Why Did my Civ Collapse?

[FenrirWolf]

Not sure where to ask this but I've speant the last week playing over the same ten turns to try and stop my civ falling.

I'm playing Babylonians (no state religion, Hereditary rule but other Civics are vanilla). Having destroyed Arabia in 1535 I've 12 Cities (5 with Zigurattes and Markets, 2 with just Zigurattes, rest frantically building).

In stability I'm told that my economy is 2 stars and I'm unstable and collapsing. My inflation is now 92 % and is going to rise to over 106% before I collapse. (Either have to have cities producing wealth or 80% on Gold production. I'm currently developing Guilds which I'll get and then I try Civil Service but crash before getting it).

I've Hattusas and Gordian in Turkey, Sur and Urusalem, Mecca and Aden to the south. Shushan to the East and Phanagoria and Aztrakhan north and north east of the Black Sea. I've even destroyed Arabia and Turkey but by 1580 or 1590 my civilization falls apart. Russia tries a war about 1575 but if I can hold them off an Apostolic Congress will call for peace and a turn after peace I collapse.

I've tried giving up my Ukranian cities to indepence and one of the Arabian cities to the Persians which gave me lots more money but still economy has 2 stars and I fall apart. I even tried CHEATING putting Zigurattes, Markets, Groceries AND Banks in all my cities AND giving myself two Prophets to make the Judean and Islam Shrines but despite having lots more money I still get 2 stars for currency and I collapse.

In Demographics my Gold is rank 2, Manufacturing rank 2 Crop Yield rank 2 Land rank 2 Population rank 8 Approval rank 6 and Imports/Exports rank 1.

My civilization seems to be strong and proper, what am I doing so terribly wrong???

P.s. As this is my first post here by no means am I criticizing the Mod. Its amazing but after surviving Persians, Arab Barbarians, Arabians, Turks, Arabians again and even Russians I just can't survive sudden unexplained collapse.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Sounds like you're too big and didn't build your economy up slowly. It's better to have a slowly growing economy than a fully built economy (because it's not the absolute economy that counts in stability).
Every city traded/given away/liberated hits your expansion stability unless you have more than 15 cities. Babylon's area is particularly small and you take a hit occupying other civs' spawn areas. So you're in a catch-22 which is exactly why Babylonia is not supposed to survive.
Your civics aren't very complementary. You should have at least vassalage in medieval age (but maybe you didn't have the stability to switch). Switch to civil service will only make things worse (since you have more than 6 cities).

 

[FenrirWolf]

My dreams of a Middle East superpower fall apart in the hazy mire of economics. I can take some consolation that I'm not the first this has happened to. Thanks AnotherPacifist.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Try the traditionally large empires (Turkey, Persia, Arabia) for your Middle East empire.

 

[FenrirWolf]

Trouble with those one's is 1) the game expects them to become powerful, 2) we all know what they did with their power and finally 3) being a micromanaging meglomaniac I really wanted to rule from the start to the finish.

Your civics aren't very complementary. You should have at least vassalage in medieval age (but maybe you didn't have the stability to switch). Switch to civil service will only make things worse (since you have more than 6 cities).

Thanks for getting me looking at civics, I didn't touch them because of the money cost so forgot the stability cost. Today I put on Vassalage and Slavery along with defensive pact with Germany. This meant I remained unstable and Greece declared war on me just after Russia did leading to the first world war BUT my civ kept going at least till 1630 when I stopped playing. Some tweaking to do but survival remains a possibility. Thanks again

 

[3Miro]

Solution to stability problems = Practice. For large empires you would currency anyways, so build Marketplaces and run merchants. This helps a lot to keep the money on the green (always increasing). This helps a lot for stability.

 

[FenrirWolf]

keep the money on the green (always increasing). This helps a lot for stability.

... you've just highlighted my major weakness, I always viewed a surplus of money as an excuse for some turns of deficit spending (works wonders in regular civ, now I realise its suicide in Rhye's Civ).

Yes I did read the instruction manual, I just didn't realise how much I didn't understand it.

 

[blizzrd]

Running a deficit isn't "suicide". Check out the currect Dutch Succession Game in this forum, we ran a deficit economy for about the first 50 turns and were Stable or Solid for most of that time.

 

[NerfCothons]

Babylon is going to be a tricky civ to play the way you want to play. Between persia, Arabia, and Turke you will take a lot of stability hits to city flips alone. You're also in a part of the world that is commercially challenged just from terrain alone with few good coastal city sites and an awful lot of desert. Additionally you will have to deal wtih at least 3 and likely more different religions throughout the course of history. Without free religion you take a stability penalty for each non-state religion in each of your cities (yikes).

 

[FenrirWolf]

Running a deficit isn't "suicide".

Depends on the state of your civilization I guess. Following 3Miro's pointer I played the dreaded 1535-1590 (when I always collapse) just keeping my money in the green (and a Def Pact with Germany). No civic changes, especially not Slavery

Spoiler :

(I consider the games version of Slavery to be immoral, real world old time Slavery served several useful purposes but I can't stomach the "Kill them and Build" strategy [The Romans at one time boasted that you could walk from Rome to the toe of Italy and only see slaves, shortly after this you couldn't do that walk without 2 legions to protect you, when Crassus then killed all the slaves there was no one left to till the fields and the city nearly starved to death. They made MUCH better deals with the Gauls and the Egyptians, rant over]).

Result was Greece didn't declare war on me (so no world war 1, yet) but my civ kept going strong (well unstable, but it DIDN'T COLLAPSE).

Thanks again 3Miro.

Babylon is going to be a tricky civ to play the way you want to play. Between persia, Arabia, and Turke you will take a lot of stability hits to city flips alone. You're also in a part of the world that is commercially challenged just from terrain alone with few good coastal city sites and an awful lot of desert. Additionally you will have to deal wtih at least 3 and likely more different religions throughout the course of history. Without free religion you take a stability penalty for each non-state religion in each of your cities (yikes).

Hence no state relgion yet. Thats an accurate summary NerfCothons, but MAN ITS FUN! But there's no way on any earth I'll be going for the Domination Scenario with Babylon, hats off to all those who manage to bring her to modern times as major player.