Please be aware of the Forum Rules of Conduct.
Though I still instinctively think in terms of rank that one has held, I haven't seen any evidence of rank since I returned to BM last January. The royal rank for former rulers looks like newer code than what used to exist and is likely the only existing instance of a rank being held after you lose it. Dukes, lords, knights, and nobles are all based upon currently-held positions.
I am just used to thinking of everyone without a title as a knight. I have always considered nobles to be knights, just not knight of such and such. However Stabbity is right, the game never calls them such.
Yeah, I mean I always call landless nobles knights too (sometimes Lord depending on the person) but I mean actually being knight of a region, with the title, without having an estate. It doesn't seem like it should be difficult to code, at least not if being able to become a knight of a region by being in the same region of the lord is possible. The main purpose would be for nobles who don't gold (rich people and priests) to be able to be in a knight of a region, without having to take 5% from other people needlessly when they don't have much of a desire for it.
If they don't want the gold, then they can be a knight of a rural or badlands, and the lord tax the priest 50%. The lord will actually be getting the same amount of gold as he would be getting without the knight, due to the inefficiency of having wild lands. So the priests income would actually be "free gold".
Is this just true for estates at 100% efficiency? As i understand it, You collect tax at 50% effiency for wildlands/vacant estates, while you collect 50% of the tax collected (which may or may not be 100%).
So it's better to have wildlands than empty estates?
No, they are equally good. He is ill-informed on that matter.
You should check your own taxes. Also, Duke Kendal performed his own experiments for quite some time after the New Estate system went into place, and confirmed that he got more taxes with empty estates sized at 10% (100% efficiency), than he did with an empty estate sized at 40% (80% or so efficiency. And wildlands are automatically 100% efficient.
Well I can guarantee thats false simply based off math. 10*100%=10, 40*80%=32, 32>10. The % of the regions tax gold received would be 50% of that but that won't change the anything (16>5).
but since we are apparently awash with gold that no one can spend, why argue over a handful of gold coins.