Economy balance in EP

[Jurand of Cracow]

Hello,

I'm using submods: Europa Perdita 0.35 / Fall of the Eagles (plus couple of graphical ones, plus Slower Battle, No forced march).
I have played campaings between 30 and 70 turns with: Garamantians, Bani Lakhm, Eranshahr, Eastern Roman Empire. The difficulties: Campaign: Hard/Very Hard, Battle: Normal. Before I haven't played vanilla ATW, since I play only mods. The TW games without mods are sensless and unrealistic. In the past, I have played hundreds of hours in RTW (Europa Barbarorum, Rome Total Realism), MTW2 (Stainless Steel - BftB, HURB, SSHIP), R2TW (Divide et Impera). For me, realism and history are essential, but games should be fun so gameplay is important.

I would like to share my experience about economy balance in the current verion of EP-FotE.

First, the changes are really good and playing without it makes no sense (well, at least as I imagine vanilla ATW is - with its different economy rules, imperium increase due to technology, few fertility levels, garrisoning armies effect etc. B-)

Second, some fine-tunning would still be welcome. Especially on economy balance.

I.
As I understand, the logic of EP economy changes is:
- having upkeep costs from buildings which realistically should cost you money (main building lines, sanitation, religious, military - good );
- dramatically more income from commerce and industry (that's realistic );
- more income from agriculture based on fertility level (great idea! most of wealth in the ancient times came from agriculture, and it was why feritile regions were most powerful ),
- some buildings cost upkeep, but provide bonus for the other buildings (Palaces, Treasuries - yeah, that's very good, why not make the same with cultural buildings :-)
- more income from trade (which is not a big deal, given that ATW is about constant war, not empire building as RTW, MTW or R2TW - you usually don't have many trade partners ).
- getting rid of the base income (as I understand the reason is realism: there should not be a magical money available - I like the idea ), but providing discount for troops at lower imperium level (as I noticed: 50% for Imperium1, 25% for Imperium2, 10% for Imperium3 - very good )
- corruption scaling per region you control (I haven't noticed big impact of corruption, even though I played ERE and Sassanids, so the 2nd and 3rd biggest factions ).

II.
What I've experienced in my games:
- after you build a trade port or any industrial building: there's plenty of money around ,
- you've got no problem with upkeep of maximum number (for a given imperium) of 20-unit armies,
- no problem of having the highest quality troops in those armies (well, for example for the Romans, the cost of the most elite army (with Palatina troops) is 4000, while of that with cheap troops is 2000 - no big difference, if one level of a trade port gives you 1000),
- no trade-off between keeping an army and investing in the economy: you always have money for everything.
The problem is: the trade/industrial buildings provide a lot of money, even at their lower levels. A province with the I/II level buildings provides usually surplus of 2000-3000, I counted that maxed with the IV-level buildings it will be between 10000 and 15000.

III.
The TW games are about trade-offs. You have a few parameters which limit your options and you have to make choices. The basic one is:
1.) you spend money on investing in the buildings - for future income or expansion of the cities to build, for example, barracks (another limit is technology, of course), or
2.) you pay the upkeep for the troops held for defense or expansion.
In the second situation you have a choice between good but expensive troops, and cheap, low-quality troops.
/there are obviously also other limits: barracks, maximum number of armies due to imperium level, in R2TW-DeI there's that great population submod still in gestation/.

In the old TW games there were also other limits. The numbers of elite troops were limited by their availability (MTW2: time to gather people), artificial caps on numbers in the whole army (I also recall example from MTW2). The investments were limited also by the fact that you could have been build only one building in a settlement at a time and building times were long. Well, building a mine in Europa Barbarorum took 32 turns, so you would ask yourself if you can freeze a settlement for such time. Return on investment was also a limit: you invest in that mine, or in something else? That mine would provide return after another 30 turns, so why not a cheaper market? Fast little money, or you can afford wait for a fat milk cow?
As far at the troops are concerned, that mine was extremely expensive, but then the income was enormous compared to the other sources (well, it provided money for one army of 10-units... but that was a lot!).

IV.
To sum up: the money should limit you. But with the current version of EP you can build whatever you can given the technology, and you can field full armies with the best factional troops available. I understand that with the major factions I played (ERE, Persia) it is easier, but for Bani Lakhm it was also not a problem (only their roster).

So this is my main observation from the gameplay concerning the economy. I would like to repeat, that the mod is great and I'm enjoying playing it . And I know I don't have the whole picture since I didn't play the hordes and the barbarian kingdoms. But after they take one province, I imagine the situation would be the same.

I hope it will be of use for somebody

[Augustusng]

Yes, it's definitely of use. We need this kind of feedback, and really appreciate it!

I'm thinking about re-adding base income so I can reduce the income from those trade and industry buildings again, and so small factions won't be as difficult. It's really quite difficult to make the start for both large and small factions playable, but not too easy or too difficult.

As far as cultural buildings go, I've kept most of them with an income bonus, for now at least, since there are many things that increase your income from culture. I've already reduced that income pretty significantly, and I'm not sure I want to reduce it even more.

Corruption could use further refinement, that's for sure. My original intent was to replace most of the corruption penalties with building upkeep, but that's not really feasible, and corruption does make a certain amount of sense. It is implemented better in Attila than it was in Rome 2, anyway.

There are some things we could do, like increasing building and research times, that could help a little. But hmmm... I'll be thinking about the economic balance some more. Feel free to add your suggestions, of course.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Ok Augustungs, if it’s useful, then the second part of my thinking about economy in FotE-EP.

Playing Romans, I have taken a thorough look at the level IV buildings’ effects, based on the in-game descriptions. The reason was: there’re only 14 slots for buildings, and if you don’t think in advance what would you need after 20 years, then you’d be caught unable to fix the problems at the later stage of the game. Sanitation and food are best examples: no slot for a building, then you have to live with adverse effects.
My way is then to plan the “final-stage” of the situation in the province (level IV buildings) and decide on the role of each slot in advance, balancing different factors, and taken into account the influences of the other provinces (e.g. +2 sanitation of Cloaca building in the neighboring provinces).

I do the balancing between food – sanitation – public order, with maximization of income, and taking somehow into account religion and growth.

• Food: I would try to achieve around -100, taking into account 4 levels climate change deterioration, and benefits form Aqueducts and Thermae as well (so sometimes -4 or -3, sometimes -2). This number “-100” is because level IV Wheat provide additional food in all provinces, so I assumed that the empire would have more than additional 100 Food in each province.
• Public order – I’d try to be at level 20 net (only buildings: positive PO minus negative PO) to ensure being able to deal with shocks, like changes in taxes or family power.
• Sanitation must be positive in each region (not province!).
• Income should be maximized, taking into account different synergies. For instance, I would plan an “Industrial province” where Wood or Iron is (+20% for industry), building Leather in a town, Pewter and Slave trader (15% for industry) in the city.

Religion is different because you don’t have full control and it also matter less if there’s 20% or 40% of your state religion – you just need to have enough PO to counteract. But as a rule I would go for [ one cathedral ] or [ one monastery + one sanctuary ] in a province.

Growth is also different because it’s useful only until the last slot in a province is inhabited (as a result, bonuses for growth from the higher levels of buildings, like “Fortified town” (level 4), are rather useless. I usually don’t care about growth.

In the following analysis I don’t introduce any new ideas or change the philosophy, just hint where imbalances are.

• Industry & Commerce (in a city): given the bonuses for a type of building (like Slave_Trader 15% for industry, or Silk 20% for Commerce) it always pays off to specialize in a type of buildings in a province: either for industry, or for commerce. In this respect Adobe industry is much inferior to because it is “half Commerce, half Industry”. I go either for Pewter (industry), or for Wine_trader / Slave_trader in the city slot. Therefor I would suggest beefing up Adobe income to compensate. Or maybe decrease the income from both Traders?

• Cultural buildings – there are 3 types for the Romans: Library, Circus, Theater. Library is unique and you would choose it if you want research. Circus and Theater have similar type of benefits (PO), which should be balanced by income. I would always go for Circus: much more PO (21 vs. 13), less religion penalty (5 vs. 3), and only slightly less money (400 vs. 800). I think it would be good to beef up Theater – maybe give some research? Maybe more money?

• Main line buildings – I wonder why should I bother to build them. They are costly, but provide little more (compare Vicus level I and Colonia level II: 1 PO, 1 growth, roads). Yes, Fortified Town level IV is different – walls justify building it – but it shows up late in the game. Maybe I miss something in ATW, I don’t know… Anyway, I’d suggest beefing them up – maybe more PO?

• Sanitation – I wonder why chain Reservoir - Aqueduct is so much inferior to Latrines-Cloaca. Yes, they give Fertility, but so little Sanitation. Compare it to the town’s Thermae which give both Fertility and much Sanitation. And also Cloaca provides 2 Sanitation to neighboring provinces. I would add some points to the Reservoir-Aqueduct, to make it more appealing.

On Resource buildings:

• Marble: there is a big income difference between Sculptor and Quarry lines. It’s quite different to the Gold line (where the Jeweler is similar to the Mine, and the access to Gems make up for the difference). Given that there are very few Cultural buildings in-game, the 20% bonus for cultural income is a negligible one. Given that the production of the resource is 20 (while Quarry 160), I would never go for the Sculptor.

• Olive, Wine – I think food yield should scale with climate change. Why Olives in Libya provide 170 food even if the land gets barren? The provinces with these resources are absolutely overpowered, because you can save a slot of Farms/Cattle for something else. So scale it please, or at least get rid of the Olives +20% commerce and the 9 PO for wine.

• Iron – I would never go for the „Forge” line, because additional 2 recruitment slots and 15% discount on the units are dwarfed by the additional 140 Iron trade resource and 15% industry, 15% agriculture boni provided by the “Foundry” line.

Minor issues, I guess due to oversight:

• In the description (and perhaps effects) of Siege buildings, for levels II and III the additional feature "Fletching II" and "Fletching I" seem to be missing, I think (given that there’s “Fletching III” for level IV.
• Armourer II gives additional experience for the units – but levels III and IV not. Maybe it’s intended, I don’t know.

[Jurand of Cracow]

This is my plan for 14-province ERE empire.

[Augustusng]

Wow, thanks again! I'll have to look at this more closely over the next few days, but it's great to have detailed feedback like this.

[drillmaster]

Would it be possible for industry buildings to have an effect on production rather than a flat income.increase? Like in Rome where the city industry building which goes.up to 20% bonus to commerce. Right now there is not a huge difference on what you build. I get that coastal provinces are super rich reaching 20000 income just from ports but industrial buildings are overshadowed by them. Dont know about barbarians though who dont have ports

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[Augustusng]

Yeah, that's not a bad idea. Maybe we can do something like that.

[MajorTom]

I wonder if it would not be the opposite, in that commerce has an affect on industry and agriculture (greater commerce means that there are more markets for your industrial base).

[A_B]

I'm in agreement that the economy is far too easy with this mod, once you're established with half a dozen cities. I lowered my tax rate as far as possible, and still had too much money.

This should be easy to fix. What might be harder to fix are some of the other interesting game mechanics. While I found the new sanitation/disease system interesting, I'm not sure the AI could handle it very well. Or if the AI could use the new edicts to overcome some of the new problems the mod throws at the player.

[Augustusng]

No, I don't think the AI can use the new quarantine edict, but what kind of problems have you noticed, in terms of sanitation? I could try re-adding some of the bonuses the AI usually gets in that regard.

[Silas_]

I actually made an account just to chime in on this, what with EP-FoTE being the best mod pairing out there. All you guys are doing great work!


Flat income exists as something of an equalizer: For smaller factions it's a much-needed boost to keep them viable, ESPECIALLY in the hands of the AI(the AI needs help, period) . For larger factions, it's something but proportionally less due to their size and the massive expenditures that come with being a large power. Taking it out WILL throw the balance towards the big guys.

That's especially true when income from ports and industry is so extreme. The function of these types of buildings is really as a money-sink and a long-term investment. If I develop industry in that province now, it's expensive and slow to build, but it's modest steady income I can count on(unless I lose the province!) in future.

At face value, the Romans should dominate and never stop. But they didn't. The base game used a system of bonuses and maluses to attempt to simulate the terrible problems the Romans had in this period and why their army and empire broke. In my very humble, unimportant opinion the mod can change how these are simulated but can't remove their intended effect without handing the Romans automatic victory. State responsibility over such masses of people is crushingly expensive. Fortifying towns and cities is crushingly expensive. Recruiting, training, equipping and maintaining field armies is so expensive that even now practically nobody does it. And even if you can afford it, who's to say you have the manpower? Or that your indolent troops will even agree to fight? On top of this, the State's ability to collect money to pay for these expensive things depends heavily on peace and stability. Tribes? Not as much.

Even with history aside, from a gameplay point of view a large part of the fun of playing as one halves of the Roman Empire is the challenge of having too much ground to cover and not enough men or gold to cover it. Or as a non-Roman, exploiting their strain and fatigue.

This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it! I'm excited to see what you guys do with this great mod.

[Augustusng]

Yep, I am thinking we might have to re-add the base income. I like that removing it gives you a better sense of where all your money comes from and makes some actions (raiding, sacking) more meaningful, but it does really throw the balance in the favor of large factions. Well, we're looking into different options for balancing it, anyway. I just haven't had much time recently to go back through it, and I don't want to release something in a hurry, that might just make the problem worse. Thanks for the feedback though, that's a good point.

[geala]

So in the current version, is base income in or out?

[Augustusng]

It's out in the current version. You can tell easily in-game by looking at your financial information. Under the "other" income category, you usually won't have anything listed (unless you have vassals paying you tribute).

[stevehoos]

In my current play through as the Alans, I found it impossible to settle with the way the economy is set up. Even with my taxes reduced and only 1 unit in my whole empire I was still netting -161 per turn. I can make all kinds of money as a hoard, but when I try to settle it's -3000 per turn with only 1 army. This is not going to work.

-Hard campaign settings

[maloskero]

Before settling try to amass as much funds as possible by sacking towns and raiding and then, when you settle, try to occupy more than one city. The "horde game" is played by planning carefully your setling so that when you do it you expand quickly with enough cash to convert province's buildings and to survive some turns with negative income while you build up your whole new infrastructure.

[stevehoos]

Before settling try to amass as much funds as possible by sacking towns and raiding and then, when you settle, try to occupy more than one city. The "horde game" is played by planning carefully your setling so that when you do it you expand quickly with enough cash to convert province's buildings and to survive some turns with negative income while you build up your whole new infrastructure.

I see, but this is very limiting. It's basically impossible to convert a desolate town. I had 40,000 saved up and ran out of money before I could procure an income. If there were no enemies on the map and I settled a desolate area on the 1st turn, I would be unable to keep it; rebels would build up and take the settlement. There has to be a base income in the mod imo, I would prefer not to wait around for a an hour building up money waiting for the perfect scenario to be able to take 2 settlements. That is the only way to win as a horde, and that is linear. There must be another way to make it harder to win with bigger factions.

[maloskero]

I see, but this is very limiting. It's basically impossible to convert a desolate town. I had 40,000 saved up and ran out of money before I could procure an income. If there were no enemies on the map and I settled a desolate area on the 1st turn, I would be unable to keep it; rebels would build up and take the settlement. There has to be a base income in the mod imo, I would prefer not to wait around for a an hour building up money waiting for the perfect scenario to be able to take 2 settlements. That is the only way to win as a horde, and that is linear. There must be another way to make it harder to win with bigger factions.

Maybe you should try settling in non-desolate areas, that should lessen the costs to survive in the first turns, I guess. But you make a good point, altough I like that carefull planing and high risk-high reward gameplay style from the horde factions, it's indeed really limiting and causing most of the early campaings as any horde faction to be the same old grind for money. Anyways, I think Augustung has already noticed this kind of "issue" and is hopefully thinking in a way to add back base income without making the game too easy

[Augustusng]

Yep, I have indeed noticed this. I just haven't had the time to sit down and work through the possible solutions. Hopefully I'll be able to soon though.