Economics Issues

**dvk901** · November 22, 2006, 09:47 AM

Just wanted to let everyone know that I'm working hard on the economics right now, and have fixed a number of other issues as well. Second patch will be out this weekend sometime.
What I'm trying to do now is 'tailor' the economic state for each faction at the beginning so that the dive into debt isn't quite so bad....my 'benchmark' is that after 10 years, if the faction can't get into the black (at least) or start making some money, then it's going to go belly-up and just wait around for someone to kill it. Rome, Carthage, Syracuse and perhaps others had such severe problems they were becoming 'useless factions' in terms of the AI control of them. My observation in playing them was that it was near impossible to survive on H/H for any of these (especially Syracuse). So, what I'm going to do is tweak the trade bonuses and starting money for each faction so it's 'hard' at first, but not impossible.
Pergamum, for example, makes money almost immediately it seems, so I reduced their starting cash a bunch, and will specifically tweak their trade.
I think the Romans are close now to a decent start...have to tweak them back just a hair.
Syracuse, being an island faction, has a very tough time. I went around getting trade from everyone, built only economic buildings, pleaded for peace, and used my money as sparingly as possible. They start with the most money of any major faction...and yet in 10-15 years they go bankrupt every time.
So I'm going to really boost their 'sea-trade' income and see if I can fix this.
Carthage, also, was dying on the vine....but I made some changes there before starting a Syracuse campaign and noticed they were again kicking butt in Africa.

Please report economic issues here....bad, good, too good...for the factions your playing. Thanks.

**Tyr** · November 22, 2006, 05:58 PM

I've only truly got in to a campaign recently, as Syracuse and Carthage. You mention the money and economic problems; but in my opinion its more of a military problem.

All the factions start with huge garrisons and armies the upkeep cripples the factions economy. Of course i can only talk for Carthage and Syracuse; but its safe to assume that its a wide spread problem; and thats why the smaller factions are struggling financially.

As Syracuse my first move was to disband half of my army. A few turns later I had taken the Cathaginian settlement on Sicily; but the Romans had taken Croton. Both however accepted a ceasefire & trade rights and this was the situation:
All of sicily was under my control, trade rights with allnearby nations, only 12 military land-based units (including family members) in total. And i was making a decent profit each turn (this was on VH/VH), despite having a naval force of 7 tiremes defending the island.

So i think the problem lies with the huge upkeep costs inflicted by having such big armies. However, do not lower the upkeep - it is low enough as it is - just reduce the amount of armies. This would also have the benefit of slowing down AI expansion.

**cherryfunk** · November 22, 2006, 06:42 PM

Yes, I noticed that about Bosporus and Pergamum also, the starting garrisons/field armies are huge. I think if you start with much lower numbers of starting troops, it allows the player to gradually build his forces and feel out how his economy is taking the strain.

It also gives more time to consolidate at the beginning -- I was fighting off full-stack Armenian armies within the first 4 turns playing as Bosporus, and personally I prefer much smaller armies in the game's opening phase.

**dvk901** · November 23, 2006, 10:53 PM

I have done as you suggested, and it made quite a difference. Everyone is now scaled way back...even the Briton/Free People faction. Still, the economy was very poor for the very small factions (some of them) and others.
So I've implemented (partially) a scheme that seems to be working well. Starting money is reduced to 5000 denari for most factions except Scythia and Seleucid, but nothing over 10000.
What has helped Syracuse, for example, is a specific AOR related trade bonus system because they are a 'naval, island based faction'. So they get a goodly bonus for sea-trade in their own lands, but normal bonuses outside Sicily. Rome and Carthage also now have bonuses related to their areas of influence, but outside them it drops considerably. The idea is to mimic reality in the sense that trade is most important and valuable in your homelands, which consequently finances your military ventures.
Hopefully, I'll have it done this weekend and release the next patch.

**cherryfunk** · November 24, 2006, 09:25 AM

Excellent news dvk, thank you for being so responsive to these requests. The current beta is a blast to play, and I think these changes are going to make it even more fun. I can't wait to try the new patch and see how the economy is working.

Btw, I tried starting a few campaigns in Lusted's TE this morning just to compare, and you'll notice that he has very small starting armies for his factions. What I like about this is A) it lets you gradually 'ramp up' your military so that your upkeep costs don't overwhelm your economy, and B) the first phase of the game is generally fought with small armies -- in some cases you have battles with just a couple of units, which I always find to be fun, especially when the stakes are high even though the numbers are low. For example as the Parthians I was attacked by a small Baktrian army and had to scrape together a force of 3 horsearchers and fight them off -- had I lost the battle, my main city would likely have fallen. So that one little fight became a 'mini epic' battle that I could not afford to lose. Lots of fun.

**dvk901** · November 24, 2006, 06:50 PM

The economy, I think, is going to be much better now, what with the reductions in army size, and a much revamped system. However, I want make all aware that I've discovered an insurmountable problem in the fact that the resources are a LOT different on these two maps (ICE, Mundus). What's a 'decent' economy on the former, is very good on the latter. There's no way to fix this without majorly reworking the maps, which I'm not prepared to do. So you'll find the Mundus campaign will have a lot more money than the others. I discovered this while testing Carthage, and saw all the resources they had in the Carthage region. They were making a ton of cash...so I backed off on the settings. That in turn killed them on the IceTorqe maps, so I did the best I could to arrive at some middle road there. As I've said, I hate a campaign with no money, and because the next patch will drastically change building times and costs....well, you're going to need money!