City Incomes Are Too Low .

[bogac94]

I started a new campaign with Baktria but my cities are poor (around 200-300 gold per turn in capital). I look at AI factions capitals and they take (1700-1800 per turn). Is this a bug ?

[c.ryo]

I started a new campaign with Baktria but my cities are poor (around 200-300 gold per turn in capital). I look at AI factions capitals and they take (1700-1800 per turn). Is this a bug ?

No its not.

[bogac94]

I dont know why AI factions can build 2 full armies and i cant even afford one full army per turn costs

[Ivan_Moscavich]

The AI gets cash bonuses, otherwise it can not perform well at all. And even still it often falls short in performance.

I actually did 31 turns as baktria (demonstrating it for a friend), and was able to keep positive income with an entire stack of very expensive units, and a fleet consisting of nothing but ballista ships and greek marine assault hexaremes. Two extremely expensive ships.

I also was able to upgrade every building in the three starting cities by turn 15.

Baktria should have absolutely zero money issues under player control. You have more than sufficient public order to max taxes after 6-8 turns, and still be able to keep positive income with an entire elite army and navy.

I also only had a single trade agreement, if I actually would have bothered to explore and get more trade agreements (I didn't since I was just giving a summary of the starting capabilities of Baktria to my buddy) my income would have been high enough I wouldn't even have needed to max taxes.

[KAM 2150]

AI gets more cash due to difficulty levels. Without that AI would go bankrupt super fast.

[bogac94]

I am playing VH/VH right now

[Ivan_Moscavich]

If you play on a difficulty other then N/N, you can't really make any legitimate complaints. The difficulty level increases completely break stats as well as campaign numbers.

I swear, there needs to be a sticky saying that the mod is not designed for difficulties above normal (yet) and that complaining about things that appear wrong on higher difficulties is just wasting people's time since it is the fault of the player instead of the mod (in its current state) that is causing the issue.

Though I doubt that'll stop people from ignoring or just not reading it and complaining anyways.

[Matmannen]

If you play on a difficulty other then N/N, you can't really make any legitimate complaints. The difficulty level increases completely break stats as well as campaign numbers.

I swear, there needs to be a sticky saying that the mod is not designed for difficulties above normal (yet) and that complaining about things that appear wrong on higher difficulties is just wasting people's time since it is the fault of the player instead of the mod (in its current state) that is causing the issue.

Though I doubt that'll stop people from ignoring or just not reading it and complaining anyways.

I find the best balance is Hard for campaign, and Normal for battles. Har for battles is possible though they can become pretty challanging since the AI will out perform your soldier by a large margin. Very hard in campaign is also very possible though be prepared form pretty extansive AI spam...

[Butan]

I swear, there needs to be a sticky saying that the mod is not designed for difficulties above normal

Its already the case at least for battle difficulty
For campaign difficulty, increasing difficulty also leads to strange things but its kind of encouraged because the CAI needs it.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

I find the best balance is Hard for campaign, and Normal for battles. Har for battles is possible though they can become pretty challanging since the AI will out perform your soldier by a large margin. Very hard in campaign is also very possible though be prepared form pretty extansive AI spam...

Its already the case at least for battle difficulty
For campaign difficulty, increasing difficulty also leads to strange things but its kind of encouraged because the CAI needs it.

I definitely agree it is doable. It's just that the game is obviously not going to be "balanced" at higher difficulties because the AI is getting bonuses while the player takes malus.

If you're going to raise the difficulty, why complain about it? It's your own damn fault for raising the difficulty in the first place. If you don't like it, lower it!

That's what I think anyways.

[rezoacken]

People are spoiled by easy games these days. If you put your game on very hard, it should be very hard.

[Steuben]

I have researched everything. My roman empire has all the provinces excemt Britain and asia minor. Corruption penalty is still so high i can only afford 5 Legions which is not enough to guard my lands. I have put statesman to all my legions and still its not enough to field more legions. Everything is on normal difficulties. Am i doing something wrong?

[antred]

I have researched everything. My roman empire has all the provinces excemt Britain and asia minor. Corruption penalty is still so high i can only afford 5 Legions which is not enough to guard my lands. I have put statesman to all my legions and still its not enough to field more legions. Everything is on normal difficulties. Am i doing something wrong?

I don't know what it is you're doing wrong, but you're doing something wrong. My Roman Empire maintains 16 legions (12 with 12 - 14 units, 4 with 20 units) and 8 fleet (most around 15 units). The only provinces under my direct control are Italy, Magna Graeca, Raetia & Noricum, Illyria, Cisalpine Gaul, Sardinia & Corsica and the cities of Carthage and Massalia, and out of those I'm only actually collecting taxes from Magna Graeca and Sardinia & Corsica (because they're providing most of my food ... I'd take them off taxation, too, but then my people would starve), and taxes are set to the lowest level. Despite all that, I have an income of about 15k per turn, and my treasury contains about 4 million gold.

I do have a whole bunch of client states and trade treaties, though, so I guess that helps. IMO, if anything, units are still way too cheap and the economy is too strong in this game.

EDIT: My guess is that you want too much too fast. Take it slow. Consolidate your empire, and build up your economy before you expand too much. Try to get trade treaties with as many nations as you can and try to have a few client states, too.

[Steuben]

I don't know what it is you're doing wrong, but you're doing something wrong. My Roman Empire maintains 16 legions (12 with 12 - 14 units, 4 with 20 units) and 8 fleet (most around 15 units). The only provinces under my direct control are Italy, Magna Graeca, Raetia & Noricum, Illyria, Cisalpine Gaul, Sardinia & Corsica and the cities of Carthage and Massalia, and out of those I'm only actually collecting taxes from Magna Graeca and Sardinia & Corsica (because they're providing most of my food ... I'd take them off taxation, too, but then my people would starve), and taxes are set to the lowest level. Despite all that, I have an income of about 15k per turn, and my treasury contains about 4 million gold.

I do have a whole bunch of client states and trade treaties, though, so I guess that helps. IMO, if anything, units are still way too cheap and the economy is too strong in this game.

EDIT: My guess is that you want too much too fast. Take it slow. Consolidate your empire, and build up your economy before you expand too much. Try to get trade treaties with as many nations as you can and try to have a few client states, too.

Iam in the year 80 bc. All my provinces are maxed out! At least to level III. Thats not the problem. The problem is more that no one want to trade with me, because i either killed them or they are on the other remaining power block with the seleucids.

[antred]

Iam in the year 80 bc. All my provinces are maxed out! At least to level III. Thats not the problem. The problem is more that no one want to trade with me, because i either killed them or they are on the other remaining power block with the seleucids.

I just went to check my income / expenditures and wrote them down:

Expenditures

Army upkeep: 26699
Navy upkeep: 21764
TOTAL: 48463

Income

Taxes: 5327 (and remember, I'm only collecting from 2 provinces, on the lowest tax rate setting)
Slaves: 606
Trade: 33122
Other: 21611 (presumably from my client states, I got about 7 or 8 of them)
TOTAL: 60666

So yeah, without all those trade agreements and client states, I might have to collect taxes from all provinces and crank them up all the way to the highest setting and might still fall short of a balanced budget. But if you really own half the damned map, I don't get why you have such low income.

P.S. It's the fall of 82 B.C. in my current campaign.

[Steuben]

I don't know what it is you're doing wrong, but you're doing something wrong. My Roman Empire maintains 16 legions (12 with 12 - 14 units, 4 with 20 units) and 8 fleet (most around 15 units). The only provinces under my direct control are Italy, Magna Graeca, Raetia & Noricum, Illyria, Cisalpine Gaul, Sardinia & Corsica and the cities of Carthage and Massalia, and out of those I'm only actually collecting taxes from Magna Graeca and Sardinia & Corsica (because they're providing most of my food ... I'd take them off taxation, too, but then my people would starve), and taxes are set to the lowest level. Despite all that, I have an income of about 15k per turn, and my treasury contains about 4 million gold.

I do have a whole bunch of client states and trade treaties, though, so I guess that helps. IMO, if anything, units are still way too cheap and the economy is too strong in this game.

EDIT: My guess is that you want too much too fast. Take it slow. Consolidate your empire, and build up your economy before you expand too much. Try to get trade treaties with as many nations as you can and try to have a few client states, too.

The big problem seems to be that the bigger the empire the more the penaltys grow to hold everything together. Empire Maintenance or corruption takes away an extrem amount of money even if you have researched everything and maxed your citys out. If you have no trade alternative for income you are screwed.

[Steuben]

The big problem seems to be that the bigger the empire the more the penaltys grow to hold everything together. Empire Maintenance or corruption takes away an extrem amount of money even if you have researched everything and maxed your citys out. If you have no trade alternative for income you are screwed.

BTW i got the tax on middle and i got zero tax income. Corruption is at 122 % on average. income is only the little trade i get. If this is how its supposed to be, this game becomes extremely hard in the later stages of the game.

[Drowsy]

BTW i got the tax on middle and i got zero tax income. Corruption is at 122 % on average. income is only the little trade i get. If this is how its supposed to be, this game becomes extremely hard in the later stages of the game.

Something to consider for your next campaign;

Generals and Diplomats have the talents to reduce EM by 6% max.
Water tanks and Academy's give newly recruited generals and diplomats +4 stars (-4% EM) straight up at a one time +6% EM penalty.

It might be to late now but if u consider this during the mid game and apply some house rules as to not make it to easy (if u abuse it money will become meaningless VERY fast) u will have a more fun late game.

[Barune]

I have put statesman to all my legions and still its not enough to field more legions.

Diplomats/governors should not be in legions they should be deployed in your most lucrative provinces.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

Diplomats/governors should not be in legions they should be deployed in your most lucrative provinces.

They're also handy for rapidly converting new provinces to your culture.

I often shuffle them to new provinces, then move them back to my best financial provinces after hitting 80-90 latin culture.