Estate/Tax Revamp Proposal

[Eldargard]

I was thinking about how we could best implement a estate/tax system that benefits from additional knights but also makes things simpler for everyone.

Code: [Select]

Dantooine
Luria Nova, duchy of Earth's Hall
Type: Rural
Location: coast
Local Lord: Alric Scarborn
Population: 15500/15500
Land Area: 4778 sq.miles
Production: Good (69%)
Morale: Content (69%)
Realm Loyalty: Friendly (73%)
Realm Control: Main
Economy: N/A
Gold: 456 gold
Food: 657 bushels
Weather area: East Pastureland
Tax Rate: 14%
To start, the tax gold collected per week remains the same Gold * Production * Region Tax Rate * 7. This means that Dantooine should make an average of 308g (456*.69*.14*7) per week. This bit would stay the same.

Next, we remove the lord's ability to tax his knights. In the end, the lords will earn more than the knights and this is assumed to be a result of taxes levied, a larger estate or whatever. the only cool button a lord gets is the ability to set the tax rate of their region.

Also, instead of allowing the lord to create and delete estates, each region is simply given a certain number of estate slots with set sizes based on the regions typical income. The idea is that each knight should earn around 80 gold per week (minimum 50g, maximum 110g) with the lord making double that (160g). Using Dantooine as an example, there would be three estates: the Lords Estate and two Knights estates. Each knight would earn 25% of the income while the Lord earns 50%

Dantooine Estates:

Code: [Select]

Name                   held by      Size Population Expected Tax
Castle Dantoon         Earl Suzzy  50 % 6200     154 gold          |rename|
North Shores Mannor    Sir Jimmy 25 % 4650     77 gold           |rename|
Sea Cliff Keep        (vacant)     25 % 4650     77 gold           |rename|
The only thing that can be changed here is the name of the estate. Estate Efficiency is also removed as there is nothing anyone can do to change it. Should only the lord be present he would earn 154g per week for a region total of 154g per week. Should he take a knight, he would continue earning 154g per week and the knight would earn 77g per week for a region total of 221g per week. Taking the third knight would finally bring the gold production to it's fullest (308g per week) with the lord earning 154g per week and each knight earning 77g per week.

Dukes would continue to be able to tax their lords by setting a duchy tax rate. this percentage is taken directly from each lords income. If Earl Suzzy's duke had a duch tax rate of 35% she would have to hand over 54g to her duke which would reduce her income to 100g per week. A duke can still take a lordship and would automatically receive the lord's estate.

The dukes income is the lord's income from his region plus all the dukes taxes.

The king an be a duke and region lord if they want (same restrictions as today) and can set a kingdom tax. Each duke would pay that percentage of their personal income to the king.

To get an idea of how this would affect a richer city, here is a breakdown of how Giask might look:

Code: [Select]

Giask
Luria Nova, duchy of Sky Hall
Type: City
Location: coast
Fortifications: Fortress (5)
Fort. Damage: 7 %
Local Lord: Aldrakar Renodin
Population: 90000/90000
Land Area: 744 sq.miles
Production: Good (69%)
Morale: Content (69%)
Realm Loyalty: Friendly (73%)
Realm Control: Main
Economy: N/A
Gold: 2936 gold
Food: 283 bushels
Weather area: East Pastureland
Tax Rate: 14%
Using the formula above we can get the weekly tax income: 1985g per week

Gisk Estates:

Code: [Select]

Name                   held by      Size Population Expected Tax
Lords Estate           Earl Suzzy  12 % 6200     239 gold          |rename|
Estate 1            Sir Jimmy 6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 2            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 3            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 4            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 5            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 6            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 7            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 8            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 9            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 10            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 11            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 12            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 13            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 14            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 15            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Estate 16            (vacant)     6 %     4650     119 gold          |rename|
Being a much more wealthy region, each knight would earn 119g (a bit more that 110 but as close as we can get to it using whole percentage points) and the lord would earn 199g per week. This means that Giask can only really realize it's full power by having quite a few knights in it's service. Though Giask is still a region that many would prefer due to it's higher earnings per lord and knight, the difference is not that huge when compared to Dantooine.

And now the poorest of regions:

Code: [Select]

Desert of Silhouettes
D'Hara, duchy of Sallowcape
Type: Badlands
Location: coast
Local Lord: Martin Longbow
Population: 350/350
Land Area: 11437 sq.miles
Production: Good (69%)
Morale: Content (69%)
Realm Loyalty: Friendly (73%)
Realm Control: Main
Economy: N/A
Gold: 36 gold
Food: 11 bushels
Weather area: East Desert
Tax Rate: 14%
The tax rate is simple: 24g per week

Desert of Silhouettes Estates:

Code: [Select]

Name                   held by      Size Population Expected Tax
Lords Estate           Earl Suzzy  100 % 350         24 gold          |rename|
That is it. If the region can not produce at least 150g per week on average, only the lord gains an estate.


In summation:
* lords can no longer tax knight income, this is assumed happen in the background if at all
* lords still set the region tax rate
* each region has a set number of estates
* the lord always receives the lors's estate
* each knights estate should produce between 50 and 110 gold (average 80)
* estates can be renamed but not removed or added
* estate sizes are static and unchangeable
* a region only earns gold on held estates
* regions that earn less than 150g have only a Lords estate
* duchy taxes are taken from the lords earnings, not from the knights
* realm taxes are taken from the dukes earnings (lords income if a lord plus duchy taxes)
* same allowances and restrictions apply regarding kings being duke and lords or dukes being lords.
* calculations assume average region production of 69% and average region tax rate of 14%
* this change would make wide spread realms very inefficient and dense realms very efficient
* most knights should have a reasonable income (enough to support a 500cs unit at 70g I think)
* actual money earned will vary based on tax rate and production values
* estate size % and population are probably not needed anymore
* estates will always be available to take by new knights.

[GundamMerc]

And what if I, as lord, want to have my knights earn more than myself, or the same amount? Besides that, this makes increasing tax on a region useless for anything besides additional estates.

[Eldargard]

No, increasing the tax on a region would mean that each individual would get more Lord and Knights both the differences will also be muck greater in rich cities than poor rurals.

Example:

Dantooine at 14% tax rate:

Code: [Select]

Name                   held by      Size Population Expected Tax
Castle Dantoon         Earl Suzzy  50 % 6200     154 gold          |rename|
North Shores Mannor    Sir Jimmy 25 % 4650     77 gold           |rename|
Sea Cliff Keep        (vacant)     25 % 4650     77 gold           |rename|
Dantooine at 16% tax rate:

Code: [Select]

Name                   held by      Size Population Expected Tax
Castle Dantoon         Earl Suzzy  50 % 6200     176 gold          |rename|
North Shores Mannor    Sir Jimmy 25 % 4650     88 gold           |rename|
Sea Cliff Keep        (vacant)     25 % 4650     88 gold           |rename|
What will happen is that Lords will no longer be able to collect 50% or more of a regions gold all on their own. If there was only a Lord of Giask (as listed in the original post) he would only collect 239g in taxes. This would be far less than what a solo lord of Giask could collect now (likely more that 900g per week). The only way for a region to reach it's full potential would be to fill it with knights.

[Eldargard]

With a system like this it could never hurt a lord (financially at least) to take on a knight and it will only help the realm for the lord to do so. Also, don't forget that dukes can still tax their lords to increase their earnings. On the plus side, even if taxed at the max (50% I believe) a lord of a region will never make less that their knights.

[De-Legro]

With a system like this it could never hurt a lord (financially at least) to take on a knight and it will only help the realm for the lord to do so. Also, don't forget that dukes can still tax their lords to increase their earnings. On the plus side, even if taxed at the max (50% I believe) a lord of a region will never make less that their knights.

It does not hurt, but it also does not directly benefit him, which is one of the goals that we want. If we have a Lord making 100g, with one knight making say 60g, we want the addition of another knight to boost both the Lord and the existing knights income. So perhaps the addition of another knight boosts the Lords income to 120g and the two knights now make 70g a piece.

I think the easiest way to do this is to modify estate efficiency, so that rather then affect only the estate, the efficiency of the region is the combination of all estate efficiencies.

[Indirik]

The problem with this is that you've just set every knight in the entire game into a fixed income, determined by the dev team. I don't think that's something we are willing to do.

[De-Legro]

The problem with this is that you've just set every knight in the entire game into a fixed income, determined by the dev team. I don't think that's something we are willing to do.

Not quite fixed, as changing region tax would change their income I believe, but yes the proposal certainly removes some of the flexibility we currently have.

[Eldargard]

You guys are both right. To start, changes in region production and tax rates will change income earned. At the same time, estates would be fixed. No resizing, adding or removing. They are what they are.

This does, indeed, remove a level of flexibility but also injects a level of simplicity. One less thing a lord needs to worry about. The trade-off might not be worth it though.

You are also right that the system also does not increase a everyone's earnings when new knights are introduced. The problem is that there is no way to guarantee that each additional will increase everyone's earnings until we can ensure that additional knights will not cause a drop in everyone's earnings.

Ensuring that no one ever loses money from additional knights is the hard part and this simplified system was an attempt at doing this in a way that was not overly complicated/hard.

A way to give a boost to everyone for gaining additional knights, once you have ensured that no one will ever earn less from additional knights, can be simple enough. One option, as De-Legro suggested, is a region wide efficiency boost. This could be simply represented by a increase of productivity with increased efficiency being the narrative explanation for the increase. Example: "The addition of a new knight has resulted in increased efficiency causing region productivity to increase by 5%". The down side is that this can cause regions with lot's of estates (mainly rich regions) to run with well over 100% production (due to increased efficiency) constantly. Even if you break it off as a separate stat the net result will likely be the same: regions will be capable of producing more money as a whole than they can now. As long as it is uniform throughout the game, I guess it is fine but I often feel that we have too much gold hanging about as it is.

In my opinion achieving this goal involves two steps:

1. Ensuring that no one loses money when taking on a new knight
2. Then find a way of boosting everyone income when taking on a knight

This suggestion was a possibly way of ensuring #1.

[De-Legro]

You guys are both right. To start, changes in region production and tax rates will change income earned. At the same time, estates would be fixed. No resizing, adding or removing. They are what they are.

This does, indeed, remove a level of flexibility but also injects a level of simplicity. One less thing a lord needs to worry about. The trade-off might not be worth it though.

You are also right that the system also does not increase a everyone's earnings when new knights are introduced. The problem is that there is no way to guarantee that each additional will increase everyone's earnings until we can ensure that additional knights will not cause a drop in everyone's earnings.

Ensuring that no one ever loses money from additional knights is the hard part and this simplified system was an attempt at doing this in a way that was not overly complicated/hard.

A way to give a boost to everyone for gaining additional knights, once you have ensured that no one will ever earn less from additional knights, can be simple enough. One option, as De-Legro suggested, is a region wide efficiency boost. This could be simply represented by a increase of productivity with increased efficiency being the narrative explanation for the increase. Example: "The addition of a new knight has resulted in increased efficiency causing region productivity to increase by 5%". The down side is that this can cause regions with lot's of estates (mainly rich regions) to run with well over 100% production (due to increased efficiency) constantly. Even if you break it off as a separate stat the net result will likely be the same: regions will be capable of producing more money as a whole than they can now. As long as it is uniform throughout the game, I guess it is fine but I often feel that we have too much gold hanging about as it is.

In my opinion achieving this goal involves two steps:

1. Ensuring that no one loses money when taking on a new knight
2. Then find a way of boosting everyone income when taking on a knight

This suggestion was a possibly way of ensuring #1.

Well there will always be situations where people lose income to add a knight. If estates are resized downwards to make room for example. I believe the currently posted gold income for the regions should be the "max" or close to the max achievable under the system. This would be when estates have 100% of the region, and are all running at 100% (and production is 100%)

[Eldargard]

You'r right. I misread what Anaris had said:

I want more knights to mean more gold per percent of estate—so that if the Lord has a 20% estate, and 1 knight has a 10% estate, and the Lord's weekly tax just from his estate averages 150, then another knight takes a 10% estate, the Lord's weekly tax goes up to 155. And the other knight's weekly tax goes up. Thus, not only would Lords who want to benefit the realm try to take on more knights, Lords who want to make a load of money on their own will, too..

I'm saying I would change the code so that the same estate you have today would start making more money, without the Lord making any changes to that estate, just because another knight took an estate in the region.

So, back to the drawing board!