Rome and empire size

[Bullseye500]

I seem to always run out of interest as I acquire 40 to 50 territories as the micro-management each turn becomes more of a burden then I want to deal with. Trying to track trade goods, build buildings and put down uprisings every turn becomes quite tedious for me. I always delete my game and start a new one at about the same point (size) of empire building. Do some of the more experienced players have any thoughts on this matter?

[13obo]

Yes, many have complained of the overwhelming micromanagement late in the game. A possible solution is to play multiplayer!

[Bullseye500]

Oops. /no delete function available.

[Bullseye500]

Yes, many have complained of the overwhelming micromanagement late in the game. A possible solution is to play multiplayer!

I have never cared much for multi-player.

[loki100]

I seem to always run out of interest as I acquire 40 to 50 territories as the micro-management each turn becomes more of a burden then I want to deal with. Trying to track trade goods, build buildings and put down uprisings every turn becomes quite tedious for me. I always delete my game and start a new one at about the same point (size) of empire building. Do some of the more experienced players have any thoughts on this matter?

I've completed 2 games (to t500) as both times I wanted to test something out. Otherwise once I hit #1 legacy and its pretty secure then yes I will often start to run a game down. I think that was becuase the post-T400 game was too easy with too much money and the ability to create as large an army as you needed (so you could have endless garrisons etc).

My guess is the changes in 1.04 may alter this, especially in terms of less money/loyalty (since you can't afford so many garrisons etc). If so we get to the late game where yes, you are probably going to win, but its a bit of a wild ride of decadence and revolts and your powerful army stretched by this, a major war and an annoying tribe raiding you?

my trick to ease the late game micro-management was first to ignore the trade model (ie I was large enough that it all balanced out) and then every turn just rotate through all my provinces - this gave me information on loyalty shifts and building slots. I found this good enough and not too time consuming.

[Bullseye500]

OK, I think that I am following you here. At the late game you just react to the territories that present an icon to show an action can/should be taken. I have just started to do this a little bit, if I'm correct if you do not act the turn that the icon appears then you will have to manually address the territory at some further date/turn.

What about using the "auto-build" function for provinces, is that viable?

Does having an occupying army in garrison provide the same stability to a territory as having the army occupying the territory? Which is more effective at pacification/quashing rebellion?

I certainly enjoy FoGII and FoG Empires and it's replay value is excellent but I still haven't been able to complete a single game of Empires without restarting anew.

[SpeedyCM]

My understanding is that all the benefits of having troops in a region are the same no matter whether the troops are in garrison or in the field.

[Pocus]

Yes, done on purpose to remove needless micro-managing.