[Submod] Alternative Economy (Updated 09.08.19)

[Auchan]

What about the AI?

It seems pretty balanced, i noticed a decent proportion beetween the size of a faction and his military power and also a nice halfway solution beetween a situation of spam stack of armies and a potential braindead bankrupt AI.

[Dardo21]

Good to hear, I've been playing 2 full campaigns back-to-back and I also had the feeling that their economy seemed pretty balanced. Even if it weren't it's a pretty hard thing to get right too, I mean I might think that sometimes 1-region factions shouldn't have more than 2 armies at high city levels, but then again, if they mostly recruit cheap units than that's balancing as well.

[~Seleukos.I.Nikator~]

Hey guys,

I've been working lately on modyfing the Seleucid rebellion script and I've found out that there is some minor incompatibility between that script and AE that I'm not sure if you are aware of.

Basically, one of the main variables used in that script is the minimum upkeep treshold for each stack that is set to 1000 for the Seleucid eastern satrapies and 2500 for the Seleucids.

For the scale of the economy in AE, 1000 is obviously not that much and some of the eastern factions pass that treshold already with one of their general units that has the upkeep of 1100+ from what I've seen.

The consenquence of this is that;

a) it's slightly easier for the eastern satrapies to reach the threshold to become potential rebels and that threshold is reached slightly faster
b) the probability of the rebellion triggering after the expiration of the 15 turn protection is slightly higher

I don't think that this has such a big impact on how the rebellion script works in the game. I wanted, nonetheless, to point this out to you.

The possible remedy will be, of course, to increase this threshold by the upkeep multiplier that you've used in AE. Can't remember now if it was x2 or x3?

[Dardo21]

I'd have to check at home, but I think it's 1/8th of the recruitment cost, so I'd have to compare it to the vanilla upkeep first, but x3-4 is probably close to it.

[The Last Imperator]

Compatible with the latest update?

[kew]

-unit recruitment cost increased around 5 times

Player army composition also changes as for example a unit of cataphracts can cost between 10,000 to 14,000 denarii. Lets say you have a full army of cataphracts, if you lose it, you would need to spend around 200,000 to 280,000 denarii to rebuild it! This changes the dynamic of recruitment cost and upkeep as in base DeI (where unit costs were pretty much made by me anyway), if you lose army, you get large income boost due to higher upkeep to unit cost relation, while here it is lower. Sure, after losing an army you might get few thousend extra money per turn BUT it might not be enough to have new and proper army in place in case of danger.

Is this working as intended?

Units:
https://i.imgur.com/1DLnnqH.png
https://i.imgur.com/DUGK00H.png
https://i.imgur.com/l44PpUa.png

Buildings: https://i.imgur.com/59lZ0Sq.png

The building price is what it should be, though for some reason unit prices aren't (?). Happens even when enabling only DeI + Alternative Economy + Cultural Tension.
Tried both the Steam version, and Dardo's latest one.

Compatible with the latest update?

Apparently not.

[~Seleukos.I.Nikator~]

I've been using AE with the latest patch and haven't really seen anything badly out of balance.

I haven't really looked very closely into it, but just by looking at the patch notes from the latest DeI update the only thing that I guess needs some adjusting is the unit cost for some of the units.

Other than that, I think AE is very much compatible with that update.

[Pheros]

Also been having some problems with this sub-mod, unfortunately.

I've been using AE with the latest patch and haven't really seen anything badly out of balance.

I haven't really looked very closely into it, but just by looking at the patch notes from the latest DeI update the only thing that I guess needs some adjusting is the unit cost for some of the units.

Other than that, I think AE is very much compatible with that update.

Are you using the Steam version? That one doesn't change anything at all in my game for some reason, no matter where I put it in the load order.

Dardo's version works, though starting as Macedonia, for example, I have an income of only 3321. Is that right? Seems low as OP mentions income has been greatly increased.
Buildings and units do cost a lot more, and my starting treasure is 121000.

Would love to know if these numbers are right.

[~Seleukos.I.Nikator~]

This sounds just about right, Pheros. You've got to bear in mind that with AE the economy will be quite challenging, especially in the first 50 turns before you get your realm up and running. Macedonian campaign is already pretty tough in itself, so you've got to expect some difficulties at the beginning.

I use Dardo's standalone version with flat upkeep bonus for the AI and progressive economy buffs from the post #490 in this thread. I can't really speak for the steam version, though.

[Dardo21]

Update: 10/04/2019: I brought the AI income and factional hidden income buff up to scale with AE (x5). This should provide little benefit to the player, but should hopefully help major AI factions out a bit with keeping up their economy and armies.

The first file is the closest to Kam's new version, with most of his economy and upkeep buffs for the AI preserved.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cS...NtetdshGBx0r-k


The second file is my own version, with a flat upkeep buff for the AI, but with higher progressive economy buffs for the AI

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18N...zH6X9fS-bpcHLL

The third file is the same as the second, but with the softcore mod economy buffs implemented and scaled to AE standards

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LE...BE6s6GSnm0rX2I

@Pheros, that sounds about right, most income is generated from trade or upgraded buildings, the difference between lvl 1 and 2 capitals will f.e. result in a sizeable increase, and as Seleukos mentioned, Macedon has a hard early game. So you'll have to decide on either spending everything on your army or trying to upgrade your infrastructure first.

[Pheros]

Alright, appreciate the responses! Was waiting to really sink some time into it, though so far it's been a very positive experience.

[~Seleukos.I.Nikator~]

Thanks for the updates to AE and CT, Dardo!

[Dardo21]

You're welcome

I've updated the files again, I brought the AI income and factional hidden income buff up to scale with AE (x5). This should provide little benefit to the player, but should hopefully help major AI factions out a bit with keeping up their economy and armies.

[Black_Rider]

I've updated the files again, I brought the AI income and factional hidden income buff up to scale with AE (x5). This should provide little benefit to the player, but should hopefully help major AI factions out a bit with keeping up their economy and armies.

It is save compatibile ?

[~Seleukos.I.Nikator~]

Such changes are always savegame compatible unless stated otherwise.

[Dardo21]

Yeah, should be no issues.

[Morphysos]

Hey there, I started a new Roman campaign with Dardo's version of AE (2nd file from his last post). In 270BC, OPM Veneti attacks me, having 2 full stacks of regular units; hardly any cheap fillers at all. Looking around on the map, most OPMs are fielding 2 strong armies by now as well. Playing on normal campaign difficulty.
I like the idea behind AE, but wasn't it also meant to prevent that sort of power from OPM's?

[Dardo21]

Them being able to afford 2 armies of units that are relatively mediocre against a full Roman army and a garrison, seems pretty reasonable yes, early game is not meant to be a pushover for the Romans. If they had no economic benefits over the player, they'd be pushovers for both the player and any larger faction, which is not the mod's intent. In regular DEI i used to encounter AI factions that could raise 3 stacks from 1 city, which I don't see with AE anymore unless they get into higher level buildings etc.

Also bear in mind, that these factions have only 1 holding to upgrade, so they have quite a lot of money left to spend on units from its starting treasury, but after these are destroyed, they'll have a much more difficult time to recruit those numbers again. Whilst a major faction might have less money to spend on armies at first instance, but will quickly gain a large increase of money after the first building upgrades start rolling in.

I did update the files with a slight modification to their tax income, which'll be 10 % lower for the AI on any difficulty, which brings it in line with Kam's original version.

[Morphysos]

Thanks for your reply Dardo, your logic makes sense.

I was going the historical route with Rome, and after taking Syracuse Carthage auto-declares war. After that the fun started: having the Veneti invade me with 2 full stacks while having to hold off the powerful Carthaginians means basically game over right now, cannot fight both fronts and win.

I will have to restart and be more careful, it's a mystery how those ancient Romans survived with all their overconfidence

[Dardo21]

Yeah, I always try to maintain peace with Carthage as long as possible, in fact on this campaign they offered me a defensive alliance which has held for over 200 turns atm. The Veneti had 2 armies for me as well, so I just played the waiting game, Massalia invaded Genua, which had been fighting the Insubres, so I took the Insubres and then posted an army on each border of the Veneti. They then sent an army to one of the borders, when I took an army away from 1 border, they sent 1 army back to their town. So I sieged the town trapping 1 army, and destroyed the 2nd one at my border.