Taxing

[Executor]

So, why tax to 200%? I'd like to hear some comments.

[Bo Jangles]

To reliably afford expensive mages or building construction costs in the first year or so assuming you have a reliable way to keep the unrest down?

[Omnirizon]

like Bo Jangles says, it is common practice to tax 200% on the first turn while using your starting commander to patrol. This gives a big boost in the number of units you can immediately recruit and, thus, allows you to expand much faster. You would only do this on the first turn typically.

Also, when raiding enemy territory, if you don't expect or plan to hold on to a province for very long, it is worth taxing 200%. That way you suck as much gold out of it while you can, and by the time the enemy gets it back the unrest is so high (and maybe pop so low) as to make it worthless in the near future.

[Executor]

I was aiming more for the raiding part, and you're wrong Omnirzon.

[chrispedersen]

I'm not sure what you're looking for Exec.
However, taxing increases unrest. Unrest decreases the ability of units to patrol.

So there is a slight benefit if you are planning on using stealthy units and are planning to stay in province.

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Executor

I was aiming more for the raiding part, and you're wrong Omnirzon.

???

[Executor]

When you set taxes to 200% in a province you just raided, it's not you who gets the gold if you lose the province, it's your enemy, and most of the time the enemy will recapture the province, that's why you put 200% taxes in the first place right, because you expect to lose it and want to cause maximal damage to the enemy?

But by setting them to 200% you're not really doing anything (if he takes them back the same turn).
He'll get the doubled income for that turn and all the gold he'll lose due to minimal unrest caused by one turn of taxing will be coved by the initial turn when he recaptured the province with 200% tax.

So, it makes more sense to put the province to 0% tax if you know you're gonna lose it.
Since then he will recapture the province with no income gain that turn and that will hurt him more than the 200%, where like I said the gold gained from 200% taxing and the lose from minimal unrest cause by raiding will be more or less the same, and he will not have actually lost any gold.

[Illuminated One]

Well, I have taken some raided provinces back where the taxes were set to 200% after 1 turn or so. The drop in population was quite noticable (though, maybe I'm overreacting cause I'm a nice good that likes his people to thrive). Afterwards I had to set taxes to 0 to reduce unrest. Don't know though if they did something else like pillaging, though.
So if your enemy doesn't have perfect mobility to take all the raided provinces back on the same turn, it does make sense imo.

[Quitti]

Originally Posted by Executor

So, it makes more sense to put the province to 0% tax if you know you're gonna lose it.
Since then he will recapture the province with no income gain that turn and that will hurt him more than the 200%, where like I said the gold gained from 200% taxing and the lose from minimal unrest cause by raiding will be more or less the same, and he will not have actually lost any gold.

Then, why don't you just set all your provinces to 200% tax and then a bit reduced tax for the few turns?

Because it doesn't pay off. You lose gold to even small amounts of unrest.

Also, Illuminated One makes an excellent point - if you raid effectively enough, the enemy cannot take all the provinces back in the same turn. I remember doing this with ea vanheim.

[Micah]

You're the one that's wrong Executor. Taxes are reset when a province is captured, meaning your entire post is erroneous.