Which is a more sound strategy? More garrison troops and higher taxes or fewer troops and lower taxes? Which yields more money in the long run?
Which is a more sound strategy? More garrison troops and higher taxes or fewer troops and lower taxes? Which yields more money in the long run?
Unless the taxes are going to be more than the upkeep, it's not worth it. Most cities, it's going to be a difference of less than one unit's upkeep, which means unless you're garrisoning with sphendonetai or something, it's almost guaranteed to be a money-losing proposition.
So the more units you garrison with, the more money you'll probably be losing?
Gee i just dont know why people have so much problems with economy.
I would think that counting is common knowlage in 21 century.
I would say that in 9 out of 10 cases its true.So the more units you garrison with, the more money you'll probably be losing?
Better strategy is sending Influencial genarl to city.
Evidently literacy isn't as important these days either.Originally Posted by LorDBulA
Actually it is best to run very high taxes with garrisons of your least expensive unit. You'll want to stay on top of those taxes as to keep your pop growth in check. If you dont, you'll end up having a very big mess on your hands with multiple catch 22 scenarios
Spelling errors in a forum does not tell tell much about a person. All it shows is that you did not bother to use a spell checker.
At most, I'll have 2 units of garrison in towns that don't have generals. I noticed that in late games, it's harder to keep high taxes in most provinces. You should always go for generals when you can.
Also, do dimplomats affect the morale within a town?
Last edited by Chester; 02-04-2006 at 10:05.
Exactly, also there are plenty of law/health/happiness increasing buildings in EB that you can use.
Bookmarks