Developer Diary 7 – Taxation and Maintenance

[Dagfinn]

It also means the AI won't turn all its people into soldiers to go fight you, meaning that the AI can behave a lot more sensibily without us having to code it.

This is very promising!

But what is stopping the AI from just having the slider at max all the time? Or is the slider designed so that it inherently caps the number of soldiers?

 

[Hansag]

because tariffs can be negative as well.

But Tariffs can not be positive and negative at the same time then?

i.e. Export Subsidies (negative) on domestically produced products going to the world market, and Import Tariffs (positive) from the goods bought there.

This could bring an added dimension to the game (with just one extra slider added).

Instead of just having one slider for Tariffs in general, having one for Exports and one for Imports could theoretically lead you to tax exports in order to substitute imports... or the other way around.

 

[unmerged(59881)]

That's cause men do not follow reason, but emotions and interests. The figures of God and women completely cover the two railtracks that determine the humans behavior.

And for what i know, anyway, gold has not been choosen just for convention. Gold is a metal that do not rust, that is easily malleable, absolutely not fragile and almost do not degradates - all the conditions that made it the best candidate to cover the figure of "worthness" (do not forget that some millennia ago humanity could not smelt titanium or similar materials we have today). Silver had those characteristics but in a lesser way, so it was obviously the candidate for the second place.

When something happens in the same way to all humanity, you can be certain that it is not by convention anyhow.

Completely agree, I actually mentioned the point that gold does not corrode and in addition is a very limited ressource as reason for that it was used as base for currencies.
But I think we are getting very OT here. We might continue this at a different sub-forum and leave the stage here open for discussing V2

 

[Quarto]

Ah, if only discussing the gold standard was on-topic for Victoria 2...

(ok, ok... seriously, we probably wouldn't want that. Even those of us who take an interest in economy probably wouldn't be that excited about a game where you have to control your money supply)

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

One little thing about the interface King, can you put the '£' before the figure, i.e. '£1000' instead of '1000£'?

 

[jetfx]

Even those of us who take an interest in economy probably wouldn't be that excited about a game where you have to control your money supply)

I beg to differ.

 

[unmerged(131989)]

The interface seems very clear and understandable.

 

[Jazumir]

i beg to differ.

+1

 

[Bezborg]

One little thing about the interface King, can you put the '£' before the figure, i.e. '£1000' instead of '1000£'?

yep, and this (back on page 4):

It sounds like a LOT of new levels of realism, I like it, although heavy headaches are anticipated

btw you have a typo in the military spending section, it says "militray spending"

also I noticed (although for the life of me I can't imagine why), all words start with a capital letter, like "Total Funds", "Daily Income" etc... except "National bank"... the discrepancy is unnerving

Those kinds of mistakes are the most obvious, and the most unnecessary

 

[diskoerekto]

But Tariffs can not be positive and negative at the same time then?

i.e. Export Subsidies (negative) on domestically produced products going to the world market, and Import Tariffs (positive) from the goods bought there.

This could bring an added dimension to the game (with just one extra slider added).

Instead of just having one slider for Tariffs in general, having one for Exports and one for Imports could theoretically lead you to tax exports in order to substitute imports... or the other way around.

I was just going to write the same thing. This would be a great addition in my opinion.

 

[KonradRichtmark]

The problem with introducing issues of money supply control into the game is that it would require every country to have its own currency, which would make the world market a hell of a mess. Just not worth it imnsho.

 

[King]

This is very promising!

But what is stopping the AI from just having the slider at max all the time? Or is the slider designed so that it inherently caps the number of soldiers?

Money, the more soldiers you have the more money you need to pay them.

 

[Rhion]

This will prove quite challenging...

To get more soldiers, you'll have increase their pay, to increase their pay, you need more money, to get more money you need a more profitable economy. Of course...the more profitable your economy is, the more your workers earn and the less likely they are to become soldiers :rofl:

So will unemployment facilitate recruiting?

 

[unmerged(48056)]

This will prove quite challenging...

To get more soldiers, you'll have increase their pay, to increase their pay, you need more money, to get more money you need a more profitable economy. Of course...the more profitable your economy is, the more your workers earn and the less likely they are to become soldiers :rofl:

So will unemployment facilitate recruiting?

Sounds similar to original Vicky, especially as a smaller populated nation, you often had to decide between soldiers and industry.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

So will unemployment facilitate recruiting?

It would be nice to have multiple ways of increasing troop availability.

But if worker POPs are unlemployed, that means the economy is weak no? Which means the state probably cant keep many soldiers on the payroll- which means they quit-aaargghhh!???!?

 

[Dagfinn]

Money, the more soldiers you have the more money you need to pay them.

Thank you kindly for your respons

Yes sure. But as I remebers it from Vicy1, the AI do anything to "make" more divisions.

So I guess my question is what keeps the ai from using all her money on soilders then...

 

[unmerged(69392)]

the pound sign should be on the left of the numbers

 

[marshman]

I beg to differ.

+1 also.

 

[KaiserChicken]

This will prove quite challenging...

To get more soldiers, you'll have increase their pay, to increase their pay, you need more money, to get more money you need a more profitable economy. Of course...the more profitable your economy is, the more your workers earn and the less likely they are to become soldiers :rofl:

So will unemployment facilitate recruiting?

Or recruiting may boost your economy (by lowering unemployment and increasing private spending in consumer goods), Keynesian-style one century before Anyway, it makes sense that unemployment facilitates recruitment. Unemployment would also tend to radicalise political beliefes, thus making a nation more prone to turn warmonger.

And +1 for money supply control!

 

[Sgt Bash]

Well... strictly speaking, we're talking about a time period when virtually nobody in the world had income taxes as such - so these taxes are a pretty big abstraction. I'm sure it's better if they stay that way - the idea is for the game to be fun, so getting overwhelmed by fifty thousand sliders would not be a step in the right direction.

In fact Income Tax was more common in the 19th Century than is commonly supposed today:

Here in the UK income tax was introduced in 1842.

In France income tax was considered in 1848, 1869 and 1876, but never actually was introduced.

Prussia introduced income tax in 1851.

The US introduced income tax in 1862 for the Civil War. The tax was reintroduced in 1894, but was struck down by the Supreme Court. Passage of the 16th amendment to the Constitution permitted income tax.