corruption question

I'm currently playing the roman campain and its about 220 b.c. I've just conqured most of spain and I'm getting tons of cash from the gold mines but losing just as much from corruption. Unfortunatly having only 2 governers there doesn't really help, I was wondering if there was anyway to loosen up the coruption there so I could actually make 3000 from a single city. I have thought about changing the capital but I'm trying to be historical and am pretty firm about keeping it Rome,
Anyone offering advice?

build buildings that increase law, is the only way to reduce corruption without changing the capital

Temples of Jupiter, Baths, Walls, roads, Garrisons [The building type], Governors with law boosting ancilliaries and traits. Youll probably need a lot of these to hold Spain anyway as its a fairly rebellious place.

i just started using the money cheat to make up for the money lost in corruption since its really gay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quackingduck

i just started using the money cheat to make up for the money lost in corruption since its really gay.

---

...

*Facepalm*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quackingduck

i just started using the money cheat to make up for the money lost in corruption since its really gay.

---

Only if you think having some level of the realism of the difficultly of running a huge empire in the game is gay. :wall:

*Coughs* I had just disbanded part of my troops in a area(s) and then built law buildings and stuff to increase income the problem in my game is I have ONE stack running around putting down rebs everywhere and there elite yes but man
why is it moneys so hard to come by??? I mean I have Spain,Asia minor,Italy,half of Gaul,even Africa yet I can never make more then ONE stack or I lose money?????:furious3: BTW money was good when I got Greece and built lvl2 mines but now:wall:

My last Roman campaign was in the previous version, but apart from a few cashflow issues relating to my blitzes [more cities to spend cash on than I had cash to spend] cash was rarely a problem. In fact there was plenty of times that I was burning cash to get rid of it - ended up building 7 or 8 full stacks and sending them off to kill the Greek East.

Just spend your early game prioritising making money - trade buildings, mines, farms, and law boosting buildings to beat corruption. Spend your money first where it will have the biggest effect - A mine in Pella makes much more than a mine in Tarsos. You need to keep track of ancilliaries and traits as well and move them to the right people - In my current Makedon campaign my FM at Pella can build mining centers for 20K, where the normal price is 30K. Thats a hell of saving, and and hes been making quick trips to Serdike and elsewhere to spread the benefits. Governors at mines are also set up with Inventor and Mining Engineer ancilliaries to maximise the cash flow. Still tight [from the AARs it seems a common enough cash issue], but worth it when 400 heavy cavalry crush the enemy in one devastating charge.

Minimise stuff you dont need like navies or uber elite troops that dont really payoff on the battlefield. Try and keep your troop producing buildings to a couple of centers, that give morale/experience/equipment bonuses and preferably with a high growth rate. Use forts to bottleneck AI approaches towards you so you get a turns advance notice that theyre coming for your city - that will allow you to spread your troops thinner because you will have more time to react.

One potential monetary blackhole is relying on local levies to garrison your cities - Only two troop types work for large scale garrisons - the basic greek/eastern skirmisher units [ Forget the name, Aknosti....bleh] and the Roman slingers. Both are basically the cheapest option you have for garrisoning cities and you need to mass produce them - literally- in advance of a blitz and whilst a blitz is going on. I learned this the hardway when I tried to use African and Spanish regional troops to garrison my cities in an old Roman campaign - complete financial meltdown.

Dont worry too much about the small rebel stacks either - they dont do that much - I usually use them a training dummy for a small stack [3-6 units + general] to punch about. You should be using your elite stack(s) to expand the empire.

Oh - and dont use watchtowers - use spies. Cost less, dont need to devote a FM to it, can be moved to new positions as needed and can get you more detailed info on a stack/character when required.

Ultimately, you want to be making a lot of money but with only low taxation. Prioritize anything that has to do with farming or granaries. Remember, it was an agricultural society back then; you make the most money by playing that way too. You should also pay attention to buildings that give the "increases tradeable goods" bonus. That helps quite a bit. Usually its a temple.

Make sure that every settlement with a governor has a school so he keeps getting ancillaries.

In terms of armies, Sand was right. Garrison your cities with the cheapest troops. (I use 1 unit of 120 skirmishers for every 3000 in population). Then, create a field army that is camped on the roadway midpoint between four or five settlements. The income from those settlements should cover the operating costs of the army. You want this army to be large enough to fend of an attack if necessary, but it will mostly just be dealing with rebels.

I don't if anyone else does this, but start thinking about units in terms of upkeep costs, not recruitment costs. It is important that you always be thinking about upkeep costs. Anyone can save up and recruit a unit of elite heavy cavalry, but the upkeep is terrible. Make sure that your armies can be supported by your economy before you recruit them.

Finally, when choosing your objectives, look at your settlements' trade screens. They provide excellent information about which settlements you are trading with. Conquer your trading partners, not some goat filled sheep town on the frontier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sand

Oh - and dont use watchtowers - use spies. Cost less, dont need to devote a FM to it, can be moved to new positions as needed and can get you more detailed info on a stack/character when required.

---

Hi
I think that watchtowers are cheaper. Cost of building watchtower = 500; cost of a spy: recruitment = 300(as far as I remember) + 100 upkeep each turn, so after two turns after recruiting a spy he becomes more expensive than a watchtower. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Regards G

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gugus

Hi
I think that watchtowers are cheaper. Cost of building watchtower = 500; cost of a spy: recruitment = 300(as far as I remember) + 100 upkeep each turn, so after two turns after recruiting a spy he becomes more expensive than a watchtower. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Regards G

---

nope...in EB watchtowers are a whopping 2 grand (2,000) mnai

you were quoting vanilla prices

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerlinusCDXX

nope...in EB watchtowers are a whopping 2 grand (2,000) mnai

you were quoting vanilla prices

---

I believe it depends on the faction, but I have been playing Carthage for awhile now and theirs is 500 but I think the Romani pay 2000

500 for Pontos too.

I was quoting 2000 for ...I forget right off hand...uhhh I know they were Greeks of some sort (AS, Baktria, Ptolemaioi, or Epeirots), as I don't play Romani.

That's cool that they customized watchtower pricing by faction though, saw the cost of watchtowers in my Greek somethin' or other campaign and never even looked at the wachtower option again (I'm a cheap bastard LOL)

Anyway even if a watchtower costs 2000 it remains forever, so in the long run is cheaper than a spy.
G

Quote:

---

Anyway even if a watchtower costs 2000 it remains forever, so in the long run is cheaper than a spy.

---

I disagree that its longevity makes it a better option however.

Watchtowers become redundant when the front moves on, so you have to build more and more, sending your FMs on errands when they could be doing something more useful. And splashing out 2K every turn or so can hurt quite a bit more.

I can use the same 5-6 spies to monitor hotspots, moving them as the front moves. Should the upkeep costs ever become crippling [ never have ] I can send them on a mission to infiltrate a city which is usually a death sentence. The flexiability of the spy unit makes it far superiour imo in bang for buck.

why dont we say its a personal preferance, spy vs watchtower. seems like a insignificant thing to argue over.

BTW im in 53 bc got mariens reforms(pardon my wrong spelling):oops:
and im now rolling over the Gauls and im raiding those points
but money-wise it hurts im losing money but I have about 3k left
(man those mines really help:sweatdrop: )I mean im playing on VH/M
and at the middle/Start of my game I was losing money by about 6k......
(I pulled though built mines trade buildings do almost nothing I don't know why their bonuses are so low.....:wall: )anyway I gonna win this and IDK go lay down
and then maybe just for fun try to reach India.....:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quackingduck

i just started using the money cheat to make up for the money lost in corruption since its really gay.

---

Money lost in corruption prefers the company of other money lost in corruption?