Wercheg, Tihr, Sargoth and Rivacheg

[estevesbk]

So, after I crushed I mean, drove the nords away from their territory to start my own Kingdom, I made myself lord of Wercheg, Tihr, Sargoth and Rivacheg (I also made a little "incursion" on the Vaegirs so Rivacheg is a "bonus")

I thought "whatever, these towns are on the coast so I don't have to worry much about sieges, etc. AI would pick other targets". But the problem is, doesn't matter how low I set the taxes, their prosperity never stay out of poor/average!

When I was a Swadian lord and helped Lady Isolla of Suno to reclaim her throne and obviously took Suno, Uxhal and Dhirim for me, it was just set the taxes to very low that in a month at most the prosperity of the towns would jump from "poor" to "very rich", but it's not what's happening... Here's the situation:

1. I'm on low/very low taxes for almost 2-3 months, the population on these towns are already +30 with me but their prosperity is always going from poor to average and average to poor.
2. You may think it has something to do with the nearby villages being raided, well, it may be, but I've spent at least 3 weeks without war with anyone so they should already have got time to regain their prosperity.
3. Besides sea raiders on Wercheg/Rivacheg, my territory is pratically free from bandits. Could even explain Wercheg/Rivacheg but not Tihr/Sargoth.
4. The fact that I was not at war for 3 weeks should have allowed caravans to come and increase their prosperity.
5. The towns never felt to any enemy hand since they were conquered by me.
6. Even I tried to manually trade moving goods from the towns, but nothing.

I sincerely am ALMOST without a clue about what's happening. When I was a swadian warlord, the very rich towns gave me about 5K of rent + wages. Now I'm having only 2K - 2,5K. The only factors I am thinking that can be contributing to that but shouldn't be enough:

1. No one wants a trade agreement with me. Most powerful factions are Vaegirs, Sarranid and Rhodoks. Khergits vanished, Swadia has only 1 castle left (it's really notorious how Swadia felt again when I left =P) and Nords have 1 captured swadian town.
2. Less factions = less trade = less prosperity?
3. This is my favourite: The towns are on the edge of the map so they don't receive enough caravans to increase their prosperity.

Sorry for the long text and thanks to anyone who cared to read and reply...

Btw, using M&B Warband 1.132 + Diplomacy 3.2.1. Started a game from the scratch with both of them, so the game is perfectly "clean". Not using any other mods. Didn't use any tweak on M&B.

Edit: Oh sorry, forgot to give details about my government:

- "Our government is a little centralized"
- "The upper class society is neither too aristocratic or plutocratic"
- "Our people are usually serfs"
- "Our troops are of mediocre quality"

 

[manekemaan]

It is indeed really strange that they remain on poor prosperity, the caravans for those towns in one of the reason so trade agreements should certainly help.

What might be the cause is bad luck: each game each town gets an "ideal prosperity". Example : sargoth has an ideal prosperity of 10. So every .. time sargoth loses prosperity when its prosperity is higher than 10 and vica versa.

note: this is something I have read somewhere. It should be confirmed by someone who can read the game .texts

 

[estevesbk]

Thanks for answering my topic manekemaan!

Yes, what's strange is that it's not just 1 or 2 of them, but the 4 towns...

It was so easy to increase the prosperity of swadian towns lowering the taxes... Now all of the 4 doesn't come higher than poor/average on low/very low taxes... =/

There's something wrong or I am in a hell of bad luck! =P

 

[BigBiker05]

The sea raiders can be pretty mean. I would have several troops patrol the area around the villages to keep raiders at bay. Farmers have a tool on town prosperity, if these farmers can't get to the towns prosperity lowers. If caravens can't get to other towns, the town prosperity lowers.

 

[estevesbk]

The sea raiders can be pretty mean. I would have several troops patrol the area around the villages to keep raiders at bay. Farmers have a tool on town prosperity, if these farmers can't get to the towns prosperity lowers. If caravens can't get to other towns, the town prosperity lowers.

Yes thanks I see your point... But sea raiders are not a threat on Tihr/Sargoth. Actually they are even the ones who are saving my economy from collapsing, because my garisons on the towns don't cost more than 1500, but with the so low revenue they are giving me + tax inefficiency (even reduced with my gov. type) I lose 3k - 5k a week to keep the garisons + an army of 150 knights and 150 sharpshooters waiting for me. So defeating sea raiders only with my companions on the party (so much more money/loot) are giving me enough money to survive.

Farmers ARE getting to Tihr and Sargoth. I really don't see a reason why they are so poor...

And funny that now I've captured Curaw and even with the same prosperity (average) it gives me much more rents...

I don't know why. Keeping the taxes low for a month now to see if Curaw goes to rich, but so far nothing...

 

[BigBiker05]

I wonder if the high troops affect prosperity... someone has to feed those troops.

 

[estevesbk]

I wonder if the high troops affect prosperity... someone has to feed those troops.

That's a good thought... But I keep all of these troops in just one town... And swadian towns didn't have a problem with that going from poor to very rich in 1-2 months.

It's coming to me that it all seems about the 3rd motive I gave:

The towns are on the edge of the map so they don't receive many caravans.

If I'm wrong and someone managed to have Tihr, Sargoth, Wercheg or Rivacheg to a rich prosperity, please let me know.

 

[Captain_Octavius]

Trade with caravans indeed increase the prosperity of towns a LOT (too few caravans arriving is the problem in your case I think), but it also turns out that arriving villagers transfer prosperity from the town to their village... I didn't believe this at first, but some people came with pretty solid proof.

I am not sure if it's true, but it would be logical if poor villages would really drain the prosperity of the town, since they have lots of shortages and barely produce anything, while rich villages shouldn't have much shortages and produce a lot, which they bring to the town, increasing it's prosperity. But again, this is mostly just theory and I don't have proof.

What is the prosperity of the villages of your towns?

 

[Killakot]

I am not sure if it's true, but it would be logical if poor villages would really drain the prosperity of the town, since they have lots of shortages and barely produce anything, while rich villages shouldn't have much shortages and produce a lot, which they bring to the town, increasing it's prosperity. But again, this is mostly just theory and I don't have proof.

In my game I posses Veluca, which is the richest, most productive and most visited town by caravans. (Taxes at normal)
Yet, it's villages are the 3rd poorest around. (Taxes on low)
For some hundred days it's been like that, so either I'm lucky or the theory doesn't really stand.
Although I've read the discussion you mentioned too, and some things are very plausible.

 

[The Sniper]

Might be a bug

 

[estevesbk]

The prosperity cannot be poor in Tihr/Sargoth villages because there were no bandits around and as I kept myself in peace for 3 weeks/1 month they should prosper.

I believe Diplomacy Mod should come as an investment. I mean, setting the taxes to low or very low, you are actually investing in the town, encouraging it to grow and prosper, etc. There's no logic on this investment doesn't come as a return.

What puzzles me is that now I'm lord of Curaw for 1 month and it didn't prosper also, keeps on average prosperity on low and very low taxes (but doesn't drop to poor also, Tihr/Sargoth sometimes do) and gives me the same amount of money on taxes, but considerably more on rents. Does anyone have a clue about why? Taxes seem to be directly linked to the town's prosperity, but rents apparently not.

Edit: Rents seem to be linked to how low or high you set the taxes but why on average prosperity in both the cases a low tax rate on Curaw gives me more money than a normal tax rate on Tihr/Sargoth/Wercheg/Rivacheg? (yes, I finally gave up trying to make them prosper and made the taxes to normal on these 4 towns =P)

 

[Captain_Octavius]

The prosperity cannot be poor in Tihr/Sargoth villages because there were no bandits around and as I kept myself in peace for 3 weeks/1 month they should prosper.

No, because there are shortages of many goods that aren't produced by your towns/villages and need to be imported. Since you don't have trade agreements, these shortages stay and prosperity stalls.

 

[estevesbk]

The prosperity cannot be poor in Tihr/Sargoth villages because there were no bandits around and as I kept myself in peace for 3 weeks/1 month they should prosper.

No, because there are shortages of many goods that aren't produced by your towns/villages and need to be imported. Since you don't have trade agreements, these shortages stay and prosperity stalls.

Interesting... Does these goods have to come from another nation? I mean, and if I begin to control the places where these goods are produced? Are there any "key places"?

 

[Captain_Octavius]

If you would conquer the places where those goods are produced, caravans of your own kingdom should transporting them over automatically, yes.

Talk to your guildmaster in your current towns and he will tell you all the shortages in goods. Then you'll have to find out where they are produced in abundance, and conquer those locations. Talking to the village elders also lets you know which goods are produced in your villages, and IIRC their shortages as well.

There are not any key places in general, though there are a few types of goods that are only produced in one or two towns. Flax is only produced by some Nord towns/villages, and the Linen made from Flax is only produced en masse in Sargoth, but since you own those, that's pretty irrelevant to you. Tulga is the biggest production center of Spices, and Jelkala has the largest production of Silk and Velvet. Curaw is one of the best cities in producing Iron, after Curaw comes Ahmerrad and then Dhirim. Wool and Wool Cloth is produced a lot by the Sarranids and the Khergit, and Salt comes mainly from the Sarranids but also from Wercheg. Wine (and thus Grapes too) is mostly produced in Veluca and Oil (also some olives, but you can find them in Sarranid lands as well)is produced a lot in Suno. Praven has a large Grain and Ale production. The best place to get Fish is in Tihr, but they aren't expensive in Wercheg either. Date fruit comes mainly from the Sarranids IIRC.

That's all I can think of right now, these are the ones I know because they can be profitable to trade. Not really sure where Tools are produced a lot, but I figure also in the towns with large Iron productions. I have no idea what good places are for Hides and Leather, but I think there are a good deal of them in the Vaegir and Khergit towns.

If you read the ingame Game Concept "Economy" explanation, it will tell you that the first priority is naturally food. Immediately after that comes Salt, because that is needed to preserve meat and fish. After that comes the clothes, then the luxury goods and tools etc.

I just checked, and in my game, the Nord towns could really benefit a lot from trade with the Swadian towns, but also with Veluca and Curaw. I have no idea at the moment what the best production centers are for Dried Meat and Cheese, but it seems those are in high demand in the Nord towns as well.

I advise to conquer Curaw, Praven, Suno and Veluca if you can. If you have those, Uxkhal would be natural to take as well.

 

[estevesbk]

Thanks a lot for the text, Cap. Octavius! =)

The problem about advancing into Swadian territory right now is that, tactically, Nord + Vaegirs are easier to defend. You have mountains, rivers, bridges, etc. meaning it will be easier to detect any enemy's 1000-1500 soldiers army.

Not to mention that I would have to face the huge Rhodoks empire that took over all Swadia and I'm far from conditions to fight those sharpshooters. I know how powerful they are because I use them... And I cannot begin to use sharpshooter x sharpshooter even with tactics, surgery, etc. bonus because of the morale penalty, as soon as I realize there will be rhodok soldiers fleeing my party which has an overall excellent morale but -100 for rhodok soldiers... =P

Are you sure that it has nothing to do with the distance caravans need to travel, being in more danger of getting caught by bandits, enemy parties, etc.? Not necessarily my enemies because e.g. Sarranids are in war with Rhodoks but not with me, so they send a caravan to my town, but in the middle a Rhodok patrol conquer the caravan,,, Rhodoks are not in war with me but in this example they would damage me anyway.

Also it  may have something to do with TIME, I mean, the more time one caravan takes to arrive, the more time will take for a second caravan to be sent?

I mean, if you think tactically as I am, the worst city to conquer is Dhirim because it's right in the middle of Caldaria, surrounded by every faction. But... Economically, it may be the easiest town to get into very rich status because caravans from everywhere may come and they don't have to travel a lot.

Manually moving goods may help? I don't think so but never hurts to ask...

 

[Captain_Octavius]

Manually trading goods may only help a little bit, you simply can't ferry over the huge amounts of goods that are required constantly.

Yes I suppose the longer the caravan needs to travel, the more risk there is of it being attacked and destroyed. But the Nord towns need the goods from Swadian territory far more than those produced in Sarranid territory.

I would advise to conquer Curaw and the castles around it and around Richaveg, and start training large quantities of Vaegir Marksmen to assault the Rhodoks with. Don't underestimate these guys, they have the same proficiency in Archery as the Rhodok Sharpshooters in Crossbows and a much faster rate of fire. Keep your Sharpshooters as ranged defense in your own towns and castles. If I were you I would attack the Rhodok towns and castles with Huscarls and Marksmen, and put them on hold at the start of the siege first, with the Huscarls in front of the Marksmen, catching the majority of the crossbow bolts with their shields, while your Marksmen fire rains of arrows from behind them, and you yourself also use a (cross)bow to clear the sharpshooters. It'll still be hard though.

Note that Dhirim also gets sieged a lot and it's hinterland constantly looted, so it won't be easier to get Dhirim to a high prosperity.

 

[estevesbk]

Well, I'm beginning a new game because the other was too messed up - I didn't know about the changes on the newest M&B version and about all the features of Diplomacy Mod. But as soon as I can, I will do the same thing - conquer the nords again. I believe I will first enlist myself as a vassal of Swadia and conquer Dhirim, I don't know if the fact of its villages being constantly raided can counter-balance the amount of caravans that the town receives.

But if anyone working on Diplomacy Mod wants the savegame of my old game, I still got it, just ask. I think even not having trade agreements the nord towns should get rich when encouraged by low taxes, if not what's the point of lowering the taxes if you never know the town will prosper, just to get a better relation and better goods prices?

About the siege on Rhodoks, well, even then I can expect heavy losses. That bolts can easily destroy huscarl shields and kill the maksman in 1 hit. I'm not underestimating them but there's clearly no comparison to sharpshooters in sieges.

 

[estevesbk]

So in my new game I'm already lord of Dhirim and Uxkhal as swadian. Will take some time until I have enough money to start my Kingdom.

What I can say so far is that keeping the taxes low (not very low, just low), their prosperity always jumps from rich to very rich and very rich to rich. That was the same result of when I was lord of the nord towns, except that they were jumping from poor to average and average to poor.

Actually I don't see a financial difference about taxes low and normal, because normal gives less prosperity and more rents(I believe the towns don't get these "jumps" or get less of them), and low gives more prosperity and less rents, but in the end with these "jumps" it will be the same.

So of course it's better to stick with low taxes because it gives you rel. up with your towns.

That's what I've concluded so far...

 

[SpittingLlama]

Just so you know, villages don't get infested when there are bandits around, its just a random chance of it happening (ie, indiscriminate about what village gets infested)

 

[Larhendiel]

I have Dhirim with its villages, Suno (without) and Sargoth (also without villages) I controll 16 cities and nearly all map
Only Vaegirs are left with Khudan, Curav Ichamur and Narra. after A YEAR OF VERY LOW TAXES and NO WAR, villages are considered the richest in all calradia even if they're average, all my cities are poor, most of the cities are poor, while Vaegirs are RICH!
I have only 7 caravans for whole continent while Vaegirs have 5 caravans. In total its 12 caravans for 21 cities while in the beginning EVERY kingdom had 5 which in total was 30 caravans for 21 cities.
THIS IS BROKEN!
I think each city should have at least one caravan, at most two, while the capital should have at most three caravans