Integrate up to nobles?

[Aslan Ponto]

In my current campaign I decided to integrate Macedonians, Romans (up to 1700 pops each) and Punics (500 pops in order to have access to Greek-Levantine war traditions). I gave them all the ranks up to noble level (aside from all the bonuses such as mixed marriages in order to integrate faster), is it necessary? Has it any drawback?

Thanks in advance.

[Menkerot]

integrating any culture in any way angers your primary culture obviously, especially since integrated cultures never assimilate. And you don't need nobles, citizen rights are enough already (and still unhappy primary culture, of course). Assimilation is better in the long run.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Aslan Ponto:

In my current campaign I decided to integrate Macedonians, Romans (up to 1700 pops each) and Punics (500 pops in order to have access to Greek-Levantine war traditions). I gave them all the ranks up to noble level (aside from all the bonuses such as mixed marriages in order to integrate faster), is it necessary? Has it any drawback?

Thanks in advance.

My thinking is; once I have enough research generation then nobles aren’t going to add much more value relative to say slaves which can produce more income from both tax and commerce.

In the technology menu hover over your research production and it will tell you how far ahead of time you are. In my current Rome save it says I’m 51 years ahead and am suffering a major penalty. So integrating a new culture up to noble status isn’t really worth it in this scenario unless I really want more trade routes as well (which Nobels provide).

Hopefully this gives you one example of how to think about it.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Originally posted by Lateralus:

My thinking is; once I have enough research generation then nobles aren’t going to add much more value relative to say slaves which can produce more income from both tax and commerce.

Just out of curiosity (because it's not something I've needed to think about yet), would this value proposition not depend on the size of your primary culture compared to the ones you integrate? If only a small number of pops in your nation can become nobles then, with so many other integrated pops, wouldn't the amount of research generation you need to max out your cap be way beyond what you could possibly produce? I get your point that the effects of this "penalty" are lessened by the ahead-on-tech penalty, but surely we're looking at a situation of totally crippled research if your primary culture is say only 10-20% of your total integrated culture pops? Wouldn't this scenario give strong cause to allow promotion to noble rank (given you're already suffering the integrated culture happiness malus anyway)?

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Cap'n Morgan:

Originally posted by Lateralus:

My thinking is; once I have enough research generation then nobles aren’t going to add much more value relative to say slaves which can produce more income from both tax and commerce.

Just out of curiosity (because it's not something I've needed to think about yet), would this value proposition not depend on the size of your primary culture compared to the ones you integrate? If only a small number of pops in your nation can become nobles then, with so many other integrated pops, wouldn't the amount of research generation you need to max out your cap be way beyond what you could possibly produce? I get your point that the effects of this "penalty" are lessened by the ahead-on-tech penalty, but surely we're looking at a situation of totally crippled research if your primary culture is say only 10-20% of your total integrated culture pops? Wouldn't this scenario give strong cause to allow promotion to noble rank (given you're already suffering the integrated culture happiness malus anyway)?

Yes, so it would depend on how far ahead of time you are, as well as the current research ratio (if it was uncapped), vs how far this will drop by deciding not to integrate a culture up to noble. There are lots of variables here and we would need a specific example to work through in order to conclude which is the best approach for that case. There are other things to consider like overall campaign strategy in the short term vs the long term. Like do I need more slaves for income or more manpower etc.

Not to mention a consideration for ones own playstyle and personal goals (if there's a role-play aspect as well.) I don't role-play much in this game and prefer to optimise for expansion efficiency with a focus on slaves for high income.

[galadon3]

Actually there isn't that much point to give them noble-rights, the ratio between the pop-classes is for the whole population so if you have only a small number of your core-culture in a territory and a big number of integrated ones thats small core-group would become nobles to reach the ratio.
So it only really makes a difference if you have big areas without your core-culture being present there. And that honestly just means that you need to up your assimilation game.
Since pops migrate around even if an area is predominantly populated by an integrated culture (wich doesn't get assimilated) there are usually quite some pops of other cultures around wich can be assimiliated to give the area a group of core-culture pops (at least a bit into the game).

Thinking nobles would only be important for science is overlooking the fact that they generate trade-routes btw.
But since the ratio isn't per culture anyway the point is pretty moot for that question anyway.

So in the end if you go till citizen or till noble with integrated cultures is mostly a roleplaying thing, if your realm has a defined cultural upper crust or is even the nobility mixed between the different accepted cultures of the realm.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by galadon3:

Thinking nobles would only be important for science is overlooking the fact that they generate trade-routes btw.

My first post in this thread mentions trade routes, so it wasn't overlooked.

[galadon3]

Originally posted by Lateralus:

Originally posted by galadon3:

Thinking nobles would only be important for science is overlooking the fact that they generate trade-routes btw.

My first post in this thread mentions trade routes, so it wasn't overlooked.

Then let me rephrase that:
Thinking that nobles would be less important for your economy then slaves is overlooking the amounts of money the trade-routes nobles generate produce.

in base-terms 7 nobles generate 1 traderoute (not affected by their happiness so that is very stable, making it very comparable to the slaves output wich is also not affected by happiness), while the base tax of 7 slaves is about 0.1 gold.
So the question wich of them is the better choice economically completely comes down to the situation:
The less slaves you need for an extra-tradegood and the higher worth the trade good in the territory is the better slaves are
And on the other hand the value and province-bonus of the available import trade goods influence the economic viablity of the trade route the nobles produce.
In the capital region the nobles pretty much always win out until you have 2 trade goods of every trade good for their empire-wide bonus (maybe with the exception of the ones tribesmen profit from for a non-tribal realm)
In other provinces the bonusses from trade-goods can be quite substantial too, let alone the money to be made from the trade-income.
So taking it as a general rule that slaves 1:1 give you more money then nobles is very doubtfull, in fact it has to be evaluated on a case to case basis.


And besides that, as said before the question if nobles or slaves get you more money is moot for the question if its important to give noble rights to integrated cultures except for a rather short transitional phase (unless you haven't grasped yet how to assimiliate populations fast) in wich you don't have enough core culture pops in the newly conquered area to form the always rather small noble class.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by galadon3:

Originally posted by Lateralus:

My first post in this thread mentions trade routes, so it wasn't overlooked.

Then let me rephrase that:
Thinking that nobles would be less important for your economy then slaves is overlooking the amounts of money the trade-routes nobles generate produce.

in base-terms 7 nobles generate 1 traderoute (not affected by their happiness so that is very stable, making it very comparable to the slaves output wich is also not affected by happiness), while the base tax of 7 slaves is about 0.1 gold.
So the question wich of them is the better choice economically completely comes down to the situation:
The less slaves you need for an extra-tradegood and the higher worth the trade good in the territory is the better slaves are
And on the other hand the value and province-bonus of the available import trade goods influence the economic viablity of the trade route the nobles produce.
In the capital region the nobles pretty much always win out until you have 2 trade goods of every trade good for their empire-wide bonus (maybe with the exception of the ones tribesmen profit from for a non-tribal realm)
In other provinces the bonusses from trade-goods can be quite substantial too, let alone the money to be made from the trade-income.
So taking it as a general rule that slaves 1:1 give you more money then nobles is very doubtfull, in fact it has to be evaluated on a case to case basis.


And besides that, as said before the question if nobles or slaves get you more money is moot for the question if its important to give noble rights to integrated cultures except for a rather short transitional phase (unless you haven't grasped yet how to assimiliate populations fast) in wich you don't have enough core culture pops in the newly conquered area to form the always rather small noble class.

I’m making so much money from a slave focused strategy that a few more trade routes isn’t worth it. But I monitor my research all the time and focus back to nobles when needed.

It’s a complex game and there’s no way you could fully understand my strategy just like I won’t be able to understand yours unless we exchanged save files and discussed it in detail. I like how complex this game is. Maybe that’s why it’s not as popular as other titles.

[Aslan Ponto]

Originally posted by Lateralus:

Originally posted by Aslan Ponto:

In my current campaign I decided to integrate Macedonians, Romans (up to 1700 pops each) and Punics (500 pops in order to have access to Greek-Levantine war traditions). I gave them all the ranks up to noble level (aside from all the bonuses such as mixed marriages in order to integrate faster), is it necessary? Has it any drawback?

Thanks in advance.

My thinking is; once I have enough research generation then nobles aren’t going to add much more value relative to say slaves which can produce more income from both tax and commerce.

In the technology menu hover over your research production and it will tell you how far ahead of time you are. In my current Rome save it says I’m 51 years ahead and am suffering a major penalty. So integrating a new culture up to noble status isn’t really worth it in this scenario unless I really want more trade routes as well (which Nobels provide).

Hopefully this gives you one example of how to think about it.

I did not know that. It says I am 94 years ahead in investigation. Atm I was trying to have many research hubs thanks to these integrated nobles, but maybe it is not that necessary, although the trade routes are nice for importing wheat and animals for specific legions. I have built forums in these selected research hubs, since I dont feel the necessity for manpower, although perhaps I should switch to a more tax based economy, since my trade income is starting to become stagnant.

[Aslan Ponto]

Originally posted by galadon3:

Actually there isn't that much point to give them noble-rights, the ratio between the pop-classes is for the whole population so if you have only a small number of your core-culture in a territory and a big number of integrated ones thats small core-group would become nobles to reach the ratio.
So it only really makes a difference if you have big areas without your core-culture being present there. And that honestly just means that you need to up your assimilation game.
Since pops migrate around even if an area is predominantly populated by an integrated culture (wich doesn't get assimilated) there are usually quite some pops of other cultures around wich can be assimiliated to give the area a group of core-culture pops (at least a bit into the game).

Thinking nobles would only be important for science is overlooking the fact that they generate trade-routes btw.
But since the ratio isn't per culture anyway the point is pretty moot for that question anyway.

So in the end if you go till citizen or till noble with integrated cultures is mostly a roleplaying thing, if your realm has a defined cultural upper crust or is even the nobility mixed between the different accepted cultures of the realm.

That was one of the reasons I had. I conquered the most populated Carthage´s regions, alongside Magna Graecia, and I noticed how vastly populated they are and how long it would take me to assimilate them. Besides, there were no pops of my own culture, so I decided to simply integrate them. Moreover, these 3 cultures still have presence in many places I want to conquer (Italia, Spain, Egypt...) so it´ll be an instant win when I conquer them,

Once I integrated them my puntuation went from 22000 to 40000 for the happiness, and the available manpower skyrocketed, so even though I had been prioritising assimilation, I came to the conclusion to this was not totally a bad decision.

Furthermore, as you point out, for me is really cool for role-playing merging in one empire the Romans, Punics and Macedonians might. I still have to integrate Capadocians in order to have access to the Persian traditions, but those will be the last ones, since I do not want my own pops to be pissed off. For playing wide as I am in this campaign I think integration is worthy, otherwise it could take centuries to assimilate big culture groups whilst dealing with their disloyalty.

[Jean-Maurice Nya]

I usually give citizen rights and not noble. You get pretty much no bonus and with a-5% in happiness for your primary one.
It's only interesting if your primary culture represents nothing on the map and you want to switch for a better one.
Citizen rights gives a - 4% to happiness and that's it, your pop will still have a few nobles.
Same goes if you want to demote a culture to slave. Don't hit the "slave" right, use the tribal one instead. The slave right reduces slave output for that culture while the tribesmen doesn't. And if you're a Republic or Monarchy, tribesmen are automatically demoted to slaves.

To rebound on the pop topic, it's why I also rely on pop growth, so my main culture will always produce a huge amount of nobles and citizen that'll compensate the pop increase from conquest and keep research efficiency at its max. Now if you have 90 years of technological advance, research efficiency will be slightly less effective than specific research traits for breakthrough.

[Aslan Ponto]

I have come to the conclusion that there are a couple of good reasons to integrate them up to nobles.

- If you conquer a territory which already has a lot of nobles of this culture, for happiness and have an already nice research hub with imports.

- In addition to this, if the territory also has pops that you want to demote, that way you save the slot for the nobles getting demoted to citizens which can be used to demote those other pops.

[Jean-Maurice Nya]

If that's a massive interesting pop than can reach over 1000 pops over a huge amount of provinces that might be interesting.
My main way to play is too integrate only to unlock military tree so I don't bother about their happiness, they'll be on assimilation as soon as it is unlocked. But that a thought for "Sim" run.

Did you see a huge gain in keeping nobles depending on their status? Because you still have nobles from an integrated pop with citizen status. So if the difference is really significative between noble status and citizen status, I might consider keeping big pop at noble status more often, mainly for the import route, my capital province is usually so full of nobles that my research efficiency is almost at max even if I use the imperial challenge cassus belli. Some pops have very good levy composition and are worth keeping integrated. It can be worth the investment and the hit on happiness as high civilization value makes it easy to keep it high by mid-late game.

[Aslan Ponto]

Originally posted by Jean-Maurice Nya:

If that's a massive interesting pop than can reach over 1000 pops over a huge amount of provinces that might be interesting.
My main way to play is too integrate only to unlock military tree so I don't bother about their happiness, they'll be on assimilation as soon as it is unlocked. But that a thought for "Sim" run.

Did you see a huge gain in keeping nobles depending on their status? Because you still have nobles from an integrated pop with citizen status. So if the difference is really significative between noble status and citizen status, I might consider keeping big pop at noble status more often, mainly for the import route, my capital province is usually so full of nobles that my research efficiency is almost at max even if I use the imperial challenge cassus belli. Some pops have very good levy composition and are worth keeping integrated. It can be worth the investment and the hit on happiness as high civilization value makes it easy to keep it high by mid-late game.

Hi, Jean. I recently conquered Southern Italy and accepted the Mesapian and Sabelian cultures, which already had around 8 trade imports in the province of Neapolis, and I did not want to lose that (also to use the Sabelian culture for opening the Italic traditions). Besides, I decided to make one of the cities a massive research hub, so after choosing the settlement with the greatest number of nobles, I am expanding it as much as possible, sending all the slaves in the area to make it a metropolis. Besides, making this 1-2 settlements massively fortified and populated protects your greatest resource, pops, even if the enemies roam through the unwalled settlements. That is why it is also interesting to demote other cultures, that way you also have control of those pops who used to be citizens etc and move wherever they are more productive and can be protected.

For me it is a tool to have a much better control over my population, so I think that if you really find the proper place where there are already lots of nobles and citizens, it does not hurt moving them up nobles, although this might make way more sense if you conquer sth like late game Latium from Rome, accepting Romans as nobles but demoting the other cultures if they have a significant number and you want them elsewhere, not early game when citizens to have a bigger levy might be enough.

That said, if the number of nobles is too low they would not get demoted even if they are not up to noble status, and they are demoted even if they are so, so it also depends mostly on the composition of the settlement itself, thus building the 3 academies is mandatory.

[galadon3]

The problem of longterm integration of many cultures is that you get an overall happiness malus and even if that doesn't lead to problems like rebellion, lower happiness means lower productivity (save for slave-pops), so it makes your empire less effective in the long run, especially integrating small cultures.
If you play the game just to the normal end date, integrating cultures that are big or get big can make sense (macedonian, punic, roman for example, depending on where you start and when you reach them can have massive numbers of pops), since having them at full effectiveness right away might beat the relatively low happiness malus effects as opposed to the long time it needs to really assimiliate them.

For small realms in special spots there can ofc be a good reason to integrate a small culture at least for a while, with Massilia and Bosparan (both greek colony states) for example I integrated the local culture right away to boost early levy numbers, but I did de-integrate them when I reached a certain size.