Income and population mechanics - Page 3

HoleyDooley · #21 February 4th, 2012, 07:31 AM

Nightfall, are you saying its NOT worth over taxing?

If so under what circumstances? Like growth 3?

Dooley

Nightfall · #22 February 4th, 2012, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoleyDooley

Nightfall, are you saying its NOT worth over taxing?

If so under what circumstances? Like growth 3?

Dooley

Given the scales in the original post it's of dubious value doing it perpetually in the capital, and even worse anywhere else.

Overtaxing certainly has uses, first turn in capital, low pop provinces with mines and provinces that you expect to lose in the next few turns, but I don't think this is a good one.

HoleyDooley · #23 February 4th, 2012, 10:57 AM

Thx Nightfall for your thoughts and advice. A lot in this game to get your head around.

Olm · #24 February 4th, 2012, 04:40 PM

Thx for all this, very enlightening.
I will go over it myself, when I have the time, but for now it seems my strategy was not perfect.

Torgon · #25 February 5th, 2012, 04:12 PM

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10701954/Tax...culations.xlsx

Just made up a spread sheet to calculate this out. Adjust assumptions and scales as desired. I have it set for a build I was trying out for man. O3P1C3G3

Bottom line is that overtaxing at 1.2 in your capital brings in about 1000 gold extra within around 20-25 turns at which point the total difference begins to decrease. At 1.3 its around 1500 gold extra by around turn 20. Your talking about an extra fort or two within the first 20 turns. That's a pretty big deal.

Overall I would say its worth it. Especially in CBM. In vanilla the trade off is a bit more questionable since foresters have a lower patrol and you almost always need 2.

However, as MA Man you also have an incentive to get up a lot of extra forts. You don't quite live and breath the stink of castle walls the same way was LA Man, but you do have some advantages they don't. Namely nature mages coming out you ears to provide supplies, and a bunch of stealthy, high strength wardens (if you're playing CBM) to sneak in and hold up the walls. Given this you can probably have a couple forts crank out a forester or two for 20 gold to patrol some provinces, leading to more gold, leading to more forts, leading to more mages. True if you used a capital recruitment turn to pick up another forester you would lose some research, but ultimately you get more if you have more castles cranking out mothers and bards.

As far as optimizing the strategy, you want as many positive scales as possible. Since the tax rate is multiplicative with any scales, the more positive modifiers you have the more this trade off tilts in favor of over taxing. For instance with O3P3G3 you can get almost 1800 extra gold by turn 21 at 1.3 tax. Take it up to 1.5 and you can get almost 2700 extra by turn 20. That's two extra forts, two labs, and almost half a temple.

Olm · #26 February 5th, 2012, 05:05 PM

GREAT!!
I wanted to do it just like that, but between job, 3 children and building a house I just barely have enough time to play one dom3 MP game and read the forum.
So many thanks to you!
This should definitely go to the strategy index, I'll send a PM to Valerius.

By the way: The exponential effect can only be seen very slightly....

Torgon · #27 February 5th, 2012, 05:59 PM

I had surprisingly little to do today, which was quite a rarity. I have everything except the building a house.

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

Made a couple changes just to make it clear what actually needs to be input.

I have to say I'm a little surprised at how effective overtaxing is. And more surprised that more people don't use it, especially given the relative importance of gold in the early game.

For instance, just with O3G3 if you tax at 200% continuously you can get almost 4000 extra gold within the first 17 turns. Sure you've trashed your capital but you'll end up with almost 50% more gold during that time period. And with a 50% advantage in numbers/forts/labs you should be able to more than make up for the reduction in you capital through expansion.

Nightfall · #28 February 5th, 2012, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torgon

I have to say I'm a little surprised at how effective overtaxing is. And more surprised that more people don't use it, especially given the relative importance of gold in the early game.

For instance, just with O3G3 if you tax at 200% continuously you can get almost 4000 extra gold within the first 17 turns. Sure you've trashed your capital but you'll end up with almost 50% more gold during that time period. And with a 50% advantage in numbers/forts/labs you should be able to more than make up for the reduction in you capital through expansion.

Maybe because in reality your going to get nothing like that...

Basic testing shows you need 6 foresters patrolling to overtax at 200% without causing unrest problems...

Nightfall · #29 February 5th, 2012, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torgon

Overall I would say its worth it. Especially in CBM. In vanilla the trade off is a bit more questionable since foresters have a lower patrol and you almost always need 2.

Basic testing in CBM shows that you do need 2.

Torgon · #30 February 5th, 2012, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightfall

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torgon

Overall I would say its worth it. Especially in CBM. In vanilla the trade off is a bit more questionable since foresters have a lower patrol and you almost always need 2.

Basic testing in CBM shows that you do need 2.

Two will basically ensure that unrest never builds up. But in general I've found that one keeps unrest at 0 when taxing at 120% probably 90% of the time. Every once in awhile you miss a turn, but you're still only getting up to 2-4 unrest usually before it drops back down to zero. Still even if you insist on using two, that extra 1100 in gold income over the first 20 turns is still worth it. Its an extra fortress + part of a lab to crank out bards.

Lets assume you need one forester for every +10 in taxes. If you're taxing at 150 you get an extra 2390 gold within the first 20 turns, with the advantage dropping off after that. It hits gold parity around turn 40. Each forester costs 20 gold, 1.3 upkeep. Lets just say 2 for simplicity sake. That's 10 gold per turn in upkeep. So at turn 20 your still sitting at +2190 gold. Which would be about 2 extra castles and a lab, or 16 extra mothers, or 62 extra wardens, or 39 extra Knights of Avalon. It seems like this is well worth it. And that assumes the foresters are completely worthless other than for patrolling. They're still scouts, and they's also precision 12, a pretty good chassis for some magic bows (thunder bows in CBM 1.92 are wicked).

And if it takes 6 foresters then stick 6 foresters on it. Are you really saying that you're not going to have a few fortress turns free here and there at some point? Fortress completed prior to a lab going up? spend 20 gold for a forester. Left with an odd amount of gold at the end of a turn and cant afford another mother or bard? Spend the 40 gold and buy a couple foresters. Seems pretty easy to get a few of these guys, and once you do crank up the taxes, and even if you have to actually recruit one INSTEAD of a mother or bard, they pay for themselves rather quickly. And with the extra gold you get from overtaxing you can get more mothers and bards in the long run. Yes, it might take awhile before you end up with the six needed to tax at 200%, but that doesn't counter the overarching point: gold now is worth MUCH more than gold later since it lets you expand now.