|
|
|
|
|
August 20th, 2007, 10:13 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
Order originally lowered unrest.
|
August 20th, 2007, 11:46 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 236
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
I thought it still did.
I definitely feel more confident raising the taxes in provinces with Order instead of Turmoil. It seems like I get less unrest and the unrest that I do get is easier to put down.
|
August 21st, 2007, 01:07 AM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 947
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
Yeah, I hear what you're saying OmikronWarrior. Growth does seem to be a good money-maker judging by your numbers. It's just, if you took Growth instead of Order intending to make money on it, it's like you're saying "I'm going to survive for 100 turns and then I'll really cash in!"
I don't think you can always assume you're going to survive that long.. It just seems worth it to take Order and get the money in the short run and use that money to buy troops to expand to get more money. But, maybe a Growth-3 defensive strategy, possibly combined with clamming or bloodstones, with the intent of being peaceful and just hoarding the wealth, could be viable.
|
August 21st, 2007, 04:27 AM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastern Finland
Posts: 7,110
Thanks: 145
Thanked 153 Times in 101 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
Growth also protects your old mages from early death, saving you a lot every late winter. Growth also keeps your provinces from getting plagues, while Order keeps all events in check and enables the "tax collection went well" events.
|
August 21st, 2007, 12:11 PM
|
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 724
Thanks: 93
Thanked 37 Times in 27 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
I've become a growth, order and luck fan myself. Usually I only take growth 1, primarily because point distribution issues.
I found that I have much more success and a lot less troubles with positive scales than negative scales. Of course this is from a SP perspective, so I'm not competing against a double bless opponent.
__________________
Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
|
August 21st, 2007, 12:15 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
Quote:
OmikronWarrior said:
OK, on a given turn (lets call it T(1)), a province will make X amount of money based on Y amount of population. Unless there are modifiers in play. Lets assume Growth 3. So, you make X*1.06 money. Now on T(2), your population has changed to Y*1.006, and since base money is directly proportional to population, you'll earn X*1.006*1.06. What my figures tell you is money made on T(1) and T(2) AVERAGED. Or they would if I bothered to do Turn 2.
|
ow, ok, i get it now, thanx. i thought you meant the figures given were cumulative.
but then actually, the money made on any turn will actually be higher then the perentage you give for that turn, instead of this only being so for the later turns. cause every figure given with a turn is an avarage of earlyer turns. but i see now that with later turns you didnt mean 'later turns on the chart', but 'the later turns up to the turn you are looking at'.
really nice chart btw, im deffinitely trying a growth scale next time. 'get and defend the rich provinces early' make a good stratagy with that..
__________________
i have spoken
|
August 21st, 2007, 01:48 PM
|
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Texas/Ohio
Posts: 363
Thanks: 11
Thanked 72 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
Since it was brough up... here are the figures adjusted by Order 3, or 1.21. Also, I've given up getting Open Office to look respectible, so I'm sticking with Excel. Sorry all you open sourcers out there. I'll be adding the zip to the original post shortly.
D 3 D 2 D 1 Neutral G 1 G 2 G 3
0 114% 116% 119% 121% 123% 126% 128%
6 112% 115% 118% 121% 124% 127% 131%
12 110% 113% 117% 121% 125% 129% 133%
18 108% 112% 116% 121% 126% 130% 135%
24 106% 111% 116% 121% 126% 132% 138%
30 104% 109% 115% 121% 127% 134% 141%
36 102% 108% 114% 121% 128% 135% 143%
42 101% 107% 114% 121% 129% 137% 146%
48 99% 106% 113% 121% 130% 139% 149%
54 97% 104% 112% 121% 130% 140% 151%
60 95% 103% 112% 121% 131% 142% 154%
66 94% 102% 111% 121% 132% 144% 157%
72 92% 101% 110% 121% 133% 146% 160%
78 91% 100% 110% 121% 134% 148% 163%
84 89% 99% 109% 121% 134% 150% 167%
90 88% 98% 109% 121% 135% 151% 170%
96 86% 96% 108% 121% 136% 153% 173%
102 85% 95% 107% 121% 137% 155% 177%
EDIT: On another note, taking and holding rich provinces is a good idea no matter what your scales, as is build forts on them since administration proves ANOTHER money multiplier and helps makes sure they don't fall into enemy hands.
|
August 21st, 2007, 04:12 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Growth and Death by the Numbers
The money multiplier from building a fortress will rarely, in my opinion, pay for the cost of building it in the first place, given other things you could spend the money on and the probable length of the game.
And a fort under siege won't help you protect your income from the province that much.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|