Tax base for new Baronies

[Meanmanturbo]

Hi all. As dev diaries have said that you will be able to create new baronies in your counties I was staring to wonder how the tax base (which I assume will be the basic measure of prosperity) of new baronies will be generated.

I can think of four possible ways.

1. It is decided upon a base tax for the entire county. All baronies in the same county have the same base, but is modified by type (city, castle, church).

2. The tax base for every potential barony is defined in the file that defines all baronies.

3. All baronies of the same type have the same tax base, what separates as wealthy Mediterranean county form a poor Scandinavian one is the amount of baronies it has and the scripted maximum number of baronies.

4. All new baronies start at a set tax base (1?) and can increase by buildings and events. Having wealthy baronies nearby could for example trigger events related to trade or lack of arable land by the neighbors leading to immigration leading to tax base increasing.

What do you think is the most probable one? Which one would you prefer to see?

[Doomdark]

All baronies of the same type have the same base tax. However, this is modified by buildings that improve the barony.

[Meanmanturbo]

Well that was decidedly straight to the point and un-vague Thanks for the quick reply.

Edit

Another thing I wondered is if it would be possible to tie in the scripted upper limits of baronies to agricultural techs. Something like a province effect.
Free-styling code example:

effect_152#barony upper limit 5#
province id = 1, 16, 32,...
NOT
tech = 521 #three field system#
...

At least for modders? Just throwing it out there. I would still buy the game if this minor detail doesn't make it

[telesien]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think medieval agriculture was more extensive based than intensive and the ammount of places you can found or colonize or whatever is more influenced by the area you are able to free for them. At least I know how new places were founded by clearing forests, but I can't remember any case when new something was founded because local people finally started using crop rotation

[Gwyn ap Nud]

In Russia, intensive farming almost never was invented into maybe even Victoria time period. In Germany, much of France and England, you had enough wild land to last for ever, so reclaiming land was easier than improving yield on pre-existing farmland. Maybe the only place this wasn't true was Italy, though don't quote me on that bit.

[Meanmanturbo]

Well, my train of thought was that better farming tech lead to higher population. Which leads to an increased number of sons that have no farm to inherit. This in turn would lead to pressure to clear more land. But I guess no amount of farming tech would allow for example Iceland to have a boom in new cities, so there might be a oint there.

[yourworstnightm]

Well, my train of thought was that better farming tech lead to higher population. Which leads to an increased number of sons that have no farm to inherit. This in turn would lead to pressure to clear more land. But I guess no amount of farming tech would allow for example Iceland to have a boom in new cities, so there might be a oint there.

Should probably be limited by terrain.

[telesien]

Well, my train of thought was that better farming tech lead to higher population. Which leads to an increased number of sons that have no farm to inherit. This in turn would lead to pressure to clear more land. But I guess no amount of farming tech would allow for example Iceland to have a boom in new cities, so there might be a oint there.

Logic is good, but does this need to be represented by new settlements? Even when some city hits limit of X people, it doesn't mean all new people have nowhere to live and they go out and found a new place to live. The increased income from new tech can be seen as only increase in quality of work, but also as combination of increased productivity and population at the same time. After all one-time increase in technology should result into one-time increase of population. The other situation is when king really wants to found new town, he doesn't need to wait until he has enough of his people, he can invite people from different countries (my home town was founded like this).

It's really not a bad idea, but it would require a lot of effort to be really usefull. For example you'd need to set the limit as combination of the quality of the land itself and current tech level + you'd need to add the diplomatic option to invite foreign settlers from other areas, which should logically lower the potential in that area. It sounds cool, but feels needlessly complicated if you ask me

[Keinwyn]

All baronies of the same type have the same base tax. However, this is modified by buildings that improve the barony.

What limits are there to how you can expand the # of buildings? It would seem odd if the Western Isles could become as rich as Thrace.

[RhoDaZZ]

It would seem odd if the Western Isles could become as rich as Thrace.

Over a 400 year period with the two going in opposite directions, it wouldn't in theory, at least not to me. My fear is that it will be possible to match up the wealthy and economically powerful cities too fast as a backwater city, i.e within a century. From this assumption the player would stand a great advantage in the game and the AI would only become challenging enough with explicit and obvious cheats, aka. very hard difficulty.

[vwclaymore]

What limits are there to how you can expand the # of buildings? It would seem odd if the Western Isles could become as rich as Thrace.

Yes, it would seem odd. I think what will prevent this is tech spread. It will take forever for the advanced tech for certain buildings to get to the Western Isles, but they will get there relatively early in Thrace (and I'm sure will already start with a good chunk of them). Theoretically I suppose it could happen in a game, but it would be so rare that I don't think it would be anything to complain about - the game is all about creating alternate history, anyway.

[Kaleidoscope]

Remember that Baronies will be managed by Barons, who will presumably have their own variable stewardship scores. This, combined with the variety of tech buildings (and presumably some baronies will begin the game with a head start in buildings) should serve to make some areas poorer and some richer.

ps where is the dev diary paradox? why do you hurt me like this?

[besaccia]

I believe that base tax would get bonus/malus acording to the position like nearby trade routes or mines or things like that

[Tartan Spartan]

Does the concept of population feature in CKII at all? If I pillage thrace endlessly will that lower the long term population/tax base? If propper farming is invented will an area become richer and grow faster? Will a high pop province influence the culture of low pop neighbours?

Please let it be so.

J

[Keinwyn]

I believe that base tax would get bonus/malus acording to the position like nearby trade routes or mines or things like that

exactly - some provinces were trade hubs/or even just on a good trade route. some had fertile plains some where desert/rock. I really hope this isn't ignored completely.

[Nick B II]

Does the concept of population feature in CKII at all? If I pillage thrace endlessly will that lower the long term population/tax base? If propper farming is invented will an area become richer and grow faster? Will a high pop province influence the culture of low pop neighbours?

Please let it be so.

J

In CK1 there was no population. Endlessly pillaging an area would have no long-term effect. Farming techs worked like province improvements. A province with chickens made 5% more a month then a province without.

I doubt that'll be much changed in CK2. I'm not sure I see a point to it changing. In CK you play a Midieval King. Midieval King's just did not have access to precise population information under almost any circumstances, and never really needed it. Why should you know more then your character would? So if population is included it should not be visible in-game unless you spend a load of cash on a census.

Where exactly is Paradox gonna get accurate population data for every County in Europe in 1100? How do you respond to nationalists insisting they had a strong presence in <province x> in 1100 and therefore should be 10% of the population? How does population tie into the overall economy?

That's a lot of work for a feature that simply should not be visible to the player.

Nick

[besaccia]

Kings didnt know the exact number, even now presidents don't know the exact population of their countries, but they exist and affects economy. Maybe the exact number should be hidden for the player, but definitively should be taken account.
PD.: Sorry for bad english

[RedRooster81]

Kings didnt know the exact number, even now presidents don't know the exact population of their countries, but they exist and affects economy. Maybe the exact number should be hidden for the player, but definitively should be taken account.
PD.: Sorry for bad english

Just as an aside, maybe you should have the best information on your own baronies, less or almost nothing on those held by other families.

[Wezqu]

Kings didnt know the exact number, even now presidents don't know the exact population of their countries, but they exist and affects economy. Maybe the exact number should be hidden for the player, but definitively should be taken account.
PD.: Sorry for bad english

That depends on the country. For example in Finland president could get the total population numbers of the country if he/she wanted to.

[Maginor]

That depends on the country. For example in Finland president could get the total population numbers of the country if he/she wanted to.

Yes, I think the number of legal citizens is pretty easy to find in many countries. The state keeps track of who is a legal citizen or not, so it shouldn't be that hard to sum up. This was quite different in medieval times, though there were a few semi-accurate population counts. They were however far in between and quite costly to make.