poor as Ottomans in circa 1550?!

[neaiskink]

Anyone got advice? I am playing as Ottos and blobbing (why else play them ) but i feel poor; my income is just a tad above French, deeply below Ming and if I kick full army maintenance, I am like -10/-20 in the red.

Why is that I feel piss poor while everyone in the forum claims you are rich as the Ottos?

Screens:
Trade and Finance with minimal maintenance http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1166207496
Overall situation http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1166207484

I have spent a lot of time in EU just after it launched, now it is a different game. Maybe I am missing something...?

 

[YuriiH]

14+ forts

 

[Markusmiless]

If I had to take a guess it's partly because your army size doesn't seem to match your development (but that is first glance and I could be wrong, I'm just basing this on that I've surplus when I've around 1/5th of your army with 1/3rd of your development).
However that is just based on my not-completely optimised playthrough so far.

It could be because your armies are reinforcing which increases the cost until it's completely reinforced (two of your armies are damaged).
Are you over you army forcelimit? (getting a look at how your economy is after your maintenance is on highest).
Also you seem to have at least 7-14 forts (are they useful to you, otherwise you could get rid of some of them which would give you 14 more ducats per month).

 

[Lor360]

Delete every single fort. Yes, I'm serious.

What would be the point of them? Delaying? Getting the bonus for defending in mountains twice in the entire game?

Without forts and the interest you're paying on loans you have +21 ducats per month extra.

 

[SPQT]

You have practically no production income and even your trade income is less than taxation.

Did you "kick started" your economy? I mean building workshops in the early game. You dont need a huge army at the beginning (24 for army maintainance?), but instead build buildings.

And manufactories are extremly worth it, especially as ottomans (boost to production and above all to trade), rob some money from venice and genoa if you cant afford it.

 

[Vulkandrache]

You still only have two merchants.
No TCs.

 

[Mrkew]

Just go full conquest on India and get all the money. Just remember to build workshops+manufacturies.
This is for example my Ottomans on very hard, which I just started to finally get the achievement of 1M deaths on both sides in one war. It's quite close to your date.
https://imgur.com/a/WvGmS
Note that I haven't built any buildings in India yet. This is just from proper trade steering. I have -500 AE with remaining indians, but who really cares about that?

 

[PhoenixG]

imo you just have a too large of an army for your economy. You need to improve your economy that have that size of an army. Build more buildings and delete some forts.

 

[Halo]

gotta spend money to make money my friend

just spam build buildings that net you at least 0.1 ducat a month in profit and you'll get your return gradually, and make all the trade companies you can

 

[holyvigil]

What SPQT said. I only need half my army to take enough muslim lands to cause a significant coalition to spawn. You don't need that big of an army early game. Once you start getting AE reduction modifiers that's when you can really start using your army.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I had about that income and ~90 regiments in 1518 as Ottomans. Too much dosh in forts, not enough investment in buildings for OP I think. Yes trade company land would help too but that doesn't explain on its own.

 

[Kubuini]

Invest in manufactories, they boost both your production and trade income. They will repay for themselves in 30-50 years (tooltip doesn't include trade income).

 

[Virupaksha]

At this point in the game manufactories are just kicking in and you want lots of them. Expansion only starts in earnest after admin 17, which is 1609. By 1609 you need to have an income high enough that gold in virtually not an issue.

From here first is forts. They have virtually no use. One on the capital. Maybe but it's a bit dubious one or two more in strategic blockages. Just by deleting 10 forts your income looks much better.

Second is states. Why are you not at your state limit? Territory which isn't stated will make very little income.

Third do you really need more than level 1 advisers. Better to lay manufactories down. After 1600 you want to be running level 3 admin and diplo for the rest of the game.

Fourth you have too much debt. Stop expanding til it's paid back, fight wars for gold instead. Ottomans virtually never need loans, why did you take them?

Fifth army is perhaps unnecessarily large. Don't need enormous amounts of standing troops with 80,000 manpower.

No forts, no loans, level one advisers you are 25 gold per month better of. Then build a manufactory per year for 20-30 years. Then forget about any money limitations for the rest of the game (though concentrating on expanding upstream along trade routes also makes a difference).

 

[neaiskink]

OK, what I used forts for:
- blocking rebels (as I cannot be everywhere with my army)
- blocking in coalition wars

Army true, again, overspent on army due to rebels and multiple front wars...
One more push in India and will do the cost cutting...

 

[bly08]

You can keep most of your forts if they're well-placed, just remember to mothball the ones you're not using even during war. Your income will grow quickly once you expand into India so I wouldn't worry about it. I also wouldn't disband any troops.

 

[Virupaksha]

OK, what I used forts for:

- blocking in coalition wars

This. If a peace deal provokes a coalition which can threaten you it's not worth it. Certainly not before admin 17.

Take the game stage by stage. Key to the game is to balance monarch points, AE, manpower and gold against each other. Putting energy into gold so it doesn't have to be thought about any more simplifies things. If you are good at war and take quantity then manpower also becomes a non-issue. Then you become too big to care about coalitions and it becomes a case of how much land you can core

 

[Bibor]

Europe and Russia are a waste of time.
Anatolia -> Syria -> Greece -> Mesopotamia -> Egypt -> Mecca & Persia -> Afghanistan & Gulf of Aden -> India coastline -> Bangladesh (cutting off India from Ming) -> India -> Ming.

By the time you turn back your attention to Europe and Russia, you'll be fielding 650.000 troops, have an income of over 2000 ducats and you'll be wondering where did you misplace those 120 transports.

 

[otaats]

• You have a large army (you don't need that much at the moment. Just merge them in your subsequent conquests.)
• You don't need so many forts. Keep the ones in Edirne, Konstantiniyye, and you can keep one in Anatolia and Trebizond, just for sake of them being cores and potentially slowing down anyone coming from north. You can wipe anyone south and east of your borders.

 

[Viadro]

Just go full conquest on India and get all the money. Just remember to build workshops+manufacturies.
This is for example my Ottomans on very hard, which I just started to finally get the achievement of 1M deaths on both sides in one war. It's quite close to your date.
https://imgur.com/a/WvGmS
Note that I haven't built any buildings in India yet. This is just from proper trade steering. I have -500 AE with remaining indians, but who really cares about that?

How did you manage to conquer so much without triggering a huge coalition? Are you a Ming tributary?

 

[otaats]

How did you manage to conquer so much without triggering a huge coalition? Are you a Ming tributary?

Yeah, but maybe there weren't too many Indian majors to go around. They sure kicked my ass one time i tried to be the master of india (8 - coalition against me.. i was England though. So i only had half of the army in India)