Concerning Treasury

**Hax** · 09-03-2008, 18:32

You put a trigger in the EBBS script which would then account for the cities that hold a treasury, and can find out what faction has taken them (this already works as we know from EB1). Then the trigger starts to work and it will take a large portion from the faction that lost it and gives it to the conquerer (say about 35,000 mnai, perhaps. If there was a way to account how much money a faction owns it would be even better). Of course, there would always be the possibility to change the location of your treasury. Imagine your capital being under siege by a bunch of savage hordlings, why not speed your treasury away to a more secure location?

Yes. Very likely.

**lobf** · 09-03-2008, 20:04

Sounds resource-heavy.

**Hax** · 09-03-2008, 20:18

Not quite, methinks. There would only be a few triggers, one consisting out of finding out whether a province has been taken, checking whether the building is in there, if so, it transfers the money to that faction.

**Ludens** · 09-03-2008, 20:51

It's a nice idea, but I imagine it's too easy to exploit for the human player: he can sensibly relocate his treasury while the A.I. won't even realize what it's for. Also, the treasury of a large empire will be harder to move than that of a small one, but one cannot vary the price of a building.

**Hax** · 09-03-2008, 20:57

Of course, if you have any ideas what could be done to decrease the exploitlevel of this idea, you're welcome to post here as well. It was mostly a suggestion, if anybody has an idea how to tweak this, I'd like to hear it.

**I Am Herenow** · 09-03-2008, 21:31

Surely the simplest solution is to have this ONLY exist for the player (i.e. no AI treasuries) to avoid exploitation? Although that would get rid of most of what you are actually suggesting. Maybe have AI treasury buildings disappear at Hard and Very Hard mode as a compromise.

I Am Herenow

**Foot** · 09-03-2008, 21:33

If it only existed for the player, and as the AI would have no idea what was going on, it would make the entire thing pointless to have. The player doesn't tend to lose his capital anyway.

Foot

**I Am Herenow** · 09-03-2008, 21:37

I see what you mean - I suppose it could just exist as a potential punishment for the player, more than an incentive for the AI?

If not, then maybe to counterbalance just raiding an AI capital and taking (part of) their treasury, the AI would become super aggressive against whoever did that? I.e. they would use all their remaining resources to wipe you out, meaning that you shouldn't go behind enemy lines and sack the Seleukid capital, say, without carefully considering the consequences first.