Tax Advice

[Torgon]

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10701954/Tax...ions%20v2.xlsx


I put this together awhile back. Calculations for various tax rates, scales, patrolling, etc. Shows break even points, cumulative income etc.

It not specifically a strategy. But it can come in handy when considering a strategy.

However, the bottom line conclusion I draw from it is two fold. One, overtaxing is very powerful in that the break even point for cumulative gold is fairly late in the game. Depending on scales, admin, etc. often after turn 40 or 50. And gold early is always worth far more than gold late.

Two. Overtaxing is more or less powerful depending on the scales you have chosen. Because of the way income in calculated (basically everything is multiplied together), that when a high tax rate is multiplied by the already high income from good scales the effect is even more dramatic. Opposite with bad scales.

[Balaskar]

Wow! Thanks to both of you for the great advice... this helps a lot!

[Knai]

That covers most things, but there are also a few specific edge cases which need to be (re)emphasized. The most critical of these are temporarily occupied enemy provinces, which should probably be taxed at 200. Others are low population provinces with gold generating sites, in which killing all the population via overtaxing, patrolling, and similar measures then keeping it at 200 to milk the sites is beneficial. Provinces you expect to lose soon should also probably be taxed at 200, so as to get the most out of them.

[JonBrave]

Originally Posted by Torgon

Two. Overtaxing is more or less powerful depending on the scales you have chosen. Because of the way income in calculated (basically everything is multiplied together), that when a high tax rate is multiplied by the already high income from good scales the effect is even more dramatic. Opposite with bad scales.

That one seems to me to depend on what you mean by "more dramatic". As you say, since most everything is multiplied together, you get more of an absolute number but equally you lose more in the long run --- it's just percentages. From the manual, the only thing I see which does "make a difference" is that patrolling kills a fixed 10 people per 1 point of unrest eliminated, and that will make much more difference to a small province than a large one.

[Bat/man]

Hmm. I'm pretty sure thats wrong.
it seems like killing 20 unrest is pretty reliably killing 700 people.

[Calahan]

Originally Posted by Bat/man

Hmm. I'm pretty sure thats wrong.
it seems like killing 20 unrest is pretty reliably killing 700 people.

Wow, you're really getting your figures screwed up there aren't you. Are you by any chance confusing the pop loss from overtaxing with the pop loss from patrolling away unrest?

Because if patrolling away 20 unrest cost 700 population, then the often seen plan of patrolling (to keep unrest down) while blood hunting would be instantly ruinous to future slave production, but since it's seen all the time it's safe to say your figures are wrong.

(why don't people ever run quick and simple tests before posting such things)

[Bat/man]

Originally Posted by Calahan

Wow, you're really getting your figures screwed up there aren't you. Are you by any chance confusing the pop loss from overtaxing with the pop loss from patrolling away unrest?

Because if patrolling away 20 unrest cost 700 population, then the often seen plan of patrolling (to keep unrest down) while blood hunting would be instantly ruinous to future slave production, but since it's seen all the time it's safe to say your figures are wrong.

(why don't people ever run quick and simple tests before posting such things)

What exactly is your beef? Taxing at 200 and patrolling in a starting population kills roughly 700.