M2 Test Imperial Orders Thread

[econ21]

Sounds good - we definitely don't need formalities like polls.

[Lucjan]

Ok...I'm stuck.

No matter what I seem to do, I can't make our projection match up to the projection in the game.

Econ, you said you got it to work out for Scotland? I'm going to try it with Spain and see if I can get it to work there. In the meantime can you show me what you did with Scotland? Certain things like the army upkeep, and where the heck the "king's purse" income is supposed to come in are driving me up the wall.

If we can't figure this out, I think we might be reduced to a simpler approach.

[econ21]

What I posted earlier about HREs accounts was probably wrong - for example, I did not factor in the free upkeep of militia units (yet another financial benefit of cities); is that a factor?

But because I could get Scotland's accounts to add up, I thought we should be able to manage things with HRE.

Did you keep a record of what was spent by the Dukes and the Imperium? If you've post that, and a start of turn 2 savegame, I could see what I come up with for the new balances. Then we can see if we concurr.

For Scotland:

The faction financial details says:

Income = 2639
360 farming
725 taxes
54 corruption (really admin)
1500 King's purse

Expenditure:3316
2416 army upkeep
900 wages

Edingburgh has income of 1139 - that equals the faction's income excluding the King's purse.

There are three armies:

Edmund = 850 upkeep
Prince = 833 upkeep
King = 958 - 375 free upkeep = 583
fleet =150 upkeep
Total army upkeep = 2416

For wages, we have:
Cardinal 150
Spy 100
Diplomat 50
Three generals 300
Total wages = 600

[Lucjan]

Here's what I'm coming up with....

Here's the financial overview from the game.


Here's the spreadsheet.


On the Financial Overview, the Income adds up nicely.
On the Spreadsheet, I'm short 58 florins when you add the Totals from the Ducal and Imperial budgets together. (The income numbers are correct I checked them a thousand times over.)
If you add the Ducal Total, the Imperial Income and Emperor's Purse, and the Corruption gain, then subtract the difference between the corruption values, which ironically enough is 58, then you get the 7797 the financial review shows as total income. But that doesn't make any sense to me.

Our army upkeep doesn't match up either. I've added our upkeep up a thousand times over. When you add the ducal army upkeep up with the Imperial army upkeep you get 5610. I am seriously convinced the computer is pulling 226 florins out of its butt on that estimate of 5836. If you right click and check the upkeep costs of every military unit we have, there is absolutely NOTHING that ends in an even number, so therefore, you can NOT have an upkeep value ending in an even number. We only have a few types of units in play.

Peasants - 90
Spear militia - 125
Spear Sargeants - 155
Archer militia - 100
Mailed knights - 250
Generals - 250

I don't see how the computer is getting an upkeep number ending with a 6, when that's mathematically impossible given our upkeep values.

Wages make sense though.
6 generals x 250
1 cardinal x 100
1 spy x 50

Somebody shed some light on this.

[econ21]

I don't think there's a problem.

On income, you do take the difference in the two corruption numbers, as the first number is extra income from "administration" (governors benefiting their settlements), not waste from corruption.

On the upkeep, I think you have assumed the Emperor and Prince have bodyguards cost 250 florins each, when in fact they cost 388 and 338. The difference is the 226 you are short of.

But I sympathesise - if it is this messy with only 6 settlements and no orders, imagine what it will be like after 6 months.

Calculating how long it took us to play WoS today, I did wonder whether we should be streamlining the WoS model rather than making it yet more complex. However, I would persevere with this because the whole point of a trial is to see if it is workable. And I really don't see any easy half-way house between decentralisation at this level and giving all the money to the reigning player to allocate.

BTW: do you want your character to take Nuremburg as his Duchy? If not, I suggest we treat it as belonging to a Count with an Imperial patron, rather than an Imperial city per se.

[Lucjan]

I'll request the next chancellor bestow a settlement on me after I'm done. Wouldn't want to abuse my station.

Anyway.. good point on the emperor and prince bodyguards, hadn't taken that into account, but the income thing still gives me a headache. I understand the formula, it just seems backwards.

Total Income + Corruption Income - the Difference between Corruption Income and Corruption Loss. Bit of a goofy formula don't you think?

[econ21]

Total Income + Corruption Income - the Difference between Corruption Income and Corruption Loss. Bit of a goofy formula don't you think?

Um, I should go to sleep now so I don't have time to load up M2TW and start digging. But the formula looks fine to me. If you are saying:

Total income + corruption income - corruption income + corruption loss

then it reduces to:


Total icome - corruption loss

which is very intuitive. Contrary to FLYdude, I think settlement income does not include corruption loss (ie corruption). But it does include corruption income (ie administration).

Or maybe I am not understanding the two of you or M2TW accounts. In which case, I apologise - please put it down to sleep deprivation.

PS: FLYdude: any interest in becoming Duke Maximillian of Nuremburg for our trial?

[flyd]

I think I found the issue. The "income" displayed for each city (on the map under city name for example) is the net income of the settlement. It is the income minus the corruption. You can check. Look at the details for the settlement. If you add the income from farms, trade, taxes and admin, you will not get the income that is displayed for the city, unless you also subtract the corruption. The fact that the difference between corruption income and corruption expenditure is 58 is not ironic at all, but a consequence of counting corruption twice. I haven't looked at the upkeep discrepancies yet.