Anti Corruption Buildings suck??? — Total War Forums

Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Anti Corruption Buildings suck???

QuesocitoQuesocito Junior MemberPosts: 64Registered Users
edited May 30 in General Discussion
Approximately 4800 for the first level Anti Corruption building(Cao Cao). "Lowers corruption by 10%"

Corruption in administrated province is ~22% with 26 provinces.

Build first anti corruption building, new corruption 19%. Lowered the corruption by x10% of original net total.

3% of highish yield province (1400) = ~42 per turn. 4800/42 = 114 turns to make up the cost of the building.

I thought it would lower corrution by 10%, as in 22% down to ~12%. Why bother building it?

Comments

  • MolgrimMolgrim Posts: 21Registered Users
    Because at some point corruption level will hit 70%, and province income 5k.
  • ZofyhrZofyhr Posts: 41Registered Users
    edited May 30
    On a long run, the best seems like to build the improved version diminushing it to every nearby regions. But true, 10% is super low in my opinion, almost pointless. It should be a subtractive 10% (for 50% corruption -10% = 40%), and not 10% of 50%, which is just reducing by 5% if you have 50% corruption).

    I'm not pretty sure if its bug or not, but it doesnt seem to be intended that way.
    I would like a dev could confirm that, cause If we compare with other percentages (bonus to incomes), it's always additive or substractive.
  • yolordmcswagyolordmcswag Posts: 770Registered Users
    Huh, I didn't know... is the same true for corruption reducing reforms aswell?
  • MolgrimMolgrim Posts: 21Registered Users
    edited May 30
    Zofyhr said:

    On a long run, the best seems like to build the improved version diminushing it to every nearby regions. But true, 10% is super low in my opinion, almost pointless. It should be a subtractive 10% (for 50% corruption -10% = 40%), and not 10% of 50%, which is just reducing by 5% if you have 50% corruption).

    I'm not pretty sure if its bug or not, but it doesnt seem to be intended that way.
    I would like a dev could confirm that, cause If we compare with other percentages (bonus to incomes), it's always additive or substractive.

    10% is not low at all, you just shouldn't try to fight with corruption early. If you have rich province with 2 or 3 income source this 5% would give you more than another +100 income from community or industry. 10% for adjacent commandiatories from the other hands are superior stat.
    In this way corruption is great mid to late game mechanics. Its have low impact early, punish careless and rapid growth but still can be manageable. Only problem is that, we dont have detailed info about base corruption level and current percentage deduction, so its hard to calculate profit.
  • QuesocitoQuesocito Junior Member Posts: 64Registered Users
    edited May 30

    Huh, I didn't know... is the same true for corruption reducing reforms aswell?

    i still need to try one, should get one later today. but im assuming it will be the same.
    Molgrim said:

    Because at some point corruption level will hit 70%, and province income 5k.

    sorry but i disagree, it shouldnt work like that for such an easily accesible building, 5k? yeah maybe on one or two provinces. but still highly unlikely in my game.

    as far as i understand, they intend for us to have vassals/alliances to hold large amounts of territory so we shouldnt be getting 70% corruption in the first place, according to how the devs explained how the game should end up
    Zofyhr said:

    On a long run, the best seems like to build the improved version diminushing it to every nearby regions. ....
    I would like a dev could confirm that, cause If we compare with other percentages (bonus to incomes), it's always additive or substractive.

    yeah i guess ill plan for the higher tier one as well. and i would also like a dev to confirm this..

  • MolgrimMolgrim Posts: 21Registered Users

    Huh, I didn't know... is the same true for corruption reducing reforms aswell?

    Yes reforms work the same way.
    Quesocito said:


    sorry but i disagree, it shouldnt work like that for such an easily accesible building, 5k? yeah maybe on one or two provinces. but still highly unlikely in my game.

    as far as i understand, they intend for us to have vassals/alliances to hold large amounts of territory so we shouldnt be getting 70% corruption in the first place, according to how the devs explained how the game should end up

    Could you explain what do you mean?
  • BeardedragonBeardedragon Member Posts: 1,349Registered Users
    Quesocito said:

    Approximately 4800 for the first level Anti Corruption building(Cao Cao). "Lowers corruption by 10%"

    Corruption in administrated province is ~22% with 26 provinces.

    Build first anti corruption building, new corruption 19%. Lowered the corruption by x10% of original net total.

    3% of highish yield province (1400) = ~42 per turn. 4800/42 = 114 turns to make up the cost of the building.

    I thought it would lower corrution by 10%, as in 22% down to ~12%. Why bother building it?

    i have 75% corruption. or had, in another game because i didnt build them. my income was trash. so you need them.
  • dreagondreagon Senior Member Posts: 1,872Registered Users
    Do those corruption buildings actually stack their effects? So if one commandery borders two with a corruption reducing building, does it benefit twice?
    "The dog is a peasant and the cat is a gentleman." H.P. Lovecraft
  • scrutyscruty Posts: 21Registered Users
    As with many things in this game, you want to stack effects. You'd barely notice a lone -10%, but send a character on a reduce corruption assignment, have items on your faction leader and heir that reduce corruption, assign an administrator to a commandery (permanent -30% corruption), etc.

    I was also sceptical about corruption when it first hit me (and it hit me hard), but there are more than enough tools to manage it in your crucial provinces. By the end of the game, I had multiple commanderies with less than 5% corruption. Stack effects and specialize - if you have a high income commandery, you'll need corruption reducing means there (buidlings, assignments, administrator being your bread and butter). But you don't have to worry about corruption in your military or food producing provinces (I had these at like 65% or something).
  • lucky_dutchlucky_dutch Posts: 181Registered Users
    edited May 30
    If its working as intended, I hate the mechanic.

    The idea of a corruption mechanic punishing thoughtless expansion is cool but when the reform to reduce it only increases my actual income by less than 1%, it sucks.

    Under the current design, the reform is the least effective reform in the entire game. Any building choices where you have to chose between reducing corruption and increasing your base income, always chose the base income.

    -corruption effects should be subtractive (in other words, if your corruption is 8% and you get the -8% corruption reform, you should have 0% corruption).
  • hanesdavhanesdav Posts: 703Registered Users
    Anti corruption buildings are definitely useful. The last levels of anti corruption buildings also reduce corruption in adjacent commanderies. I can't imagine late game without them.
  • XhalXhal Junior Member Posts: 154Registered Users
    Corruption will kill you in the end game if you don't deal with it.

    I managed to conquer the whole map and keep corruption at 0% everywhere but initially corruption would go to 60% in some regions before I realised it.

    You take more lands yet make less money.

    There is a book that gives -5% corruption faction wide for leader, heir or prime minister so you can get -15% there. Theres a few techs that can get you about 25%.
  • QuesocitoQuesocito Junior Member Posts: 64Registered Users
    sorry just to be clear is it not viable to vassalise and make alliances to gain the provinces one needs for the victory condition?

    like previous TW games, the intention wasnt to conquer everyone but to vassalise and alliance your way as well.to reduce the corruption.

    I still think its nuts that corruption becomes such an issue.. basically saying the government would collapse if it didnt have tons of anti corruption buildings, and traits, and reforms etc etc.. its almost as bad as the measly 10% tax hikes having such a big impact on colony happiness..
  • Misaka_ComplexMisaka_Complex Posts: 1,443Registered Users
    edited May 30
    You can sweep out corruption via assignments so there isn't really much value to these buildings. My Dong has 5k income with 0 corruption because I keep a close eye on it, you also shouldn't build every city the same way either so you don't need 26 of them.
  • ZofyhrZofyhr Posts: 41Registered Users
    edited May 30
    hanesdav said:

    Anti corruption buildings are definitely useful. The last levels of anti corruption buildings also reduce corruption in adjacent commanderies. I can't imagine late game without them.

    Are you sure about it ? The tooltip just mentions it applies to commanderies nearby. Not to the commandery itself.

    In Thrones of Britannia, it was specifically written when it applies to the province and nearby provinces.
  • hanesdavhanesdav Posts: 703Registered Users
    Zofyhr said:

    hanesdav said:

    Anti corruption buildings are definitely useful. The last levels of anti corruption buildings also reduce corruption in adjacent commanderies. I can't imagine late game without them.

    Are you sure about it ? The tooltip just mentions it applies to commanderies nearby. Not to the commandery itself.

    In Thrones of Britannia, it was specifically written when it applies to the province and nearby provinces.


    Destroying that building will increase corruption. It surely applies to commandery itself. I can post here this save and you can try it yourself.

  • dreagondreagon Senior Member Posts: 1,872Registered Users
    Zofyhr said:

    hanesdav said:

    Anti corruption buildings are definitely useful. The last levels of anti corruption buildings also reduce corruption in adjacent commanderies. I can't imagine late game without them.

    Are you sure about it ? The tooltip just mentions it applies to commanderies nearby. Not to the commandery itself.

    In Thrones of Britannia, it was specifically written when it applies to the province and nearby provinces.
    I was wondering about that same thing myself. But the post above me seems to prove that it is also local. It also makes more sense of certain building upgrades. The lvl 3 State Workshop provides -10% corruption. Lvl 4 reduces the corruption in adjacent commanderies by 10%. Even if that didn't apply locally it would be an upgrade but it would be a weird kind of upgrade.
    "The dog is a peasant and the cat is a gentleman." H.P. Lovecraft
  • ZofyhrZofyhr Posts: 41Registered Users
    I'm somehow very reassured about it. They maybe should make it clearer on the tooltip.

    There are so many things I had to save & load to fully understand what it exactly does...

    It's out of topic but for instance, the effect of relationship between generals is a bit unclear in the game.
  • ZofyhrZofyhr Posts: 41Registered Users
    Anyone knows if the corruption reduction for nearby commanderies stack ?

    So having multiple corruption reduction building for nearby commanderies stacking each others would be a great way to deal with corruption.
  • CaptainChiffreCaptainChiffre Posts: 7Registered Users
    btw hanesdav's screenshot seems to imply, that the reduction is subtractive since the 7% jumped up to 21% without the -15% building, so it seems to be worth it after all.
Sign In or Register to comment.