great mod but can't stop from going way into negative financial

[Incomitatus]

It's not a bug, King Kong removed the squalor effects on purpose to make population growth harder.

It is still a bug because the effect descriptions still say the traits and ancillaries reduce squalor. The bug would simply be in the descriptions being incorrect rather than the effects, but it's still wrong one way or the other.

[Withwnar]

Yep, that's what I meant. Just that the descriptions are wrong.

[kraxmause]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Swad]

Build economic buildings EVERYWHERE. Make use of the free upkeep slots in the fort that sits in the land north of Minas Tirith.

Playing as Gondor in 3.2 VH/VH, I don't really see this as an effective strategy early on, aside from farms. The bonuses are too little to be worth it as it generally takes 20+ turns for the building to pay off itself, and in some cases, don't pay themselves off for 40-50 turns in most minor provinces. Aside from a few key provinces, markets and roads, and especially paved roads will not be worth the cost when your settlements are still small. There is simply too little trade going on on all ends of the province to effectively pay themselves off in a timely manner. There's one other strategy that's far more effective.

By far, what I've found to be much more effective is to to train a few extra units with the cost of building these useless buildings and take settlements that provide several hundred gold per turn.

Until mid-late game when most settlements have gained one level, these building might pay themselves off as their cost is fixed and their rewards isn't limited, but by far the most effective strategy in this game to becoming economically viable is to simply train a few extra units to conquer your enemies' settlements.

But even better than this is to attack barely defended settlements halfway across the map. The AI has such great bonuses on VH that any sacking of the town and destruction of the buildings will be all but repaired and more by the time you reach them with the actual invasion force.

[Ultra123]

Playing as Gondor in 3.2 VH/VH, I don't really see this as an effective strategy early on, aside from farms. The bonuses are too little to be worth it as it generally takes 20+ turns for the building to pay off itself, and in some cases, don't pay themselves off for 40-50 turns in most minor provinces. Aside from a few key provinces, markets and roads, and especially paved roads will not be worth the cost when your settlements are still small. There is simply too little trade going on on all ends of the province to effectively pay themselves off in a timely manner. There's one other strategy that's far more effective.

By far, what I've found to be much more effective is to to train a few extra units with the cost of building these useless buildings and take settlements that provide several hundred gold per turn.

Until mid-late game when most settlements have gained one level, these building might pay themselves off as their cost is fixed and their rewards isn't limited, but by far the most effective strategy in this game to becoming economically viable is to simply train a few extra units to conquer your enemies' settlements.

But even better than this is to attack barely defended settlements halfway across the map. The AI has such great bonuses on VH that any sacking of the town and destruction of the buildings will be all but repaired and more by the time you reach them with the actual invasion force.

Respectfully swad your totally off here

yes it might take 20 + turns (10 more realistic) for a building to pay itself, but 20 turns after the start your going to need much more money on retraining and better troops. its investing into the future and you should build economic buildings no matter what unless its a frontline settlement like MT where your going to want barracks (though you should build the mines there immediatly). Also paved roads are one of the best investments in the game and can dramatically increase a settlements income per turn! im shocked you havent seen this, maybe i n med2 vanilla it wasnt worht it but in TATW the bonus's are huge.

secondly, you cannot simply (walk into mordor ) conquer other peoples settlements for cash in TATW so easily thanks to AI garrrison scripts and stacks of doom, as gondor (unless you rape harad settlements on the coast) your pretty much stuck for quite some time with same settlements, you canot take some of the ais citys thanks to the scripts, plsu even if you did you wont have the manpower left to defend it.

[Swad]

Respectfully swad your totally off here
yes it might take 20 + turns (10 more realistic) for a building to pay itself, but 20 turns after the start your going to need much more money on retraining and better troops.

Well, 20+ turns without calculating in the time it takes to actually build the building itself.

Take for example mines in Minas Tirith, it makes about 165 gold and costs 3500 to begin construction. Simple math says the mine will need just over 20 turns to build not including the time it takes the mine to be built. That 3500 gold can buy around 2-3 gondor militia and sustain them for around 2-3 turns. It's enough to march them to a town and take it. If the town makes a measly 200 gold, it' still better than the mine.
And take for example the 6300 gold marketplace. In the settlement it says it will boost trade for about 140 gold. That's a total of 45 turns not counting the 6 turns it needs to be built. Even with an administrator with a 30% trade bonus it will still take an excess of 32 turns + 6 construction turns. It is a colossal waste of money, not in the sense that you're going in the red, but that there are far better things to do with your gold that will net you more cash to work with.

its investing into the future and you should build economic buildings no matter what unless its a frontline settlement like MT where your going to want barracks (though you should build the mines there immediatly).

I wholeheartedly disagree. Take for example the settlements in the west of gondor, these settlements make incredibly little money. The profits of building a market place there is in the two digits, and in most cases won't go over two digits when you factor in the profits made from its neighbors as well.

Also paved roads are one of the best investments in the game and can dramatically increase a settlements income per turn! im shocked you havent seen this, maybe i n med2 vanilla it wasnt worht it but in TATW the bonus's are huge.

I guess I should ask whether we're playing the same version here. I do not see this dramatic increase in profits that you speak of. While in other mods like Call of Warhammer I will notice a really big boost in trade when these are built, it is not so for almost all of Gondor's settlements, and I imagine not all the cities will benefit. In my cases most of the paved road's bonuses to the trade in the settlement and around it is an absolute waste of money. Given the alternative of conquering a new settlement.

secondly, you cannot simply (walk into mordor ) conquer other peoples settlements for cash in TATW so easily thanks to AI garrrison scripts and stacks of doom, as gondor (unless you rape harad settlements on the coast) your pretty much stuck for quite some time with same settlements, you canot take some of the ais citys thanks to the scripts, plsu even if you did you wont have the manpower left to defend it.

Since we can get ballistas quite early on, garrison scripts aren't much of a problem. Harad and Mordor are quite easy to attack early on. It's quite possible to take a good portion of Harad down within 75 turns. Again, using that construction money on taking even small settlements that make about 500 gold is far more effective than using it to build stuff that produce barely any returns. I simply am not getting the same boosts in trade that other people seem to be getting while playing this mod. Maybe this is true for the elves, or maybe it's true for the dwarves, but it is by far not true for Gondor or necessarily everyone else. Are you guys using submods by any chance?

For me and Gondor, it seems far more economical to use that starting money to conquer settlements early on. Only until the late game when settlements get big enough that marketplaces and paved roads become cost effective.

[Eönwë]

Aren't mines suppose to increase trade as well?

[Incomitatus]

Making economic investment pay off takes planning and the use of your Generals as Governors to really get the most out of it. It's not for people who like to rush. Some of us, though, do prefer a longer game, if for no other reason than we like the challenge of letting the AI build up (or just like the fancy late units) wherein a 20 turn RoI is a great deal.

I, personally, am inclined to side with Ultra123 here, but I fully recognise that this is a conflict of two different, and equally valid, approaches to the game. Most economic development should be delayed until one decides to not expand for awhile. If you are playing as Gondor you have the luxury of choosing to dig in for awhile instead of much immediate expansion - the existing borders, with the capture of Cair Andros, are very defensible - however a rush to capture the Ithilien and Harondor provinces (among other options) can also be a strong opening. If your goal is to win as quickly as possible, an expansionist opening is necessary.

However, there is no shortage of time in TATW so choosing to invest in the economy first is also a viable strategy if you want to be able to enjoy epic campaigns in the mid-late game (100+ turns) with strong armies of great units against strong armies. I stopped enjoying the fast game several years ago (but even I will admit there are factions in TATW that must expand quickly or die, and I do play them - Gondor's just not one of them) but I won't tell someone who likes to play that way that they're doing it wrong.

(Bypassing the Garrison Scripts also feels like exploiting the game, but that's just my Prim trait showing. )

That said, Paved Roads are usually quite profitable: in Minas Tirth they repay themselves in 13 turns; 19 if you count the time to build them (but I believe counting that time at full value is not an accurate way of calculating value). More than that, Paved Roads greatly speed up troop movement. That alone is a good reason to build them in many locations. Besides which, due to recruit pool refill times, you can't dump all of your money into troop recruitment right away - you run out of troops to recruit! - so you might as well put the rest into projects that will give you more money later.

Gondor's Western province are also tricky. They suffer from Corruption which takes a chunk out of all other sources of income. Corruption can be reduced by buildings or Governors who provide Law. The Grain Exchange in Lond Galen should be built immediately to prevent bad traits for any Governor who is in town, but that should be the end of trade investment in those places for a long time. Build farms for the growth. Roads should be built eventually but it's a low priority over there.

There is one point you make that is very true, though, even for a slower game: Trade is hard to make truly lucrative. Population levels are too low. Building more than the Grain Exchange in the vast majority of settlements is not worth it until the mid-game. The big exception (other than Paved Roads) is the sea trade buildings that permit multiple trade routes: the settlement details screen is terrible at accurately predicting the benefits of building the Merchant's Wharf line of buildings - don't rely on it.

Aren't mines suppose to increase trade as well?

No. The resources that are mined can be traded, but that happens whether the mines are built or not, and building the mines doesn't improve their trade value. Mines in towns/cities do improve population growth for the Dwarves, though.

[Eönwë]

I never build roads in Ithilien or Harondor as it also allows enemy troops to move faster which annoys me cause my watchtowers now have no use...

But building mines and such increase population growth through wealth or I'm I wrong here?
And the number the building description of mines gives as extra income is with the extra trade or just the mines itself?

[Incomitatus]

I never build roads in Ithilien or Harondor as it also allows enemy troops to move faster which annoys me cause my watchtowers now have no use...

That's what Spies are for...

But building mines and such increase population growth through wealth or I'm I wrong here?
And the number the building description of mines gives as extra income is with the extra trade or just the mines itself?

You're wrong here.

'Wealth' has no influence on population growth. Only the Dwarves get population growth from mines.

There is no extra trade. Mines have nothing to do with Trade, at all. I apologize if I was unclear about that. What I meant was that, if you have Gold in a province, it is traded with other provinces whether you build mines or not. Building mines does not get you more money from trading it.

The number you see in the building description is how much money the mines are making from Mining (or will make, if you haven't built them yet) it includes any bonuses you would get from your current Governor's traits or ancillaries. It does not include any bonus you would get from a trait your Governor does not yet have but might get from building the mines (if they aren't built yet).

[Eönwë]

Ah thanks for that Incomitatus!
Some building descriptions just aren't fully correct I think...Or I just read them wrong haha

I will use spies indeed hehe

[eugenioso]

goddamn it, isnt it possible to do a sticky about economy? it feels like every time i check the forum there is an economy thread.

bad economy? dont spend more than you earn. stick that in big bold letters somewhere and close down all thoughts about economy threads.

[Incomitatus]

goddamn it, isnt it possible to do a sticky about economy? it feels like every time i check the forum there is an economy thread.

bad economy? dont spend more than you earn. stick that in big bold letters somewhere and close down all thoughts about economy threads.

It does seem to get rehashed all the time, doesn't it?

Still, I think most people want to know how to make more money, not just be told to spend less.

[kostas84]

If you are playing gondor build paved roads on Pelargir and Minad Tirith, you get an extra 300+ trade income per turn from them, try them if u dont believe me.

[eugenioso]

the reason i dont run into money issues, ever, is because first and foremost i always build the economic buildings, after building the cultural buildings. so my first 20 turns focus fully on the economy and of holding back, allowing me later to absolutely rape my opposition.

[Incomitatus]

the reason i dont run into money issues, ever, is because first and foremost i always build the economic buildings, after building the cultural buildings. so my first 20 turns focus fully on the economy and of holding back, allowing me later to absolutely rape my opposition.

Yes, I do the same... only I'll focus on economy for 50+ turns before going on campaign. So many players don't seem to have the patience, though. What would they have done with the old Civ games, I wonder?

[FC Groningen]

Rush till our butts fall off! busy with a Rhun campaign and I destroyed Dale and took Erebor and the Iron Hills and I'm on turn 26.

[Captain Adverse]

...bad economy? dont spend more than you earn. stick that in big bold letters somewhere and close down all thoughts about economy threads.

That's no solution to the problems this game has with economic growth.

To be honest I have not dared to play this game on Hard/Very Hard because it is already fairly difficult to deal with on Medium. There are so many military and economic cheats to aid the AI that playing without some player cheating is extremely difficult. One of the main problems is player economics.

As mentioned by several previous posts, eonomic buildings are progressively more expensive and time consuming to build, while the return on each investment is both small and reduced by the length of time it takes to just break even on the original investment. Meanwhile players are facing larger and larger stacks of higher quality AI forces requiring more expensive higher quality player forces to counter.

This gets worse as the player attempts to expand in the middle game, where culture requirements inhibit recruitment and reinforcement in newly acquired territories, but where massive AI counter-attacks are prevelant. Player's need larger and larger military forces to both hold new territory and defend against or attack AI forces. You begin to face the law of deminishing returns; where the larger your goals the greater the cost in men and materials but the less you are earning in tax/trade income.

This is particularly problematic with the factions that have huge territorial goals. Remember, (for example) Mordor has to defeat Gondor, Rohan, Silvan Elves, High Elves and Dwarves. Gondor has to defeat Mordor and Harad (a very large territory) and recall that Gondor cannot leave the rear territories defensiveless (as recommended here to save money) after turn 70 because the Corsair invasions start around that time.

I have yet to figure out a good way to balance my economy with my military expenses, even following some of the advice in this thread. It seems to me that the economics need to be reworked somehow; either by reducing the upkeep of units, increasing the return on economic investments, or both.

Meanwhile, would someone who has REALLY figured it all out mind explaining a REALISTIC method of dealing with the current economic nightmare so that I can deal with this game more effectively?

Thanks.

[FC Groningen]

You say that the bigger upgrades cost a lot of money and it will take a long time to see profit from it. It's a point you have to get past. From the moment you spend the money, it will only gain you money instead. If you're doubting the effects, check the settlement statistics the moment you purchased a building. The blinking parts are the profits you'll make the moment the building is complete. I still say that conquest is the best way to make more money fast. Gondor is one of the factions that should rush actually to prevent the enemy from growing too strong. As you say, Umbar is key here and once you have it (and Vatavea too) you should be able to defend that settlement, which prevents Harad mounting further attacks on your coasts and drawing their troops away from the river.

[Captain Adverse]

You say that the bigger upgrades cost a lot of money and it will take a long time to see profit from it. It's a point you have to get past.... I still say that conquest is the best way to make more money fast. Gondor is one of the factions that should rush actually to prevent the enemy from growing too strong. As you say, Umbar is key here and once you have it (and Vatavea too) you should be able to defend that settlement, which prevents Harad mounting further attacks on your coasts and drawing their troops away from the river.

Fine, let's use your example of Umbar. Umbar is a huge city from game start. The AI garrison event* provides it with a large and high quality garrison which requires that you build a very large invasion force of at least decent quality. Once you take the city you'll need sufficient forces to hold it from the AI attempts to reclaim it. Remember, with the current AI military cheats you will be facing repeating attacks from magically appearing stacks of high quality forces. Because of the culture requirements even if you exterminate the population, it will take a long time before you develop the city's infrastructure enough to get any local reinforcements. Also, until you can actually recruit units in any conquered settlement, there are no "free slots" to reduce garrison costs.

Therefore you will need to ship reinforcements from Gondor to Umbar on a regular basis, and any units stationed in the captured settlement will be a drain on your economy until culture and infrastructure allows free slots. This costs money and takes time. It also requires you maintain a navy. Maintaining forces costs money, recruiting forces costs money, and reinforcing units costs, not to mention buying/upgrading buildings. Unless I am mistaken, recruitment also affects population, reducing the tax base and slowing growth when you recruit from any settlement.

IMO if you take Umbar you should try to hold it both to prevent the Corsairs, and as a jumping off and resupply point for expansion into Harad. Thus, the building costs. IMO this holds true of most other settlements. If you take one you should usually (with some exceptions) be prepared to hold it, develop it, and make it into a forward supply base for further expansion. Otherwise you will fail to meet your ultimate goals of eliminating X, Y, Z, etc. factions.

This all costs money and takes time; a lot of both. The economy, as it currently stands, does not seem to work too well for the nations with major expansion goals. Throw in corruption, and other negative leader traits and raising money is always problematic. Thus my problem since I currently like to play as Gondor or Mordor.


*(Which you might be able to circumvent if you are lucky enough to draw out and completely eliminate the existing forces so you can occupy the city without the event firing.)