Taking enemy soldiers into slavery

[Seleucid Fanatic]

i just won a battle where the enemy captured was worth 35K minai (the faction heir was there + some other elite troops ) i tried ransoming them back to the ptolemies but of course the cost was too high so what does enslaving them do exactly ?

[Outcast]

If enslaving was the first option it should be the same as killing them, just in EB style. If they denied the ransom they would have been automatically killed - just like in MTW2

[gustave]

Enslaving now gives you a small cash bonus.

[parthian8]

I believe there is also now the option to enslave rather than slaughter the populations of captured provinces. Given that it is the MTW2 engine, I assume this is a cosmetic change. In Rome 1 slavery had economic and social impacts for a number of factions, as was the case historically (heightened lawlessness for example among displaced rural populations) In Italy itself we know it contributed to the development of grain doles and gladiatorial games. In Gaul (it's claimed) slave taking and the trade in wine had a destabilising effect on inter-tribal co-operation. It also led directly to the ultimately republic busting drive to resettle landless veterans.
Though I doubt it, is any of this possibly to mirror in the game as a causus belli and in the development of traits? For example, could a Gallic general with a pre-existing drink issue who takes a lot of slaves acquire other unpleasant traits that affect influence as a result. I do see some generals seeming to get bad traits over their treatment of prisoners already, including ones who fail to maximise the booty for their troops.

[romanius24]

Enslaving cities give cash or just post battle armies?

[Jervaj]

I havent noticed any bonus from enslaving though, teh AI rejects the ransom offers often but I dont see any bonus.

[romanius24]

I noticed a cash bonus if you enslave prisoners. Not sure if it applies if they refuse a ransom though. I was wondering if enslaving cities also gives that cash bonus.

[Kull]

If you try the ransom route and it fails, the prisoners are essentially slain and you don't get any bonus. Selling into slavery will always give you something, but it's very small - the idea is that you have given these captives to your army as a reward for the victory and they in turn make the sale and get most of the profits. None of that is really visible in-game but it mirrors the historical reality.

Factions will never ransom back their troops if they are bankrupt, so one possible strategy is to contact your enemy with a diplomat prior to a major battle, just to check on their finances. If they have money, ransoming may work.

The enslave option when capturing a city does provide more money, as you can see just by looking at the benefits of each of the 3 options. But all you get is what you see on that choice screen - the "enslave troops" bonus does not extend to city capture. BTW, be very cautious in v2.2 about any steps that reduce city population. It takes a loooong time for them to recover - population growth is extremely slow. However, if there's a huge cultural difference, than you may have no choice other than a population reducing option as otherwise revolt is certain.

[Jervaj]

They are actually enslaved too if they reject the ransom. Its what the mesage and the sound indicate I think

[Roma_Victrix]

If I remember correctly, enslaving them in RTW meant that their numbers were dispersed across your settlements and increased the populations of them slightly. That makes some sense, but I don't think M2TW could accommodate that, could it?

[z3n]

It would require extensive scripting and may have a bad effect on turn times. However to compromise I may add a random ancillary/trait which gives a bonus to population and tax. It will decrease troop morale as the FM is taking more than his fair share of prisoners.

[QWE_asd]

It would require extensive scripting and may have a bad effect on turn times. However to compromise I may add a random ancillary/trait which gives a bonus to population and tax. It will decrease troop morale as the FM is taking more than his fair share of prisoners.

The trait sounds good, but those -1 famine traits don't work for small settlements since they don't have famine.
Chivalry gives population bonus.
Why is the m2tw Dread/Chivalry mechanic removed? It's much more dynamic than the new "confidence" mechanic and has more role-playing value.

[Zemich]

no such thing as chivalry in antiquity

[z3n]

The trait sounds good, but those -1 famine traits don't work for small settlements since they don't have famine.
Chivalry gives population bonus.

We don't really want the small villages/towns to be able to grow very quickly or easily for that matter. It should be difficult for them to do so, therefore that's not really much of an issue here.

[parthian8]

Kull

Thanks for that helpful insight.
Populations were usually enslaved only when there was a whiff of vengeance in the air, and it is good that it shouldn’t be the easy option.
I understand that later platforms offered a greater range of options, like surrender or face the consequences.
Therefore it has to be the traits route.
Enslavement should be rife with pros and cons.
Could the creation of Latifundia be made more controversial?
Am I always hopeful of more civil strife.
Could the old Chivalry trait line could do more to reflect the differences in attitude to social issues that divided an Optimate like Cato the Elder and those of the Gracchi.
Is the Auctoritas trait not akin to the pinnacle of chivalry and honour?
And every faction had its conservatives and reformers.
I don’t really know what ‘confidence” is.

[parthian8]

Chivalry was a catch-all phrase in MTW2...as it was not a concept that could be fairly applied across the board in that game either.
And its good the EBII avoids that trap.
But the concept of Fides...a man of his word and one who holds his honour in esteem...was reasonably universal and could be used, under a more generic and culturally neutral name...to separate the sheep from the goats.

[parthian8]

Like "Honour" rather than "Confidence".