Questions about the economy

I love client rulers, especially because I don't tend to use new settlements as troop centres with factional barracks anyway. I roleplay them as little client kingdoms who pay tribute to my faction, not provinces in their empire. Celtic Lesser Kings are good, though they sometimes necessitate recruiting cavalry where a Hellenistic Mercenary General or one of the others does not (since they are cavalry). Most of the time, I tend to do without, but if it's a settlement on the border with a regular foe, it's sometimes useful to have some horsemen you can send out a side gate during a siege.


On a related topic to the main, is there any rhyme or reason to how good or bad harvests are (and thus farming incomes, which seem very variable)?

Client rulers are good for ruling the bigger, more unruly cities. The reason I cautioned against them is that some newer players build the quickest gov type they can and just recruit client rulers in every town. They are not neccessary in every town, and building them for all your armies quickly leads to a real economic drain.

My post was all about planning out your government choice rather than randomly assigning them coz you don't understand what they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blxz

Client rulers are good for ruling the bigger, more unruly cities. The reason I cautioned against them is that some newer players build the quickest gov type they can and just recruit client rulers in every town. They are not neccessary in every town, and building them for all your armies quickly leads to a real economic drain.

My post was all about planning out your government choice rather than randomly assigning them coz you don't understand what they do.

---

It does, but that's also part of the roleplaying of being a non-imperial power for me. These are independent places that pay tribute, but have to support their own government and garrisons. When your heartland is somewhere as rich as Asia Minor, it doesn't matter so much, but I'd imagine other regions are more problematic if you have a lot of client rulers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

It does, but that's also part of the roleplaying of being a non-imperial power for me. These are independent places that pay tribute, but have to support their own government and garrisons. When your heartland is somewhere as rich as Asia Minor, it doesn't matter so much, but I'd imagine other regions are more problematic if you have a lot of client rulers.

---

True, but the OP was mostly about having difficulty with finances. Roleplaying tends to be self inflicted limits normally so is best for a player with more skill in the game. I was explaining from a totally gamey perspective. But yes, some factions were very unlikely to expand territorially and would instead impose a sort of vassal state upon their conquered foes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

On a related topic to the main, is there any rhyme or reason to how good or bad harvests are (and thus farming incomes, which seem very variable)?

---

It's a random number script. Just like irl (at the time at least).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rotten

It's a random number script. Just like irl (at the time at least).

---

Also farming incomes are so low in EB because income is linked to pop growth (which has been reduced). Therefore its not really a major variation in the early game and by mid to late game there is so much money available in terms of trade and mining and tax that farming still plays a relatively minor role, at least the variation won't do anything unless you are running so close to the line...but thats uncommon and possibly poor gameplay in the light of the randomness.

As a long-time lurker and occasional poster I wanted to thank Yarema for asking a good question and thank everyone else for giving up some good ideas. I seem to be in a similiar position of having expanded rapidly then felt the pinch of fiscal reality. When I start my next campaign I'll bare these suggestions in mind.
Thanks again.
CJ

Sounds like the Celtic Lesser king (and his bodyguard) should be able to deal with most typically small pop-up rebel brigand stacks all by himself, without any help from other garrison troops. If he can kill, say, 3 units of Celtic Levy Spearmen by himself, for instance - outnumbered 6 to 1 on the battlefield! - then he's a good investment.