Inflation in newest beta

[Peter Ebbesen]

Inflation effect from mayors have been changed completely to not make them a super-weapon for only gigantic powers. Now the ratio of mayors versus cities affect a yearly deflation, which is 0.25% when all cities have mayors.

In other word it takes 40 years for a country with mayors in every city to combat the effects of choosing the inflation hit in the "Corruption" random event (9x061) rather than the stability hit.

I suggest that the option of choosing an inflation hit be removed from that event, since only the AI is going to choose it now. (15% chance, approximately). I cannot think of a single reason save masochism for a human player to choose the inflation hit under the new rules.

The added inflation from a single state bankruptcy now takes 100 years to combat at best (barring random events). Though state bankruptcy is a serious business, this is perhaps going too far. I suggest reducing the inflation penalty for bankruptcies to 10%.

Overall an interesting change to the inflation system, and certainly the change to make inflation combating useful for both the large and the small is a very positive development, which will be especially valued in MP (amongst the nations in the latin techgroup, that is), but it does have some amusing consequences

 

[Stonewall]

So does this mean that if I have mayors in every city, I will get a deflation of .25 per year? If so, this is an awesome development. I am glad to see the change.

 

[unmerged(485)]

On the surface this looks great. Hope it works out ok. The idea is a great step toward helping those small countries fight inflation.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Awesome patch. I especially like mayors and tax colletcotrs change (although both are obviously in need of testing, as those are fairly big changes...)

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
Awesome patch. I especially Now like mayors and tax colletcotrs change (although both are obviously in need of testing, as those are fairly big changes...)

I really like the sound of them as well.

I must admit that I do wonder about the tax collector changes on nations not in the favoured latin and orthodox tech group for whom tax income used to be the major income early in the game, because low tech levels meant negligible trade and production income. Now they will not even get the census taxes which in many cases amounted to 25%-40% of their total yearly income for quite some time (until they manage to get infrastructure 1 AND mint money from monthly taxes like mad). Much less of an issue in a 1492 or 1617 (or later) start than in a 1419 start, of course, as starting tech levels are generally speaking higher.

EDIT: Changed infra 2 to infra 1

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
I really like the sound of them as well.

I must admit that I do wonder about the tax collector changes on nations not in the favoured latin and orthodox tech group for whom tax income used to be the major income early in the game, because low tech levels meant negligible trade and production income. Now they will not even get the census taxes which in many cases amounted to 25%-40% of their total yearly income for quite some time (until they manage to get infrastructure 2 AND mint money from monthly taxes like mad). Much less of an issue in a 1492 or 1617 (or later) start than in a 1419 start, of course, as starting tech levels are generally speaking higher.

I am not sure what do you mean. That nations will not have enough tech to promote tax collectors?

I wonder what that:

- Armies with cavalry majority are now less effective attacking in rough terrain.

Means. Seems rather vague, and might be extremely important

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
- Armies with cavalry majority are now less effective attacking in rough terrain.

Means. Seems rather vague, and might be extremely important

-1 on diceroll if you got more cavalry than infantry in the army.

(When not on plains or desert)

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by Johan
-1 on diceroll if you got more cavalry than infantry in the army.

(When not on plains or desert)

Quite big change.

*note to himself: Don't use cavalry armies not on plains/deserts*

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
I am not sure what do you mean. That nations will not have enough tech to promote tax collectors?

Yes. However, I typed infra 2 instead of infra 1, which is the correct level, so it is only of little import.

A standard example would be the Timurid empire which has a monthly income of 9.6d in 1419 - of which 8.6d is taxes. They actually lose something like 47% of their pre-this-patch total yearly income for the first five or six years

However, since it is infra 1 that is needed, not infra 2, it is not critical - even for the pagans.

 

[Johan]

The values can always change

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
I really like the sound of them as well.

I must admit that I do wonder about the tax collector changes on nations not in the favoured latin and orthodox tech group for whom tax income used to be the major income early in the game, because low tech levels meant negligible trade and production income. Now they will not even get the census taxes which in many cases amounted to 25%-40% of their total yearly income for quite some time (until they manage to get infrastructure 1 AND mint money from monthly taxes like mad). Much less of an issue in a 1492 or 1617 (or later) start than in a 1419 start, of course, as starting tech levels are generally speaking higher.

I will be very interested to see how this pans out on testing. I think it is a good change. However, since many of the high tax value provinces are in Europe, promoting tax officials will give an immediate large hike in your income. In MP it may be that those countries that can get their tax system up and running first will get time for one massive war against someone who will be unable to raise the funds to succesfully defend themselves.

Let's hope it doesn't work out that way.

 

[Smirfy]

Originally posted by Owen
I will be very interested to see how this pans out on testing. I think it is a good change. However, since many of the high tax value provinces are in Europe, promoting tax officials will give an immediate large hike in your income. In MP it may be that those countries that can get their tax system up and running first will get time for one massive war against someone who will be unable to raise the funds to succesfully defend themselves.

Let's hope it doesn't work out that way.

Thats the way it happened

 

[Spakh]

Now the spanish player could only pray that he gets a "deflation" event (-8 By the way, this is a great improvement to the game. It'll be really great for the minors.

 

[unmerged(12740)]

Originally posted by Smirfy
Thats the way it happened

can't this be handled by taking a loan or two at the beginning hitting the one time +100 ducats to infra & viola, infra 1 + tax collectors -- or is infra 1 too expensive for that?

cld be handled by giving everyone except certain pagans infra 1 at the start, which wld seem reasonable to me.

 

[JohnMK]

Originally posted by Johan
The values can always change

Okay how about -.33% instead of -.25%.

 

[unmerged(10951)]

I think deflation might be overdone. As I put in a post in the Bug Report section, putting governers in about 1/2 to 2/3rds of my provinces caused my inflation to drop roughtly 0.6% per month going from 7.9% to 0.0% in no-time. Even setting my slider to full gold production didn't stop the rapid drop, or raise it again.

 

[unmerged(10262)]

Will not this make nation gets even more money? With all citys having promoted govenors you can without negative effects take out 25% of your income in pure cash.

 

[Porcius]

Originally posted by knott
Will not this make nation gets even more money? With all citys having promoted govenors you can without negative effects take out 25% of your income in pure cash.

I'm assuming that there will still be an inflationary effect to taking cash, so the .25 deflation effect of a strong tax system will be warring with the, say, .20 inflation effect.

Effectively, making the deflationary effect .05, right? Unless I'm missing something.

This will certainly shrink armies.

 

[unmerged(10262)]

Originally posted by Porcius
I'm assuming that there will still be an inflationary effect to taking cash, so the .25 deflation effect of a strong tax system will be warring with the, say, .20 inflation effect.

Effectively, making the deflationary effect .05, right? Unless I'm missing something.

This will certainly shrink armies.

But still at 0 inflation you can get 0.25 inflation from cash and lose the same ammount from govenors or?

 

[Amadís de Gaula]

It makes the game easier. I happened to have an autosaved Spain 1570 game, made the test... and I find it very, very easy to control inflation. I don´t even care about the future bankrupcies.

Governors effect should be a bit toned down, I believe. And IMHO something must be done to Castille, Austria to avoid rampaging inflation.

And BTW thanks a lot for your work and effort, Johan.