Jutes faction trait useless??

[fokke85]

Hi guys,

I'm currently playing a campaign as the Jutes. Loads of fun. I think the Nordic factions have cool unit rosters and the Huscarls especially are just beasts! One thing that bothers me though is their faction trait. Getting gold for killing units is great. But the 200% extra income for razing settlements just seems pointless. Although 200% seems like a lot but looting or sacking a town always gives you way more income. Especially when you consider that the Viking Kingdoms trait gives you increased income for looting, sacking and raiding. What do you guys think?

[Ozymandias Maximus]

I rarely raze settlements, so I found it useless. The Danes no seasickness and the Geats no snow attrition are both huge bonuses. I'd much rather have either of those.

[AnonMilwaukean]

I sort of agree about the Jutes. And for the same reason as the one quoted below:

The Danes no seasickness and the Geats no snow attrition are both huge bonuses. I'd much rather have either of those.

Honestly, no snow attrition is actually pretty powerful since the climate changes mean the snow attrition zones slowly creep south. If you look at it from an army tradition standpoint, the Geats basically give you the barbarian tradition for no snow attrition for free, which saves a whopping 4 tradition skill points (2 to unlock the tradition, and 2 more to fill it so that you aren't only getting 50% less snow attrition). And that tradition is one I often choose for at least one army (usually to serve as a police of sorts to eliminate rebellions during the winter).

Further, the no seasickness boost means armies can take settlements from the sea without having nearly as tough a time of it.

So, yes, the Jutes do seem to me to have the worst ability of the three Norse tribes. But I wouldn't call it useless. It certainly can be useful, just less so than the others IMO.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

Well it's not useless, it's for razing, if you raze you get a bonus.

Razing is useful sometimes if you want to get rid of an enemy but not overextend yourself to new territory that will need babysitting for a long time.

Maybe you can't afford to have an army stationed there until public order stabilises or maybe you don't want to make border contact with a hostile faction which would make them declare war on you a bigger possibility, so you can get rid of the enemy faction and not have to waste any resources in keeping the settlement under control.

[Arksa]

If the AI actually had a clue in this game and posed a threat (if they built empires), I could see myself going for some razing runs against some big empires before they can react and try weaken them where it hurts, but those do not really seem exist in this game.

[JustCrabbe]

I've been playing a co-op campaign with Jutes/Burgundians. We make a monstrous team because I facilitate his expansion and he facilitates mine. I sack and annihilate people on the coast while he razes territories in-land. He gets easy and well positioned coastal provinces and I get low-fertility regions which give me tons of food.

Honestly I feel like the traits are more for our benefit. It offers us different styles of play where traditionally there wouldn't be any.


EDIT: I CAN EDIT NOW!

[craziii]

viking factions got some awesome faction traits, don't complain about the good stuff

[Påsan]

Well considering they get the best units (Huscarls) I think its a fair trade. Also the exstra gold for kills are pretty great. (Anyone knows how much?)