Is migration worse than stabilising?

[funnyfritz]

Hello guys! I went with a Buryat run for the first try on the new DLC (which is great, good job devs) and without forsaking my nomads traditions, I found it consistently better to stop in a duchy, get a few vassals (and somewhat more tributaries) and enjoy the flow of herds. The game always suggests you to migrate, but even if fertility is really low where I am the fact that by moving I'd be losing a certain percentage of subjects (seems to me that distance is somewhat taken into account by tributaries AI) and I would have to increase control in the land I'd acquire is really off-putting, even if I tried in different occasions. Am I missing something in the way I play? Thank you very much!

 

[OutsiderSubtype]

It's a good question. My initial instinct is that it's usually just better to stay where you are and try to raise fertility with yurt upgrades. There never seems to be a viable migration target in range where the fertility is meaningfully better.

 

[Duchy-2]

You're right, especially if you use herders to swap around land within your realm every now and then. That way you'll almost always have high fertility, even during bad seasons. Most of the time higher than if you were to migrate.

 

[name_here]

Migrating to a fresh province that's been mostly herders and thus is near 100% fertility is better if you keep doing it, but the problem is that it's really hard to find fresh provinces.