Printable View
Hi I was just curious why is it that when you exterminate a population of a captured city you get more money then enslaving them? when you exterminate them you just get to take all thier stuff as loot but when you enslave them not only do you get all thier stuff which in rtw gives you the most money but you also get to sell them as slaves.. there were huge amounts of money made in this back then it just seems to be more logical to get more money enslaving than exterminating
When you enslave, the province gets an extra slaves trade resources for about 20 turns or so. Can bring in quite some cash. Also, by enslaving instead of exterminating you don't lose any tax payers, you just 'move them to a better place'.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutus
Thanks, good to know that (strategically that is ~D).
By this chance, you have one of the best signatures at the entire ORG. :2thumbsup:
.
:bow: Thank you. We aim to amuse.
As Brutus stated you´ll get a heafty trade boost for 20 turns when enslaving. Depending on amount of slaves and current traders you usually makes a lot more cash from enslaving than from the one-time-cash-boost of exterminating. Plus the redirection of populance to a more disireable location which in turn can be worth tons of cash. So there´s a lot of factors to take into count.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZIM!!
Enslaving also leads to a reallocation of the squalor problem, so you might want to take your governors out of those cities that are already on the top population level, for the slaves only go to cities with governors. And the last thing you want, need or wish for is an already overcrowded city to get even more squalor-producers.
On the other hand, if you want small, uderdeveloped settlements to enjoy a growth boost, place a governor inside and enslave as enslave can.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ciaran
Thanks Ciaran, you've taught me something new. :bow:
.