Am I running too many Homes? Orc/Warrior

[Realest]

i believe higher BE does not mean a good prov, and a low Be does not signify a bad prov.

[Dolgil]

For orc, homes are better than stables. One stable gives you 60 offensive points. One home gives an extra 8 pop. Turn that into elites 8 x 8 = 64. Twenty percent should be more than enough.

Low BE provinces ( under 80%) are always bad. Way too net worth inefficient. High BE provinces may or may not be. You can get high BE provinces on low draft.

[Realest]

You are right that homes are better than stables but your explanation isnt. True, homes will give 8 more pop space but u can't say all 8 are gonna be military.

lets assume 60% draft rate,

0.6 x 25 = 15

now add homes, so peoples per acre becomes 33,

0.6 x 33 = 19.8

so assuming you keep draft rate the same, which you should, u gained roughly 5 elites per acre at 60% draft, which is 40 off pts.

to reach the 8 more elites you said, you will need to up draft to 70%

0.7 x 33 = 23

Thus, the reason to run homes is not because of the offense increase. Ultimately as orc, you want to run neither of these buildings so lets not worry about them.

Lastly there is no set relationship between BE. Under 80% is not always bad - it just depends on what you want to do. You are right tho, that high BE may reflect poorly drafted provinces, which is why I said what I said earlier.

edit: why you run homes over stables is cause stable power is dependent on elites you run and thus amount of land needed.

[WestVenom]

Remember basically 10% homes = 3.2% increase in population =)

so just weigh that against the bonusses you get from other buildings and see if its worth it.

3.2% increase in pop is basically about 0.8 TPA or 0.8 WPA or a mix of both = 0.8 increase in your province everything else held constant.

[clarey]

Military power and economy is what wins wars, not BE =p

Remember though, if you run homes for the BE boost thus maintaining the same draft, the tpa comes out of your epa which compromises your attack power. So not really a good argument imo. Weighing 10% homes against the bonuses other buildings offer, hell, i'd take other buildings.

[Realest]

good leader wins wars ;)

[Baobandia]

Nucular bombs win wars.

On topic: Homes ftw! That extra birth rate is good for filling up your 30% extra gained land (orcs can have a hard time reaching max pop in war... though this might not be too good) and the extra peasants = extra money = more sustainability in war.

If you're going for 48-hours-wars, then perhaps it's a bit too many, anyway.

[Realest]

homes are not ftw, dont build em.

[Deathwish238]

Should I perhaps replace some of my homes with Banks to get my economy going a bit better? I don't really like the idea of running banks during war...but I suppose I'm not against it

[_greenie]

10% homes aint bad, anymore is a waste IMO

[Catwalk]

Flawed logic Realest. You can simply raise draft from 60% to 61% or whatever if you want to look at the full military benefit of homes. You also ignore the BE effect of having 25 jobs removed. Not sure if homes are worth it or not, if you assume max pop they're quite good. In a war situation it's a little trickier to analyze, as they may seem useless if you're below max pop. However, you still enter war with higher pop than you would otherwise and will be at a higher pop level even after losing some. Including the BE and birth rate effects, homes are worth 13-15 peasants depending on how you measure it.

[Realest]

um.. you do not run 100% homes, therefore if u do not keep draft rate constant, u are overdrafting your other acres. Sure the new pop space and lack of jobs means u could increase draft to 61, 62, etc. like you said to get more offense. However, you dont really get "8 more units to use", which is what i was demonstrating.

again, this person is clearly asking on help on his strat, and suggesting homes is not helping, esp if its just analyzed like, "imo 10% homes is good" or "imo 20% isnt too much"

[Fate1316]

You don't need to turn your draft that far up to get the benefit of "8 more units to use".

No Homes
Pop/Acre = 25
Draft = 60%
Mil/Acre = 15 pop/acre
Pez/Acre = 10
Job/Acre = 16.7 (for max BE)

10% Homes
Pop/Acre = 25.8
Draft = 61.2%
Mil/Acre = 15.8
Pez/Acre = 10
Job/Acre = 15 (for max BE)

20% Homes
Pop/Acre = 26.6
Draft = 62.4%
Mil/Acre = 16.6
Pez/Acre = 10
Job/Acre = 13.3 (for max BE)

30% Homes
Pop/Acre = 27.4
Draft = 63.5%
Mil/Acre = 17.4
Pez/Acre = 10
Job/Acre = 11.7 (for max BE)

[_greenie]

um.. you do not run 100% homes, therefore if u do not keep draft rate constant, u are overdrafting your other acres. Sure the new pop space and lack of jobs means u could increase draft to 61, 62, etc. like you said to get more offense. However, you dont really get "8 more units to use", which is what i was demonstrating.

again, this person is clearly asking on help on his strat, and suggesting homes is not helping, esp if its just analyzed like, "imo 10% homes is good" or "imo 20% isnt too much"

to me, homes is a choice based on how much you care about BE...

there isnt too much difference between the two, just that one gives you a BR bonus for slightly lower effects from other buildings

its totally up to the user as to what they want to run, for me, its either 10% or less... my gen elf runs homes, but thats cause it has ~10% extra pop, which means it can make better use of them, for an orc warrior with only ~4% pop, they probably arent as worthwhile

[Deathwish238]

Someone mentioned that a good province has a strong military and economy. Well, my military is fine...but I'm lacking gc. So more banks seems to be the logical solution.

However, I'm not keen on running banks during war....


How does this look:

War
Homes 10
Farms 10
TG 23
Forts 20
Hospitals 17
Guilds 11
Towers 6
Dungeons 3


OOW
Homes 10
Farms 10
Banks 30
TG 16
Guilds 15
Hops 10
Towers 6
Dungeons 3



Now I'm thinking I would have too many Forts...but I don't really know what else to put it into and being harder to break sounds like a great idea