Popular Post Mars Posted December 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted December 11, 2019 Economic Partnership: This one would make the alliance trade section of the market useful since this comes with another alliance mechanic - the ability to set tariffs on inter-alliance trades. The default is no tariffs on same alliance and MDP level and higher agreements, but exceptions can be made with the Economic Partnership treaty. How it would work is the alliance will tax trades that fall outside these agreements. Example: If set to 10% and you sell 1 steel at 3000ppu to a nation that falls outside any agreement, 300 of that will automatically be sent to your Alliance Bank. This way Alliances have encourage trades with trade partners or profit when their members trade outside them. If you trade with a nation from an Alliance you have a standing Economic Partnership with, members keep 100% of the money. Tributary Agreements: When signed this guarantees one treaty partner gives the other treaty partner an allotted sum of money or resources at the end of every day/week or month. This can be a new way to incentivize protectorate agreements as well as establish reparations as a legitimate, in-game mechanically sound surrender term. Example: If one alliance agrees to pay 1000 food every 1st of the month, when that day rolls around it gets automatically sent via bank transfer to treaty partner. If bank is empty, every time you add food to it, it will automatically send it until the amount is fulfilled. This basically means the tribute is automatically deducted from alliance bank making it so you cant keep money in the bank and not pay up. You either have the money in your bank, not use the bank, add money until the amount is reached or cancel the treaty. 7 Quote Throw me to the wolves and I’ll return leading the pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namukara Posted December 11, 2019 Share Posted December 11, 2019 I like the first one, but I'm opposed to the second. Larger alliances already exploit micros, let's not formalise that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Strong agree on the tributary idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Epi Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 (edited) 1 Edited February 18, 2021 by Epi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blutarch Mann Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 An adjustment to the tributary; Being unable to pay when the tribute date rolls round should immediately inform the tributary owner, so that punishments can be handed out when a tributary fails to make their payment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard J Crabs Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 optionally have trades come straight from the alliance bank. I personally don't care about tariff's since GOONS will always be 100% taxes, but it'd be nice to have trades available to other alliances that doesn't need to be on my person. Also there's already a mechanic in game to share markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward I Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Treaties have no direct effect on in-game economic activity at the moment. What you're proposing isn't adding a new treaty so much as adding two new mechanics: alliance taxes on their members' trades (tariffs) and automated transfers of money and resources. Rather than tying either of those to treaties, which seems clumsy and limiting, if they're implemented I'd suggest adding them as independent mechanics. If alliances want to include them as part of their treaty agreements, they can make use of them independent of drawing lines on the treaty web, which was always meant to be a visual aid rather than a mechanic. Epi's right as far as the balance and metagame go. Micros, and peaceful alliances in general, are of little immediate use to the larger alliances that protect them. If they view tributary arrangements as exploitation, they don't have to sign them. They'd also probably be useful for all alliances as a means of economic integration or cooperation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeMilton Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 EPs no. Tributaries yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.