I need a Loan

[Don Megel]

Yup, although I seem to have legions at my command and europe at my feet I appear to be no so adept at finances. I have neg 1k in several cities and am only just staying in the black from turn to turn. I understand this has more to do with a high population more than a lack of income but dont know what to do in order to curtail my cities growth. All taxes are at very high, I dont care if they revolt (I'd like for them to revolt as that would allow me to kill them all).

Is there any way short of moveing the garrison out of town and then squashing a revolt to stop the pop explosion? Such as dont build this building or do build that one.

I know this must have been talked about before but I cant find it.

Thanks

[lars573]

Your military supports is divided between all your cities and if they aren't making enough to keep up there chunk of the up keep they are in the negative. try replacing your city garrisions with town watch (or the non-Roman equivalent) and standing down a few legions. But that might not keep all your cities out of the red all the time.

[Haido]

See to it that you have roman temples as well. It helps alot.

[ToranagaSama]

Hi,

I don't reccommend this, but this is what happened to me in a my prolonged Prologue game.

I had a nice little empire going with about 4 provinces, and an uncertain financial circumstance. My oldest, northernmost and original City was a problem, as it was filled to the brim with people and the consequent related issues. It had negative financial returns, and I had just enough troops to keep things under control and to fend off any attack.

The Sentate in its infinite wisdom requested that I proceed North and Take a Barbarian city, as if I didn't have anything better to do! I didn't have enough troops to leave as a Guard, and to take the Barbarian city. In the past, the Senate armies had saved my bacon and protected this city. So, I decided to leave the city unguarded and proceed North. To my surprise (I had no Spies), almost as soon as I had made my move north, two Barbian arimies appeared out of nowhere and surrounded the city. Of course, I turned my troops around and headed back to defend the city, but I was too late, and the city was taken by the Barbarians.

I easily retook the city. The thing is though, the game treated the re-taking of the City as if it weren't *my* city to begin with, and presented me with the same options as if it were a *newly* conquered Barbarian/Opposing Faction's city. Giving me the same options to, Occupy, Enslave, or Exterminate, along with the commensurate monetary benefits for each. Being short on money, I said screw it, took the money and Exterminated them all.

This whole senario turned out to be just what the doctored ordered (american euphemisim), as not only did coup the windfall from the Extermination, BUT, with a smaller population the City was no longer suffering from the ills of over-population, and was now producing a SIGNIFICANT profit, where it had been a money loser.

The cost of all this? Well, the Senate might have been a little miffed, but screw them! The only other negative was a bit of damage to a couple of buildings, which was easily and quickly repaired. The city now produces a huge profit, has a *relatively* small population, and has all its advanced buildings to boot!!

I believe this may be one of the *unforeseen* quirky exploitations, that eventually will come to be disdained by serious players, but in the meantime....

[Bob the Insane]

Have you tried making a diplomatic move of offering to pay a tribute to a faction in return of a lump sum of cash now???? (an actual loan... )

[Don Megel]

A real loan, thats a good idea, didnt even think of that, lol.

Ive tried moveing the entire garrison out of the town. It grows red, says its going to rebel then the next turn they are happy again. I cant figure out how to make them revolt. Ive destroyed the sewers to hurt happnies but nothing... they now are 2k in the hole every turn.

[therother]

This whole senario turned out to be just what the doctored ordered (american euphemisim), as not only did coup the windfall from the Extermination, BUT, with a smaller population the City was no longer suffering from the ills of over-population, and was now producing a SIGNIFICANT profit, where it had been a money loser.

I think you are misunderstanding the profit/loss calculations a little.

Each city in your Empire has as obligation, commensurate to its population, to pay for all military units, naval vessels, agents and generals. If you look into the settlement details screen, you will see these expenditures as the first last two in the bottom Income bar. (Other expenditures, BTW, are for corruption, devastation, and entertainment.)

From what you say, it seems that your original city was bearing the lion share of this load. So when you slaughtered all those excess people, the load was more evenly spread between your other cities, and so it appeared that this city is now more profitable. What you should check, though, is whether you are making more money in the financial page of the faction overview scroll.

I would suggest not, especially if you had trade buildings/ports in this settlement. Whilst farming and mining incomes seem to be invariant to population change, trade and taxes certainly aren’t. Administration, I think, might be a 2nd order effect, in that it seems to depend on the overall income of the settlement and the management ability of your governor – he needs at least some management ability to get some extra money, and you can get quite a fair bit with the right man in the right city. One of my level 8 management governors reaps in ~1500 denarii per turn in admin alone.

Ok, perhaps a very simple example will help. Take two of my cities, Patavium with a population of 32885 and Segestica with 6799 citizens (well, men, it seems women and children aren’t counted!). I'm paying pay 96518 denarii in unit upkeep, and 16000 in wages. Overall population is something in the order of 550,000 men.

Patavium
Income:
Farming 1120
Mining 0
Taxes 887
Trade 2290
Admin 171
Total 4468

Expenditure:
Wages 975
Upkeep 5881
Corruption 859
Total 7715

Profit: -3247

Segestica
Income:
Farming 320
Mining 875
Taxes 744
Trade 1206
Total 3145

Expenditure:
Wages 201
Upkeep 1216
Corruption 314
Total 1731

Profit 1414

So, looking at it this way, Segestica is making a fortune, but Patavium is losing money hand over fist. But the truth is different. Patavium is putting 4468 in my kitty per turn (which is pretty low, my most profitable cities rake in >10000), whilst Segestica is putting 3145. If I were to slaughter the population down to the level of Segestica, it would indeed make it appear as if the city is now making a profit, but my income in taxes, trade, and probably admin would have been hit, making my overall income lower, and therefore losing money overall. I estimate that a loss of 25,000 citizens would decrease income by over 1,000 denarii[*]. This would, of course, be offset by the looting income, and perhaps the Senate bounty and any entertainment/garrison costs you no longer need, but in the long run I think you're better off managing your discontent.
[*] (4468 - ~1000) - ~1800 =~ +1700 profit

[ToranagaSama]

Dude, FIRST, let me say THANK YOU for the effort, because I am at a true loss to comprehend how RTW's economic systems works! It is the bane of my RTW existence. Bare with me cause I haven't taken a math class, nor dealt with much of it since my Wall St. days, so w/o a calc or a computer I, seriously, can't even add!!! hahaha....

BUT, words and logic are my business!!

OK, using your example, -3247 +1414 = -1833, so you're operating at a loss.

If you exterminate the good folks of Pativium, then you'll still have the income infrastucture, and one would hope the Income dervied from it, particularly, Trade, Mining and Farming.

I'm not sure I've got this at all, but taking your words and my experience:

"If I were to slaughter the population down to the level of Segestica, it would indeed make it appear as if the city is now making a profit,...."

From the above, Pativum would now be making a "profit", correct?

If so, then even if Pativium produced a zero sum profit, then along with Segestica's profit, overall you're in the black with a profit of 1414.

This is MUCH better than being in the red with a net -1833.

Maybe I'm missing something???

The way I see it, is that no matter what the population level, nor the taxes received from that population, if that City operates at a LOSS, its an albatross.

Eliminating that Loss, even if it's just a Zero sum gain, Overall, your Income *should* result in a Net Gain by the amount of the Loss.

The key to all this, I *believe* is in understanding the relationship of Population/Population Loss to Expenditures. It would seem in the experience I described, the population loss (Extermination), consequently reduced Expenditures to a level resultant to Profit, and the consequent overall Net Gain.

Thank you again for your comments.

I'd appreciate your thoughts.