Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    NerZhulen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    769

    Default Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    Occupying produces total -35 p.order points (-10 + (-25)) and you get no gold, captives are freed.
    Looting produces total -55 p.order points (-20 + (-35)) and you get some gold, plus you get slaves.
    Razing produces total -55 p.order points (-5 + (-50)) and you get no gold, and all buildings are destroyed, captives are killed.

    In rome one, exterminating (razing) a settlement was much better choice concerning the future public order compared to occupying the settlement.
    But here razing seems to give you nothing and make the people angry even more.

    What am I missing here? Can someone explain me what is the point of razing a settlement? Since destroying all buildings is for free and can be done in one turn manually.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    It grants you the least province instability, meaning your armies won't need to stay as much time in the province in order to make it stable, wich in turn means more time fighting where needed.

  3. #3
    NerZhulen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    769

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    Do I understand it correctly? Because there is like provincial instability (-1 per turn), if it gives me one more negative point per turn if there is no army, that is almost no difference?

  4. #4
    clshieldsvt's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    36

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    @luck_ponte you beat me to it. I guess that's what I get for trying to post while at work.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    Nope. Provincial instability works this way: let's say you just occupied the settlement. The instability is -10. That means that for that turn, due to the instability, there will be -10 public order in the province (plus the conquest order penalty). The next turn, the instability will be -9, that is, there will be -9 public order, the next is -8 and so on until the province gets stable. The raze option is the one with the highest conquest penalty (-50) but the least instability (-5), meaning that after the conquest penalty your province will have only a -5 penalty in public order from instability, that will wear off in 5 turns. This means it is good in the sense your army doesn't have to babysit the province for such a long time. Hope it clarifies ;D

  6. #6
    clshieldsvt's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    36

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    No what the Provincial Instability (-1 per turn) means that you will be gaining 1 public order per turn. For example you Occupy a settlement and the Provincial Instability (-1 per turn) will be -10 from Public Order. On your next turn the Provincial Instability (-1 per turn) will be -9 and so on. Having an army in the settlement doesn't affect Provincial Instability, the army just adds public order bonus from Military Presence.

  7. #7
    NerZhulen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    769

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    So, given your information I calculated

    Occupy: -65 points in first 5 turns (10+9+8+7+6+25) + further -15 points in next 5 turns (5+4+3+2+1)
    Loot: -120 points in first 5 turns (20+19+18+17+16+35) + further -120 in next 15 turns (15+14+13+12+11+10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1)
    Razing: -70 total points in first 5 turns (5+4+3+2+1+55)

    The difference between occupy and raze is than 10 points spread over turn 5-10 after you take settlement, is that rite?
    I still get the occupy as better solution in the initial 5 turns. Plus your relation with the previour owner goes to bottom when you raze.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Occupy/loot/raze settlement messed up?

    Again, wrong. The conquest public order penalty is only for 1 turn, and then it vanishes. Plus, the instability wears off in a way that if you have -15 instability it will take 15 turns for its effect to completely wear off. So, if you occupy, you get -35 in the first turn, -9 in the second, -8 in the third, and so on till you hit 0. The point is not the total amount of public order penalty, but the pace between immediate public penalty and long-term instability. So, let's say you want to blitz a province and captures two settlements in the same turn. If you raze both, you'll probably get an instant revolt. However, if you raze it, wait a turn or two and then attack the second, the province will be more stable, because your army presence can more easily tip the public order up after the initial public order blunt. That means you have to plan ahead when deciding between occupy, loot, raze sack or even liberate, it all depends on the situation and on what you're planning to do next. Again, hope it helps ;D

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •