Help! My lands are going monochrome!

**phonicsmonkey** · 12-05-2007, 07:06

Time heals all wounds

**Flavius Merobaudes** · 12-05-2007, 11:26

The income of the settlement will decrease because of devastation. You can see it in the settlement details scroll.
The lands will take a long time to be restored. 10, maybe 20 turns depending on the area affected. Larger enemy armies destroy more crops in a larger radius because they eat more.

**igor** · 12-05-2007, 13:24

I'm not sure if larger armies destroy more.

What I'm sure about. Devastation is only caused by enemy army (all rebels are considered enemy). If in the second turn after respawning you don't kill the rebels, devastation starts. The same naturally holds for the enemy army, if stands immobile on your lands.

The adjacent tiles are devastated, the longer enemy stays put the bigger devastation tiles gets. If an enemy army stands on their teritory, but the adjacent tile is your teritory, you'll get devastation on your bordering tiles.

If you don't have farm upgrades (the basic one included), you get no devastation, even if the enemy army is parked on your land for century. So basically I don't build farm upgrades on my border provinces, until I'm completely sure I'm able to destroy any arriving or spawning stack, and I build upgrades in my inner provinces when I'm sure I can destroy in time any rebels with my garrison.

There is a bug though. Even if you don't have farm upgrades, but the adjacent province has it, and the enemy stands on the adjacent province on the tile that borders your tile, you'll get the devastation. The typical example is: Valencia is still rebel, it has no upgrades, stupid Spanish army is standing in Toledo province on the tile that borders a Valencian tile, the Spanish don't move that meagre army and when they build first farm upgrade in Toledo, voila there's devastation in Valencia. When I was Moors, I had to wait some 30 turns to clear that devestation, which I inherited when I later occupied Valencia.

What's even worse is idiotic AI behavior. I've seen many times a small rebel army which AI ignored, even though it had the resources and man power to EASILY win the battle, so at the end when you take such a province you inherit this devastation.

**ReiseReise** · 12-05-2007, 16:27

Not building farms because you are afraid of devastation is so wrong I don't know where to begin. Thinking about putting a new roof on your house? You better not, it might be damaged in a storm. Want a new car? There haven't been any crash-proof ones invented yet so why bother.
In most regions, building farms is much more profitable than trade buildings. The income bonus alone far far far outweighs the mere chance that an army might park in the territory and give devastation. Not to mention faster population growth = more taxes, faster wall upgrades, better buildings available to create even more income etc etc.
An interesting question: Since regions without farms cannot get devastation (I did not know that!), does the devastation just take away the extra farm income, or can it be more than that? Whatever the answer, I still would not base my economic building choices on whether or not a rebel stack will appear.

**Flavius Merobaudes** · 12-05-2007, 17:22

You're right Reise. It would be difficult to set up an experiment for this, but I don't think one is necessary. I seriously doubt that devastation will ever reach a value even close to farming income, or if so then only in very rare cases.
Farms are usually my second building after dirt roads and should probably be the first one when thinking it over.

**DVX BELLORVM** · 12-05-2007, 22:06

The devastation doesn't concern me at all, as I've never seen it much higher than 100 FL. You'll be losing much more income if an army stands on a road, especially the one that connects your city with a port.

**mir** · 12-06-2007, 01:36

Ah, so we lose income even when an enemy army stands on a road?

I suspected the little carts and horses on the roads had to have a meaning! Hahaha.

Thanks for the feedback on the ravaged lands, everyone. Now I'll just settle back and wait. And wait. And wait. And wait. And wait some more.

Until the lands turn all green and brown and lovely again. Unless another rebel army decides to camp down for the century again! Grrr!

-mir-

PS. I've heard ports too can blockaded by an enemy army (not ships but army). By camping your enemy directly on an enemy port, you deny them their trade income.

**igor** · 12-06-2007, 09:44

Well, I wasn't saying how it should be done, but how I do. So, don't come to tell me, what's wrong and what's not.

Though I know my strategy is a consequence of some kind of neurosis. I'm such perfectionist I can't handle to have a single black tile. I know it costs me more to prevent it, but I can't help it, I must have no devastation in my reign. This devastation is a fixation of mine from RTW already. I logged on because of this devastation neurosis, even though I was lurking around for months.

Income of farm upgrades are minimal though (50 fl for an upgrade), you do the count how many upgrades one needs just to support a simple unit of mail knights and how much each upgrade costs. But it's true that farm upgrades are important for population growth, and here I loose more because of my irrational neurosis.

To answer the question: as far as I know devastation is a procentage from overall farm income, so it can't get higher than farm income but it can get higher than an upgrade.

@Flavius
Btw, besides basic roads the next thing I build is a church/mosque. It helps you preventing the spreading of other religions and heresy, it gives you a point in population growth and a point of chivalry for a governer which translates to another point in population growth. That's how I do, not to say what's wrong or right.

**Flavius Merobaudes** · 12-06-2007, 12:16

Congrats to your first two posts, IGOR. I didn't notice you're new. Welcome to the org!

Of course everybody can do what he likes best. No one here will try to tell you what to do and what not.
When I first played MTW2, I started the same way: roads -> churches -> corn exchange... But when playing some time, I noticed religion is not that important in the first few turns. And (small) churches are quite expensive for the beginning. I think it's enough to build them after about five turns, when you have basic economic buildings (road, farms, corn exchange).

**ReiseReise** · 12-07-2007, 01:18

Truly sorry if I was a bit harsh Igor

I get carried away sometimes.
It goes on a region by region basis, but in a lot of regions farms will give you 50-100 florins and grain exchange might give you 20-50. Ports are a different story and I don't think the "predicted income" (grayed out icons in city income window) are accurate for ports. This could be my own neurosis, but I think the game needs a turn after the port is built to rearrange all the trade routs. So usually the trade increase from ports is greater than appears. I've never really studied it that much.

If you like to be friends with the Pope, churches are good for catholics far away from the Pope (England, Scotland, Danes, Spain, Portugal, Poland) because they increase your Papal rating until you can get a diplomat to Rome and make an alliance.

But I usually end up build Grain Exchange before farms so my governors don't get +2 BadTrader in the blink of an eye.

**mir** · 12-07-2007, 07:39

Originally Posted by igor

Well, I wasn't saying how it should be done, but how I do. So, don't come to tell me, what's wrong and what's not.

Though I know my strategy is a consequence of some kind of neurosis. I'm such perfectionist I can't handle to have a single black tile. I know it costs me more to prevent it, but I can't help it, I must have no devastation in my reign. This devastation is a fixation of mine from RTW already. I logged on because of this devastation neurosis, even though I was lurking around for months.

@Flavius
Btw, besides basic roads the next thing I build is a church/mosque. It helps you preventing the spreading of other religions and heresy, it gives you a point in population growth and a point of chivalry for a governer which translates to another point in population growth. That's how I do, not to say what's wrong or right.

Hey, igor, welcome to the org! Thanks for posting the advice.

I confess I suffer from a similar syndrome - the spots of black and grey are just too unseemly to be left as they are. Hence my original post! Haha.

I, too, build roads first and foremost. For the trade income but more for the increased speed by which my armies and agents travel...

Second will be the Grain Exchanges (for Merchants and trade); third, land clearance for pop. growth. These days I also build a Town Hall and Town Guard after. Mainly for the pop. growth and happiness but I've also read that the Town Hall will help to reduce corruption in your province.

Town Halls also reduces chances of your Generals and Merchants getting crooked (or so I've read...).

-mir-

**igor** · 12-07-2007, 13:43

Originally Posted by mir

Second will be the Grain Exchanges (for Merchants and trade); third, land clearance for pop. growth. These days I also build a Town Hall and Town Guard after. Mainly for the pop. growth and happiness but I've also read that the Town Hall will help to reduce corruption in your province.

-mir-

This is probably common knowledge, but anyway: Coruption is dependent on the distance from the capital, the further the settlement is from the capital the bigger procentage you loose to coruption. It can be easily tested on the Turkish campaign on turn one, at the start of the game, if you don't change anything but just check the projected profits on h/h they are 1137 fl. If you just move the capital from Iconium to Caesarea, which is more central, the projected profits are 1280 -- nearly the equivalent of 3 farm upgrades, as I always say: Beware of black tiles, don't you EVER build any farming upgrade, it's not worth it. Keep your reign clean from those damned black tiles!

Otherwise the coruption can only be countered by law bonuses by governors (if they have any) or by buildings (in cities town halls series of buildings and town guard series of buildings give law bonuses +5% per upgrade, every upgrade of the castle gives +5% law bonuses). But this math is a bit more complicated and I don't understand fully the mechanics, it's not like this: 15% distance from capital and 15% law bonuses equals 0 corruption. For example the castle type of settlement has one half less distance penalty than city type settlement, but it seems that this counts only in regard to city order and not in regard to coruption, in other words it seems that if the castle has 10% distance from capital penalty it will count as 20% penalty for coruption calculation purposes (the city on the same spot would anyway have 20% penalty).