Raiding all the AI's money away. (A Rant on Raiding)

[Dominicius]

Let me get this out of the way, I'm playing the game on Very Hard so the AI gets massive money cheats. I recently decided to give beastmen a go and focused on maximizing my raiding income to the point where I was raiding between 3 to 4 k gold per army. Unfortunately, I would then find out that the money you get from raiding is actually taken directly from the AI's treasury, so with all the raiding that I was doing I would actually reach the point where the AI RUNS OUT OF MONEY, causing my raiding income to suddenly drop to sub 300 or even ZERO. Add to this the fact that the AI can spend a bunch of money during their turn before I can steal it makes income fluctuate to the point where I can't trust the UI to tell me how much money I'll actually get when my turn rolls back around.

To put it simply, this makes raiding just completely unreliable for no understandable reason and further nerfs already weak and underplayed factions. The money you get from using this stance should not be tied to AI's money supply and should not fluctuate when I hit the end turn button. Hopefully, CA re-examines this mechanic when they finally get around to reworking the beastmen.

[zefyris]

pretty sure raiding is based on the region income and not on the faction treasury.
Meaning, if you want to get money from raiding you need to look at how much a region make smoney and pick them accordingly.
Also, raiding a region that is currently under siege or does not generate money (example : they cut the money generation to prevent a rebelion) will net you 0 from raiding.
Also several armies raiding a same region will net less income per army raiding than if they raid different regions.

[franz]

If they are out of money , their armies start to take attrition , pretty simple.

[Buldor]

Originally posted by Dominicius:

Let me get this out of the way, I'm playing the game on Very Hard so the AI gets massive money cheats. I recently decided to give beastmen a go and focused on maximizing my raiding income to the point where I was raiding between 3 to 4 k gold per army. Unfortunately, I would then find out that the money you get from raiding is actually taken directly from the AI's treasury, so with all the raiding that I was doing I would actually reach the point where the AI RUNS OUT OF MONEY, causing my raiding income to suddenly drop to sub 300 or even ZERO. Add to this the fact that the AI can spend a bunch of money during their turn before I can steal it makes income fluctuate to the point where I can't trust the UI to tell me how much money I'll actually get when my turn rolls back around.

To put it simply, this makes raiding just completely unreliable for no understandable reason and further nerfs already weak and underplayed factions. The money you get from using this stance should not be tied to AI's money supply and should not fluctuate when I hit the end turn button. Hopefully, CA re-examines this mechanic when they finally get around to reworking the beastmen.

Ummm, raiding is income based and not a siphon of any kind. It damages income but does not steal money. If you see them start to take attrition due to upkeep costs its not because you stole money from them - it is because you damaged their income so much it has fallen below their upkeep costs.

I assume this was done early game, and to a factions capital, perhaps even only region?

Next, the income is based on their value so if the region took damage, has a rebellion etc. this would all reduce the value. Likewise, if they simply do not make money then you will not make money raiding. Also, if it is under siege, you will also get nothing.

Raiding is also a zero sum game. There is only ever so much potential in any one region - raiding it with 2 armies for example would see their value split rather than double.

Hopefully you can reexamine game mechanics and return to the tutorial to explain these basic mechanics, so when they finally redo beastmen you will still be clearly out of your depth on difficulties beyond normal.

[Dominicius]

Considering I likely have more hours in this game than you, along with more Very Hard campaigns won under my belt I'd suggest not wasting your time making such worthless, dismissive replies.

I can only speculate that it might be a bug but when I have two armies raiding and each army set to make 2k and then have that drop down to zero the moment I hit end turn without anyone sieging the settlement or any revolts taking place, what am I supposed to think? Especially when I made this amount of money for several turn prior without any issue.

[Mountain King]

Originally posted by Dominicius:

Considering I likely have more hours in this game than you, along with more Very Hard campaigns won under my belt I'd suggest not wasting your time making such worthless, dismissive replies.

Brag about your hours while hiding behind a private profile. You didn't even know how raiding fundamentally works, LOL.

[Red Bat]

Raiding is based on region income, which is why you get different amounts of money if you move 1 region over against the same empire. This is easily testable and something you'll exploit the hell out of when you are destroying Reikland.

Beastmen have a lot of problems, but generating raid income isn't one of them. 40% bonus from Khazrak + one of their first blue skills and some techs results in them getting enough raid income to come pretty close to leveling out with their upkeep. This is slightly inferior overall to WoC who get less raid bonuses but more upkeep reduction and can thus get effectively free armies in certain circumstances. But they don't have the awful horde infighting mechanic which overall makes them easier to play.

[Wh♂♂par]

"Raiding should not be tied to what the one you are raiding has." This doesn't sound... sound at all.

As others stated, it negatively impacts their GPR, their treasury only passively through this. Once their treasury hit zero by applying this, that's when you don't gain any further income.

[zefyris]

Originally posted by Dominicius:

Considering I likely have more hours in this game than you, along with more Very Hard campaigns won under my belt I'd suggest not wasting your time making such worthless, dismissive replies.

Wait a minute, you're talking about me here lmao? There's only 3 peoples posting above what I quoted, one has neither his hours nor achievement visible, the others only has his hours (5k+ btw), and I have both visible so it can only be me.

Imagine telling to someone who has almost 1,800 hours in game 1+ 2 together and has achievement in VH+ for all the races accross the games (the only I'm still missing in game 2 are those of the game 1 races that haven't been reworked yet because I'm waiting for the rework, but have them in game 1 ) that he has NOT ENOUGH hours and NOT ENOUGH VH achievements to know what he's talking about.

While being unable yourself to understand it and just conclude that it "must be a bug" rather than listening to others. Oh, and hiding your profile too, nice one ~