Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Costs unbalanced?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorkus
    They're a complete waste of money. They add like 50 to yearly income and cost thousands to build (and waste production time to boot).
    I don't know you about you, but for the first couple of Governor’s residences, I usually have more than enough production time to build everything I want.

    As you say, if you are building farms to get your money back from farming income, then you'll be very disappointed. The amortisation on the more advanced upgrades is formidable. IMO, their principal function is to increase population growth, thereby increasing the size that your city will eventually reach, shorting the time until you can reach higher tech levels, and increasing tax and trade revenue.

    Those first two levels can make a significant difference to the time it takes to reach the next population level required to upgrade your Governor’s residence, especially in provinces with low basic farm rates. For instance, at 2% growth, it will take 35 turns to increase population from 6k to 12k, but only 24 turns at 3%. Plus your Governors won't get the bad farmer traits, not that make that much difference!

    I always build farms in my core settlements early on in the game, and in selected regions later on.
    Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  2. #2
    Member Member Thoros of Myr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    605

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Basic roads are worth it. why? becuase they allow your troops to move farther.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    I always take Rhodes regardless of my faction as it gives a 40% boost to trade. The first responder here is off base, you can't make any money with "a few ports". His strategy will leave your bankrupt. Ports and trade - and as many trade agreements as possible - are the key, but the others help.

    Grifman

  4. #4

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    1. I build all port upgrades ASAP. They pay for themselves easily.

    2. Don't underestimate mining income. They show up as goods in the trading screen as well though I don't know how much they add to trade.

    3. Markets not only increase trade income in the settlement you built it on, it also raises trade income in all the other settlements trading with that settlement. It has a good rate of return when you look at it that way.

    4. The increase of each farm upgrade is 80. That's not too bad. The first few upgrades have a good rate of return. Their main purpose, especially the later ones, is to increase population growth and the maximum population allowed. Many cities won't reach 24,000 or even 12,000 without farms. That's the same rationale for the 1st and 4th market upgrades, though the 1st is cheap, anyway.

    I built all the port, market and trade caravan upgrades I could as Parthia. Antioch, Tarsus, Salamis and Jerusalem are all earning 5,000+ and Sidon is earning 4,000+. Most of that is trade income.

  5. #5
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    2. Don't underestimate mining income. They show up as goods in the trading screen as well though I don't know how much they add to trade.
    Trade goes up markedly, as you can trade gold and silver as a trade resource. Strangely you don't need a mine to start.

    Mines also add to your Admin Income, but only if you have a Governor with some management ability of course. It’s not a great deal per scroll, but it all adds up. BTW, farming does not add to admin.

    [You get 1/50 of your mining income per management scroll, so a 6 scroll governor will get 24 denarii in Admin for a basic silver mine.]

    I think it's worth mentioning that when things get hairy, and you're under pressure from the enemy, you might lose a fair proportion of your trading income. In such cases, it’s good to have something to fall back upon. Farms, mines, and to some extent at least, taxes, are not dependent on anything outside your settlement.
    Last edited by therother; 10-10-2004 at 15:47. Reason: Corrections
    Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  6. #6

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    So, do you mean mines make the trading income from gold and silver larger or do they not affect it at all?

  7. #7
    Member Member Spartiate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    On the site of the Battle of the Boyne
    Posts
    422

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    In my first campaign as the Julii i had to keep conquering new cities every 5/10 turns just to slaughter the pop for the cash to keep ahead of my debts.I never got a hold of the economics in that first campaign and so every once in a while i would encourage my largest cities to revolt just so i could kill the pop for cash.Talk about arace against time.
    "Go tell the Spartans,stranger passing by that here,obedient to their laws we lie."

  8. #8
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    So, do you mean mines make the trading income from gold and silver larger or do they not affect it at all?
    Upgrading mines does indeed seem to make trading income from silver & gold larger. I've just upgraded from shallow to deep in Sardis and it trade income went up by 8.33% for each of my overseas exports. How much of that is due to the silver is an open matter - there are two other goods, and it's feasible that they increased as well.
    Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  9. #9
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grifman
    I always take Rhodes regardless of my faction as it gives a 40% boost to trade. The first responder here is off base, you can't make any money with "a few ports". His strategy will leave your bankrupt. Ports and trade - and as many trade agreements as possible - are the key, but the others help.

    Grifman
    Ports and trade are not "THE key." there are a lot of ways you can make money in this game. I principally make money through diplomacy and conquering. Adding an additional province almost always beats adding a port or port level. Especially if you're planning to exterminate.

    To be sure, if you're a less aggressive player than me, ports are the way to go. I didn't say otherwise. I'm biased toward expansive strategies, so I'll concede that my advice probably has less value for someone who takes a more patient approach to the game.

  10. #10
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorkus
    I'm biased toward expansive strategies, so I'll concede that my advice probably has less value for someone who takes a more patient approach to the game.
    Which, as I'm the very model of such a player, is probably why we have such differing views on population expansion. For me, one of the things I aim for is having the most populated, richest, and advanced civilisation. I monitor the profit I make per turn, and try to maximise it with the settlements that I have. I then move on expanding slowly, methodically, where I'm allowed to by treaty, or where my strategic situation says would be best, using subterfuge if necessary it the settlement belongs to an ally or neutral. I never break an alliance, and only rarely declare war on a neutral, except at the Senate's direct behest.

    I prefer to use diplomacy over brute force, spies and assassins over swords and cavalry. I enjoy the odd battle, to be sure, but it's the overall strategy that draws me to TW.
    Last edited by therother; 10-10-2004 at 21:42.
    Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  11. #11

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorkus
    Ports and trade are not "THE key." there are a lot of ways you can make money in this game. I principally make money through diplomacy and conquering. Adding an additional province almost always beats adding a port or port level. Especially if you're planning to exterminate.

    To be sure, if you're a less aggressive player than me, ports are the way to go. I didn't say otherwise. I'm biased toward expansive strategies, so I'll concede that my advice probably has less value for someone who takes a more patient approach to the game.
    Funny, why limit yourself so much? I make money ALL three ways :)

    Grifman

  12. #12
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    I agree with you. That's why I would have said "A key" rather than "THE key."

    I also wouldn't have said that the other person was "off base" for prioritizing troop buildings over ports. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Grifman
    Funny, why limit yourself so much? I make money ALL three ways :)

    Grifman
    Last edited by Dorkus; 10-10-2004 at 21:31.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Costs unbalanced?

    Trade income is the biggest source of income, however, especially if you can control a bunch of cities in the Eastern Mediterranean or the Aegean Sea. It depends on the location of your territories. I have a 5-city core in my Parthian game. Jerusalem makes 6,000 denarii per turn. Antioch, Tarsus and Salamis make around 5,000 and Sidon slightly over 4,000. That's just trade income. Since Antioch is my capital, I have 0 corruption in all 5 cities, also.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO