1. The comments about how the author does not understand concepts like basic supply and demand is completely wrong. If anything those that commented about this issue are the ones that don't understand the concept at all and only know it by its theoretical definition. The authorbused the concept of supply and demand butbalso added in a few snips of how it needs to be interpreted differently based on outside factors such as laws, gocernance, supply chain and information. Those that tr*shed the author for being s*upid did not consider the setting of: medieval era technology, corrupt and irresposible nobles and bad governance (it was literally pointed out how most of the more decent nobles worked in the capital as top brass and those on the ground were corrupt and lazy provincial novels). The source of a lot of issues were boiled down to basic concepts but the author put into consideration all outside factors he could to allow for a more realistic flow of events rather than simply saying, when supply of cotton rises, the demand goes down and the demand for grain rises and people grow grain. This is all well and good in an isolated scenario but the problem in the story was that a war is happening and overproduction of cotton in the country caused a famine since grains were being funneled to the war effort alongside cotton. Because of this prices of both products rised and sonce there was little to no local production of grain the famine occured because of the rising food prices due to war. There are plenty more examples of this kind of know ot all reviews. They did not consider the context and situation certain concepts were used and claim that the concept was misused or used without proper knowledge when in fact those commenters were simply looking at things in a theoretical view and claiming it as realistic. Simply the ramblings of know it all s*um who want to out down others.
2. Then the people who say that a lot of characters are 2 dimensional or cardboard cutouts. I mean there are a ton of characters in this book but at least the important ones are properly fleshed out. You can't give 100 characters backstories now can you? Even the bigger series such as Naruto and One Piece with their huge pool of characters only expound on the backstories of important characters. Moreover this is a novel not a manga so exposition really comes with a lot of drawbacks. In reality the author did a fairly decent job at exposition. Though some characters were handled quite poorly, at leadt majority of them had good characyer development.

Finally those that comment on how this novel is dumbed down. In all honesty it really is dumbed down but this move does jot make it bad. In fact this made the novel better, there are a lot of people claiming to be mature and have mature taste calling this childish but in reality they are the childish ones. After all this novel was made for entertainment, want deep political in intrigue and drama? Read autobiographies, research politics or f*cking study politics! Dumbed down you say? Well it was done so readers could ENJOY reading this for ENTERTAINMENT. If reading hyper realistic things is what you want read political novels based on TRUE STORIES for godsake. People coming to FICTION sections and calling stuff unrealistic are just plain childish and immature. There is a fine line between fiction and realism and good novels of fiction for young adults/seinen stay on that thin line. If you want a fiction that isn't unrealistic then don't ppick isekai for crying out loud. You sound like a f*cking hypocrite, there are novels that are worse ofnthan this that should have tue shounen tag and you chose to tr*sh on one of the better novels. FFS stop being salty that your favorite realistic isekai did not get an anime or manga adaptation.