Can we please make enough to support cities/castles.
- 主题发起人 Snall
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
dzorro
Knight at Arms
stygN 说:
This tactic don't work very well. You need lots of cities to keep selling your loot and most of them run out of money faster then you can sell all your stuff. Tournament seems to be the only way to really go. But even then it gets boring after a while. There has to be more ways to really make bigger sum of money.
Baleur
Recruit
Snall 说:
Thats a good point, im wondering about the reason to take towns etc too.
1. You could just run around alone and amass hundreds of thousands of denars, own every army and dominate the landscape.
2. Or you could take a bunch of castles, own villages and a town or two, have your own little faction. And be broke, eventually resulting in your army deserting due to not getting paid (or fed), leaving all of your new nation weak, undefended and poor.
Yeah
But i suppose it'd be too dull if it was too easy. Perhaps a future patch will add some sort of trade "buff" to player owned cities, making them nearly sustainable. I dont see why not.
Even, fair? I dont think AI kings have to pay upkeep, right? Otherwise how do they afford the garrisons and junk?
Master Looter
Sergeant at Arms
i have looting at 6 i can make several thousand denars selling stuff from a single pillaged village, and training my weapon skills on 50 angry villagers is an added benefit
iconokill
Recruit
Capturing and selling sea raiders is how I'm supporting my army now. It's even more profitable than trading. Sell 30 of those guys and you get 3300 plus another 1000 from selling off the loot. I can make about 10k per day off them. I'm going to try to build me a squad of slavers just to make it more effective.
Snall
Recruit
Again, point is that your cities/villages should support the army, not the other way around- as for no cav...I'm KHERGIT. Heh. (Although I do keep some Swab xbows/knights usually). Yeah, maybe someday this will work- or it could be moded in...but right now it's just sad. Ah well, still funner than vanilla a bit, although I haven't played multi much since beta..
EDIT - Knights, bludgeoning only.
EDIT - Knights, bludgeoning only.
iconokill
Recruit
Snall 说:
Well villages have no cost, so everything you get from them is profit. As for cities/castles, I see these more of a place to store troops than to make money, but they do help offset the cost. I think if you kill the big bandit groups around your cities (allowing caravans to arrive and depart safely) and trade with the city it should increase in wealth, thus increase tariffs.
Vaegir knights don't have any bludgeon weapons. When I give that order they all stop.
Baleur
Recruit
Castles, yes. But cities are definetly there to make a profit. They are civilian places that basically has nothing to do with the army, hence the army shouldnt be required to pillage and loot to have a single city prosper or even manage to grow enough of their own foodiconokill 说:
Lugh
Recruit
Take a look at the condition of the city. Is trade able to flow between it and other cities? Are the surrounding villages able to migrate to and from the city?
It all effects the taxes you collect afaik. So you need to patrol.
If you protect the city and surrounding area properly, you should be reaping a thousand or two from each city no problem. More than enough for a few hundred troops.
You don't need to garrisson everywhere with Knights and Huscalrs. What I do is garrison with mid-tier melee and archers. Pick one city to be a repository for two different armies. A big force of huscarls for breaking sieges with (as in, get into the besieged castle or city and chosoe to join the defense with your huscarls) and a big force of Knights for rampagin across free-roaming armies.
It all effects the taxes you collect afaik. So you need to patrol.
If you protect the city and surrounding area properly, you should be reaping a thousand or two from each city no problem. More than enough for a few hundred troops.
You don't need to garrisson everywhere with Knights and Huscalrs. What I do is garrison with mid-tier melee and archers. Pick one city to be a repository for two different armies. A big force of huscarls for breaking sieges with (as in, get into the besieged castle or city and chosoe to join the defense with your huscarls) and a big force of Knights for rampagin across free-roaming armies.
Bahamut
Regular
Don't garrison with elite troops... you're right, it isn't possible to profit off a 150 man huscarl/mamluke garrison. You can garrison 25+ recruits for the price of a knight, and those 25 recruits, thanks to the autoresolve system, will make a far, far more effective defense.
All my castles/towns make a profit... average town income is what, 500 rent and 500 tariff? put up 500 recruits for garrison, and you still make a tidy profit, whilst having enough of a garrison to make all but the most organised war parties pause for thought. Should they decide to attack anyway, your zerg swarm should buy you enough time to retaliate with an army worth a damn in actual combat.
All my castles/towns make a profit... average town income is what, 500 rent and 500 tariff? put up 500 recruits for garrison, and you still make a tidy profit, whilst having enough of a garrison to make all but the most organised war parties pause for thought. Should they decide to attack anyway, your zerg swarm should buy you enough time to retaliate with an army worth a damn in actual combat.
I have a town (Ichamur) + villages attached and i can support 300 man garrison (swadians: 10 sergeants 10 infantry 20 footman 10 sharpshooter 10 crossbowman 40 skirmisher and 200 militia) it cost me 905. From tariffs and rents I'm getting something around 3000 denars so i have still about 2000 denars for my 90 man warband upkeep in wartime i'm making tiny profit but i have loot, prisoners etc. In peace time I'm leaving 40 of my men in town so i have 340 garrison and i'm getting profit from taxes + loot and prisoners from bandits. (don't forget to keep extra money in inventory for wages if some of your villages will be raided)
UnfortunateCrow
Regular
I'm not sure what everyone else's problem is, but I have no problem keeping my castles and towns garrisoned.
A town with two villages can support 300 troops easily. I have Wercheg garrisoned with only huscarls, veterans, warriors, and vet archers, and it supports about 330 with it's income plus the two villages. If you garrison lesser troops, the money goes even further.
A castle with one town can support 100 troops easily as well. 300 for a town, and 100 for a castle is more than enough.
A town with two villages can support 300 troops easily. I have Wercheg garrisoned with only huscarls, veterans, warriors, and vet archers, and it supports about 330 with it's income plus the two villages. If you garrison lesser troops, the money goes even further.
A castle with one town can support 100 troops easily as well. 300 for a town, and 100 for a castle is more than enough.
Boduar
Regular
Depends on how much tax inefficiency screws you. When I just have one castle/city because im a vassal its not bad I actually gain more money by far while keeping a good garrison but when I became my own faction I basically give away all the castle/cities because I cant afford to since tax inefficiency almost > than income.
类似的主题
