National Complacency and Tax Rate

[Ogaden]

I think there should be a complacency factor where the longer you have gone without declaring war, the lower your national tax rate goes.  Citizens rally around the flag in times of war and accept higher "victory taxes" which stay that high after the war is over, but slowly over time people see prolonged periods of peace as a time to collect a "peace dividend" of lower taxes.

 

Tax percentage should be 100% higher than normal when you are at war, and slowly degrade over 800 turns to about 50% lower than normal, basically starting at a 60% tax rate degrading to a 20% tax rate, every turn of peace, citizens get a tax cut of 0.05%.  At war, every attack you either receive or inflict boosts your tax rate by 5% as citizens rally to the war effort and tax cuts don't occur while you're at war.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Ogaden

[MrHat]

What about people/alliances who want to be neutral? 

[Ogaden]

What about people/alliances who want to be neutral? 

They don't have to pay the immense cost of rebuilding their shattered nations after a war, and if they are attacked for some reason, this also benefits those attacked

[elsuper]

I have to say this seems to me like it would be good for the game overall, by mitigating the high costs of conflict.

[Phiney]

Like this idea.

[SoS]

Fixes a lot of current system.

[Dalinar]

This is a good idea

[Azaghul]

I really like this idea.  It would help discourage the type of stat hugging seen in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

 

The one thing I'd say is that it should be structured to benefit fighting an *actual* war more than just raiding.

[Ogaden]

I really like this idea.  It would help discourage the type of stat hugging seen in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways).

 

The one thing I'd say is that it should be structured to benefit fighting an *actual* war more than just raiding.

Maybe to get the full benefit you need to be attacked as well?

[ataraxis]

Might encourage "fake" wars to keep the bonus high and up.

 

But as long as we iron out the loopholes this is a solid idea.

[elsuper]

Maybe to get the full benefit you need to be attacked as well?

 

I suggest that it be at least partially based on damage suffered/dealt, to reduce slot-filling type abuse.

[Neo Uruk]

I suggest that it be at least partially based on damage suffered/dealt, to reduce slot-filling type abuse.

Definitely. It would be improper to allow raiding inactives for tax benefit, but raiding an active member (with a high enough damage output at least) should count as a war.

[ataraxis]

We can combine the orb idea suggested in the other thread (about confidence) to get something of the following:

 

Every turn, if you have at least 1 orb, you gain a 0.05% orb income bonus (up to 200% or 4000 orbs), but it costs, oh let's say 1% of your orbs rounded up to the nearest integer (so it takes more orbs to maintain a higher income bonus; 40 orbs / turn is almost impossible)

 

All military actions gain 5 orbs per BP used, so 6 immense triumph ground victories = 18 BP = 90 orbs.

Let's throw an additional 10 orbs in for beiging someone to round it off at 100 orbs.

 

To avoid fake warring and such:

Moderate success: -1 base orbs (so a moderate success ground victory = 12 orbs)

Pyrrhic victory: -2 base orbs

Utter failure: -4 base orbs

If the target is inactive for >7 days: -2 base orbs (if you somehow get an utter failure on an inactive target, the base orb count is at 0, not -1)

 

Defending gets no base orbs: you get orbs by attacking back!

 

Either orbs can be some abstract concept like Ogaden's approval (this basically just puts some numbers to hopefully iron out some loopholes), or it could even become some tradeable commodity, which will allow people to trade in orbs to the neutrals big nations for lots of money.

 

It could also be a currency for some kind of perk system should this ever come to light.

[Just Monika]

I think there should be a complacency factor where the longer you have gone without declaring war, the lower your national tax rate goes.  Citizens rally around the flag in times of war and accept higher "victory taxes" which stay that high after the war is over, but slowly over time people see prolonged periods of peace as a time to collect a "peace dividend" of lower taxes.

 

Tax percentage should be 100% higher than normal when you are at war, and slowly degrade over 800 turns to about 50% lower than normal, basically starting at a 60% tax rate degrading to a 20% tax rate, every turn of peace, citizens get a tax cut of 0.05%.  At war, every attack you either receive or inflict boosts your tax rate by 5% as citizens rally to the war effort and tax cuts don't occur while you're at war.

Times of war may be periods of higher taxes, but they are still not benefitial to the national economy normally and it normally would be more adequately reflected by a change of economic policy towards the left (higher taxes, less income).

 

If you want to portray "rally around the flag effect", why not go with something like a 10-15% ressource production boost for the duration of the war?

 

They don't have to pay the immense cost of rebuilding their shattered nations after a war, and if they are attacked for some reason, this also benefits those attacked

If this was in any way to make up for post-war reconstruction, then it'd be more appropriate to lower the rebuilding cost for destroyed infrastructure, not detract of the income of those who don't go to war frequently. I very much prefer to not have to declare war, just to keep a proper tax rating, especially given 50% shaved off would make manufacturing nations even more dependent on market prices, because they'd run a loss with upkeep.

 

And that non-neutrals have to pay for reconstruction more often than neutrals is part of their choice of playing the game this way. If you want more incentives for war, add more reasons to go to war politically, not introduce a need for it economically.

[Azaghul]

Times of war may be periods of higher taxes, but they are still not benefitial to the national economy normally and it normally would be more adequately reflected by a change of economic policy towards the left (higher taxes, less income).

 

If you want to portray "rally around the flag effect", why not go with something like a 10-15% ressource production boost for the duration of the war?

 

If this was in any way to make up for post-war reconstruction, then it'd be more appropriate to lower the rebuilding cost for destroyed infrastructure, not detract of the income of those who don't go to war frequently. I very much prefer to not have to declare war, just to keep a proper tax rating, especially given 50% shaved off would make manufacturing nations even more dependent on market prices, because they'd run a loss with upkeep.

 

And that non-neutrals have to pay for reconstruction more often than neutrals is part of their choice of playing the game this way. If you want more incentives for war, add more reasons to go to war politically, not introduce a need for it economically.

Politically like other games of this style this is a sandbox game so there's no real way for the game design to incentive war in the political sense except indirectly through economic means.

 

I suggest that it be at least partially based on damage suffered/dealt, to reduce slot-filling type abuse.

Maybe to get the full benefit you need to be attacked as well?

Something like this.

 

Maybe have the bonus be split up into multiple categories to "earn" it?

 

For example.  Max bonus is 50% tax rate, which decreases over time.  Each component of that 50% decreases on its own over time, perhaps in 4 categories?

- Wars declared: 30% of bonus (15% of income.)

- Damage done in wars: 20% of bonus, (10% of income.) 

- Wars declared on you: 15% of bonus (7.5% of income.)

- Damage done to you in wars: 35% of bonus (17.5% of income.)

[Wiliam]

Actually this is a really interesting idea!