Barbarians and No Money - How do you do it?

Hi. I have just started with EBV1.0 and am really struggling with the lack of money. I have started a sauromatae and Getai game and am struggling (M/M). With the Getai I have conquered four provinces but with the troops required to hold the conquests and some casualties I do not have enough tp take other settlements. It is 260BC and cash flow is positive $250 - 500 (give or take). I am in debt for 75,000, therefore 150 turns or 40 years to pay it of!!! Is this normal? and do I pray that no one attacks my very thinly held conquests for the next 40 years? Same sort of issue with the Sauromatae, in debt for 80,000, can't build anything with no money, and not enough troops to hold down more conquests. Am I missing something, or am I being impatient? Any guidance or help (checked for an AAR, but no luck) would be appreciated.

Thanks

AKL

Well, as the Aedui it took me over 50 turns to pay off my dept. You'll notice that your income grows gradually as your settlements grow. If you don't like messing with finances you should probably try one of wealthier factions for starters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony luke

Hi. I have just started with EBV1.0 and am really struggling with the lack of money. I have started a sauromatae and Getai game and am struggling (M/M). With the Getai I have conquered four provinces but with the troops required to hold the conquests and some casualties I do not have enough tp take other settlements. It is 260BC and cash flow is positive $250 - 500 (give or take). I am in debt for 75,000, therefore 150 turns or 40 years to pay it of!!! Is this normal? and do I pray that no one attacks my very thinly held conquests for the next 40 years? Same sort of issue with the Sauromatae, in debt for 80,000, can't build anything with no money, and not enough troops to hold down more conquests. Am I missing something, or am I being impatient? Any guidance or help (checked for an AAR, but no luck) would be appreciated.

Thanks

AKL

---

For Barbarians
Usually what people do is disband the more expensive units right at the start. I qeue up all the essential and cheap buildings in my capital right away and not build any units as you already start off with more than enough. (roads,etc) Then I try to conquer everything nearby as quickly as I can. Do not seige cities out as you will fall further into debt. I am a bit careless during this time since I will most likely disband most of the army anyways after I've captured nearby cities.

After 2-4 provinces you should start seeing your economy rise again. Once I have my immediate sorrouding towns, I disband all the extra units in my army, only keeping around enough to keep the towns from going into unhappy red faces.


For Nomadic Factions
I have little experience with them. From what I've read on the forums is, most people just sack settlements (exterminate/destroy) every building and move on to the next settlement to earn income.


Hope that helps

I pretty much do things the Tapanojum way. Reduce the size of your military and take more risks, leaving behind small garrisons and advancing with half-stacks against full-stack enemy armies. You should never really let yourself dip more than a few thousand mnai into debt, for the reasons you've just shared with us.

If that sounds a bit tricky, you've got another option. Disband practically everyone right at the start, and focus on building up the economy of your core provinces until it can support the expeditionary force you've always dreamed about but have been afraid to mention at parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrtwisties

I pretty much do things the Tapanojum way. Reduce the size of your military and take more risks, leaving behind small garrisons and advancing with half-stacks against full-stack enemy armies. You should never really let yourself dip more than a few thousand mnai into debt, for the reasons you've just shared with us.

If that sounds a bit tricky, you've got another option. Disband practically everyone right at the start, and focus on building up the economy of your core provinces until it can support the expeditionary force you've always dreamed about but have been afraid to mention at parties.

---

Mrtwisties make a good point, usually the more experienced players face much larger enemy armies at the beginning. Don't be discouraged if you face an enemy with more men then you. When attacking towns the enemy army usually splits apart. A unit or 2 int he town center, and then 1 or 2 units in different sections of the town (N,S,W,E), making your job a whole lot easier.

Well, Sauromatae is tougher, but with the Getai money should not me a major problem. Do it like this...

Turn 1. Move the rightmost starting army towards Kallatis. Insert spy...
Move leftmost army and starting garrison towards Naissos. Built two Komatai and put a Granary, sewer system and roads in the building queue.

Turn 2. Continue moving towards cities.

Turn 3. If the spy did his job. You can now take Kallatis. Leave the archers unit there... Try and keep casualties well down. Besiege Naissos.

Turn 4. If the spy failed to open the gates you can now take Kallatis with siege equipment. Continue Naissos siege. If you consider yourself lucky and a good general try and also take Naissos by storm with siege equipment. Be warned that the garrison there is pretty tough.

Turn 5. Move the army that took Kallatis towards Singidunum.

Turn 6. The Naissos garrison sallies. You take the city. As always try and keep casualties to a minimum. Move a Komatai unit from the capital as garrison. Move towards Sigindunum.

Turn 7. Lay siege to Singidunum. The garrison usually sallies as they have nice troops. Crush them. Leave a unit in garrison duty and move on to Sarmisegetuza.

Take the future capital of the Getai and them finances should be up and running. If you have any troops left better go for Serdike ASAP. It gives you nice regionals that complement your Getai forces...

Hope you like my mini-guide to the first turns of the Getai...

The coasts are the key.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony luke

Hi. I have just started with EBV1.0 and am really struggling with the lack of money. I have started a sauromatae and Getai game and am struggling (M/M). With the Getai I have conquered four provinces but with the troops required to hold the conquests and some casualties I do not have enough tp take other settlements. It is 260BC and cash flow is positive $250 - 500 (give or take). I am in debt for 75,000, therefore 150 turns or 40 years to pay it of!!! Is this normal? and do I pray that no one attacks my very thinly held conquests for the next 40 years? Same sort of issue with the Sauromatae, in debt for 80,000, can't build anything with no money, and not enough troops to hold down more conquests. Am I missing something, or am I being impatient? Any guidance or help (checked for an AAR, but no luck) would be appreciated.

Thanks

AKL

---

I know what you mean:whip:

Do I always play on VH/VH and by now I have used Hellene's and Dacia - still, I alway's get more money because I play extensive campaign's with loot's of fighting's and extermination's of enemy town's - by my opinion that is the only way to play EB, have money, and build your empire - but! 80% of EB player's just can not follow this pace because it take's year's (human year's) of RTW campaign's to make it work:san_angry:

There are couple of major problem's in EB regarding the 'lack of money' and unit upkeep:

1-The unit's are expensive on the default level's so you can build half of your City just by halting training of 2 elite unit's:shrug: Imperial palace cost's 12800 minai, while elite's are 3000-5000 minai and some elephant's even over 15000 minai! - All of this is far away from historic notes

2-The unt's are expensive to be maintained - most of the time, upkeep cost's are 30-40% of the price! So player's are very seriou's if they are thinking of disbanding 80-100% of their army after a conquest!

Because now player need's to go back with is army sometime's for more than 5-10 turn's just to use them again - During that time you have to pay upkeep! And if you count that new unit cost's only 2,5-3 times more then upkeep of one new unit - you will see that you LOOSE MONEY if you DON'T disband your troop's that are now far away from battlefield (that mean's your battlefield - so if you take Rome maybe you want to expand in AsiaMinor not North Italy).

So, Pyrros did not disband his troop's he took to Italy - no, he used then after that in Makedonia and Sparta... If you play Epeiro's you will think twice before you decide to take 6 turn's from Italy to Makedonia with all the troop's

I belive that upkeep cost's should not be greater then 10-15% of unit training cost's - but that is just me:san_grin:

3-Manly because human player is alway's in debt you will have to play just certan faction's - one's that have 3+region's at the start..
Let me say it this way - I don't know how many, but I am sure that Pontos-Armenia-Saka are played only by 10% of EB's - just because there are no option's to gain money

I think that all faction's should have at least +100 minai income at the start as Huaman player not - 3000 to -6000 minai:shrug:

But that would really change the EB team perspective:stwshame:

i enjoy how it EB is now. every single dollar counts. it gets hairy when you must destroy some buildings or units in order to get some positive income.

@maksimus- i believe pontos is a very popular faction. it is most definitely not impossible to gain money with the smaller factions. your first turns are quick and matter a lot, but it is not difficult to take or raze a few towns and save money for ten years.

if you really are unhappy with EB, the team does not discourage mini-mods. they pop up all the time. change the upkeep costs or whatever.

it seems you always pop up in the threads just to say how you would have done it. well do it! i'm sure if you have these feelings others do to and will help/play your mod.


and @ tony luke - no, being 75000 in debt is not normal and i can't figure how your campaign became that disastrous.

As the Arverni I didn't disband a single unit, preferring instead to concentrate the troops into one fullstack and go rampaging around Gaul. When I had almost finished unifying Gaul by siege starvation (I didn't exterminate) I was in the positive. Part of the reason being that I set as high a tax rate as possible in all my cities. It took me 60 turns to crawl out of it, but it was alright in the end. Once I took Massalia and exterminated it, things turned rosy. But then, by that time I didn't have a single unit above half strength, so it was pretty touch and go.

One thing that helped me immensely was that i used my starting mnai to queue roads, a coupla lugoae to garrison my home provinces, and spent all the rest on iaosatae. I slung Gaul to its knees.

It depends, really, on the faction you are playing, and on what setting. I personally prefer VH/M, which is recommended for EB. I've only played one Getai campaign, and haven't gotten around to the Sauromatae yet (marching around through a vast, howling wasteland - just to keep the bandits suppressed - is not my idea of a good time). However, I have had plenty of success (and endless fun) with other "barbarian" factions, such as the Aedui, Arverni, Sweboz and (especially) the Lusotannan.

The real key to long-term success is making difficult and critical decisions - in the first few rounds. Most "barbarian" factions, start with ridiculously powerful armies in relation to their ability to support those armies. And so, you have 2 choices: (a) increase your holdings to pay for all those expensive and highly-effective soldiers, or (b) decrease military expenditures to a level more-or-less commensurate with your resources.

If you choose to go with your existing army, you must gain territory, and in a damned hurry. Blitz, push, bum-rush, and pour out your troops' blood like water if you have to, but long sieges (anything more than the 1 round it takes to build a battering ram or a few ladders) will land you so far in debt that you may NEVER get out.

With the obvious exception of the Gallic factions, most "barbarians" start the game relatively isolated from, or allied with, non-Rebel factions. Any halfway-decent human player can whip the daylights out of a computer opponent, given anything resembling decent odds (say, 2:1 or better). So shrinking your army should not be a problem, since invasion by a "real" faction is off in the future somewhere. If you choose to reform the army, you can go a couple of different directions.

First, you can disband most of your more expensive/effective units, queue up some buildings, and go a-conquering. Be careful, though, because you could wind up with negative cash flow, negative funds in the "bank," and a depleted-but-expensive army that is not sufficiently numerous to garrison your provinces and still field a decent striking force. No money to build, no money to retrain, too weak to keep expanding ... might as well start over.

Second, if you are really, REALLY poor at the outset, consider disbanding ALL of your expensive units, and instead of buying buildings with your starting cash, put some cheap units in the queue. The Lusotannan are a great example. They start with a large and effective field army of excellent skirmisher cavalry, medium-heavy spearmen, light sword infantry and skirmishers. Problem is, they own ONE province, and cash flow is negative 8,000+ (!) right off the bat. I disband every one of those cavalry and spear units, in favor of as many light swordsmen and skirmishers I can afford. Even so, cash flow remains negative ("only" by 2,000 per turn or so), but by Turn 6-7, I've conquered 2 new territories, and have positive cash flow. Before long, I'm out of the negative and have enough to retrain my battered troops for further conquests.

The "barbarian" factions are fun and challenging in their own unique ways. Whatever you do, enjoy!

I must admit to bumbling the Sauromatae both times I played them, along with the Saka (although I tried a radical "India first" strategy there). I'm just clumsy with the HA's: I can't make small cav-only armies work well enough to expand on a shoestring. I end up having my FM garrisons getting seiged out by irritating rebs...:embarassed:

Compare that with my current H/H Pontos camapign, where I've extinguished the Hai and control half the black sea coast, winning battle after battle with scraps, odd mercenaries and repeated battle-saving charges from my faction leader.

Part of the problem is that barbies tend to have less developed economies around them so trade builds up slow, unlike the Eastern med, Adriatic or the Aegean. One good trade deal there can transform your economy instantly: once you secure the coast you're rolling in it. The Baltic on the other hand starts paying off only after you conquer it all and build it all up.

Despite that, I have no problem with the foot barbies, love the Lusotannan (sooo much metal), and enjoyed the gauls, britons and germans. Its just those horse fanciers I can't get going.

[QUOTE=iwwtf_az]if you really are unhappy with EB, the team does not discourage mini-mods. they pop up all the time. change the upkeep costs or whatever.

it seems you always pop up in the threads just to say how you would have done it. well do it! i'm sure if you have these feelings others do to and will help/play your mod.QUOTE]

I am not unhappy with EB :no: I would not be here if that is so..
It's just that I like it so much I must suggest in hope to make it better - not just my way :no:

There are numbers of examples when I said ok - I am wrong:san_grin:

As other players mentioned, you MUST reduce the size of your army in order to reduce its upkeep cost, too.

And as your economy grows a bit each turn, you gradually build your military again.

Good luck:2thumbsup:

Gentlemen,

Many thanks for your varied and sound responses. In general I am an experienced player and have no problems winning the battles even on hard. The issue is just getting used to EB V1.0, which by the way is truly excellent, credit and praise for those who created it. I have done well as the Sweboz on H/H and am just experimenting with the HA armies and Getai. I normally build one cheap improvement (road for instance), then four 100 man cheap skirmisher units (future garrison troops), then start out on the conquest trail. Someone above queried how you can be 70,000 + in debt, easy; at (-) 4000 a turn for a start posn and the distance it takes you to literally get to the cities etc, then take them, then march on .... 0 - 25 turns later you are in the red for a lot! Just started a Parthia game and by using the spies to cause Selucid revolts I am doing fairly well. Again many thanks for you comments and input.

Courage,

AKL

If you're new to EB don't start as any of the following factions:

Casse
Hayasdan*
Pahlava*
Pontos
Saka Rauka*
Sauromatae*

Even i struggle with the ones with a * at the end and i've been playing EB for about 2 years now. I can eventually become a superpower with all of them except Hayasdan who i just can't seem to get my head around.

I'd try something a bit easier for your start. Aediu/Averni are barbarians but have it a lot easier than your choice. Getai have it quite hard because their troops are all light and their neighbours are all heavy, but it's still quite easy compared to Sauromatae. Hell i think even the Saka Rauka are easier than Sauromatae, provided you take your starting army and raid/exterminate cities with landmarks to the south. The Seleukids have one city just beneath where the Hayasdan start with a nice population and a wonder to destroy which'l give you 15,000 denari.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maksimus

I know what you mean:whip:

Do I always play on VH/VH and by now I have used Hellene's and Dacia - still, I alway's get more money because I play extensive campaign's with loot's of fighting's and extermination's of enemy town's - by my opinion that is the only way to play EB, have money, and build your empire - but! 80% of EB player's just can not follow this pace because it take's year's (human year's) of RTW campaign's to make it work:san_angry:

There are couple of major problem's in EB regarding the 'lack of money' and unit upkeep:

1-The unit's are expensive on the default level's so you can build half of your City just by halting training of 2 elite unit's:shrug: Imperial palace cost's 12800 minai, while elite's are 3000-5000 minai and some elephant's even over 15000 minai! - All of this is far away from historic notes

2-The unt's are expensive to be maintained - most of the time, upkeep cost's are 30-40% of the price! So player's are very seriou's if they are thinking of disbanding 80-100% of their army after a conquest!

Because now player need's to go back with is army sometime's for more than 5-10 turn's just to use them again - During that time you have to pay upkeep! And if you count that new unit cost's only 2,5-3 times more then upkeep of one new unit - you will see that you LOOSE MONEY if you DON'T disband your troop's that are now far away from battlefield (that mean's your battlefield - so if you take Rome maybe you want to expand in AsiaMinor not North Italy).

So, Pyrros did not disband his troop's he took to Italy - no, he used then after that in Makedonia and Sparta... If you play Epeiro's you will think twice before you decide to take 6 turn's from Italy to Makedonia with all the troop's

I belive that upkeep cost's should not be greater then 10-15% of unit training cost's - but that is just me:san_grin:

3-Manly because human player is alway's in debt you will have to play just certan faction's - one's that have 3+region's at the start..
Let me say it this way - I don't know how many, but I am sure that Pontos-Armenia-Saka are played only by 10% of EB's - just because there are no option's to gain money

I think that all faction's should have at least +100 minai income at the start as Huaman player not - 3000 to -6000 minai:shrug:

But that would really change the EB team perspective:stwshame:

---

I hate to disagree.. have played Pontos on and off for a while, and it is easily one of the most enjoyable factions despite the main problem it suffers from - recruitment holes in faction MIC. I have a feeling that the financial situation at the start might be planned, because after a few well planned moves to take some of the coastal towns, you will be rolling in more money than your ex neighbour in Sardis - Croseus. Currently have 5 gold mines, some of which are amongst the best in game, and am pulling in enough money to kick both Selucia, Ptolies and the KH out of my region, while still donating large sums to the Maks.
It might take 10-15 years to get to that stage, but once there you are set, probably too little challenge really.

The Eperiots were the same, a few tough years then it was no problem to go where I want and do what I want.
Averni, same story, however there was never really the same amount of money coming in, but certainly enough to get by while plastering the Sweboz and Romans. The Aedui (sp) were defeated in about 4 years.

In my opnion, more money would simply detract from the game as it would be too easy. I like a challenge! Ares knows the AI provides almost none :wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perturabo

I hate to disagree.. have played Pontos on and off for a while, and it is easily one of the most enjoyable factions despite the main problem it suffers from - recruitment holes in faction MIC. I have a feeling that the financial situation at the start might be planned, because after a few well planned moves to take some of the coastal towns, you will be rolling in more money than your ex neighbour in Sardis - Crosesus. Currently have 5 gold mines, some of which are amongst the best in game, and am pulling in enough money to kick both Selucia, Ptolies and the KH out of my region, while still donating large sums to the Maks.
It might take 10-15 years to get to that stage, but once there you are set, probably too little challenge really.

The Eperiots were the same, a few tough years then it was no problem to go where I want and do what I want.
Averni, same story, however there was never really the same amount of money coming in, but certainly enough to get by while plastering the Sweboz and Romans. The Aedui (sp) were defeated in about 4 years.

In my opnion, more money would simply detract from the game as it would be too easy. I like a challenge!

---

I agree, It was my bad to just type in blank.. Pontos i Ok, really, Armenia too:dancinglock:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maksimus

There are couple of major problem's in EB regarding the 'lack of money' and unit upkeep:

1-The unit's are expensive on the default level's so you can build half of your City just by halting training of 2 elite unit's:shrug: Imperial palace cost's 12800 minai, while elite's are 3000-5000 minai and some elephant's even over 15000 minai! - All of this is far away from historic notes

2-The unt's are expensive to be maintained - most of the time, upkeep cost's are 30-40% of the price! So player's are very seriou's if they are thinking of disbanding 80-100% of their army after a conquest!

Because now player need's to go back with is army sometime's for more than 5-10 turn's just to use them again - During that time you have to pay upkeep! And if you count that new unit cost's only 2,5-3 times more then upkeep of one new unit - you will see that you LOOSE MONEY if you DON'T disband your troop's that are now far away from battlefield (that mean's your battlefield - so if you take Rome maybe you want to expand in AsiaMinor not North Italy).

So, Pyrros did not disband his troop's he took to Italy - no, he used then after that in Makedonia and Sparta... If you play Epeiro's you will think twice before you decide to take 6 turn's from Italy to Makedonia with all the troop's

I belive that upkeep cost's should not be greater then 10-15% of unit training cost's - but that is just me:san_grin:

3-Manly because human player is alway's in debt you will have to play just certan faction's - one's that have 3+region's at the start..
Let me say it this way - I don't know how many, but I am sure that Pontos-Armenia-Saka are played only by 10% of EB's - just because there are no option's to gain money

---

I hope I did not misread (the intentions of) your post but here are a few comments:

It is estimated that at least 50% of the annual budget of any premodern state/government with some kind of "standing" army went to the armed forces (this does include the construction of military installations), if not more.... I have seen estimates as high as 66 - 75%.

In fact, one of the explanations offered for the halt of rapid Roman expansions during the reign of Augustus and the fact that the legions lost in 9 A.D, were not replaced for decades is the the idea that theRomans no longer could afford it economically to increase their army. The cost of maintaining the army has always been considered one of the factors in the collapse of the Roman Empire.


For most of the barbarian empires, the situation was even far far worse! Most could only afford short campaigns, or otherwise face economic collapse and social unrest....