> >What's wrong with splitting off?
>
> You lose about a quarter of your population. The
> smaller your population, the less
> footmen you have, the less magic you have, the less
> goods you have. If I must choose
> between having 2000 goods, 120 points of magic and a
> bad mood in the clan or much
> smaller amounts of treasure and a good mood, I'll
> pick the first one without hesitation.
>
The thing is, beyond a certain point more wealth
really doesn't help you. Sure, it is nice to have a
year or two of extra food stored away, and a hundred
extra cows, and a few hundred cows worth of goods in
your treasury, and to be able to max out all the
sacred time magic and still have a dozen points left
over......
.....but it sounds like you go WAY beyond that stage. I routinely find in the last years of the game that, except maybe for cows, my clan is pretty much invulnerable, and has enough resources to rapidly recover from any crisis that does manage to annoy us. Having more of everything beyond that doesn't help us more.
On the other hand, there is a cost to bad clan mood and a general nasty reputation. Your ability to deal with some sorts of crisies is hurt by a cranky clan. Your ability to get certain things done is hurt if your neighbours distrust you.
I guess overall my view is that population pumping isn't necessarily bad, but that it is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Beyond a certain point I'd have to say it is probably less than optimal. Exactly where that point is depends, I guess, on where your level of risk tolerance is.
Regards;
Bryan
Powered by hypermail