gold output
 

How is the gold production of your home province supposed to be calculated?

from Doms I we had :

base output from pop * bonus from scales * bonus from castle

so in doms II, for a econ maxxed empire this would translate to :

base output : 1 gold for 200 pop
30.000 pop = 150 gold
time 1.50 (fortified city)
time 1.33 (from the 3 scales which give a bonus)

=> result 300 gp

But when I launch a game, I only get something around 250.

What is strange is that if I reduce the fortified city to a mausoleum (+20%), I drop to 220.

Anybody tried to figure how the formula really worked?

Re: gold output
 

Are you sure the max population is set at 30,000? With Ulm and Growth +3, I was above 30,000 pop in my starting province, and the income kept progressing.

Scales are said to have been weakened, did you take that into account? Perhaps it may be of some incidence, or perhaps not then. And Lastly, I recall reading terrains influence the income. Again, anyone should really confirm or infirm that.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">sure pop can increase far above this level. I'm just speaking of turn 1, when you have around 30.000 pop. From my calculations it should lead to 300 gold with maxxed econ (in doms II).

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I took that into account. In Doms I the scales were more generous. In Doms II, you have +7% for each order, and +2% for each productivity or growth (speaking only of gold bonus here), so it leads to the +33% I'm speaking in my example.

The formula of Doms I would have led, thus, to 300 gold. I wonder what has changed, perhaps how admin is computed.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I didnt know terrain could influence income, if somebody knows, feel free to speak!

Re: gold output
 

Administration seems to work in a different maner. My Watchtower gave an average income of 210 while my Fortified City gave about 250 gold. And the difference between the administration values is 40, the same as the difference between the incomes. You also found a similar result before, so I gather the change is here.

Sorry for my misunderstanding, I read you took a scale three, while you said you took the three scales. *Grumbles* I shall learn how to read properly.

I will check for the post, I recall having read farmlands gave an income bonus. But either it is wrong or it is not the case for starting provinces, for balance reasons maybe?

Re: gold output
 

yes, it hinted on me too that the difference in admin led to the same difference in gold. Thats very strange, because in other provinces (where you have a castle) you wont get this 'lump sum' from your admin. I suppose the mechanism is not bugged, as it has surely been well scrutinized, but I dont understand it as of now!

[ November 01, 2003, 20:30: Message edited by: Pocus ]

Re: gold output
 

This sounds like a bug. Besides, admin is one of the things that should be FULLY explained in the God setup process. Or any time it is on the screen, for that matter.

Re: gold output
 

I did some testing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
Looks like IW cut the gold producing value of administration to 50% of the admin value.

I.E.
Watch Tower [admin 10] gets you 5% extra gold
Wizards Tower [admin 30] gets you 15% extra gold
Fortified City [admin 50] gets you 25% extra gold


Frankly with the weaker economy it was already hard to afford extra forts. Now that it takes forever to pay them off... they are even less usefull. I am very unhappy with the economics of Dom II.

Time for a fort to pay for itself using even scales when placed on a 20K population province:

Watch Tower = 60 turns
Dark Citadel = 60 turns
Wizards Tower = 20 turns
Citadel = 30 Turns
Fortified City = 30 turns

[ November 01, 2003, 22:03: Message edited by: apoger ]

Re: gold output
 

I know some people don't care about realism, but just incidentally, real-world castles often took generations to build.

PvK

Re: gold output
 

But a wizard tower never pays for itself under the new system, as the points you put into it could go to Order. Ignoring resources and national units, of course=)

Yeah. I don't like the new economics. It makes the game even more dreary and depressing than before... truly apocalyptic now=) I think I'll stop taking the fortified city, with this new revelation.

Alternately, since admin is so much weaker, perhaps its weight in the castle's gold cost and nation points cost could be reduced.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hehehe. Just wait until you will meet with Ermor. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif your economy will be non existent very fast.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">So what are you suggesting? That to build a castle in three turns, you should have to put more than just one commander to work? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 01, 2003, 22:19: Message edited by: Saber Cherry ]

Re: gold output
 

>I know some people don't care about realism, but just incidentally, real-world castles often took generations to build.

Roman armies put up rather impressive fortifictations *every night* while the army was in the field.

Dominions is a limited game in a world of high fantasy. You can't expect "realism". However we can try for FUN.

Re: gold output
 

> Hehehe. Just wait until you will meet with Ermor. your economy will be non existent very fast.

Insult to injury.
I am aware of this and it's part of what I don't like about the new system.

Re: gold output
 

Yeah, I always assumed the castles were already mostly built, and just didn't have a front door or complete paperwork for tax reasons. In fact, I can think of ten good reasons why castles are so quickly built. Another one might be that they aren't real castles, just miniature models, like Camelot in the Holy Grail. Or that it costs 300lbs of gold to send a message back in time several generations to start building a castle. PvK, I like realism as much as you, but you're a little uncreative sometimes. Maybe you should go back to MOO and play Klackons. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Ermorian citadel = infinite turns (same as in Dom I)...there are many other benefits from castling apart from income boosts.

Anyway, there's a simple fix for those that want to play with more of everything: just play with rich settings.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That would be a valid and perfectly good solution, if gold and resource levels could be manipulated independently. Which I had originally assumed would be the case. As it stands, going "rich" really screws up the resource levels and thus game balance.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">In what way is Ermor worse under the new system? Their relative effect is the same, a province long under its influence in dom 1 gave 0 income it will in dom 2 as well.

Re: gold output
 

If you knew me better, Saber Cherry, I really don't think you'd think of me as un-creative. Although I do appreciate realism, what I enjoy even more are games where things have consistent cause & effect, and relative values that make sense. Balance and intersting and meaningful decisions are also important. I find it interesting that it takes at least a few turns and some gold to build a castle. I don't really want it to take hundreds or thousands of turns to build a castle. I don't think it makes me unimaginitive to remember that that was the historical reality, however. Also, sometimes restraint in abilities leads is a form of imagination, and can lead to more interesting situations.

As for the actual topic at hand, it would be a nice and simple addition to allow both gold and resources to be independently adjusted during game setup. This would handle the concern some players have about the gold levels, without affecting the resource levels.

PvK

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm kidding, just so you know=) I like Proportions and think it is very creative! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: gold output
 

Thanks!

Re: gold output
 

>In what way is Ermor worse under the new system?


Since gold is tighter, influence from Ermonian dominion will hurt more.

Even if ermors influence has been reduced (and I don't know if it has) by 1/2...

In Dom I;
Taxes 1000
Upkeep 500
Net=500 gold to spend per turn
Then Ermors influence brings taxes down 200.
Net=300 gold to spend per turn

In Dom II;
Taxes 600
Upkeep 500 (no change to that)
Net = 100 gold to spend per turn
Then Ermors influence brings taxes down 100 (a guess).
Net = 0 gold to spend per turn

This sort of thing has repercussions beyond Ermor. The Dom II economy is much different than Dom I.

Frankly, I'm surprised you had to ask about this.

[ November 02, 2003, 05:23: Message edited by: apoger ]

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Frankly I am suprised by your analysis, the glaring fault is of course that upkeep is dependent on income, so everything else equal the upkeep in the second case would be 300 not 500. Thus, if we assume the rest of the numbers make sense, you would have 200 gold remaining. Making the influence more or less proportional, and if we change the ermorian influence to -120gp it is proportional.

Re: gold output
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Frankly I am suprised by your analysis, the glaring fault is of course that upkeep is dependent on income, so everything else equal the upkeep in the second case would be 300 not 500. Thus, if we assume the rest of the numbers make sense, you would have 200 gold remaining. Making the influence more or less proportional, and if we change the ermorian influence to -120gp it is proportional. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">He is also neglecting the fact that in Dom I you had to pay upkeep on your patrollers - you couldn't get that kind of extra income without patrollers.

Of course Ermorian influence will be less in absolute terms - you aren't taxing at 200% in Dom II. That is the biggest reason incomes are less. Some positive scales have been nerfed somewhat - but on the other hand, so have their negative counterparts. You won't lose as much from Ermor's Turmoil 3 in Dom II as you would have in Dom I.

Usually though your core provinces won't fall under Ermorian dominion anyway, unless you have very low dominion strength and/or are failing to preach. Mictlan might have a problem with an Ermorian dominion pusher, but I doubt if many others would - Ermor can't preach and can't afford many temples. (Desert Tombs C'tis can do both, but doesn't have the killer dominion. I don't know if Carrion Woods Pangaea can preach and still has cheap temples - if so, dominion pushing from them could be very dangerous.)

More serious is that provinces you take from Ermor are more or less permanently ruined, while other players who fight living opponents can gain valuable land (if they win). The high gem income of the Unholy Sepulchre (and other lands searched by Ermor's pretender, if they go for a rainbow mage) makes up for this somewhat - if you can use it.

Of course all this analysis assumes that Ermor is going Ashen Empire or Soul Gates. Otherwise they will probably take much less malign dominion since they will need gold and supplies for their own troops - and they don't have the "kill the living, reanimate the dead" special dominion effect.

Yes, it is likely to be somewhat of a disadvantage to start next to an Ashen Empire or Soul Gates Ermor (or a Carrion Woods Pangaea). But those themes will probably be unpopular in MP because they are (a) easy to counter (by human players), (b) start slow (at least Dom I Ermor did), and perhaps most importantly (c) draw too much hostility from a diplomatic perspective.

I'd like to be able to play all the different special themes of Ermor before making a definitive statement as to which would be best for MP; but at the moment I expect that Ashen Empire/Soul Gates would probably not be a good choice.

Re: gold output
 

I've never found being next to Ermor to be a disadvantage, and several times have found it to be a boon. You should defend yourself against hostile dominion pushes -- they're very common. IMHO it's unusual to have Ermorian dominion hold sway over your lands.

Also, Ermor doesn't really want to push his dominion into your lands, as that's simply diplomatic suicide. Making his lands worthless to you and going no further is much more attractive -- and I don't see how this is significantly different than Dom 1.

Re: gold output
 

Previously the complaint I read about castles was that Admin was overpowered and that would decide your choice. Now I read that admin is underpowered and castles are not an effective economic investment.

Er, um, are we playing monopoly? I thought you built castles for defence, a base for offence, and control? I'm not sure that the economics being desired makes much sense in the environment we are playing. The castle allows you to hold the lands and gather taxes effciently - its not a factory designed to produce more factories.

I quite like the idea that the defense strength might affect the choice of stonghold. Remember what you wrote on this subject re Dom I race design Alex?

The impact of gold shortages is something we should be cautious about. Magic is weaker so golds stronger, golds less available so in built magic is stronger, air is weaker so blood is stronger but blood is weaker unless you are . . . in which case . . . blah, blah, blah . . . on no my brains turned to mush. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

So, so, much has changed. Alex don't react to every change based upon the impact it has upon the Dom I play balence because its not that relevant. The old world is gone and the new one is only just unfolding. I don't know how it will be but I can see glimpses and they contain many rich hues and deep, deep, shadows. Fear the Dark, oh yes, fear the Dark for its is rising!

Don't worry, be happy . . .

Keir

Re: gold output
 

I run some testbeds on castles storming. Nobody play with the intent of loosing, but still I think taking into consideration how your castle handle an assault can be a factor to be considered.

Just try the hill fortress : You will get 32 arrows fired each round into the inner yard, a yard so small that enemies will stay here a long time before being able to break into the inner area.
We need to test this with additional effects like staff of storms or arrow fend, but I dont think castle arrows will be useless anyway, as even with low precision, they will hit often when fired at point blank.

An by the way, the hill fortress is not that bad, when you only take design points cost and admin level.