Aiel117 Aiel117

Tweaking Tax System (and Dynamics Analysis)

Tweaking Tax System (and Dynamics Analysis)

Does anyone tax?

Argument

What taxing should do is provide an interesting choice between utility now or in the future.

Taxing is currently a formula where a sovereign decides to trade (gildar) for (production AND research OR mana from spells that reduce unrest OR buildings slots from special buildings that reduce unrest).

My suggestion is to change this tax system to a trade off between (gildar AND research) for (production or buildings or mana).  This might be too big a change for the main game and might be more suited for a mod at this point, but that's up to your interpretation.

Current Beta 1 Problem

There is such a s superfluous amount of gildar to be gained from selling magic items that there's no reason to take the research hit.  I always have more than enough gold or production to get what I want, so research is the only valuable commodity after mid-Act I.  For the sake of this thread, let's assume that gold wasn't flowing like water because I'm sure we'll see better balance on that part in Beta II.

Review: How it Works (skip to Trade Offs if you don't want to dive deep)

Using Resources

Gildar can buy units, buy buildings, buy items, needed for some quests, can bribe other players, and is easily transferred throughout the kingdom and does not suffer from diminishing returns.  X gildar buys your first spearman and the same amount buys your 100th.

Production can only buy units and buy buildings and is not transferable.  Production will usually be highest in the oldest cities where there are fewer opportunities to get new buildings and less need for units than in new towns on the frontier, so production has diminishing returns in older cities.  Thus production can be considered an inferior good to gildar, and I would only trade 1 gildar for multiple production.

Research can't be compared as easily.  It boosts population potential which boosts research, gold and production.  It boosts production directly based on materials.  It allows magic, champions, better units, and basically everything.  The balance is that returns on research are diminishing.  In one game, it costs about ~200 research to get agriculture (up to +30 food per grain and farms) while it costs ~600 research to get animal husbandry (up to +20 food per grain and pastures).  I would trade away research only as I needed production and gildar for actual units/buildings/items.

In buying units and buildings, 1 gildar buys 1 production.

Gathering Resources

Gildar is gathered with the following formula: (population x 1 x tax rate) + hero benefits + resources - unit cost - buildings maintenance + building benefits.

Production is: ((population x .1) + (materials x (technology boost + building boost + 5)) x -unrest rate from taxes

Research is: ((population x .1) x (1 + technology boost + building boost + magic boost + research boost)) x -unrest rate from taxes

Tax

Tax is jagged and there might be other factors that I'm not aware of (I'm not looking at the code), but seems to be:

No tax = 10% unrest, 0% tax rate; low tax = 26% unrest, 1% tax rate; normal tax = 40% unrest, 3% tax rate; high tax = 52% unrest, 5% tax rate; brutal tax = 62% unrest, 7% tax rate; oppressive tax = 90% unrest, 10% tax rate.  The five jumps are: +1% tax for 16% unrest; +2% tax for 14% unrest; +2% tax for 12% unrest; +2% tax for 10% unrest; +2% tax for +10% unrest; +3% tax for +28% unrest.

So tax has a sharp entry cost, but then decreasing unrest costs and stable returns up until oppressive.

Story

I'm with Pslblog in that unrest and rebellion is somewhat silly given the do or die situation of Elemental.  The idea behind taxing as it is right now is that if I as the sovereign decide to take 1 gildar out of 100 for uses of the kingdom, then 16% of the population quits working and producing.  That's crazy talk.  And if 10% tax is "oppressive", then what do we call the US (which isn't the heaviest taxer) where I lose ~30% of my income to taxes?  I should have been rebelling in the streets long since.  So, the idea is a little hard to choke down, even if the %'s were adjusted for story reasons.  The farmer who produces X amount of wheat is likely to continue producing X amount of wheat even when taxes rise.

Trade Offs

In one of my games on turn 79, here are the trade offs: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/taxtrades.png/. One day I'll learn how to post images.  The production, by the way, is kingdom wide.  I have no idea what the in game tool tip is calculating (it showed 22.2 production when I had 292 kingdom wide over 8 cities)

So, is 4 gildar worth 46 production and 7.8 research?  Or is even 8 gildar worth 43 produciton and 6.8 research?  I can literally produce 5 units across my kingdom for every 1 I buy with gildar at that exchange rate AND not reduce my research by significant amounts.

But even if was balanced, I would almost always choose efficient production and research over the versatility of gildar.  Gildar fills the gaps in strategy, and a well executed strategy would have few gaps.  Making gildar too valuable would negate all strategy, since units and buildings could then pop up anywhere at any time.

How it Could Work

Let's say that production was balanced against research and gildar.

Story

I'm thinking that a sovereign has a choice to either take control directly or empower his people.  In a hands-on tyranny, there's more production because the government directly tells people what to do and where to do it.  The pyramids would never have been built by individuals making choices independently.  In a free society, there's more income and research because the people are more efficient and have the time to innovate.  No government spending $50 on hammers.  That also fits more into the kingdom/empire balance in the Elemental world.

Definitions

Instead of taxes, call it government style.  Instead of % tax rate, call it something like government type (dictatorship to theocracy to monarchy to oligarchy to republic to democracy).  These governments exert "order" in various degrees from 0% to 100%.  More order is +% to production while less order is +% to research and gildar.  It seems like a big change, but it's just renaming what already exists.

Keep unrest but it will only be caused by magic that curses the city or by sickness or other affects that would genuinely cause the population to be less effective at everything.

Kingdoms vs Empires

Kingdoms could have access to less ordered governments or receive greater bonuses from less ordered governments while empires would be the opposite.

Formulas

Gildar is gathered with the following formula: (population x 1 x order rate/10) + hero benefits + resources - unit cost - buildings maintenance + building benefits.

Production is: ((population x .1) + (materials x (technology boost + building boost + 5)) x -order rate/10

Research is: ((population x .1) x (1 + technology boost + building boost + magic boost + research boost)) x -order rate/10

Example

Going back to my game on turn 79, if I had to choose between 8 gildar AND 6.8 research or 43 production, I'd have a tougher choice.  Let's again assume this has been balanced, so the exact numbers aren't an issue.  I'd go with gildar and research if my kingdom was doing well and I had some breathing room to reach for better tech, with gildar being stockpiled against harsh times ahead.  No need for 20 more spearmen if I could instead reach for axemen before building.  However, I'd go with production if I was beset by enemies and needed to respond with units quickly or I had a lot of buildings to catch up on.

41,462 views 29 replies
Reply #26 Top

I'm with seanw3 in that we should probably wait for beta2 to come out and see what balance changes that it brings.

Plus, hero items are related to but not necessarily a part of the tax system itself.  If gaining resources is too easy, then taxing doesn't matter, but let's assume for this thread that resource decisions do matter and that taxing is a vital and important decision.

But yeah, right now, why would you bother buying hero equipment at the current costs?  If you need to spend 10k to get your heroes additional 10 defense, why not spend that on making 200 spear men instantly?  Armor is not worth the current price, and items are best sold, and it's quite easy to win without getting that far into the tech tree.  I'm sure beta2 will fix some of these issues.

Reply #27 Top

Quoting Aiel117, reply 26

But yeah, right now, why would you bother buying hero equipment at the current costs?  If you need to spend 10k to get your heroes additional 10 defense, why not spend that on making 200 spear men instantly?  Armor is not worth the current price, and items are best sold
End of Aiel117's quote

 

This is the main issue

Reply #28 Top

Yeah I agree the tax system and economy seems pretty screwy at the moment - tax is really low (I wish I only payed 3% tax!) and it's clear that the best strat at the moment is to keep tax as low as possible. Also tax and unrest seems pretty strange when the game is about tiny communities in a hostile world - I don't think they would have the luxury of industrial disputes and striking - they're supposed to be in a life or death scenario. I thought the economy system for GalCiv2 was really good but it wouldnt fit in the world being created for this game.

In many ways I think they could just ditch the tax slider and and have cities generate yeilds based on tile yields, population, and buildings. Each city produces food, materials, money, and research so why not just add a focus button in the city details menu where you can choose where you want the city to prioritise. Default city setting would be a balanced approach but then you could toggle it so that the city focuses on one of the 4 areas - this could result in say a 30% boost in the chosen area (e.g research) but then a 10% penalty in the other areas (production, gold, food) as people are directed away from these areas. This model would be pretty staightforward and wouldnt need lots of sliders.

Cities need to generate more money too as I currently just ignore money raised by cities and just sell to the shop.

Also, just throwing this out there but maybe champs should have a maintenance cost too - I know they have a hiring fee but maybe they should have an ongoing fee based on their level. How about bribing rival champs to join your side too?

Reply #29 Top

I think Champs need to remain free of maintenance. It was the oversharing of experience which made grabbing a lot useful ...

now with splitting XP, it is less useful to try a "gotta collect em all" approach to champions.

 

That being said, its probably nice to have a Champ in each city ... :)