BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Development => Feature Requests => Topic started by: Eldargard on January 13, 2015, 09:10:14 AM
-
Title:
Per Vassal Taxes and Stipends
Summary:
Allow a liege to set individual tax rates for each vassal and to give their vassals a set, reoccurring, stipend.
Details:
First off, allow a liege to set the tax levels of his vassals on an individual basis. Currently a lord sets a single "lords share" tax rate and that rate is applied to all of his knights. I believe that it is the same when a duke taxes his lords and when a ruler taxes his dukes. This would allow a liege to tax each vassal more or less as they see fit.
Additionally I would like it if a liege could chose to give stipends to specific vassals. This would be a set amount of gold automatically taken from the lieges income and paid to the vassal at tax time and treated as tax income. A liege could only give stipends to vassals that have a tax rate of 0% to prevent a loop-the loop from occurring in which the duke gives the lord a 50 gold stipend that is then taxed and partially returned to the duke.
The stipend would be set in the same place as taxes are but would be for set amounts instead of a percentage. If I were a duke with 4 lords I could tax the wealthiest at 20%, the second wealthiest at 15% and give each of the poorer lords a stipend of 50 gold.
The gold would be paid after the taxes are worked out from a top to bottom fashion.
1. All taxes are collected and distributed like usual.
2. The king pays any grants he has set to his dukes.
3. The dukes pay any grants they have set to their lords.
4. The lords pay any grants they have set to their knights.
5. All done, taxes are now paid out like usual.
Should a liege lack the resources to pay a grant fully they pay all they can with the losses split proportionally between grants and looses h/p for being unable to pay.
This stipend should be viewed as a part of the oath/agreement between a knight and lord, a lord and duke or between a duke and king. Should the grant be increased by the liege it is a show if satisfaction while a decrease is either a punishment or a sign of inability. It could even be taken as the liege breaking their end of a deal.
Benefits:
This would allow realms to ensure that those who need money get in in a clean and automated fashion. Should a noble be in need of a certain level of cashflow (to support a unit for example), this can be ensured regardless of where their estate is. At the same time it is completely optional and individuals can chose to use or not use the system. This would allow a realm to calculate how much a unit of X strength should cost on average (weekly pay + new recruits + repairs + whatever) and tweak the taxes/stipends to ensure each noble gets at least that much every tax day. There would no longer be a need for proud nobles to go begging for money from the realm money council and remove the need for wealthy nobled to have to hang around banks on tax days so they can pass out gold to those who need it.
The system as presented also prevents a liege from taking any more than they already do - the maximum tax rate is still the same. It just allows for efficient redistribution should a liege decide that their vassal's service deserves or requires more than their current estate/region/duchy could possibly support.
It is also impossibly for a realm to implement a fully top-down system since the maximum tax level does not increase and because it is impossible to tax someone and to give them a stipend. To one can not chose to take all of their vassals' gold by setting the tax rate to 100% then hand out set amounts.
Possible Downsides or Exploits:
A realm that takes full advantage of the system would be more efficient than a realm that chose not to. Some might feel that the lure of efficiency might tempt people to implement a tax system that contradicts the values held by the country. Some might suggest that this would reduce interactions between characters but I feel that it would simply focus the interactions where they should be when it comes to money matters: between a vassal and his liege. I personally feel that giving stipends can be roleplayed into most any form of governmental system though.
First Knight: I would like to give you my oath!
Lord: I am a generous lord, I will give you an estate equal in size to my own! 40% of my region now belongs to you. I only ask that you serve me well and pay your taxes (10%).
Second Knight: I would like to give you my oath of service.
Lord: I am a generous Lord. You will receive the 20% of my region yet unclaimed as an estate and all it's revenue and a stipend of 50g per week in exchange for your loyal service!
Later:
Lord: My duke, I have taken on a new knight but I must pay him 50g a week out of my own pocket to cover the expenses he will have to maintain a proper unit.
Duke: Wonderful! I will see to it that your tax is reduced and, if necessary, a stipend awarded to compensate you for your loss. We need every man we can get!
-
I'm all in favour of customization if easily possible, and have lusted after stipends for years. Maybe use the same interface, with negative "tax" percentage numbers rather than a fixed gold amount?
-
This has been suggested before, and was rejected I believe due to the added complication for Lords. That is not to say it won't be considered but that anything that can be done to make the management of it for Lords as easy as possible will go a long way to making it work.
-
This has been suggested before, and was rejected I believe due to the added complication for Lords. That is not to say it won't be considered but that anything that can be done to make the management of it for Lords as easy as possible will go a long way to making it work.
I'd say the simplest version for the lords is a one-time set and forget tax percentage per knight, that can go positive or negative.
-
I would be nice to be able to tax knights differently as a lord, and tax lords differently as a duke, and tax dukes differently as ruler.
-
If you want to give a knight less money, shrink their estate. Give them more money? Make their estate bigger. I don't see a need for all this complicating of things.
-
If you want to give a knight less money, shrink their estate. Give them more money? Make their estate bigger. I don't see a need for all this complicating of things.
True for the knights, I guess (well, somewhat, if you ignore estate efficiency), but that can't be done for dukes or rulers.
-
Rulers and dukes have taxes on those below them they can regulate to adjust their incomes.
-
If you want to give a knight less money, shrink their estate. Give them more money? Make their estate bigger. I don't see a need for all this complicating of things.
True, but with some regions, it is impossible to give everyone enough gold to meet the expenses imposed upon them with these means. There is simply not enough gold to go around. The accepted solution at this time is not: "Just field the largest unit you can with the gold you have." I am totally fine with such a solution and am generally avoid having any of my noble characters ask for money and instead field sub-optimal units. The solution I have seen most often is to create or designate a "money giving group" and then have the knights and lords that make little gold go asking for gold as needed. This is, in my opinion, not the kind of behavior I imagine the "highest of nobility" our characters are supposed to represent would engage in. Plus, it adds a lot of overhead.
Say there is a badlands region that only produces 50g per week for the lord (no knights). Then add on to the fact that the realms general has decided that every troop leader must field a 600CS unit (or a unit of such strength that the lord can not afford it). The duke, who wants very much his 15% share from the other, more profitable regions sets the tax to 15%. That leaves this lord with an income of 43g or so. What is the solution? The Lord must now go begging for grants from his liege, the ruler, the treasurer or some group of rich nobles who have been established to give handouts. Then the giver and taker of the money has to stop doing fun things like attacking evil outlanders and spend time at the bank making the transfers.
My proposed solution makes it possible for the duke to keep his 15% tax on the other regions (the ones that earn well) and then give that poor lord enough of a stipend to cover the expenses of a quality unit. Every tax day that lord simply gets enough income to cover his expenses. No need to go begging. No need for anyone to go spend more time at the bank.
Plus, it makes it possible for dukes to make certain regions more appealing to potential lords. Now: "Would someone like to be a lord of this poor rural? You will make much less that you did from your estate at the capital but if you are willing to go beg for gold from our generous welfare council, we will give you handouts as needed." With this proposed feature: "We need a lord for PoorRural. Any takers will receive 100% of PoorRural's tax income plus 50g per week."
The same scenario can be applied to knights. Say I have already given 2 knights 40% estates and end up taking on a 3rd knight. With this there may not be a need to change everyone's estate sizes and tax rates as you can simply choose to not tax the new knight and then give them a stipend. The new knight will not need to go begging and there needs to be less time spent at the bank. The lord, might even petition their duke to see if they would be willing to reduce their taxes or increase their stipend if the lord's income has dropped too much from taking on the new knight and ensuring that the knight has a reasonable income.
Plus, given a little time a realm will reach some kind of equilibrium. All knights will receive the estate size, tax rate and stipend amounts needed to cover reasonable expenses. Each Lord will have a tax rate or stipend that ensures they can cover their expenses - after all, it is possible that their duke is willing to adjust the lords loss of income incurred by taking on a new knight by adjusting that lords tax rate or stipend. The dukes do not usually have so many issues being short of money but it is still possible for the king to adjust tax rates or stipends to ensure that they all have what they need. All without nobles begging for money, the need for a welfare council and less time spent at the bank.
Regarding negative tax percentages, I find myself a bit skeptical. If we give a lord a negative 50% of the lords income and that lord loses a knight causing his income to raise from 70 gold to 100 gold, I will suddenly find myself paying the man 50g for a total of 150g instead of 35g for a total of 105g. I would be a little unhappy about that. Plus, this gives the lord one more reason why they should be careful or hesitant of taking on a knight. If doing so reduces the lords income their stipend from their duke is also suddenly lessened. Using a fixed amount eliminates this uncertainty and confusion. It just seems simpler to me.
As far as s simple interface goes, I think it would only take a minor adjustment to the GovernEstates page for lords or the equivalent for the dukes/kings. Just add a column for "tax rate/stipend" that lets you set the tax rate or stipend with a drop down menu per knight. The menu would contain a list of values like:
50% Tax
49% Tax
48% Tax
47% Tax
46% Tax
45% Tax
...
1% Tax
0% Tax
10g Stipend
20g Stipend
30g Stipend
40g Stipend
...
490g Stipend
500g Stipend
The lord/duke/kind simply selects a value for each vassal and that is all.
-
True, but with some regions, it is impossible to give everyone enough gold to meet the expenses imposed upon them with these means. There is simply not enough gold to go around. The accepted solution at this time is not: "Just field the largest unit you can with the gold you have." I am totally fine with such a solution and am generally avoid having any of my noble characters ask for money and instead field sub-optimal units. The solution I have seen most often is to create or designate a "money giving group" and then have the knights and lords that make little gold go asking for gold as needed. This is, in my opinion, not the kind of behavior I imagine the "highest of nobility" our characters are supposed to represent would engage in. Plus, it adds a lot of overhead.
Say there is a badlands region that only produces 50g per week for the lord (no knights). Then add on to the fact that the realms general has decided that every troop leader must field a 600CS unit (or a unit of such strength that the lord can not afford it). The duke, who wants very much his 15% share from the other, more profitable regions sets the tax to 15%. That leaves this lord with an income of 43g or so. What is the solution? The Lord must now go begging for grants from his liege, the ruler, the treasurer or some group of rich nobles who have been established to give handouts. Then the giver and taker of the money has to stop doing fun things like attacking evil outlanders and spend time at the bank making the transfers.
My proposed solution makes it possible for the duke to keep his 15% tax on the other regions (the ones that earn well) and then give that poor lord enough of a stipend to cover the expenses of a quality unit. Every tax day that lord simply gets enough income to cover his expenses. No need to go begging. No need for anyone to go spend more time at the bank.
Plus, it makes it possible for dukes to make certain regions more appealing to potential lords. Now: "Would someone like to be a lord of this poor rural? You will make much less that you did from your estate at the capital but if you are willing to go beg for gold from our generous welfare council, we will give you handouts as needed." With this proposed feature: "We need a lord for PoorRural. Any takers will receive 100% of PoorRural's tax income plus 50g per week."
The same scenario can be applied to knights. Say I have already given 2 knights 40% estates and end up taking on a 3rd knight. With this there may not be a need to change everyone's estate sizes and tax rates as you can simply choose to not tax the new knight and then give them a stipend. The new knight will not need to go begging and there needs to be less time spent at the bank. The lord, might even petition their duke to see if they would be willing to reduce their taxes or increase their stipend if the lord's income has dropped too much from taking on the new knight and ensuring that the knight has a reasonable income.
Plus, given a little time a realm will reach some kind of equilibrium. All knights will receive the estate size, tax rate and stipend amounts needed to cover reasonable expenses. Each Lord will have a tax rate or stipend that ensures they can cover their expenses - after all, it is possible that their duke is willing to adjust the lords loss of income incurred by taking on a new knight by adjusting that lords tax rate or stipend. The dukes do not usually have so many issues being short of money but it is still possible for the king to adjust tax rates or stipends to ensure that they all have what they need. All without nobles begging for money, the need for a welfare council and less time spent at the bank.
Regarding negative tax percentages, I find myself a bit skeptical. If we give a lord a negative 50% of the lords income and that lord loses a knight causing his income to raise from 70 gold to 100 gold, I will suddenly find myself paying the man 50g for a total of 150g instead of 35g for a total of 105g. I would be a little unhappy about that. Plus, this gives the lord one more reason why they should be careful or hesitant of taking on a knight. If doing so reduces the lords income their stipend from their duke is also suddenly lessened. Using a fixed amount eliminates this uncertainty and confusion. It just seems simpler to me.
As far as s simple interface goes, I think it would only take a minor adjustment to the GovernEstates page for lords or the equivalent for the dukes/kings. Just add a column for "tax rate/stipend" that lets you set the tax rate or stipend with a drop down menu per knight. The menu would contain a list of values like:
50% Tax
49% Tax
48% Tax
47% Tax
46% Tax
45% Tax
...
1% Tax
0% Tax
10g Stipend
20g Stipend
30g Stipend
40g Stipend
...
490g Stipend
500g Stipend
The lord/duke/kind simply selects a value for each vassal and that is all.
Not every region is meant to be controlled. If a region does not provide even enough gold for the Lord to make do, then perhaps it is not a region worth appointing a Lord to.
-
True, though i am not at all a fan of a realm possessing regions without a lord. In my opinion, if a region does not consistently have a lord, it should return to rouge. Say if a region is lordless for 7 days, consecutive or not, it goes rouge. 1 lordless day could be removed for every week the region is held by a lord.
-
True, though i am not at all a fan of a realm possessing regions without a lord. In my opinion, if a region does not consistently have a lord, it should return to rouge. Say if a region is lordless for 7 days, consecutive or not, it goes rouge. 1 lordless day could be removed for every week the region is held by a lord.
I would suggest that if a region is that rubbish, don't bother TOing it in the first place. I certainly don't endorse holding on to a region and never appointing a lord.
-
The thing is that the potential value of a region is more than just it's gold production. Perhaps due to the current political borders it holds a good strategic position. Perhaps some worthwhile infrastructure is build on it. If it is worth it for a realm to hold it would be nice if there was a way to ensure the guy stuck with it gets well paid without having to go asking for gold and having to deal with a bunch of manual transfers.
-
Rulers and dukes have taxes on those below them they can regulate to adjust their incomes.
Yea, but they can't say: Duke 1, I love you, so no taxes. Duke 2, you are a wimp, so take this 20% tax.
-
Or... Lord 1, your region sucks but it's there and it's ours so I'm not taxing you but Lord 2, you're region's rich and I want a piece of it!
-
Or... Lord 1, your region sucks but it's there and it's ours so I'm not taxing you but Lord 2, you're region's rich and I want a piece of it!
Which is where percentages come in.
Besides, you could tax the whole Duchy at the highest rate, and use the extra money to give presents to the Lords that you do like :) Or buy their grain for a higher price. Or pay for their infrastructure.
-
I think giving people buttons which arbitrarily give/take away gold with very little counterplay or interaction is bad. The only reason this is an improvement over the current systems is that it adds the 'give' button, which is better than only having 'take' but still worse than having neither.
-
Which is where percentages come in.
Besides, you could tax the whole Duchy at the highest rate, and use the extra money to give presents to the Lords that you do like :) Or buy their grain for a higher price. Or pay for their infrastructure.
True - this is what we can do now. However, this takes extra time and effort on the liege's part and requires them to head to a bank to redistribute the money every tax day. I would rather just have it taken care of while I do more interesting things (write fun messages, scheme, train, wage war).
-
I think giving people buttons which arbitrarily give/take away gold with very little counterplay or interaction is bad. The only reason this is an improvement over the current systems is that it adds the 'give' button, which is better than only having 'take' but still worse than having neither.
I am all for character interaction. I have a lot of fun writing messages and getting into politics, religion, debate and all that. Proper, realistic interactions are awesome. I just can not see how having my Knight or Lord character asking for hand-outs is either proper or realistic behavior for "the highest of nobility". I would rather spend less time dealing with this and more time doing fun stuff.
If we are determined to give most of the wealth to a select few within each realm, why not give them an easy way to pass that gold around in a simple, realistic and easy way? The gold is already flowing up then back down, I just want to automate the process as much as possible!If this is not the way (which I am totally cool with), then perhaps another way would work.
-
I'm just disagreeing on the premise that automation leaves to more time for other things and therefor is a good thing. I think the lack of automation is what stimulates interaction, free choice and especially the occasion for things to go wrong.
Imagine following armies was automated. People wouldn't have to sign in every turn to press the travel button, we would have more coordinated and bigger battles, and players could focus on writing battle roleplays! Great, no? /s :)
-
True. I totally see your point: not everything that could be automated should be automated and everyone is likely to have a different idea of what tasks are good candidates for automation.
I do, however, feel that this proposal is worth considering for two reasons. First, it does not take player agency away. You can chose to use it or not, it might make life easier or you can opt to avoid it. Second, it is focused on automating what I feel is a secondary function of the game, something that most do just because they have to in order to accomplish X, X being what they are really wanting.
-
All these threads lately.. I think it's a slippery slope.
These players don't enjoy doing this, those players don't enjoy doing that.
Remove manual redistribution of gold, remove seasons, remove classes, remove juggling food between provinces.
What shall we be left with in the end?
Just bear in mind that if you personally don't enjoy something it doesn't mean it's redundant.
-
I agree on all points. However, I will still propose ideas for what I think would be improvements but I leave it for the Devs and community to like them, hate them, ignore them as they will.
-
I am not sure how much this suggestion takes away from the game though.
Take Aways:
1. The need for nobles to repeatedly ask their liege or treasury council for gold.
2. The need for lieges or treasure council members to go to a bank as often to ensure their nobles have the money they need.
Add Ins:
1. An extra facet to the vassal/liege relationship.
2. The ability to individuals tax ones vassals.
It doesn't see to me that a whole lot is lost. All the same, it would have wide spread repercussions and might not be a good idea at all. I like it but I am also happy that it will be the Devs and communities job to decide if it is right for Battlemaster.
-
Also couldn't you offer stipends through guild infrastructure? Sponsors put in what they want to spread out, members come to the guild house to take what they need
-
That sounds like a very plausible work around. Certainly lower maintenance than constant bank transfers but I kind of like tying the stipend to the whole vassal/liege agreement.
That being said, this has some seriously cool potential. Set up Different ranks with different funding levels. One level grants 100G, the next 75G, 50G, 25G and so on. Have each knight of the realm who needs the boost join and get assigned to the appropriate level based on how much money the need to maintain a decent unit. Sponsors just keep pumping money into it.
This could even make it possible to pay knights to serve and fight even without a lord or estate (hedge knights). A lot of fun potential here!
-
That sounds like a very plausible work around. Certainly lower maintenance than constant bank transfers but I kind of like tying the stipend to the whole vassal/liege agreement.
That being said, this has some seriously cool potential. Set up Different ranks with different funding levels. One level grants 100G, the next 75G, 50G, 25G and so on. Have each knight of the realm who needs the boost join and get assigned to the appropriate level based on how much money the need to maintain a decent unit. Sponsors just keep pumping money into it.
This could even make it possible to pay knights to serve and fight even without a lord or estate (hedge knights). A lot of fun potential here!
The main drawbacks are that guild treasuries are tied to chapter houses and money transfers are not automatic. E.g Sponsor Kepler will have to put money in Chapter Keplerstan (manually) and Knight Hedgehog will have to withdraw (manually) from the same guildhouse.
Also you'll lose (a tiny bit) on guild maintenance. And good luck making your sponsor pay on time :P I've had a few guilds set up for reasons of money distribution, and honestly I think it's easier to just send over bonds. The Guild approach is nocer, though.
-
All good points. Those rich Dukes and their grasping ways!
-
I don't think I've ever seen a guild designed for automated gold distribution actually work. Lots of people have tried to set it up, but it never really works out in the end.
Also, as i said in the last thread about this, a system that allows the return of automated socialism/equality of taxes across the realm it's not desired, and almost certainly won't be approved. Out loud fully intentional that taxes and incomes are unequal.
-
I don't think I've ever seen a guild designed for automated gold distribution actually work. Lots of people have tried to set it up, but it never really works out in the end.
Also, as i said in the last thread about this, a system that allows the return of automated socialism/equality of taxes across the realm it's not desired, and almost certainly won't be approved. Out loud fully intentional that taxes and incomes are unequal.
I think that it would be a lot of work to set up a communist system with the changes I propose here.
-
I think it would be a lot of work to set up a communist system with the changes I propose here.
To set up a completely share-and-share-alike system, where everyone gets the exact same amount of gold? Sure, that would be pretty tough. You'd still have some variation due to all kinds of things like production changes, trade balances, militia payments, etc. But the essence of your proposed change is "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". You said it yourself in your original proposal:
This would allow realms to ensure that those who need money get in in a clean and automated fashion. Should a noble be in need of a certain level of cashflow (to support a unit for example), this can be ensured regardless of where their estate is.
You're trying to implement an automatic system so that everyone will get whatever they need. The problem is that the system was designed so that doesn't happen. It is intentionally a "bottom up" system, and NOT "top down".
It is 100% intentional that not all nobles will have the same income. It is intended that the knight of a rich city makes more than the knight of a poor badlands. And quite possibly has a higher income than some lords. The system is intentionally unequal. Some nobles won't have all the gold they want or need. Some will have excessively large surplus incomes. That's the way the world works.
If you want to take away this intentional inequality among the nobility, then that's a major design decision. You'll have to convince Anaris/Tom that a return to a communistic "every gets what they need" system is desirable. Once you have buy-in that this is OK, then you can start threads like this to discuss the exact mechanics of how to make it happen.
-
I don't think I've ever seen a guild designed for automated gold distribution actually work. Lots of people have tried to set it up, but it never really works out in the end.
Also, as i said in the last thread about this, a system that allows the return of automated socialism/equality of taxes across the realm it's not desired, and almost certainly won't be approved. Out loud fully intentional that taxes and incomes are unequal.
The Lions in Fontan made it work. Mind you the other Fontan armies that tried to replicated the system failed.
-
The Fontan Lions were also largely run by either a multi or a multi-cluster. They should never be held up as an example of "how to do" anything in BattleMaster—more like "how not to do" armies, and more importantly how not to react to Titan decisions, given what ultimately led to half the army quitting the game all at once.
-
The Fontan Lions were also largely run by either a multi or a multi-cluster. They should never be held up as an example of "how to do" anything in BattleMaster—more like "how not to do" armies, and more importantly how not to react to Titan decisions, given what ultimately led to half the army quitting the game all at once.
There were several players in the structure not part of that group though, in fact some of the biggest financial contributors.
-
To set up a completely share-and-share-alike system, where everyone gets the exact same amount of gold? Sure, that would be pretty tough. You'd still have some variation due to all kinds of things like production changes, trade balances, militia payments, etc. But the essence of your proposed change is "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". You said it yourself in your original proposal:
You're trying to implement an automatic system so that everyone will get whatever they need. The problem is that the system was designed so that doesn't happen. It is intentionally a "bottom up" system, and NOT "top down".
It is 100% intentional that not all nobles will have the same income. It is intended that the knight of a rich city makes more than the knight of a poor badlands. And quite possibly has a higher income than some lords. The system is intentionally unequal. Some nobles won't have all the gold they want or need. Some will have excessively large surplus incomes. That's the way the world works.
If you want to take away this intentional inequality among the nobility, then that's a major design decision. You'll have to convince Anaris/Tom that a return to a communistic "every gets what they need" system is desirable. Once you have buy-in that this is OK, then you can start threads like this to discuss the exact mechanics of how to make it happen.
OK. Makes sense!
-
sum(region taxes)/noblbes
-
sum(region taxes)/noblbes
Yes, as Indirik said, not going to happen without convincing Tom.
-
KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN
TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM
-
The thing is that the potential value of a region is more than just it's gold production. Perhaps due to the current political borders it holds a good strategic position. Perhaps some worthwhile infrastructure is build on it. If it is worth it for a realm to hold it would be nice if there was a way to ensure the guy stuck with it gets well paid without having to go asking for gold and having to deal with a bunch of manual transfers.
So basically having their cake and eating it too :P
-
So basically having their cake and eating it too :P
Not really. That would be making crappy regions suddenly profitable goldwise. I never suggested this.
-
Not really. That would be making crappy regions suddenly profitable goldwise. I never suggested this.
You said exactly that though :P
"...it would be nice if there was a way to ensure the guy stuck with it gets well paid without having to go asking for gold...
-
You said exactly that though :P
"...it would be nice if there was a way to ensure the guy stuck with it gets well paid without having to go asking for gold...
Sacha: Paid for from other regions. Hence the stipends, which is literally what the entire thread is about.