supply troops to anywhere. I suppose the only good thing about it is that noone lands troops there.

Some of the crappier far eastern steppe settlements would make such a list as well. They may not be targets for lots of AI attacks, but they make up for that by not only being worthless but taking so long to get to. Every turn an army is moving towards one is a turn's wasted upkeep, and the payoff for getting them is extremely small. I suppose at least they're good places to bleed the Mongols before they reach your more valuable settlements.

[ReiseReise]

But, the more worthless a province is the more valuable it is, because you can give it to the Pope!
Great strategy!

[Dead Guy]

Dongola

Trade: Poor
Troop Supply: Useless if you have Gaza etc
Public Order: if you're not Egypt, horrible.

And to top that off, if a rebel stack spawn there I never have the energy to even recruit some militia to squash it!

Jedda is pretty smashing too... All of these provinces that have long land routes are also great if the flood/earthquake bug strikes, so it takes 7 years to pass through =)

[Gray Beard]

Durazzo takes the cake for worst province because if you are the Byzantines you have to hold it to keep it from becoming a jumping off place for the Sicilians and as a buffer against the Venetians. However, it is so small, very isolated because of the terain and simply worthles unless you can hold for something like 150 years. And yet Thesiloniki Constantinople and Corinth are to far away to protect each other so you have to take it and keep a big honking hairy legged army garrisoned there to protect the other three places from a Venetian sneak attack until you can take Ragussa. Then you have to defend it to keep the Sicilians landing there and turning your flank.

[Ramses II CP]

Fortaleza (sp?) in Brazil. Horrible public order problems, incredibly distant from everywhere, frequent storms, no sea trade zones nearby, and if you happen to lose it to rebellion it will be ~10 turns before you can get troops all the way back to it to recapture it.

Oh, and the trade goods aren't that impressive. The only times I've taken it were for story reasons.

Dongola and Jedda can have sea trade which, if nothing else, boosts your income at Cairo. Dongola, Arguin, and even Jedda have trade goods that it's worthwhile to park a merchant on. Provinces that are heavily contested just mean that you can have some fun battles! Since when is that a negative?

I would say only Bulgar approaches the uselessness of Brazil, but even Bulgar has land trade routes and can be used as a bulwark in the Mongol or Timurid wars.

No contest. Fortaleza. :yes:

:egypt:

[PrestigeX]

Iverness
Rhodes
and all the ones which are where you'll find the last of teh russians (so far away and only accessible by long march

[Grombeard]

Durazzo takes the cake for worst province because if you are the Byzantines you have to hold it to keep it from becoming a jumping off place for the Sicilians and as a buffer against the Venetians. However, it is so small, very isolated because of the terain and simply worthles unless you can hold for something like 150 years. And yet Thesiloniki Constantinople and Corinth are to far away to protect each other so you have to take it and keep a big honking hairy legged army garrisoned there to protect the other three places from a Venetian sneak attack until you can take Ragussa. Then you have to defend it to keep the Sicilians landing there and turning your flank.


That's definitely it! Couldn't have said it better! It takes ages until it grows and it's at a horrible position where you would need something... stronger... than some wood sticks placed around a few huts. So mostly i just leave it alone and take the castle north of it...

[glyphz]

I also think Durazzo is the most worthless province, but that's based on my limited experience, meaning in all of my campaigns not one has yet to go farther than 80 turns, so I havent gone to the New World, nor held the NE provinces yet.:lost:

a 400 pop. village at the start located between 2 potentially dangerous foes (Venice, Byzantines) that want it. A large garrison is needed to protect it w/c costs a ton more than what Durazzo can offer you. :ballchain: Indeed, in 2 campaigns of mine (Sicily, Venice), I gave the province to the Pope, and he was so happy to get it that he would have been on his knees kissing my iron greaves in private if he had the chance:knight: . I offer it very soon after taking a large hit in the Pope-O-Meter, due to conquering Christian settlements. I believe that's better than getting at an early war w/ a neighbor just for a slow growing, high-maintenance town.

Ajaccio and Cagliari, once with port, tend to create more income than some inland provinces of the same population, though I am still squeezing the most out of v1.0 before upgrading to v1.2/3, where i heard AI tend to be more aggresive :gossip: . I guess I might also give Ajaccio to the Pope if multiple factions are so obsessively attracted at that island resort.~:lightbulb:

Dongola and Jedda do get some trade income from ports and definitely add to Cairo's trade, but they're not top priority and only go after them when I have an army to spare. It does get annoying though when you try to wipe out the Egyptians quickly and turn those pesky Egyptian stacks to rebel, only to find them take Jedda or Dongola. Tsk! :furious3:

Inverness as well as all settlements in the British Isles become cities once they're all mine. Separated from the main continent, there is no need to have a large garrison, and the trade becomes very nice later on. I'd leave a high chiv general (or maybe 2 + some boats) to guard the isles, and increase public growth in all settlements (esp. dublin. caenarvon, york and inverness) till at least 6000:medievalcheers:

[Rhyfelwyr]

I was going to say Ajaccio, but then Ramses reminded me about Fortaleza.

In one campaign, I saw a Papal army, Milanse Army, Spanish Army, and Portuguese army all on Ajaccio at the same time, surrounded by their fleets. And the Moors travelled there shortly after as well. And in other campaigns the Sicilians often show interest in Ajaccio after they take Cagliari. Its just an absolute nightmare to defend, you need an expensive fleet just to ferry reinforcements there.

As the Turks I've found Durazzo doesn't cause too much trouble, I've had it attacked by the Papacy (bizarelly agressive in this campaign), but that is all, although I have admittedly wiped the Byzantines out.

Dongola and Jedda seem to be generating some good income for me just now, although I did have trouble with public order in Jedda, largely because a couple of Heretics had been camped there.

Fortaleza is a waste of space as a settlement, you don't even need to conquer it to use it resources, which is all its good for. At least if you convert Mikosukee and the Cuban city to Castles you can reinforce your armies when fighting the Aztecs.

Trebizond is another pretty useless settlement, very slow growth and is stuck behind a network of mountains. I suppose it can reinforce armies in Tblisi/Yerevan when the hordes arrive.

And Arguin is pretty useless.

Nicosia isn't good for much either.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Arguin.

It's only neighbor is Timbuktu. And it's more valuable for merchants if someone ELSE holds it for trading purposes.

Ummmm how about Helsinki for an actual province near real factions?

It's like the tiniest in the game, and is barely worth having as a recruiter of basic horse. It's worthless as a trading partner until 100 turns have passed.

I dont use new world provinces because by the time you've gotten to the new world the game is over.

Bottom line: Arguin is the MOST WORTHLESS PROVINCE EVER

No strategic value. No economic value. More useful for someone else to hold it for your merchants to make more money.

[Guru]

Ummmm how about Helsinki for an actual province near real factions?

It's like the tiniest in the game, and is barely worth having as a recruiter of basic horse. It's worthless as a trading partner until 100 turns have passed.
I must disagree. Helsinki is very small in the beginning, true, but It'll make a good trade city when it grows. It has some resources and it'll boost the trade in other coastal towns nearby, too. Has to be converted into a town though. To be honest it didn't even exist by 1100s. I'd say Bulgar, Ajaccio and Arguin are the most worthless provinces. Dunno about New World provinces.

[Philbert]

I'm ambivalent about Ajaccio being worthless. It is certainly true that it will be attacked every other turn, but I found (as the Sicilians) that it was fun defending it, and it became an excellent training ground for troops and generals.
The ground around Ajaccio became fertilized with blood from all over the known world.

[Eikon the Magistrate]

Bulgar is my worst province. Sooo far away and whenever I have a full army waiting for the Timurid party to show up, they siege it for 1 turn and move on :no: the other far off russian provinces are pretty much the same sarkel etc

Corinth/Rhodes fun but pretty useless to own

Inverness is a dissapointment because it never produces enough..just sits there and pickles itself for 200 turns sure no civil unrest but no money either. When I play as the Scots I take York right away and it always turns into a bigger and richer city even tho its many turns behind initially.

Helsinki is great!! 4 trade items in the province... turn it into a city as the danes or russians and it gets big fast.

Nicosias location is why its valuable I keep raiding armies there all the time.

Once you control dongola and jedda your trade in cairo and alexandria almost doubles...

Arguin is the closest city in the old world to the new world.

Fortaleza is the closest city in the new world to old world.

Ajaccio does get alot of attacks, but that means they arent attacking elsewhere...and they are attacking you in sieges....and it is an island after all... IMO few provinces with sea access are entirely useless

[Askthepizzaguy]

I must disagree. Helsinki is very small in the beginning, true, but It'll make a good trade city when it grows.

When it grows?

What good would that do? I've got to conquer the world in the time it takes the average person to sneeze. I haven't got the time to coddle the peasantry. I'm far too busy chopping off heads and setting fire to the broken bodies of the vanquished.

If I wanted to build cities... I wouldn't spend all my time destroying them!

[Grombeard]

When it grows?

What good would that do? I've got to conquer the world in the time it takes the average person to sneeze. I haven't got the time to coddle the peasantry. I'm far too busy chopping off heads and setting fire to the broken bodies of the vanquished.

If I wanted to build cities... I wouldn't spend all my time destroying them!

So this is what comes out when you let a pizza guy rule an empire... :sweatdrop: :help:

Hmm... Taking that one step further: Do you think there is a connection between the Romans conquering the whole world and pizza coming from italy? And did Alexander the Great and Ghengis Khan started their lives as pizza delivery boys? Should we stop ordering pizza to not support a possible future warlord? :inquisitive:

[Guru]

When it grows?

What good would that do? I've got to conquer the world in the time it takes the average person to sneeze. I haven't got the time to coddle the peasantry. I'm far too busy chopping off heads and setting fire to the broken bodies of the vanquished.

If I wanted to build cities... I wouldn't spend all my time destroying them!
Makes me question what you're doing in a thread like this then ~D (I'm not being rude or anything, don't take offence.) If your goal is to burn the city and slaughter the population, does it really matter what the city is like? You can slaughter the population like you can do in any other city, right?

Helsinki grows like any other city, when you use the end turn button. Of course settlements won't grow very big when you kill everyone inside, don't build any buildings and your game lasts for 10 turns. If you occupy instead of extermination and play a long game, the settlements won't be just small villages of widows in the end.

And I hope you know what happens to you when the peasantry gets bored of your rule... It'll happen in the 1700s or so. And you'll be the main ingredient of "Pizza the Cruel".

[The Wandering Scholar]

Small settlements are like puppies, nurse them and treat them good and they will come out good in the end.

[Askthepizzaguy]

:thumbsup:
So this is what comes out when you let a pizza guy rule an empire... :sweatdrop: :help:

Hmm... Taking that one step further: Do you think there is a connection between the Romans conquering the whole world and pizza coming from italy? And did Alexander the Great and Ghengis Khan started their lives as pizza delivery boys? Should we stop ordering pizza to not support a possible future warlord? :inquisitive:

You know where all this anger comes from?

People who refuse to tip the pizza guy. :grin2:



Makes me question what you're doing in a thread like this then ~D (I'm not being rude or anything, don't take offence.) If your goal is to burn the city and slaughter the population, does it really matter what the city is like? You can slaughter the population like you can do in any other city, right?

Helsinki grows like any other city, when you use the end turn button. Of course settlements won't grow very big when you kill everyone inside, don't build any buildings and your game lasts for 10 turns. If you occupy instead of extermination and play a long game, the settlements won't be just small villages of widows in the end.

And I hope you know what happens to you when the peasantry gets bored of your rule... It'll happen in the 1700s or so. And you'll be the main ingredient of "Pizza the Cruel".

Actually there is a very good argument for why a blitzer would care. As opposed to a turtle, who has the time and patience to raise ANY worthless province into something almost worthwhile, the Pizzaguy, er, the Blitzer has to conquer the map in a set number of turns, and only certain provinces, when conquered early or in succession, assist me in rolling up the map.

Good castles in strategic positions, large cities for sacking florins and militia recruitment and vital trade for supporting my vast armies, as well as sentence fragments.

It can be said that a blitzer cares MORE about WHICH provinces he owns than a turtle does!

As for raising puppies... I'd rather raze cities. Treat them terribly and they will all be forced to accept your brutal rule in the end.

[ReiseReise]

:thumbsup:
It can be said that a blitzer cares MORE about WHICH provinces he owns than a turtle does!


Very interesting. The turtle can say "Oh well, whats another 30 turns while this grows into something useful, I will be supported by all my pretty buildings in my other cities in the meantime."
The blitzer does not have that luxury and says "wtf is this worthless pile of filth, the sacking proceeds won't even cover the funeral expenses of the soldiers who died taking it." And considering the funeral expenses are the wages of a dirty peasant with an even dirtier shovel and a very strong leg from kicking all the bodies into a trench.... thats saying a lot.

[Malkut]

When it grows?

There are other options. I took an already developed Helsinki in the Late Campaign in Stainless Steel, converted it into a city, and it wasn't particularly bad. More advanced units at the beginning, too.

On the other hand, SS makes you feed and rest your troops, so I don't know if you can have armies of Borg relentlessly crushing the entire world in 28 turns.

[Guru]

It can be said that a blitzer cares MORE about WHICH provinces he owns than a turtle does!
Says the Blitzer. ~:handball:

Blitzer's games are short. He needs to conquer all (or set amount of) settlements. Settlements are his objectives. If he is going to take every settlement, he'll need Arguin and Constantinople. Of course he'll get more money from 'nople but nevertheless, he'll need Arguin too.
It won't take many turns until the Blitzer will own all settlements, which, in my humble opinion, eliminates the "WHICH" question to some extent. You, dear pizzaboy, have already proven that an experienced Blitzer can effectively blitz regardless of what provinces he has in the beginning. The blitzer plays to win. To conquer. To chop off heads for fun.
Turtle's games are long. He'll build and tech up with a handful of provinces. Settlements like Arguin or Inverness have little potential to grow big even in the hands of a turtle. They'll grow slowly or even stop growing when they're still small. Bigger settlements are the key to teching up. The Turtle may stick with a couple of settlements for hundreds of turns. He prefers provinces with decent potential. He doesn't really need settlements like Inverness but the Blitzer does, for different reasons obviously.. The Blitzer doesn't have to care about that potential, he's games are so short and he is not going to tech up.

It can also be said that a turtle cares MORE about WHICH provinces he owns than a blitzer does! ~D I'm also sure that a turtle cares longer.

And by the way, the settlement you suggested to be the most worthless province (near real factions) is the capital of the country I live in! ~:pissed:
Think about that! ~D

[Askthepizzaguy]

Says the Blitzer. ~:handball:

Blitzer's games are short. He needs to conquer all (or set amount of) settlements. Settlements are his objectives. If he is going to take every settlement, he'll need Arguin and Constantinople. Of course he'll get more money from 'nople but nevertheless, he'll need Arguin too.
It won't take many turns until the Blitzer will own all settlements, which, in my humble opinion, eliminates the "WHICH" question to some extent. You, dear pizzaboy, have already proven that an experienced Blitzer can effectively blitz regardless of what provinces he has in the beginning. The blitzer plays to win. To conquer. To chop off heads for fun.
Turtle's games are long. He'll build and tech up with a handful of provinces. Settlements like Arguin or Inverness have little potential to grow big even in the hands of a turtle. They'll grow slowly or even stop growing when they're still small. Bigger settlements are the key to teching up. The Turtle may stick with a couple of settlements for hundreds of turns. He prefers provinces with decent potential. He doesn't really need settlements like Inverness but the Blitzer does, for different reasons obviously.. The Blitzer doesn't have to care about that potential, he's games are so short and he is not going to tech up.

It can also be said that a turtle cares MORE about WHICH provinces he owns than a blitzer does! ~D I'm also sure that a turtle cares longer.

And by the way, the settlement you suggested to be the most worthless province (near real factions) is the capital of the country I live in! ~:pissed:
Think about that! ~D

Tsk tsk, Guru!

You and I both know that Helsinki in this particular game, in the vanilla version, is the least developed or populated province, or darn close to it. PS it did not exist in the year the campaign begins anyway, so that's giving it more credit than it even deserves. I don't imaging New York City or Washington D.C. would be very 'useful' or 'populated' in 1080ad either. Helsinki didn't exist until 1550.

:beam:

I think you missed my point. If I aim for worthless provinces right off the bat, I waste a LOT of money to gain a province which cannot defend itself, build itself up for many, many turns (thus rendering it worthless to me, given the short duration of my campaign... as Jedda is worthless to Scotland) or even contribute any sizeable taxation towards my campaign.

In short, what a province is worth to me is what remains for the 10-20 turns after I sack/occupy it. That's what it's value is to the blitzer. Some provinces, Helsinki for example, provide almost no sacking florins, provide no income, and if I left it truly undefended and wasn't heading into Russia, Russia would take it, as it is Russia's second or third "objective".

Vienna, on the other hand, is IMMENSELY useful to the blitzer. Central location to blitz from, can support itself, can generate ballista, can be converted into a castle, can develop itself in the span it takes to blitz, and is profitable even whilst defending itself!

See the argument?

From my perspective, a turtle has 50 or more turns to spare to turn Dublin, Helsinki, or God-forsaken Arguin into a major province capable of supporting or defending itself. Ok ok, Jedda will always suck.

I don't have such luxury. And although Helsinki or Arguin are on my list of objectives, it's about as worthless to me as a used tin can on my scavanger hunt list. Once obtained, it's completely worthless, and is in fact a drain on my time and resources.

But I can understand your perspective, even if I disagree with your premise, honourable sir.

Salute!
:knight:

PS- I think very highly of Finland, by the way. A friend and trading partner, home of some very nice and friendly people, with a seemingly functional government with very well-funded social programs. Not to mention the women are VERY attractive. Plus they don't go around bombing everyone like some preeminent yet failing superpowers I happen to claim residence within. Go USA and such. I love my country, but.... sometimes... damn.

[Guru]

Tsk tsk, Guru!

You and I both know that Helsinki in this particular game, in the vanilla version, is the least developed or populated province, or darn close to it. PS it did not exist in the year the campaign begins anyway, so that's giving it more credit than it even deserves. I don't imaging New York City or Washington D.C. would be very 'useful' or 'populated' in 1080ad either. Helsinki didn't exist until 1550.
Yes I know. My "Helsinki" comment wasn't really a serious argument, more of an ice-breaking ending line or something like that. The town was ordered to be built by some Swedish king (Gustav?) in 1550 to compete in trade with Reval (Tallinn). I wonder why the developers didn't include Turku rather than Helsinki...

I think you missed my point. If I aim for worthless provinces right off the bat, I waste a LOT of money to gain a province which cannot defend itself, build itself up for many, many turns (thus rendering it worthless to me, given the short duration of my campaign... as Jedda is worthless to Scotland) or even contribute any sizeable taxation towards my campaign.

In short, what a province is worth to me is what remains for the 10-20 turns after I sack/occupy it. That's what it's value is to the blitzer. Some provinces, Helsinki for example, provide almost no sacking florins, provide no income, and if I left it truly undefended and wasn't heading into Russia, Russia would take it, as it is Russia's second or third "objective".

Vienna, on the other hand, is IMMENSELY useful to the blitzer. Central location to blitz from, can support itself, can generate ballista, can be converted into a castle, can develop itself in the span it takes to blitz, and is profitable even whilst defending itself!

See the argument?

From my perspective, a turtle has 50 or more turns to spare to turn Dublin, Helsinki, or God-forsaken Arguin into a major province capable of supporting or defending itself. Ok ok, Jedda will always suck.

I don't have such luxury. And although Helsinki or Arguin are on my list of objectives, it's about as worthless to me as a used tin can on my scavanger hunt list. Once obtained, it's completely worthless, and is in fact a drain on my time and resources.

But I can understand your perspective, even if I disagree with your premise, honourable sir.

Salute!
:knight:
Our playing styles are quite different, and it was obvious to me that we'd have different opinions on this matter. I've played Blitz games too (tho very few I must admit) and I understand the blitzer's priorites. For the Blitzer, the most important province is the one that assists him in his mission the most; helps him to conquer the whole known world. That could very well be Vienna, as you argumented in that earlier thread. Faraway, small settlements do not help the blitzer, even though he needs to capture those provinces too.
The Turtle can turn small faraway settlements into major cities only if they have the potential. Settlements like Stockholm have great potential for the Turtle. Settlements with little potential do not interest the turtle.
Again, just like in that "best province" thread, we have different definitions for the province we're trying to choose here. It cannot be said that a turtle's way of approaching this matter is better than the Blitzer's, neither the other way around. I think I understand both approaches, but as a turtle(ish) player I had to bring forth the turtle's opinion in contrast to your Blitzking's views. I like the way you argument to support your views. Where's pizzaguy, there's discussion (of varying quality ~D )

PS What a time-consuming discussion, I really should be doing something else! :jester:


- Regards, Guru

[Eikon the Magistrate]

Well after abit of experience with it Ill have to correct myself and agree with most.... Arguin is a terrible, terrible place. I thought I could correct it...I spammed priests and assasins and spies and kept full garrisons tried to keep a governor always built EVERYTHING and the dam place still rebels... whats worse I never made any money from it really.. at least not enough to ever warrant me making the effort to capture it again!

I thought I was the ultimate turtle... I guess wild hearts cant be tamed :inquisitive:

[Czar Alexsandr]

I'm a turtle, no doubt about that. For me, one of the worst provinces was Durazzo. Playing as the Byzantines Durazzo was, for me, a battleground that I had great difficulty sending reinforcements to. I lost a general in the mountain passes near the settlement that had a decent army too. I got so angry I sent Prince John from Constantinople and defeated the Venitians that had attacked it and then latter took Ragusa. It has slow growth and the income was very meager. The amount of resources I poured into it was, of course, easily more than the tangible value of the settlement. To it's credit.. it can be called useful only in the way that it's a staging ground to attack or defend from Venice or Sicily. But I would also say it was the most useless settlement in my game.

As Russia Helsinki is acctually useful. In the early period I use it to train and send the troops available in castles to Riga and Novgorod. That's useful for dealing with the Polish, Germans, and Danes that usually end up being my enemies. However, when I capture Vilnius I can send them by land or just increase the garrison at Vilnius. I think Helsinki can be seen as a strategic postion though. I use it to reinforce my armies in the region and to launch naval invasions against the Danes. It does have rather slow growth though, however I always think I'm safe leaving it as a viable option to get good troops to Novgorod and Riga quickly.

Bulgar and Sarkel, sigh, alas I must confide, Bulgar and Sarkel are pretty poor. ^_^; They're good for absorbing the invasions but that's just about it. It's hard to use them as bases to attack the Mongols and Timurids cause their economy is poor, they don't grow fast so there's limited troop production, and they're hard to send reinforcements to. I like to think of them as.. the very poorly defended eastren front of Russia that is a constant thorn in the side for me. :shame: Lol. I do send reinforcements from Sarkel to Caffa though. Caffa, Kiev, Ryzan, and Moscow are much more important to protect than Bulgar and Sarkel. Sarkel and Bulgar are good for monitering the progress the invaders are making... not much more. If I'm lucky the hordes arrive in Baghdad and I can take Tiblisi, a much better position in every way. Along with Trebeizond I can acctually send men to Kiev and Caffa way more efficently, as well as the fact the regions make better frontlines. I think they have their uses though. (Mostly mental. Think about it, they're big provinces, tricks you into thinking you've got a good sized empire. XD )

I played a short Scotland game once, Iverness is a rather slow growing low output settlement, but I wouldn't call it the worst. I used it to recruit my "good" troops. Somehow I managed to keep the English from taking York until Iverness was a fortress and I had more options. (Canervon was lost tragicaly, seems it was hard to send reinforcements there, for me anyhow.)

On a final note, the Czar would like to remind everyone the steppe settlements are not useless! In fact, they are the grandest and mightest most beautiful and powerful provinces in all of the world. Yes.. that is why everyone wants them. Bah. Didn't work for you did it Napolean? HAHAHAHA!!! ... Ahem.. Yes.. Russia is grand, truely.

[Zanar]

Rome, amirite?

[Askthepizzaguy]

I can't say Rome is worthless or even all that dangerous.

Not only does Rome trade with most of the prosperous Italian peninsula, but the islands and Palermo as well. It is a large city at the start, making enough money to defend itself easily. The only drawback to Rome is making the Pope your enemy, and by extension, any non-excommunicated Catholic willing to crusade.

However, I find that the benefits far outweigh the risks once a crusade has been already called, or if I am blitzing, which is always...

Besides, holding Rome and slaying the current Pope is the easiest way to curry favor with the new Pope. Offer him rome, and all of a sudden you will be good buddies.

But what is even more effective is slaying Pope after Pope in succession until you can put your own man in office. Then reconciliation happens for Catholic nations.... and spells doom for all those opposing the Pope's home Empire.

Don't let the man in the silly hat boss you around. BECOME the Pope and tell everyone else what to do. That's what he did, and it worked well for him. It's what I do... and I happen to be somewhat good at what I do.

[Gray Beard]

I guess I play a kind of hybrid blitzing turtle game with the Byzantines. If you look at my walk through for Byzantium you'll see I advocate taking it to the Turks from turn one. But then I regroup, consolidate and build some wealth before going after the pretentious Venetians. However, I think that going from 5 to 18 or 20 provinces in 20 turns, especially on the Eastern part of the map where the provinces are too big to move through and attack somewhere else in one turn qualifies as a blitz. My goal is to blitz up to an Empire that is big enough to defend itself and become a glorious civilization rather than a brutal conqueror. But to each his own.

I've also played Scotland and found them to be a really good faction to blitz with because they have their backs to the sea and thus fewer borders to defend. I can roll up most of Western Europe in about 50 game years

[Zanar]

I can't say Rome is worthless or even all that dangerous.

Not only does Rome trade with most of the prosperous Italian peninsula, but the islands and Palermo as well. It is a large city at the start, making enough money to defend itself easily. The only drawback to Rome is making the Pope your enemy, and by extension, any non-excommunicated Catholic willing to crusade.

However, I find that the benefits far outweigh the risks once a crusade has been already called, or if I am blitzing, which is always...

Besides, holding Rome and slaying the current Pope is the easiest way to curry favor with the new Pope. Offer him rome, and all of a sudden you will be good buddies.

But what is even more effective is slaying Pope after Pope in succession until you can put your own man in office. Then reconciliation happens for Catholic nations.... and spells doom for all those opposing the Pope's home Empire.

Don't let the man in the silly hat boss you around. BECOME the Pope and tell everyone else what to do. That's what he did, and it worked well for him. It's what I do... and I happen to be somewhat good at what I do.



i was joking!:laugh4:

[Askthepizzaguy]

i was joking!:laugh4:

I suspected as much. Therefore I play the straight man to your funny man and act as though I don't realise the joke... thus making it funnier.

Now I'm making it even funnier by pointing that out in anticlimactic fashion. Which is called an anti-joke; a sophisticated form of humor not often seen in casual conversation.

A common anti-joke would be the chicken crossing the road joke. The whole point of the joke is that there is no punchline, and the audience is expecting one. They don't laugh, but the joke teller does.

I believe I've just one-upped you, sir.
:beam:

[ReiseReise]

"So what do you call yourselves?"
"The Aristocrats!"

[Yoyoma1910]

A common anti-joke would be the chicken crossing the road joke. The whole point of the joke is that there is no punchline, and the audience is expecting one. They don't laugh, but the joke teller does.



Who are you, Neil Hamburger?

[Zanar]

I suspected as much. Therefore I play the straight man to your funny man and act as though I don't realise the joke... thus making it funnier.

Now I'm making it even funnier by pointing that out in anticlimactic fashion. Which is called an anti-joke; a sophisticated form of humor not often seen in casual conversation.

A common anti-joke would be the chicken crossing the road joke. The whole point of the joke is that there is no punchline, and the audience is expecting one. They don't laugh, but the joke teller does.

I believe I've just one-upped you, sir.
:beam:


Uh-oh guys, looks we have a smarty pants in our mits. Too bad you've only
managed to humor just yourself. Therefore you fail.

'lolwut' would've been a better response my good man :yes:

[Askthepizzaguy]

Uh-oh guys, looks we have a smarty pants in our mits. Too bad you've only
managed to humor just yourself. Therefore you fail.

'lolwut' would've been a better response my good man :yes:

The whole point was to snuff out any humor at all remaining in your joke, and make one at your expense. Which I find very funny. Therefore, I win.

I don't need to make the audience laugh. Like Robin Williams, sometimes I tell jokes that are just for me and no one else.

[irishron2004]

The whole point was to snuff out any humor at all remaining in your joke, and make one at your expense. Which I find very funny. Therefore, I win.

I don't need to make the audience laugh. Like Robin Williams, sometimes I tell jokes that are just for me and no one else.


You're both off subject. The only response of best province/worst province is personal choice and playing style. The rest is x amount of bull.

[Askthepizzaguy]

You're both off subject. The only response of best province/worst province is personal choice and playing style. The rest is x amount of bull.

Very true.

Fair enough. Back to the topic then.
:focus:

[OverKnight]

From my own experience, Durazzo, hands down.

It starts as a wall-less heap, everyone wants it, and if you're the Byzzies, you still have to take it, because it's historically your heap.

[Askthepizzaguy]

From my own experience, Durazzo, hands down.

It starts as a wall-less heap, everyone wants it, and if you're the Byzzies, you still have to take it, because it's historically your heap.

An interesting suggestion overknight. I would tend to agree that Durazzo is more trouble than it is initially worth.

Here's what you get from Durazzo:

1. You get an early warning system against Venetian and Sicilian incursions.

2. You get a much needed, easily built castle province that won't interfere with your greater trade policies in the Greek Isles.

3. A great place to defend, in the mountains and passes, against any invaders.

-----------

Here's what you get if you don't take Durazzo:

1. A base of operations for your enemies right next to a major city of yours.

2. No real warning against invasion, because once you let them have Durazzo, they can wait on the border and threaten to strike you, but not strike you, requiring the long term commitment of troops to defend a core province.

3. The land route between Corinth and Thessalonica can be easily cut off by marauders

4. Al Qaeda may in fact form a base in Durazzo. That is why we need to invade it, and then occupy it for 100 years. Otherwise the people of the Eastern Roman Empire will be made less safe. I've asked Congress to renew the bill which allows our spy network to intercept messengers on horseback and to covertly view scrolls that others may be reading. But Congress has not passed that bill, and it's making us unsafe. I know I was not elected Emperor, but if I were elected, it would mean that I had the will of the people. A mandate, to make the people more safe. And that is why I created the spy network. There are some allegations of hidden interrogation centers and prison camps for captured prisoners. Some have questioned my policy of not releasing prisoners from the battlefield. My assassins are currently dealing with those people. I'm just kidding, there Jonathan Q. Publikopolous. Heh heh heh. (Shoulders flapping up and down.)

(Suddenly serious)
As for the energy bill before Congress, I propose that our horses begin a regimen of eating nothing but sugar cubes rather than waste valuable oats. I know the price of oats has gone up to 3 denari per amphora. Some analysts predict it will go up to 4 denari. However, raising taxes on the oat companies will only raise the price of oats even higher. I suggest we begin looking for more sources of oats at home. We must find a way to rid ourselves of our dependence on foreign oats.

As for the border, there has been a rise of illegal immigration from the nearby Catholic province of Sofia. Several priests are inside our borders attempting to convert our population to Catholocism. I've met with the leader of Hungary, and I looked him in the eyes, and I think he's a good man. I trust him. So when he says that these evildoers crossing our border and making mischief is not the first step in an invasion, I believe him.

I also understand there is some contention between my chosen heir, Jonathan Makain, and his rivals, Hillarious Klintonopolous and Barack Obampolous. However, I will not comment on which should be the successor to the Empire and what their individual foreign policies are, as that would be improper for a sitting Emperor. Besides, there's still a chance that Ronnious Paulopolous could win the nomination. And that Baptist guy.

Folks, we are currently engaged in the pivotal struggle of this, the twelfth century. We are currently engaged in a battle with an axis of evil; Venice, Sicily, and one of those Koreas. If we turn our backs on the province of Durazzo, the Catholics will establish a base there from which to attack us. In this moment of great uncertainty, we must not withdraw our troops from Durazzo.

Thank you, and good night.

https://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh137/askthepizzaguy2/prez2.jpg

[irishron2004]

An interesting suggestion overknight. I would tend to agree that Durazzo is more trouble than it is initially worth.

Here's what you get from Durazzo:

1. You get an early warning system against Venetian and Sicilian incursions.

2. You get a much needed, easily built castle province that won't interfere with your greater trade policies in the Greek Isles.

3. A great place to defend, in the mountains and passes, against any invaders.

-----------

Here's what you get if you don't take Durazzo:

1. A base of operations for your enemies right next to a major city of yours.

2. No real warning against invasion, because once you let them have Durazzo, they can wait on the border and threaten to strike you, but not strike you, requiring the long term commitment of troops to defend a core province.

3. The land route between Corinth and Thessalonica can be easily cut off by marauders

4. Al Qaeda may in fact form a base in Durazzo. That is why we need to invade it, and then occupy it for 100 years. Otherwise the people of the Eastern Roman Empire will be made less safe. I've asked Congress to renew the bill which allows our spy network to intercept messengers on horseback and to covertly view scrolls that others may be reading. But Congress has not passed that bill, and it's making us unsafe. I know I was not elected Emperor, but if I were elected, it would mean that I had the will of the people.
A mandate, to make the people more safe. And that is why I created the spy network. There are some allegations of hidden interrogation centers and prison camps for captured prisoners. Some have questioned my policy of not releasing prisoners from the battlefield. My assassins are currently dealing with those people. I'm just kidding, there Jonathan Q. Publikopolous. Heh heh heh. (Shoulders flapping up and down.)

(Suddenly serious)
As for the energy bill before Congress, I propose that our horses begin a regimen of eating nothing but sugar cubes rather than waste valuable oats. I know the price of oats has gone up to 3 denari per amphora. Some analysts predict it will go up to 4 denari. However, raising taxes on the oat companies will only raise the price of oats even higher. I suggest we begin looking for more sources of oats at home. We must find a way to rid ourselves of our dependence on foreign oats.

As for the border, there has been a rise of illegal immigration from the nearby Catholic province of Sofia. Several priests are inside our borders attempting to convert our population to Catholocism. I've met with the leader of Hungary, and I looked him in the eyes, and I think he's a good man. I trust him. So when he says that these evildoers crossing our border and making mischief is not the first step in an invasion, I believe him.

I also understand there is some contention between my chosen heir, Jonothan Makain, and his rivals, Hillarious Klintonopolous and Barack Obampolous. However, I will not comment on which should be the successor to the Empire and what their individual foreign policies are, as that would be improper for a sitting Emperor. Besides, there's still a chance that Ronnious Paulopolous could win the nomination. And that Baptist guy.

Folks, we are currently engaged in the pivotal struggle of this, the twelfth century. We are currently engaged in a battle with an axis of evil; Venice, Sicily, and one of those Koreas. If we turn our backs on the province of Durazzo, the Catholics will establish a base there from which to attack us. In this moment of great uncertainty, we must not withdraw our troops from Durazzo.

Thank you, and good night.

https://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh137/askthepizzaguy2/prez2.jpg

When did the pizza guy become George W. or visa versa?

[Mek Simmur al Ragaski]

For me it has to be the region north of Florence, it is attacked constantly by Milan, Venice and Silicy, then the pope dies and Venice become the next popedom (what?, ive never read a dictionary!) Then milan, silicy and venice ally and joint attack you, block your trade and constantly lower public order.

In the end i was forced to hand it over to the papal states, then flush out silicy

[Pater Familias]

Perhaps not the most useless province but surely the most useless capital is Leon. It's a long walk to anywhere, including its own port ... and then it's a long sail. Every other province in all of Iberia is more useful, as are the coasts of greater Spain as far as Normandy in the north and the Italian peninsula in the east.

[Yoyoma1910]

Perhaps not the most useless province but surely the most useless capital is Leon. It's a long walk to anywhere, including its own port ... and then it's a long sail. Every other province in all of Iberia is more useful, as are the coasts of greater Spain as far as Normandy in the north and the Italian peninsula in the east.



I don't know, it is sort of smack dab in the middle of the Iberian Peninsula, with an easy enough stroll to everywhere else in the area, such as Cordoba when you take it.

[seari]

I think inssbruck (sp?) is a useless province. OK it is in the mountains, and so an easy place to defend but i have actually never seen an attack on inssbruck except by the HRE when you take it from them.
You can say, it is a castle so you can easily train your troops there but unless you're a blitzer (who needs a lot of castles, no?), you're better off with bern, I think, as recruiting castle due to it's better location. You are way faster in France, as fast as innsbruck in Northern Italy and practically as fast as them in Northern Europe, if you aren't faster.
'Ah but then i convert it to a city and make it a money-making paradise' you could say. WRONG! It doesn't generate a lot of money, and so, even more useless as a city.

And my apologies for my English, I learned it in school.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I think inssbruck (sp?) is a useless province. OK it is in the mountains, and so an easy place to defend but i have actually never seen an attack on inssbruck except by the HRE when you take it from them.
You can say, it is a castle so you can easily train your troops there but unless you're a blitzer (who needs a lot of castles, no?), you're better off with bern, I think, as recruiting castle due to it's better location. You are way faster in France, as fast as innsbruck in Northern Italy and practically as fast as them in Northern Europe, if you aren't faster.
'Ah but then i convert it to a city and make it a money-making paradise' you could say. WRONG! It doesn't generate a lot of money, and so, even more useless as a city.

And my apologies for my English, I learned it in school.

Once the HRE has taken northern Italy, it's sole purpose is a recruitment province for mounted units for crusading. Otherwise, it doesn't do a whole lot.

[Yoyoma1910]

Man, why y'all have to go a start dissing on my old stomping grounds?!?

Innsbruck, meaning Bridge over the Inn (River). Emperor Maximilian thought it was great enough to build the tomb he was never buried in there and has the first renaissance style church north of the alps.

https://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh311/yoyoma1910/Innsbruck1.jpg





Besides, it's handy in regulating the flow of traffic through the alps.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Man, why y'all have to go a start dissing on my old stomping grounds?!?

Innsbruck, meaning Bridge over the Inn (River). Emperor Maximilian thought it was great enough to build the tomb he was never buried in there and has the first renaissance style church north of the alps.

https://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh311/yoyoma1910/Innsbruck1.jpg

https://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh311/yoyoma1910/Innsbruck2.jpg




Besides, it's handy in regulating the flow of traffic through the alps.
Ok, in real life this particular town may have been influential and so forth. But like Helsinki, a modern-day delight, it simply has almost no relevance in this game. It should be an honour just having your town in an epic strategy game like this.

I'm from Manchester, New Hampshire. When the bleeping expletive will I have my old stomping grounds in a war game? Never, that's when.

So suck it up. :2thumbsup: At least it's in the game. Some of us aren't so lucky. Being among the most worthless provinces is better than not even being mentioned.

(I'm not implying New Hampshire should be in M2TW, but for anyone born in Europe and not having their particular town as an epicenter of warfare, it's at least a small consolation that their homeland is being featured at all.)

[Yoyoma1910]

Yes well, it's not really my home town. I'm from New Orleans. I simply attended the University there. And the reason it is in the game is because, unlike Manchester, New Hampshire (which I'm sure is a place of great importance, though none germane to this game) Tirol has played a historically important part in the wars of Europe. It is located in one of the main passageways through the alps. Even Otzi, the bronze age man, was found there, showing that it has been a regularly traveled region since that era. Innsbruck, which is the capitol, is in Northern Tirol, which has much poorer farming than Southern Tirol, which is now part of Italy. So no, it's not going to be an economic powerhouse.

In the game, it can play a strategic role if you are an Italian faction at war with the HRE, or if say France gets too big (such as when Napoleon invaded). But granted it does loose its value if you simply mow everything over.

[Askthepizzaguy]

And the reason it is in the game is because, unlike Manchester, New Hampshire (which I'm sure is a place of great importance, though none germane to this game)

Don't be so charitable. Manchester is not a place of great importance, save for my birth there. :grin2:

It's the most populated place in New Hampshire, a place noted for being one of the early presidential voting states, and also clam chowdah.

By the way, as a person who was born and lived 18 years in Nah Hampshah, I can tell you honestly that no one talks like that there. Up in the northern part of the state, most have a French-Canadian accent, not a southern New England accent as would be famous from the television show Family Guy. Rhode Island and Massachussettes have very distinct accents from Nah Hampshah. Clam Chowdah.

I admit I tend to drop my r's when it comes to New HampshiRe, but not in words where the r is important, like the word impoRtant. I in fact say clam chowder, as opposed to clam chowdah, as the r is more prominent in such a word.

Manchester isn't even the state capital, Concord is. And I can tell you, Concord is noted only for being the state capital. Otherwise, it's a tiny little town by most state's standards. There is nothing else of note about it. At least Manchester has a decent airport and a mall.

If you're travelling to New Hampshire by plane, you will end up in Manchester, as it is the only place there with an international airport. And by international, I mean it has a place to land planes that are larger than a single propeller.

Also of note about Nah Hampshah: We are not all a bunch of farmers. It's a mountain state. Most of the people live in the "city" of Manchester, and in the fairly "urban" (by New Hampshah standards) places like Nashua. The southern part of the state is basically an extension of Massachussettes, and many people have jobs in that state. They just can't stand to live in Massachussettes.

It is quite difficult to farm in icy, mountainous conditions. Just so you know. New Hampshire once had a great computer industry that went down the toilet when the economy crashed, after Digital collapsed and 9/11 happened. The southern half of the state is basically one giant idyllic suburb. Not particularly rural or farming country. I think I saw two cow farms in the whole state, and I don't think anyone is eating New Hampshire imported beef.

I moved to Florida, and it's not much different here, save for the weather. I see a surprising amount of New Hampshirites who vacation here.

New Hampshah is a socially liberal, economically conservative swing state. Quite a bit different from Vermont, The Hippie Capital of The Known Universe. Vermont is nothing but trees and maple syrup, as well as communes of hippies and hipsters young and old alike. They have nude sit-ins and contemplate seceding from the union and becomming a Nation of Hippies.

Interestingly enough, they have a large French Canadian uber religious minority. I have a step-brother who went to school there to become a priest or something. I always get a kick out of hippies and fundies coexisting peacefully. Yes, it is possible.

Vermont is basically New Hampshire's retarded cousin. And since New Hampshire is basically Massachussettes' affluent suburb, and Massachussettes is just a wannabe New York City, Vermont doesn't even qualify as a state. Can you name it's Capital? Yes, it's Montpelier.

Montpelier. Yeah. A lot of movers and shakers go to Montpelier. I'd say that Vermont is just a small rabble of French tree-huggers, but since the trees are all covered in syrup... that leads to people dying from being frozen to sticky trees, and even Vermont...ians aren't that spacey.

But I digress. My entire point was that New Hampshire was a no-name place of unimportance to most people except as a tourist curiosity. We have a lot of wicker baskets to sell you. There's some nice skiing areas and a couple nice hotels in the mountains.

Look for the Mount Washington Hotel sometime if you're in the area. I've been there it's frickin fabulous. To find a more luxurious hotel you'd have to go to New York City, and New York don't have the backdrop of the White Mountains behind it. So sucks to be them.

Anyways. If you're from New Hampshire, as I am, you're relegated to the pathetic position of picking on Vermont and Wyoming as being more "hick state" than you. Although technically we aren't even remotely hick. We're affluent white suburb. But no one outside of NH will ever care.
New Hampshire is not the United States' Most Worthless Province, but it's pretty close!

Some fun facts:

1. The official state motto of New Hampshire is "Live Free or Die", but an alternative, unofficial motto has been proposed: "Yes, we do have a beach, but it is the shortest one in the entire nation* and it's really, really, really cold." It also has slimy rocks, mud, and sand, and lots of sharp spiky shells. It's called Hampton Beach. Take your family there sometime and enjoy the frigid water and the sharp shells to cut your blue, shivering toes on. Also considered for the State Motto: "Yes, we are a state", "No, we aren't part of Canada", "Hey, at least we have a beach", and "Hey, at least we aren't Vermont."

2. Vermont sucks so badly that one town, Killington, tried to secede from Vermont and join New Hampshire because the per capita taxes there became unbearable.* Vermont wishes it were a state. So much for becoming it's own country.


3. New Hampshire pwns Vermont.

4. Although the state of New Hampshire is 96.97 percent white, that is NOT why they are called the "White Mountains".

5. The State Constitution of New Hampshire is the nation's only state constitution which acknowledges the right of revolution, which means that any time we are displeased with the Governor, we can kick his big fat butt to the curb armed with torches and pitchforks. We don't take ____ from our government. Don't you wish you lived there?

6. The residents of Dixville Notch in Coos (pronounced coh-oss) County traditionally cast the very first primary votes in the entire nation for President of the United States. Again, don't you wish you lived there? Other states don't seem to matter because everyone has dropped out of the race by then, and then you get to vote for the person already nominated. Not a whole lot of choices there. But if you lived in New Hampshire you could vote for anyone who actually ran, and throw your vote away on Giuliani or Dodd. Nifty, huh?

7. There is snow somewhere in New Hampshire 365 days a year, and Mount Washington (New Hampshire) holds the world record for directly measured surface wind speed, at 231 mph (372 km/h), recorded on the afternoon of April 12, 1934**. The mountain's summit also boasts around 110 days of hurricane force winds every single year. So we are officially the windiest place on Earth. Take that! You can literally be blown off of the top of that mountain.

The preceeding was almost entirely off-topic, so I'll shut up now. But if anyone was ever curious about Askthepizzaguy's home state, this is his long-winded rant about it.
:focus:

__________________________
*Yes, that is actually a real fact.
**The only windier places on earth are inside of tornadoes, which are not directly measured on the surface of the Earth, but hundreds of feet above the earth. And no one has bothered to record the wind above mount Washington, but presumably it's even windier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killington%2C_Vermont_secession_movement

[Martok]

Yes, we have indeed gone somewhat astray here. :focus:


I've not played the game that much myself. That said, I would have to say Inverness is probably the most useless province I've come across so far. It's too isolated and too damn poor to be worthwhile, at least in the beginning.