I dislike how the tax -> unrest mechanic is currently implemented because it affects 3 things - gildar production, production, and research - 2 of which are seemingly unrelated to taxes. The first is obvious and correct - higher taxes, more gildar. But do higher taxes equal lower production? Do they equal less research? I don't think either of those statements i true (except at extremes), which is why I think taxes / unrest needs another pass.
People, especially people in a post-apocalyptic world, aren't going to work less because of reasonable tax levels. They work less and they become more likely to die to some wandering monster. Not finishing that last spearmen army or the hedge wall might mean the difference between them living and dying next time some wolves come to attack. And the researchers certainly aren't going to start slacking off because you're taxing them.
I'm sure there are a hundred ways to implement it, but here's my idea:
Taxes affect Gildar and Growth. The idea being that people are joining your town from the wilderness because it's safer. And, in return for that safety, they pay taxes, provide labor, do research, etc. If taxes are at none or low, people will flock to your cities because they'll get protection at almost no cost. If taxes are crushing, some might think that they can protect themselves, it's not worth giving up all of their income.
On the standard end, taxes don't affect production or research.
Normal Taxes: Same gildar as normal taxes now, and no affect on growth Low Taxes: Lower income, increased growth No Taxes: No income from taxes, greatly increased growth
But on the higher end, people start getting pissed off and start showing their displeasure by striking or slowing work, or maybe even leaving
High Taxes: Increased gildar, decreased growth, some very low unrest level Crushing Taxes: Greatly increased gildar, negative growth as people leave, moderate unrest level.
Unrest affects Gildar, Production, Research. Unrest is caused by conquering a city, spells, and high taxes. It roughly corresponds to people stopping work because they don't like the current regime. The implementation should be roughly the same as it is now, but the causes would be different.
An additional option might be to cause raising taxes to any levels to temporarily increase unrest, to prevent people from constantly shifting their tax rate. People don't like taxes being raised.
This idea makes sense. It would also resolve the current issue of the game design encouraging you to run at no taxes for as long as possible to keep your research competitive.
It still would make people run at no taxes for as long as possible to increase growth, but that cause and effect makes more sense to me at least. The Sovereign is advertising low taxes to get more people to join his settlement. Without that there would be no benefit to setting no or low taxes, so I don't think it can be removed.
If you skip the middle step, then obviously you won't think it make sense...
higher taxes = higher unrest. Does that make sense?
higher unrest = lower production. Does that make sense?
higher unrest = lower creativity. Does that makes sense?
Seems okay to me. o0
^This
That's exactly what I think doesn't make sense. It's very much a non-linear relationship and isn't modeled correctly in my opinion.
If your taxes were 0%, you'd go to work, do your job. And you'd be extremely happy that you weren't being taxed.
If your taxes were 10%, you might grumble a little bit, but you'd still go to work and do your job. You wouldn't do 90% of your job, or 10% of the population wouldn't suddenly quit their job and decide that they were just not going to work.
If your taxes went up to 20%, maybe because another empire declared war on you and the money was needed for defense, you'd still go to work and do your job. Heck, you might even do your job better because you were patriotic and wanted to help with the war effort.
At some threshold you'd get fed and and either leave or go on strike, but that threshold is not at none, low, or normal taxes. As long as taxes are reasonable, you're just going to grumble a little, get over it, and get back to work. Add to that the fact that wandering monsters are trying to kill everyone and if you don't do your job you have a higher chance of getting eaten and I really don't see people stopping work for normal taxes.
I'd like to see a relationship that was more like
No taxes = no unrest
Low taxes = no unrest
Normal taxes = tiny unrest, like 10% (there are always crazies)
High taxes = moderate unrest, like 25%
Highest taxes = high unrest, like 50%
Right now, 30% of your population stops working when taxes are at normal levels? How often do you hear of people stopping working because their taxes are too high? I have, but it's certainly not 30% of the population. You still need an income, and to have an income, you need a job.
I like this idea. Although doesn't it mean you would never use No Taxes? Maybe No Taxes would have a bonus of some sort?
Exactly StevenAus - the original idea had a population growth bonus from no taxes, corresponding to people flocking to your cities because they'd get protection at no cost.
The examples being provided are of taxes against an individual. Even at that level; in order to infer that low taxes would cause no unrest is to assume that the individuals being taxed have a sufficient income that they are not starving/struggling to survive. I find this unlikely given the theme. It is more likely that we would be looking at a culture similar to that of feudal societies with serfs that are given just enough to survive and a high level of corruption where by their overlords are taking what little they have away from them.
It is clear from the game that the cities have researchers and some level of industrialization (business) carrying on within them. We can then assume that the taxes are also impacting groups (I.E an individual who hires/pays/provides work for other individuals). Let's assume one of the research groups in this world is called 'StarDock' and look to them for an example...
If StarDock were allowed to keep every "gildar" they acquired:
That said, all of the variables that would go into accurately modeling an economic system are not in the game. The game itself is not very realistic and that is not a focal point.
I think it is better to drop the arguments regarding realism and instead focus on whether we like the result of the existing mechanism. I prefer the existing system to the alternatives that have been suggested in this thread.
I think taxes and their correlation to unrest is far more important to model after how it impacts the rest of the game. Although a small growth bonus to no taxes would be neat.
I agree with Heavenfall here; if you raise taxes even a little then you get disproportionate penalties to research and production and relatively little gildar. This means I avoid raising taxes for ages until I have a few gallows and prisons set up to reduce unrest.
Maybe thats the intended dynamic (i.e. you make taxes really unattractive for factions without the proper infrastructure) but it feels very punishing to me, especially if you capture an enemy city because then you have further unrest on top.
You both make a good point, that the model should be focused on how it impacts the rest of the game, not on realism. And Yazari is right, realism is subject to interpretation from different parties, and no one can really say what the right "realism" definition is.
The game mechanism, in effect, trades [gildar] for [production & research]. It's effectively an economic slider that re-allocates "effort" to gildar or production & research. Maybe my problem with it is the simplistic way it's treated - many games have more complex ways to allocate "effort" between those same three things. I think (but I don't have the data to support right now) that another part of my problem is the disproportionate penalty to production and research that comes from raising taxes. When I get a chance I'm going to get some data points with empires of various size. My estimates from memory of a city on the first turn (and I'm sure I'm at least a little off, please feel free to correct my numbers if you have them in front of you):
Research 5
Production 9 or 12 (3 x 3 or 3 x 4)
Gildar at no taxes: 0
Gildar at normal taxes: 1.2
At normal taxes, research and production are dropped by 28%. So 1.2 gildar = 3 production and 1.5 research.
I'm going to take some time later and fill in some more locations from my save games, I'd like to fully define what the current trade off is.
For those commenting, how do we define what a good trade off is between [gildar] and [production & research]? Does anyone know offhand what rushing production costs? That's certainly not the right number, as it should cost more to rush production, but it's probably a boundary. Also, maybe this is suggesting that there be some method to "rush" research - making it a viable strategy to tax the life out of your populace and just pay for everything?
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
