The RTW II Economy - Research, Tips and Strategies

[Bramborough]

About 150 turns into first Roman campaign. Re looting: I've mostly been occupying regions, but entering Libya, decided to sack a few settlements to see how it would work out. I didn't nuke out the specific numbers, but following is my general impression:

Pros:
- Substantial immediate boost to treasury. Self explanatory.
- Boosts slave population, increasing factionwide economy. One doesn't get the enslavement of captives option with straight occupation.

Cons:
- All buildings substantially damaged; repair costs amount to roughly 70-80% of the initial treasury income. This isn't necessarily a big concern, however, if one intends to wholesale replace existing buildings with own-faction structures, AND has sufficient treasury to do so immediately (so all those construction sites don't turn into slums).
- Doubles the provincial unrest penalty (and therefore doubles the number of turns required to eradicate it).
- Boosts slave population, increasing factionwide public order penalties. Not exactly "factionwide" perhaps, but slave pop in all your provinces will increase, although the closer provinces' will be higher. Looting Cyrene/Augila in Libya led to high slave pop order penalties (-10 or worse) in Phazania/Africa, and lower (say, -7 to -9) in home provinces Italia, Cisalpina, etc. This wasn't ALL just from those two cities, of course. I'd been enslaving defeated armies/fleets since beginning my North Africa campaign, but definitely noticed a big boost (or hit, however one wants to look at it) upon the looting of these 2 cities.

Overall, I'd say looting is not the way to go if one wants to permanently retain a province and incorporate as a usefully-functioning economic component of the empire. The headaches of trying to restore public order and tying up one's forces in military occupation just take too long. HOWEVER:

An idea which has occurred to me is using an undesired province (or even just a region or two outside one's own full provinces) as a "training ground" for generals. Go in, loot cities, don't garrison, let public order spiral out of control. Rebel army appears, and your army general now gets to put another whopping on them for more rank boost, with no diplomatic penalties. Rinse and repeat. This might be a good way to keep providing battles to rank up generals in between major campaigns. Just take care to do this to a landlocked settlement, as rebel port cities tend to get blockaded (but not attacked) by AI factions, and permanent stalemate ensues.

[Oleander Ardens]

About 150 turns into first Roman campaign. Re looting: I've mostly been occupying regions, but entering Libya, decided to sack a few settlements to see how it would work out. I didn't nuke out the specific numbers, but following is my general impression:

Pros:
- Substantial immediate boost to treasury. Self explanatory.
- Boosts slave population, increasing factionwide economy. One doesn't get the enslavement of captives option with straight occupation.

Cons:
- All buildings substantially damaged; repair costs amount to roughly 70-80% of the initial treasury income. This isn't necessarily a big concern, however, if one intends to wholesale replace existing buildings with own-faction structures, AND has sufficient treasury to do so immediately (so all those construction sites don't turn into slums).
- Doubles the provincial unrest penalty (and therefore doubles the number of turns required to eradicate it).
- Boosts slave population, increasing factionwide public order penalties. Not exactly "factionwide" perhaps, but slave pop in all your provinces will increase, although the closer provinces' will be higher. Looting Cyrene/Augila in Libya led to high slave pop order penalties (-10 or worse) in Phazania/Africa, and lower (say, -7 to -9) in home provinces Italia, Cisalpina, etc. This wasn't ALL just from those two cities, of course. I'd been enslaving defeated armies/fleets since beginning my North Africa campaign, but definitely noticed a big boost (or hit, however one wants to look at it) upon the looting of these 2 cities.

Good to read. I have started to look more into province specialisation. It differs a bit between the factions but my original approach seems right. It pays off to look very closely at the bonus/malus a building gives.

Military recruitment is an interesting topic as well and profits greatly from detailed planning, possibly more so then in the past, especially for the Roman and Hellenistic factions. The Barbarians, especially my Suebians are starting to look a bit outmatched by the possibilities further south.

I'm on a business trip and will only come back home Sunday, so not much testing recently.

[JeromeBaker]

An idea which has occurred to me is using an undesired province (or even just a region or two outside one's own full provinces) as a "training ground" for generals. Go in, loot cities, don't garrison, let public order spiral out of control. Rebel army appears, and your army general now gets to put another whopping on them for more rank boost, with no diplomatic penalties. Rinse and repeat. This might be a good way to keep providing battles to rank up generals in between major campaigns. Just take care to do this to a landlocked settlement, as rebel port cities tend to get blockaded (but not attacked) by AI factions, and permanent stalemate ensues.

Great idea, I am going to try this out next time I get a chance to play. Combining this approach along with having a champion in my stack should boost up a new army really fast. I might even be able to build up my general to a decent level before someone kills him off.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Just take care to do this to a landlocked settlement, as rebel port cities tend to get blockaded (but not attacked) by AI factions, and permanent stalemate ensues

OTOH, I could see doing this to a faraway port settlement that someone else might desperately need

Cheesy, but what the heck, so are a lot of other things in this game......

[Bramborough]

200 turns in, with associated tinkering of provinces, I'm coming more and more to realize that province specialization is the key. I haven't really figured out the specific formulas, but clearly it's impossible (and probably deliberately so) to fully develop a province's towns/commerce/industry AND also be self sufficient in food. With the limited slots available, just can't be done past Level III. And I don't think that's necessarily a "flaw"...it's supposed to be that way. It kinda makes sense; Rome couldn't have become Rome without drawing tons of resources from across its empire (especially food).

It seems to me that one can balance out a province with Level III buildings...but without much food surplus to contribute elsewhere. Then, introducing a Level IV building into its mix then makes the province reliant on external food...either directly because it requires a lot of food in itself, or indirectly by needing to compensate for its squalor by building other food-consuming public order buildings.

As I've said, I haven't figured out specifics, but my basic idea is that, just as there are different levels of buildings, I'm going to start thinking of "Level II-IV provinces":

Level II Province: Food producer. May not make much money. No buildings higher than Level II (other than perhaps agricultural). The province's function is to provide the food surplus necessary to support the higher provinces.
Level III Province: Self-sufficient in food. Makes decent money, but held back in development so as to not require food imports. No buildings higher than Level III. One could conceivably run the entire empire consisting of only Level III provinces.
Level IV Province: Richest provinces, fully developed with Level IV buildings, and therefore making the most money. To do this, however, the province CANNOT be self-sufficient in food.

The trick will be figuring out how many "Level II" provinces I need to hold back in order to support a "Level IV" province. Will a 1:1 ratio do it? Or will I need 1.5:1 or even 2:1? The other interesting thing is how the tech tree plays into the equation, especially in the way that Level III buildings are available early (or even at start in some cases), while Level IV buildings can take quite a long time. In my own campaign, I've developed the trees roughly equally, and am just now beginning to unlock many of the Level IV buildings. In the meantime, I've also built up my provinces to the "Level III" description, and am now realizing that I may have to "deconstruct" some of them back down to Level II in order to find the food surplus I'm going to need. It would have taken an incredible amount of discipline to deliberately hold back these provinces looking so many turns ahead. Concomitantly, I'm also realizing that the various tech trees may not be quite so independent or even "disconnected" as they first appear. They may not be directly tied to each other, but the buildings/effects they produce are definitely intertwined in developing a functioning empire. On this particular point, we as a community may have been a little prematurely critical of CA.

Note: that last point does not pertain to the ridiculously early achievement of legionary troops. Regardless of what sort of tech development or victory condition which one pursues, it just shouldn't be possible to graduate past hastati/principes/triarii decades before 200BC. Criticism of that one particular feature in the Roman military tech tree is 100% legitimate.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Once again, a very thoughtful post. And the description seems to mirror what one would expect in a RL situation.....outlying agricultural areas providing the subsistence level to their much larger, more developed cousins in the cities. Almost makes me want to go and get the game now just so I can play with the economy (econ was one of my biggest love/hate relationships with R1).

[BroskiDerpman]

Edit: @Posts below

Seriously guys? I wasn't trying being negative. I was just making some suggestions and criticisms; and no I don't want the game right now. You may consider me too vocal but I find it perfectly normal on a TW forum, perhaps a little too silent.

I may have some repetition but each time I try to add something new, I guess nobody bothers about that too and claim that my posts are all repetitive on Ca when there's other people who post that stuff too. Is it because I'm the one who mainly posts? Is it because I'm the main one who has concerns about the game?

Why should I make up flaws too? There are bugs and gameplay issues... My criticisms are only my own tastes and nobody here has to obey it or anything. I am not convincing myself, might as well ask Vuk; He convinced me.

I have interests on this game as it's TW, one of my favorite franchises. Why shouldn't I be concerned? It is in my interests that the TW franchise is still what I think is good. (Of course it's my own opinion.)

All day long? I'm only on when I got to do exercises for spinal stuff. Getting stuck on a traction chair is boring, of course I'm on the forums for a few hours because I'm unable to do anything else! I bought a mobile device just so I won't be bored to death when being in the machine while it does it's work. If I didn't have this disability I wouldn't be roaming the forums all day. (I don't need anybody to feel sorry or anything I just want to make it clear)

[Myth]

Patience is key RS, you got to wait for some patches first! Or when the first expansion gets released/ Holiday sale. You'll probably enjoy the game more that way.

You'll have a better impression of the game that way too instead of waiting for the constant patches completing and fixing the game just to enjoy the game.

Plus there's other games to try out while you wait... ;)

Are you trying to convince us that the game is not worth getting now... or yourself? You have been so vocal about it it makes me think you actually want the game but you're desperatly digging for flaws, real or imagined, to justify not obtaining it.

[Quillan]

The trick will be figuring out how many "Level II" provinces I need to hold back in order to support a "Level IV" province. Will a 1:1 ratio do it? Or will I need 1.5:1 or even 2:1? The other interesting thing is how the tech tree plays into the equation, especially in the way that Level III buildings are available early (or even at start in some cases), while Level IV buildings can take quite a long time. In my own campaign, I've developed the trees roughly equally, and am just now beginning to unlock many of the Level IV buildings. In the meantime, I've also built up my provinces to the "Level III" description, and am now realizing that I may have to "deconstruct" some of them back down to Level II in order to find the food surplus I'm going to need. It would have taken an incredible amount of discipline to deliberately hold back these provinces looking so many turns ahead. Concomitantly, I'm also realizing that the various tech trees may not be quite so independent or even "disconnected" as they first appear. They may not be directly tied to each other, but the buildings/effects they produce are definitely intertwined in developing a functioning empire. On this particular point, we as a community may have been a little prematurely critical of CA.[/I]

Your experience pretty much mirrors mine. The best food producer seems to be the level 4 farm, which gives 15 food while causing 12 squalor. But that particular tech is in Economy 3; I haven't gotten there yet. I spent way to much time finishing out construction and most of legalism, so I tend to use outlying villages as food producers. Slot one gets a farm, slot two gets a cattle ranch, if it has a port it becomes a fishing port. How far I upgrade depends upon two major factors: do I own the provincial capital (where I can spam happiness buildings) and what buildings can I build there (I really like the gladiator school as Rome; 12 points of happiness for 4 food consumed).

I have to limit military development in order to provide sufficient foot for the empire and keep the provinces happy. But I can't go completely food/happiness or my ability to build good armies goes away.

By the way, has everyone else's experience been that the AI is just incompetent in this regard? Almost every faction at this stage of the game is either constantly having revolts due to unhappiness or can't maintain troops due to attrition because of starvation. They build too many of the wrong buildings and don't have enough happiness, food, or both.

[Shaitan]

...
By the way, has everyone else's experience been that the AI is just incompetent in this regard? Almost every faction at this stage of the game is either constantly having revolts due to unhappiness or can't maintain troops due to attrition because of starvation. They build too many of the wrong buildings and don't have enough happiness, food, or both.

I see this in my campaign too. At first I wondered why other factions armies suffer of attrition in their own land. It is the lacking food.

[nearchos]

The AI is totaly incompetent with balancing the building decisions, ( among uther things), what i tried in my campaign, with 57 my own settlements and 7 of my client states, is i have 4 provinces, (12-16) settlements for food and military training, with high level infrastracture and with 2 full stack armies( from a total of 12) in the area, so when a rabelion is iminent, i moove the army at the spot, with forced march if needed, crash the rebellion. and all over again.
Thwe good think is that since the rebellion, it takes at leest 2 turns for the AI to mone the rebel army, after the increase of the unit naumbers.