Well, in this iteration of the campaign mechanics health is pretty irrelevant other than as a modifier for wealth. While it is probably too late right now it may be worth looking into using it as some kind of victory point modifier? Basically it represents how many people (and how happy they are) in the territory controlled by a faction. The more successful a colony is the more VPs it generates, at least for a faction that wants to colonise. On the other side of the coin factions, like the greenskins, would benefit VPs from reducing populations. This would allow for more faction specific goals and playstyles.

You could even take it further and create different populations so the make up of populations allows different projects or developments, such as enslaving a captured population if your faction's population is in the majority, more VPs for having a purely Dwarven colony or if it is mixed you unlock the ability to create a innovation hub which would allow for better and more trade and so on. This is of course much more complicated...

I also think that population should affect wealth but maybe there should be balancing bonuses for factions that are less likely to want to take care of a population...

Wazoo

Interesting ideas! Definitely worth considering for WT2, at least . Right now switching the VP mechanics while we're in the second half of the game already might upset the plans of some factions, and different populations is (as you say) a bit complicated... Interesting to be sure, but mechanically speaking something I'd have to spend a bit of time on to make it work. And it'd have to be balanced so more savage factions can also benefit from it by doing the exact opposite...

Actually it brings up an idea of separating population not by race (human, dwarf, elf etc) but by class. The standard type of population would be something like "workers", and then savage factions like orcs, chaos and skaven get "slaves" (which opens up some projects) and the more cultured factions (human, dwarf, elf) get "elites" (which opens up other projects)... And then expand on that with extra types. Thoughts?

Right now I'm thinking not of having population affect wealth, but the other way around- if the economy is bad, people move away or starve (decrease health), and if the economy is good, it attracts extra people and birth rates go up (increase health). Makes sense to me, but if you can make a good case for why it should be the other way around then I'm certainly all ears !