Informal poll on played faction campaigns.

[Rad]

I'd like it if the currently red economies started with zero to low profits (at vh difficulty). That way, one's initial expansion need only focus on taking 1-2 regions and clearing devastation causing roaming rebel stacks, instead of a full out Blitz to get rid of debt. If I remember correctly, it took me 5 conquests as Epeiros to start making enough money to function properly at the beginning. That was with disbanding/killing off those silly and expensive trunked beasts.

[Genghis Skahn]

Personally, speaking solely as a player, I enjoy the early game debt and blitz for smaller factions. It sort of divides the campaign up in sections; the first of those being a 'rise to power' story that ultimately leads to stability. As well, it differentiates factional economy on a case by case basis. Some can disband and grow, some can't without conquest. Some geographic regions were simply more resource rich and richer in population(so more trade) than others. I'd prefer if that feature wasn't changed.

[Rad]

The idea of having to triple your territory (in order to get out of that damn debt) within 10 years is absurd. For the moment, that's the reality for a lot of factions.
The 'rise to power' stage is on steroids, hah.

It took Rome, what, 500 years to move out of Italy?
I'd much rather take 1-2 regions and conclude initial expansion. Then build up, expand some more. Rince and repeat until the glorious team releases a new version

[Funkmaster Rick]

Factions that start with debt give us players a lot fewer meaningful choices in the early game.

[LusitanianWolf]

I would love to be able to turtle in the starting provinces and not being force to always blitz so early in the game as a small faction. I've been having some ideas and currently taking a look at the files and tutorials, so maybe I'll be able to design a solution and perhaps a submod so other people can test it as well... And would be great if in the process I get some skills helpfull to the EB team

Regarding the pool I've played campaigns with many different factions but since I usualy start a new campaign once a new update gets out and also spend lots of time doing custom battles I usualy don't get very far (100-200 turns). Last factions I've played have been the Sauromatae, Makedonia, Pahlavah and currently the Lugiones.
Love the diversity in this amasing mod!

[Thuycidides]

The idea of having to triple your territory (in order to get out of that damn debt) within 10 years is absurd.

+1

It's just another artificial thing added to the game to compensate for the AI's appalling and irremediable lack of skill no both the campaign and battle maps.

[Funkmaster Rick]

It's just another artificial thing added to the game to compensate for the AI's appalling and irremediable lack of skill no both the campaign and battle maps.

You say irremediable, but z3n's doing a damn good job of proving you wrong.

[Tuuvi]

I enjoy a challenge in the early game but I agree that having almost every faction start with negative income makes the start of a campaign more formulaic. A less precarious starting position might help the AI too.

[z3n]

I'll bring it up with the team but it would likely be QS implementing that sort of broad sweeping change.

[Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ]

It took Rome, what, 500 years to move out of Italy?

It took Alexander eight years to reach the Indus Valley.

The idea of having to triple your territory (in order to get out of that damn debt) within 10 years is absurd. For the moment, that's the reality for a lot of factions.
The 'rise to power' stage is on steroids, hah.

Are you accusing Alexander of doping?

[Rad]

Aaaaaaaand that's why he's called The Great
Still, the Collegium of Fortuna will look into his actions, to assure that there was no foul play.

[Cohors_Evocata]

Soon I will publish my thesis that Alexander conquered the Persian Empire as a means to acquire the funds required to pay for the Macedonian army...

[Cohors_Evocata]

Since the number of voters seems to have been stable for a while now, I think I can release the results as they are atm. My own vote was made to account for Genghis not clicking on Hayastan.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

My thanks to all those who voted, it has been very insightful to get some results on this.

[Kravixon01]

Voted. I've only played Rome and two hellenistic factions, but Id like to play at least one campaign with one of the eastern factions and one of the Gallic factions.

Either way, I appreciate having realistic enemies to fight and read about units and conquered settlements, so I'm learning a little bit about other factions even if I don't ever do a play through.

[Rilder]

I think I've only gotten a fair bit into a couple campaigns so far, Getai and Carthage being the main ones, though I have done a Pahlava campaign recently which is a bit different than I usually do. (Not really comfortable with cavalry focused factions)

As for the whole economy deal, spoken earlier in the thread, I don't really have a problem with it, its sorta an EB thing dating back to the first one, your economy is going to be a bit tenuous especially when trying to maintain any sort of campaign army without a strong economic backing. I think in my Getai campaign I basically had a cycle of taking a province and disbanding (or garrisoning units that can get free upkeep) while my funds recovered then buying a bunch of units for another campaign.

[Rad]

Blitzer

I will always object to such campaign starts. The debt doesn't give you much choice, and the AI will suffer because of it. A low income starting economy should work best for most factions. EB is full of players who want to enjoy a campaign, not blast through it.

[QuintusSertorius]

The debt doesn't give you much choice, and the AI will suffer because of it. A low income starting economy should work best for most factions. EB is full of players who want to enjoy a campaign, not blast through it.

The AI isn't impacted by it economically, since they have script-support to prevent them going into debt. For most factions it isn't necessary to blitz, just take 2-3 settlements (if you don't start with many).

I didn't find it terribly imposing in my last Epeiros game. I took Rhegion and Messana, and that was enough to stabilise my starting economy. Especially when I disbanded the elephants as the game opened, and suffered losses fighting the Romans (but also stripping them of all their available forces at the same time).

[Rad]

Oh it is... you just didn't see how. I have to hunt it down to get rid of debt. Having a blood hungry Rad on its back is very bad for the AI.

Take 2-3 settlements initially to get a somewhat stable economy? More like 4-5 actually, but even 2-3 is too much for my taste. I'd rather conquer 1-2 settlements, with a decently long peace until the next war, especially before the AI starts recruiting like crazy.

[Rilder]

Blitzer

I'm -really- not a blitzer, at least by the definition as I understand it, you know people just rushing the map as fast as possible. My first moves are to stabilize my faction, usually by going after an independent province. (Really how many factions in in this bad economic position at the start don't have enough independent provinces around them that they can't at least stabilize their income without going against the actual AI factions?)

You don't need 4-5 immediately, that might be needed eventually to get a proper standing army but its not an immediate concern.

[Rad]

I play on vh (the standard for any med 2 mod, let none fool you), income is lower than other difficulties. 4-5 initial conquests is in my unfortunately, quite large playing experience what takes for a decent start with the current economic setup. Just enough to keep building up the cities and maintain some forces to repel the occasional attack - and I use cheap troops, so it's not a lot of money put into army upkeep. Look at the wretched Gauls - 1 province, big armies, massive debt incoming.