Colonzing, is it worth it?

[unmerged(25633)]

But each year you wait for the infra to raise, and the cost of colonizing to fall, is a year's worth of income lost.

And consider the fact that some colonies may enable you to conquer pagan nations more easily, or attack the possessions of another colonial nation (Brazil is VERY vulnerable to as few as 1000 cav ) to gain enough points to snatch one or more province(s) (who talked about Portugal ? :rofl: ).

Also, 76mm, I think you forget that you need to siege and seize control of more than one province to get one from your enemy, and there're lot of european provinces (even in France) that are poor...

And another factor to consider in the cost/benefit analysis would be the value of CoT's captured with the use of certain colonies as strategic bases.

I'm relatively new to the game, but, as Sweden in my current AoM campaign I was able to take Ceram, Malacca, New York, and Zanzibar before 1750 (and gave away Surinam, Bombay and Guangzhou in peace deals). In my opinion, I wouldn't have gotten any of these without the colonies I had earlier established--and I was very frugal in establishing these (prior to 1718, I had only established Roanoke, Table and Palakmedi).

In the time that I've played the game, my focus has been on Sweden 1617-1718. I've attempted to play as historically as possible--yes, I do give in to temptation--to the death of Karl XII (thereafter the gloves come off!)

In my next stab at this I plan to reduce my colonizing efforts much more, and I expect that this will be reflected in a much reduced Sweden.

Regards,

Corsair

 

[Moquel]

THIS IS A SIDENOTE:
I was thinking of what you called your AAR: Strenght and Honour.
That was the slogon of one of the alliances in planetarion, witch I was member off

Eat my shorts you Legion scum!

As for colonizing, yeah, it's worth it. A good colonial base in NA or SA and you're good to go for conquering the Aztec or Incas etc which always is a nice thing in any game, regardless of cost.

And you easily earn the money back on the better places to colonize, for example a nice little colony in Table and you've got a CoT coming your way, or why not making a run at colonizing the provinces with 10k natives in India for a suddenly large city in the middle of some of the richest provinces in the game?
The possibilities really are endless and I always think they're worth the expense.

 

[unmerged(25696)]

And after all, half of the provinces (approximatively) are to be colonized. If you don't, you lose half the fun of the game.

One more benefit : if the new colonies are adjacent to your country (that is, unbroken landpath to your capital), they count for your manpower (and you may later build conscription center). Imagine the number of 100k armies you may field with a completely CCed Siberia...

 

[unmerged(25432)]

i only focus on settling trade posts. They're cheap & give a high % of income/investment. Your trade levels go through the roof which is good for your income, but most importantly, what i own can't be owned by my rivals! (unless the send troops)

 

[unmerged(21937)]

i only focus on settling trade posts. They're cheap & give a high % of income/investment. Your trade levels go through the roof which is good for your income, but most importantly, what i own can't be owned by my rivals! (unless the send troops)

TPs are not long term invertment. You only get trade income from a tp, while you get also tax and production income from a colony. Also, colonies can have ports, which TPs can't have. And possibly most importantly: If you happen to go to war, colonies just change control and can be taken back, but if somebody else takes control of your tp in a war, he may burn it (and AI always burns all tps it takes control of) so they are very vulnerable in a war.

 

[MarshalN]

Yup, the way TPs are made, they are only useful for provinces that are difficult (if not impossible) to colonize and provinces that will almost never pay off (0 base tax, etc)

 

[unmerged(25696)]

Yup, the way TPs are made, they are only useful for provinces that are difficult (if not impossible) to colonize and provinces that will almost never pay off (0 base tax, etc)

Also useful when you want to "book" a large territory, to colonize later. But correct me if I'm wrong, they count for the stab & tech costs, don't they ?

 

[Katte]

But how do you determine which region/province is worthwhile (thinking economically)?

 

[unmerged(16181)]

Yup, the way TPs are made, they are only useful for provinces that are difficult (if not impossible) to colonize and provinces that will almost never pay off (0 base tax, etc)

They are also useful to boost the success chance for a province. I find that when I have a trading post in a province, it is easier to colonize than one with nothing in it.

 

[unmerged(9338)]

About BB points, who really cares, within 50 years of play you "are hated throughout the entire world" anyway...

Yeahh... for not to say the whole universe!

 

[unmerged(25696)]

But how do you determine which region/province is worthwhile (thinking economically)?

Look at the Base tax value (in the prov, the number in the circle on the left - or the right, never remember ) and at the good product (the image in the box, center high of the prov). The first determines the tax income (when it becomes a colonial city, before it's negligible), and IMHO consider it to be good at 3-4. The latter determines the production income, more important than the tax income for colonies and at a later era of play. Excellent goods : spices, porcelains. Good : cotton, coffee, ivory, copper, iron, gold, textiles.

Tip : always colonize north america, try to colonize (carefully) india & indonesia/malaisia, and later siberia (easy one). TP for africa, except south africa (good colonies, strategic base). South america : it depends of the province. And, DoW & Conquer those native americans (north & south).

 

[unmerged(19159)]

of course it is worth it. colonial products : spice ,coffe ,sugar ! will become key to your economy . and i don't think that there is a problem between colonizing and warring in europe. if you are big country : France, Spain , u can easily afford to do both, and if u are not big and rich country ( for example Eire ) there are no cheap wars for u so gaining province will cost u a lot ( unless it is using the oportunities which on the other hand don't requires enourmos armies or fleets).

 

[unmerged(25822)]

it depends on who you are playing

Colonising siberia is a must if you are russia /manchu,no penalties,massive manpower with barracks, furs in high prices after you got officials and so on, portugal and spain must colonise as they have plently of explorers, tordesillas (btw why tordesillas isnt the pope when this law passes? :wacko: ) and so they can grab land early,same for morroco and frontier countries.-for those countries colonies i beleive do pay back

on the other hand if you play austria,sweden,france,ottos you can keep the money to build factories and maintain a big army to defend your place,after all you only get few (if any) explorers when rest of the world is no longer white , england seem to be more of a personal choice (i have never play them)- me thinks for those countries colonies do not pay back

As an 1 province minor (example ragusa) its real fun to colonise only islands and provoke big guys with no fleet to come and get you,also it might not be lucritive (you will never have to money to paint america in your coloure) but it pays back since one colony can double your income-for one province minnors i think colonising adds fun to the game and pays back int he longterm

 

[unmerged(10894)]

In MP, colonisation becomes much, much more important than it does in SP. Because of the fact that wars over one province may often rage on for 5+ years and cost well over the cost of colonising a few normal provinces, war is not nearly as profitable as colonisation. And don't forget that your enemy may come back for its province you took off it, whereas a colony is not quite as dangerous or risky.

Another point is that what you colonise, the other players can't. This becomes a very important factor when things heat up, as you have the resources they would otherwise have.

However you do need to be cautious about colonisation, especially with low tax colonies. AFAIK having even low income colonial cities will raise your stability and technology costs, sometimes more than what the benefits of that colony is. However if you need more places for manufactories, it may still be a good idea to colonise low tax-low production provinces.

Provinces that have reasonable priced goods are automatically worth it. Sugar, Spices, Chinaware, Wine, Fur, Tobacco and Gold are all good to colonise when possible. Grain may still be good to colonise, if you need the military support.

 

[unmerged(14553)]

(btw why tordesillas isnt the pope when this law passes? :wacko: )

Huh? Tordesillas is the name of the city where the treaty was signed...

or am I misunderstanding something?

 

[unmerged(19081)]

France and England must colonize northern america. It's the bonus against european non colonial countries. And if you have a good strategy you can have almost all northern america. It gives you manpower, money, and trade. There is a lot of 3-4 tax income provinces and some 5. You have coton, tobacco as commercial goods. It's very interesting. And far more it's easy, with a bit of preparations, to take over the indians countries. And you can have as far as 50% chances of inquisition there, so even religion is not a long term problem.

In a GC as France, in 1680, I have almost all north americas as far as rio grande, except far northern provincies (to expensive and not interesting), 4-5 provinces not yet owned, 3 provinces owned by England, Hurons and Dakota's territories. It's almost the third (I think) of my annual income. And it's not in contradiction with manufactories building (I have now about 17-18). A good strategy is to take all the coastal provincies as south as possible, isolate english colonies, and then, you have time to colonize what's left. During this time you have time to go to India, Australia and New-zealand, who are good places to colonize too.

England have explorers at about 1470-1480 and some conquistadors after 1500. For France it's about 20 or 30 years later.

 

[unmerged(25822)]

Huh? Tordesillas is the name of the city where the treaty was signed...

or am I misunderstanding something?

OUPS! :rofl:

i guess im in complete ignorance of western european history