Economy

[Christianus]

Ave!
I remember the overview of the economy-system in EB for RTW was way of with its numbers.
Will it be the same in EBII?

[Mediolanicus]

Explain how the RTW overview was off?

[Alsatia]

In RTW, the numbers taken from the cities shows its total revenue then subtracts debt. In M2TW, it only shows income from the cities, but the nuber does not subtract the defecit. To find the defcit, you have to go to the financial overview.

I thnk that is his difference in numbers.

[/Bean\]

I prefer the RTW system. It's much quicker to see where you're making and losing money. The MedII system makes it look like you're empire is really rich, but you still lose money. Rather misleading.

[Skullheadhq]

Hardcoded
I'm sorry, I know it really sucks. When you think you're getting rich you're actually losing a lot of money, just like the modern day bankers.

[Ludens]

I prefer the RTW system. It's much quicker to see where you're making and losing money. The MedII system makes it look like you're empire is really rich, but you still lose money. Rather misleading.

Although I see the point of the R:TW system, it made it harder to identify your profitable cities. I suspect many new R:TW players never realized this until it was pointed out to them, and therefore upgraded backwaters because it looked like they made more money than big, central cities.

[Megas Methuselah]

I, for one, prefer the M2TW system. As Lemur says, it's easier to identify your bread-winning cities. It's not difficult to open your financial scroll to study your total revenue, total expenses, and net earnings/losses.

[Meneldil]

M2TW system drives me insane. Having to check the revenue scroll every turn is boring.

[moonburn]

the rtw system sucked cause some cities turning a profit barelly payed for their garrison (some never did with the mercenary generals acting as governors)

[A Very Super Market]

That isn't a problem of the system itself than a problem of your own economy in the first place. I mean, unless you got to that situation through misunderstanding the system, it isn't a cause of it.

[Cambyses]

While this discussion is interesting, is the OP not simply questioning whether the disparities between the building browser and actual income will be fixed in EB?

I mean where for example the building description of a mine says it will earn you 5000mnai, but only actually provides 800mnai etc? Not really an issue for experienced players I know.

Or maybe Ive totally misundertood the OP!

BTW, I much prefer the M2TW system as well, ie not taking any money out of your treasury for items that are in the queue but not actually being built. Plus you get a scroll showing your finances pop up every turn anyway, so the whole profit/loss thing is easier to resolve, especially as certain incomes do not even fall under a city anyway (ie merchants, the so called king's purse etc).

[Skullheadhq]

Well who cares, just check your stats

[Vasiliyi]

While this discussion is interesting, is the OP not simply questioning whether the disparities between the building browser and actual income will be fixed in EB?

I mean where for example the building description of a mine says it will earn you 5000mnai, but only actually provides 800mnai etc? Not really an issue for experienced players I know.

Or maybe Ive totally misundertood the OP!

BTW, I much prefer the M2TW system as well, ie not taking any money out of your treasury for items that are in the queue but not actually being built. Plus you get a scroll showing your finances pop up every turn anyway, so the whole profit/loss thing is easier to resolve, especially as certain incomes do not even fall under a city anyway (ie merchants, the so called king's purse etc).

Actually it is this I really dislike.

[madbriton]

I actually prefer the M2TW version. The RTW one divides up the army costs per population, but that doesn't mean that the -2000 city is losing you money.