Jump to content

Limit and make clearer alliance tax rates


R492
 Share

Recommended Posts

Alliances shouldn't be able to squeeze every last bit of production value from their members, even top alliances that offer significant protections and grants.  As a new player being spammed with messages to join alliances, then picking one and being dragged though an application process that takes an hour or more, then told to switch from my noob protection beige into the faction's trading bloc colour and suddenly finding that all of my resources are being taken without having been given so much as a heads-up from the system feels outright scummy and even if veteran players can find their justifications it turns away newer players who feel like their hard-earned resources are being stolen by players who simply know the system better and exploit it.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is your reasoning primarily moral (like it feels scummy) or because it actually is scummy/alliances don’t need that tax? Btw if you feel as though the application process is too long please take that up with me or Jaden.

Edited by Alekomityens
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically mentioned my issue with the application process towards the end of the process itself, that's there more to bring home the main point though rather than a point of its own.  The tax rate is the issue, I understand the reason a tax rate needs to exist but setting it to 100% is way overboard and the fact that there is no warning of tax rate changes when moving between blocks nor any way I'd noticed to check tax rates until they're listed in my revenue screen and it's too late needs to change.  I would say that taxes are fine but setting them to 100% is a big issue for me, not just because it's all my income and forces players to go to war from day one just to meet the basic needs of their empires but also the fact that it's allowed to be done in the first place just doesn't sit right, and especially when there's no warning before it just happens and it's too late to turn back, and even beyond that there's nothing about it in any part of the tutorial I've encountered including the part where it has you join an alliance and switch your trading bloc.  It's a frustration with the game mechanic itself as much as it is with the alliance, and at least going forward I hope you'll let other players know about the tax rate before they make a decision, it's not a good selling point but players deserve to know what they're getting into when they join an alliance.

Edited by R492
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, R492 said:

I specifically mentioned my issue with the application process towards the end of the process itself, that's there more to bring home the main point though rather than a point of its own.  The tax rate is the issue, I understand the reason a tax rate needs to exist but setting it to 100% is way overboard and the fact that there is no warning of tax rate changes when moving between blocks nor any way I'd noticed to check tax rates until they're listed in my revenue screen and it's too late needs to change.  I would say that taxes are fine but setting them to 100% is a big issue for me, not just because it's all my income and forces players to go to war from day one just to meet the basic needs of their empires but also the fact that it's allowed to be done in the first place just doesn't sit right, and especially when there's no warning before it just happens and it's too late to turn back, and even beyond that there's nothing about it in any part of the tutorial I've encountered including the part where it has you join an alliance and switch your trading bloc.  It's a frustration with the game mechanic itself as much as it is with the alliance, and at least going forward I hope you'll let other players know about the tax rate before they make a decision, it's not a good selling point but players deserve to know what they're getting into when they join an alliance.


Not sure why you decided to post this here instead of discord but most applicants go through our application process quickly. it only requires filling out a google form an making a forum post, takes 15 minutes tops.

We have a 100% tax rate because we run a command economy, though a 100% tax rate should large even be an issue at your city level, here, i'll do some math with you.

Looking at your city build, I can already see you aren't following our guide, but regardless, lets see your income, it is around $479k daily.image.thumb.png.f1a0bb98caa974d927ae63439a873f04.png
You're still new and havent finished up any of your raid targets yet, so lets look at how much one of your peers makes every 2 days from raiding
image.thumb.png.d56f8ae8fc6f006079a5bc3efb94ea20.png
about 3.8 million per 2 days, multiplied with 5 targets that is about 19.2 million per 2 days. In contrast you produce $958k per 2 days. The Actual "Tax" on your income is about 5%, if you have shitty raid targets maybe 10%-20%, since raiding money is untaxable. Looking at what Sonamoo raids isnt even counting the resource value, which im sure increases the worths of her raid more and more, maybe the tax actually 4%? 3%? 2%?

Regardless, it is extremely low. This is operational security but we've already explained to you that after graduation we boost you to a certain amount of cities and projects that do cost tens to even hundreds of millions to buy. Additionally, we give you a quite hefty signing bonus when you do sign up, but it seems as though you have not applied for that.

Regarding your arguement for forcing nations to go to war when they start, that is part of the game and the fastest way to grow on Orbis, which is why we require you to do as such.

Regardless, if this hasn't convinced you as to why we have such a high tax rate, you are always free to leave, you don't have much debt at all because you didn't apply for the signing grant. I wish you luck.

Edited by Suyash Adhikari

TCM3_1_281x175.png.d5f909d45f36d3dcb3722580e7b7ecc2.png
Coal Duke (Imperator Emeritus) of The Coal Mines
Diety Emeritus of The Immortals, Patres Conscripti (President Emeritus) of the Independent Republic of Orange Nations, Lieutenant Emeritus of Black Skies, Imperator Emeritus of the Valyrian Freehold, Imperator Emeritus of the Divine Phoenix, Prefect Emeritus of Carthago, Regent Emeritus of the New Polar Order

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Homie, you're in for a treat.

Disclaimer one: I am currently in VM but plan to return in a few months.
Disclaimer two:  I used to be very active in Rose's IA untill a few months ago. 
Disclaimer three: Everything here is in my own name, I don't speak for anyone else.

Now that we got that out of the way, I completly agree with you.
Let me start off by saying I understand why @Alekomityens and @Suyash Adhikari defend their system, within the current rule set it isn't a bad one. I'm not blaming them (or anyone else with very high taxes)for what they are doing. But I too have wondered for a very long time if the current rule set is the right one.

Do we want alliances to remove that much player agency? I have seen the econ / grant system of many alliances (because of friends, leaks etc..) and most of the time it involves a mandatory plan that lasts anywhere from weeks to months (or maybe forever). Do we want new players to be forced trough a 100/100 (or 90/90) tax rate? Do we want to remove all ability to do with their money as they wish? If they want to market flip (with varying succes mind you), is it fair to let alliances say no simply because of efficient growth.

Do we want this game to be a pure efficiency machine in a way that makes it so new players can't play the game, but just have to watch it be played for them?

I wanted to propose a "solution" for this a while ago, it would tie into the reworked "public opinion". The idea was "would the populace of a nation be happy that they are taxed 100/100 if they aren't given back enough in return". That public opinion rework never materialized so I never proposed my idea.

I do think we should find a way to make 100/100 playing less efficient. I am not sure how or what, but i'm sure if we brainstormed about it, we could find some interesting mechanics that aren't just "cap tax at 20%".

Next up, I think being more public about tax rates would be good yeah. In practice it would be hard because alliances have many diffrent tax brackets depending on how big or small you are, or if you wanted the alliance to pay for rebuild or what not. There are very few alliances with one tax bracket. 

That was my rant of the day.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, R492 said:

Alliances shouldn't be able to squeeze every last bit of production value from their members, even top alliances that offer significant protections and grants.  As a new player being spammed with messages to join alliances, then picking one and being dragged though an application process that takes an hour or more, then told to switch from my noob protection beige into the faction's trading bloc colour and suddenly finding that all of my resources are being taken without having been given so much as a heads-up from the system feels outright scummy and even if veteran players can find their justifications it turns away newer players who feel like their hard-earned resources are being stolen by players who simply know the system better and exploit it.

???

Any alliance worth their salt posts their tax rates on the alliance page. :v

Could've always asked "What does 100/100 mean?"  Generally I'd always clarify that for every applicant and ask if they were cool with it before accepting them.

I'm cool 100/100 because I understand that in a command economy, smaller nations get more than they put in.  Fine with it at larger scales too because of my worldviews.

TL;DR Read the fine print.  Maybe Alex could have a public tax bracket section on all alliance pages.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BelgiumFury said:

Homie, you're in for a treat.

Disclaimer one: I am currently in VM but plan to return in a few months.
Disclaimer two:  I used to be very active in Rose's IA untill a few months ago. 
Disclaimer three: Everything here is in my own name, I don't speak for anyone else.

Now that we got that out of the way, I completly agree with you.
Let me start off by saying I understand why @Alekomityens and @Suyash Adhikari defend their system, within the current rule set it isn't a bad one. I'm not blaming them (or anyone else with very high taxes)for what they are doing. But I too have wondered for a very long time if the current rule set is the right one.

Do we want alliances to remove that much player agency? I have seen the econ / grant system of many alliances (because of friends, leaks etc..) and most of the time it involves a mandatory plan that lasts anywhere from weeks to months (or maybe forever). Do we want new players to be forced trough a 100/100 (or 90/90) tax rate? Do we want to remove all ability to do with their money as they wish? If they want to market flip (with varying succes mind you), is it fair to let alliances say no simply because of efficient growth.

Do we want this game to be a pure efficiency machine in a way that makes it so new players can't play the game, but just have to watch it be played for them?

I wanted to propose a "solution" for this a while ago, it would tie into the reworked "public opinion". The idea was "would the populace of a nation be happy that they are taxed 100/100 if they aren't given back enough in return". That public opinion rework never materialized so I never proposed my idea.

I do think we should find a way to make 100/100 playing less efficient. I am not sure how or what, but i'm sure if we brainstormed about it, we could find some interesting mechanics that aren't just "cap tax at 20%".

Next up, I think being more public about tax rates would be good yeah. In practice it would be hard because alliances have many diffrent tax brackets depending on how big or small you are, or if you wanted the alliance to pay for rebuild or what not. There are very few alliances with one tax bracket. 

That was my rant of the day.

"is it fair to let alliances say no simply because of efficient growth?" Yes? Just as fair as the option existing for them not to do that?

Why is your solution to a supposed (and nonexistent I might add) lack of player choice to.... Remove more player choice?

If you hate taxes you're free to pick an alliance with low or even no taxes. They exist. TFP has no taxes, they're a top 5. How exactly is there a lack of choice there? Is it because most people wouldn't exactly accuse TFP of being a good alliance? Is that why it's omitted and this framed as some sort of great calamity of missing choice?

Because that's the only way that makes sense, and I have to break it to yah, TFP being 0 tax and also not accused of being particularly good by many people, is not merely a coincidence. Other 0 tax alliances are either a whale retirement home or... Micros with a very limited lifespan. Goodness I wonder why that is!

Golly, batman, turns out most micros actually DO run very low taxes. To their own EXTREME detriment! I don't say this merely cause I've always been a proponent of centrally planned economy, but also because, THEY'RE NOT ROSE. Rose, the gargantuan, ancient, and LOADED Rose, still know to tax it's sub c20s at what is it now? 80/80 or something? Richest alliance in the game or at least on par with t$ but still taxes out the nose. 

But of course Rose is already obscenely wealthy so these taxes are primarily just maintaining and growing that wealth while also loading city grants into the econ equivalent of a belt-fed machine gun. 

The United Armies on the other hand, I think it's always had a 30/30 tax rate, is probably to this day, broke as all shit. When I had my micro, they had triple our members and about double our city count. And then proceeded to make about 1/7th what we did, just in general taxes excluded, since I actually ran 100/0 outside of rebuild. And shit, I was broke too! 

 

So yeah, options already exist for alliances with low taxes. Most of them aren't very good. That's not a coincidence. Most of them straight up use their tax rate to boost recruitment, knowing alliances, like Rose, despite their obscene wealth advantage, do tax out the nose. I specifically never mentioned taxes in my recruitment messages for the same reason a micro running 20/20 DOES mention them. Cause frankly when your competition during recruitment is top 5s like Rose, TKR and even TFP with 0 taxes, there are not many options you've got. I played up the whole "hey we're pretty smol, smol tighter community gang yeeee" thing. 

 

As a last note, to that thing where it's straight up against the economic stability and wealth security of micros to be low tax, maybe you ancient leviathans could solve that one! I'm just saying the last time I heard of protectors investing in their prots was when IQ was around and did that. Hell I've never even heard of Rose doing it, ever. If your prots aren't worth investing into, ancient leviathans, why are you protecting then anyway? That's just never made sense to me. Oh well, Sakura's rambled enough for today.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other commenters have noted several tidbits that I agree with.

The Enterprise has a multiple-day application process, and tax rates are well below "command economy" levels. But that is how it is done there. Any alliance worth a rip is going to vet applicants thoroughly, even if they spam message to everyone. Also, any alliance worth anything useful will tell you what they offer for things like grants and taxes. I am not going to say all alliances know what they are doing, because there is a fair amount of dross out there, but in general many of the alliances trying to recruit new players have established procedures and practices because they are what work for the best and most efficient growth and construction of a player nation.

This is a good reminder that the game itself and the culture/meta of the game are not always in sync with one another. Just playing the game to play the game is something you can do, but in all honesty I do not know many players or alliances which do this. Finding this game, signing up, and then getting swarmed with messages from all of these places can be a little overwhelming and confusing, and it is tough to navigate sure. There are a lot of nations though that get signed up, poke around for a day or two, and then just never come back. It would be great to avoid this.

The reality is that if you do not like where you went you can leave, but keep in mind the various alliances all have different requirements and procedures. Some alliances might be bigger or smaller, but that is not always a measure of skill. Good luck.

  • Upvote 2

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem.
Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cüm Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2021 at 3:23 PM, BrythonLexi said:

Any alliance worth their salt posts their tax rates on the alliance page. :v

I literally do not know a single alliance that does. I checked out your alliance, ASM, TKR, Rose, and T$. 
It just doesn't happen, there is no transparancy to players untill after they applied or even joined. Which in my opinion is pretty unacceptable.

On 7/6/2021 at 3:23 PM, BrythonLexi said:

TL;DR Read the fine print.  Maybe Alex could have a public tax bracket section on all alliance pages.

Maybe. Would this be enough for transparancy though? 
Alliances have diffrent tax brackets for diffrent members. 

On 7/6/2021 at 4:48 PM, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

"is it fair to let alliances say no simply because of efficient growth?" Yes? Just as fair as the option existing for them not to do that?

Why is your solution to a supposed (and nonexistent I might add) lack of player choice to.... Remove more player choice?

 Because many people don't "play" this game. You and I know both know this. A lot of people join an alliance and either wither away and only do what someone dm's them to do (or for gods sake maybe even a bot). And because new players do not have any indication what an alliance will ask of them before you join them, and if they do they often have a severe lack of understanding of what this actually means. Most new people will join one alliance, if that alliance doesn't work for them, they'll just never play again. Not a lot of new people leave their first alliance to find one that suits their ideals better. "How do I know?" you might ask, well i've handled hundreds of applications. 

On 7/6/2021 at 4:48 PM, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

Because that's the only way that makes sense, and I have to break it to yah, TFP being 0 tax and also not accused of being particularly good by many people, is not merely a coincidence. Other 0 tax alliances are either a whale retirement home or... Micros with a very limited lifespan. Goodness I wonder why that is!

Golly, batman, turns out most micros actually DO run very low taxes. To their own EXTREME detriment! I don't say this merely cause I've always been a proponent of centrally planned economy, but also because, THEY'RE NOT ROSE. Rose, the gargantuan, ancient, and LOADED Rose, still know to tax it's sub c20s at what is it now? 80/80 or something? Richest alliance in the game or at least on par with t$ but still taxes out the nose. 

But of course Rose is already obscenely wealthy so these taxes are primarily just maintaining and growing that wealth while also loading city grants into the econ equivalent of a belt-fed machine gun. 

The United Armies on the other hand, I think it's always had a 30/30 tax rate, is probably to this day, broke as all shit. When I had my micro, they had triple our members and about double our city count. And then proceeded to make about 1/7th what we did, just in general taxes excluded, since I actually ran 100/0 outside of rebuild. And shit, I was broke too! 

Let's unpack this.
1: I am not and will never vouch for 0 taxes, this clearly is not what i asked for. I do realize taxes are important.

2: I have never been in rose econ. I coudln't tell you how we tax lower tier nations right now. But I make the same point here that i made earlier. Every alliance tries to be good. The current game mechanics allow and encourage command economies in all but the most active and competent players. I am asking if that's the right thing to do? Should a game encourage alliances to take gameplay away from their members?

3: Yeah (most) alliances should run taxes. The question was if you can make it more interesting than playing the game for your members (at 100/100)for the sake of pure efficiency. And that is a question everyone should ask. Optimal growth is achieved trough pure efficiency, but is fun also realized in that way? I get why alliances do it right now, the current rule set encourages it. I just wonder out loud if the current rule set is a good one.

On 7/6/2021 at 4:48 PM, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

So yeah, options already exist for alliances with low taxes. Most of them aren't very good. That's not a coincidence. Most of them straight up use their tax rate to boost recruitment, knowing alliances, like Rose, despite their obscene wealth advantage, do tax out the nose. I specifically never mentioned taxes in my recruitment messages for the same reason a micro running 20/20 DOES mention them. Cause frankly when your competition during recruitment is top 5s like Rose, TKR and even TFP with 0 taxes, there are not many options you've got. I played up the whole "hey we're pretty smol, smol tighter community gang yeeee" thing. 

I agree low taxes are an issue too (once again mainly for new players). I think there should be some solution for this problem too, but this issue seems a lot harder to fix. I would however also be open to listen to solutions here :). 

On 7/6/2021 at 4:48 PM, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

As a last note, to that thing where it's straight up against the economic stability and wealth security of micros to be low tax, maybe you ancient leviathans could solve that one! I'm just saying the last time I heard of protectors investing in their prots was when IQ was around and did that. Hell I've never even heard of Rose doing it, ever. If your prots aren't worth investing into, ancient leviathans, why are you protecting then anyway? That's just never made sense to me. Oh well, Sakura's rambled enough for today.

Yeah. I agree. Sadly enough I can't fund an alliance by myself! And inside of rose I don't have the position or placement to change this. This solution depends on the goodwill of alliances, and as much as i love goodwill, there isn't always enough. 

 

 

Edit : ASM clearly has their taxes on their page. I didn't see this when I looked this up. This is my fault and I think it's very good to have transparency like them. 

Edited by BelgiumFury
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:

I literally do not know a single alliance that does. I checked out your alliance, ASM, TKR, Rose, and T$. 
It just doesn't happen, there is no transparancy to players untill after they applied or even joined. Which in my opinion is pretty unacceptable.

Sup.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Sup.

Well I know one alliance that does this 😛
Credit where credit is due.

A+ for transparancy.
When are you starting "Grumpy young bastards"?

Edited by BelgiumFury
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like at this point I should probably clarify that my frustration is not with my alliance or the fact that 100/100 is a thing some places do.  I think the only complaint I could have with them is that it's not made clear how competitively focused a player should be when applying or how narrow their particular path is.  My main frustration is with the game itself, my actual suggestion in this would be to have a popup when changing trading blocs that warns the player of how their income will be affected in the change (since currently it's my understanding that taxes are tied to the blocs, though I have only been around for 5 days at this point).  Spending 10 minutes after a tick wondering where my income that I built up for and had already made plans for is a shitty feeling, and at least if I had had some warning that it would happen I could have planned around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How competitive should a player be? Actually a good question. I could not imagine doing something other than joining a competitive major alliance and being part of the global politics. If you want to be competitive, your best bet is to join one of them. I like to assume that most people here do want to be competitive in some way, and they should make a choice that allows them to justify that.

But there are places built around an external community, or a theme, or something like that, and that appeals to some people. I personally would not join an alliance where the big perk was that we were all avid manwha readers or something like that, but there are people who will. It can be difficult to "play this game" sometimes, as another commenter has noted, and honestly if you are as active as you are now, I would hate to see you decide to just walk off.

This is a game where some alliances and people can count in years; some of the oldest are 6-7 years old. There is a lot there that gets built up. The game needs more people, but it takes a little bit of time (measured in weeks/months, not days) to actually reach some big heights.

 

6 hours ago, R492 said:

my actual suggestion in this would be to have a popup when changing trading blocs that warns the player of how their income will be affected in the change (since currently it's my understanding that taxes are tied to the blocs, though I have only been around for 5 days at this point).  Spending 10 minutes after a tick wondering where my income that I built up for and had already made plans for is a shitty feeling, and at least if I had had some warning that it would happen I could have planned around it.

Most people will be on Beige for awhile, which is best for them and they should not change. Then they will join the color of their alliance. Taxes are not tied to color blocs, but members (quantity and score) are. Most of the higher revenue colors are policed by alliances, so in general you will not stay on them long without permission.

  • Thanks 1

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem.
Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cüm Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BelgiumFury said:

I literally do not know a single alliance that does. I checked out your alliance, ASM, TKR, Rose, and T$. 

....huh.  So i'll be.

For the record we don't post it since Blankie Gang is a private alliance and, at least for the short-to-medium term does not take applicants we didn't pre-approve.

 Also going to correct for ASM here, they do list it.

I was coming to this replying "Bet?" and then... well, turns out you're right.  Yeah, that's pretty bad that people don't list tax rates.

8 hours ago, BelgiumFury said:

Maybe. Would this be enough for transparancy though? 
Alliances have diffrent tax brackets for diffrent members.

Haven't thought of it much, but it could always show the existing brackets and how many members?  Would probably be unintuitive though, defeating the point.  Maybe mean/median taxes?

asm.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2021 at 1:18 PM, BelgiumFury said:

literally do not know a single alliance that does. I checked out your alliance, ASM, TKR, Rose, and T$. 
It just doesn't happen, there is no transparancy to players untill after they applied or even joined. Which in my opinion is pretty unacceptable.

When did you apply at ASM? I don't recall you ever applying. We're very clear about our tax policy in the interview just incase they didn't read in the recruitment message or on the alliance page. If they aren't good with it we make suggestions on what alliances they can go.

Hell I when I applied at TKR they were pretty clear on taxes even though they knew it wasn't going to be a problem with me. They wanted make sure I knew. 

So I think before you comment on ASM "lack of transparency" you actually experience our process. 

 

As for OP, I feel what you saying but PnW is your oyster. Alliances do stuff differently from each other. I suggest you look around and ask questions. Make what you will. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 3:18 AM, BelgiumFury said:

Because many people don't "play" this game. You and I know both know this. A lot of people join an alliance and either wither away and only do what someone dm's them to do

How is it AA's running high taxes that makes a boring game boring? Not the player bases fault that the most you can do between wars is play baseball or try to make money flipping resources on the market. Sounds more like a problem with the game itself than how people playing it.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 3:57 AM, BrythonLexi said:

....huh.  So i'll be.

For the record we don't post it since Blankie Gang is a private alliance and, at least for the short-to-medium term does not take applicants we didn't pre-approve.

 Also going to correct for ASM here, they do list it.

I was coming to this replying "Bet?" and then... well, turns out you're right.  Yeah, that's pretty bad that people don't list tax rates.

Haven't thought of it much, but it could always show the existing brackets and how many members?  Would probably be unintuitive though, defeating the point.  Maybe mean/median taxes?
[image removed for compression reasons]

1 Makes sense, private alliances don't need it.

2 I missed ASM, they indeed do. Edited the original post.

3 The point was never to attack ASM, e$+t$, TKR, Rose or any other alliance directly. Mainly that "leading alliances in orbis" aren't doing it. In the top 30 at least 66% (probably more) do not list their taxes. I'm happy we can both agree that this is problematic.

4  Clarifying taxes for members is a tough thing right. It is ceratainly something to think about but many diffrent things can throw of averages and medians.. Rebuild etc..

15 hours ago, Redarmy said:

Hell I when I applied at TKR they were pretty clear on taxes even though they knew it wasn't going to be a problem with me. They wanted make sure I knew. 

Your other points have been handled on discord or earlier in this thread. But just to be clear: I was wrong, ASM does clearly list it and make it clear before the interview on the alliance page itself. (and I am sure they do it in the interview as well).


But on the cited point. Let me first clarify: what I am about to say isn't about TKR, but about "most leading alliances in orbis". I think it is completly fair (and needed / valid) to state this in interviews. I do however not think this is enough. After new people have already invested time to join an alliance (in their eyes they are in the weaker "negotiating position"), I doubt they will just change their alliances because of taxes. Being transparant before members actually apply (like ASM is), is in my opinion very important. And I think it is usefull to think about how we should best do this.

5 hours ago, Bearson said:

How is it AA's running high taxes that makes a boring game boring? Not the player bases fault that the most you can do between wars is play baseball or try to make money flipping resources on the market. Sounds more like a problem with the game itself than how people playing it.

This game could be the most interesting game there was, if all your funds went to the alliance, and they decided what you could use funds for, that still wouldn't make it very interesting. Now of course this game itself also has many flaws (which isn't worth a debate because you are right). Alliances compensate for this with events and a lot of interestign stuff ofcourse and that's positive.
I think this would be a partial soluition to a far bigger problem, and not an end all be all solution. 

Edited by BelgiumFury
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.