Attention CA: Trade Disruption Bug!!?

[therother]

Has anyone managed to figure out if devastation actually works as intended?

I've been fiddling with various factors, and it doesn't seem to have much of an effect on anything that I could see. Trade, taxes, mining or farming income seem unaffected.

Grovelling EDIT: It affects the Corruption and Other in the Financial Overview scroll, and works perfectly!

[Soulflame]

I've been fiddling with various factors, and it doesn't seem to have much of an effect on anything that I could see. Trade, taxes, mining or farming income seem unaffected.

Grovelling EDIT: It affects the Corruption and Other in the Financial Overview scroll, and works perfectly!

I expected as much a few days back, so here is the reason as well:

Okay now this is just weird. Jambo (& Quietus & Andrew) you are right.. it is added to the income and devastation is left out. This could be because devastation is an abnormal loss and as such directly substracted from your total (as in rebuild of the land or something?)

It's done in some economical instances to put abnormal losses directly on the profit/loss statement (hope i remember the word right) because it is difficult to attribute it to just one city (since devastation does not come from city, but from the land: multiple cities can have difficulty from one group of bandits, you can't change anything in the city to change the effects of devastation (you need to remove the brigands) etc.). Thus it is put as a global loss, which makes a bit sense.

[therother]

It's done in some economical instances to put abnormal losses directly on the profit/loss statement (hope i remember the word right) because it is difficult to attribute it to just one city (since devastation does not come from city, but from the land: multiple cities can have difficulty from one group of bandits, you can't change anything in the city to change the effects of devastation (you need to remove the brigands) etc.). Thus it is put as a global loss, which makes a bit sense.

I'll bow to your knowledge of accounting, but it doesn't really make that much sense IMHO. The land that is 'devastated', after all, is contained within the region of one city. The devastation icon appears in the scroll for that city. It seems a little odd that they don't subtract it from the income of that city, especially as it's a reduction, usually, in the farming income of the province. Yet another of RTW economic idiosyncrasies, I feel. It would be nice if they would patch this to act as one would expect, even though technically it's not a bug, just an annoyance.

[Soulflame]

I think they did that so you can see that there is devastation going around in the neighboorhood of that city, and how much it is, so that you can take action against it. If it was only on the financial statement of each year, you'd never find the rascals looting your farming fields and mugging the traders!

Although I do study economics.. I study G'nite'Kram . But I can understand that they don't really substract it from a cities income; the bandits responsible could also be sitting on your allies ground, on the trade route which is affected. So then you would get the devastation, but where do you attribute it too? You cannot ignore it, since it's there, but as you don't own the other city, where do you put it?
So I think it's okay to put it on the financial statement because although it does influence your city, it can't be controlled by your city (nothing you do in your city can alter the devastation... deacrease population, increase, buildings, training units.. all doesn't help against devastation. The only thing that helps is removing it by military or diplomacy means, which are not controlled by the city).

Well, that's my theory at least... I'm sure someone from accounting will prove me wrong at some point .