Lets keep the economists out of this!

[Samurai Waki]

bugger the economic ai. I want to control every little aspect of my kingdom to pet my micromanaging fetish.

[Aetius the Last Roman]

One of the reasons Rome (albiet one of very few reasons) has the upper hand on medieval is the economy is harder to manage. It adds depth to the game and stops you from just going all 'Total War' on the game. Adding depth to the game may seems detrimental to those that just like to kill stuff but it does make the game better, more complex and easier to appreciate after five hours of gameplay. However that said, if people wish to just go around war-mongering I think CA should include better AI economic management.

[Samurai Waki]

Or Costum Battles...

I am entirely against dumbing down the economics for the blood thirsty masses, it adds so much to the game, if you want to kill people, by all means, play MP if the AI isn't challenging enough.

[Trithemius]

bugger the economic ai. I want to control every little aspect of my kingdom to pet my micromanaging fetish.

YES!

While I understand the desire to keep things streamlined, and AI-moderated, I REALLY like having an option to "take the hood off" and look at how things are working (and tinker with them...).

Megalomaniacs unite!

[TexRoadkill]

I prefer not to bother too much with the financial bs. I wouldn't mind trusting the AI to do it if it didn't suck. I hated how everytime I left a city up to the AI they started churning out a bunch of temples like the end times were near.

[Prince Cobra]

Sorry, Dragoncrusader, I don't agree. I like to take care of the economy of my country. The real sovereign should rule not only his army but also his lands. By the way Richard I (the Lionheart) has a lot of problems because of his reluctance to rule the economy of his kingdom. The French king Philip II August didn't miss his chance...war... and that led to the death of Richard .And not all governors were as good as Richard's.