Proposal for new DLC: The Means of Wealth

[Imgran]

EDITED NOTE: This thread has taken on the character of a brainstorming session with many different suggestions throughout the thread. I *HIGHLY* Recommend that any Dev who reads this takes the time to read the whole thing, there's a lot of ideas here that I in all humility think are excellent, and by no means are all of those ideas mine.


This is something I was rambling about in a thread in the main forum when I suddenly realized I had conceptualized an entire DLC/patch scheme that wouldn't (I don't think) be all that hard to implement, and would add a lot of fun and enjoyment to EUIV without really costing anhything but a bit of devtime.

Let me tell you though that that loot bar is very interesting. It's a source of extreme potential down the road for this game, if the devs see it. Because for the first time we have numbers for not just the potential wealth of the province but also the current affluence of the province. And both are already tied directly to the province's income.

The potential for a national system of taxation, economic policies, and a whole load of new content ideas just opened up with something that I strongly suspect the devs just see as a new loot mechanic. I'm guessing it may take a modder to get them to see the light, but oh what a light it is!

Imagine if you had this natural development system that we've both discussed where a full loot bar unlocked the potential for the province to develop on its own, slowly.

Now imagine this: A set of buttons in the economy window marked Emergency Tax, High Tax, Average Tax, Low Tax, Minimal Tax.

Minimal Tax and Low Tax cuts tax income by 50% and 20% respectively but lowers Unrest somewhat and gives a boost to the loot bar (which really should be called Affluence Bar) and triggers (relatively) rapid development in all provinces. Great if you can afford it, you then have the choice of going for a very lax tax policy, but short term risks are very significant since you won't be able to build as much or have as big of an army and navy. Makes for a great long game but a very very challenging short term game.

And maybe to balance the lowered unrest, Autonomy ticks up when taxes are low as the government maintains less control over the economy.

Normal taxes are the current default, usually good in most situations and generally sufficient for most players to kee their army at the force limit. No impact on unrest or autonomy.

High Tax increases your national tax modifier by something pretty significant, say 20%, but the affluence bar fills much more slowly and the MTTH between development goes up as a result and unrest increases a bit, while autonomy drops. Thus you can potentially go over force limit safely, but in the long run your provinces will be poorer than they could have been, and an oppressive tax policy carries a big penalty over a 400 year campaign -- but a tax income burst for short term gain, or if you're playing a relatively poor OPM, can make a difference to survival that may be worth it. And of course with the DLC you can keep developing a small nation with only a few provinces with monarch points to make up for anything you lose from taxation. Think of it as going Socialist.

Emergency taxes give a huge boost to national tax but the loot bar goes down and keeping emergency taxes for any length of time encourages Peasant Rebels or even the Peasant's War disaster. Meanwhile the autonomy drop is no better than High Tax. This is an emergency SOS option only, designed strictly to stave off bankruptcy, but in a pinch it could save a nation in a real financial crisis.

Put this system in place along with the current DLC model, and all the DLC does is allow you to spend MP to keep your taxes high and still develop your province, or alternatively to spur natural development to even greater hights or make a key development where you feel you need it. Still valuable, and that would put it in the area where most DLC features are for this game -- an interesting potentially strategic extra, similar to National Focus.

If the Devs did this it would also add some amazing depth and tactical choice to the peacetime game, which this game desperately, desperately, DESPERATELY needs. I really hope something like this makes it into the next patch, especially because the potential for DLC-only extras in a system like this is also extreme. Or put the entire new tax system as the centerpiece of a new DLC. I probably won't buy CS but I would buy that, and I think I'm not alone

Now beyond that core concept, which you already have enough material for a base for the core game (natural development of provinces based on Loot/Affluence bar but only access to Normal tax mode) and for DLC content (the taxation system itself, which gives very VERY interesting gameplay consequences for decisions at the outset of the campaign that can affect a whole playthrough) the option for potential decisions, rebalancing national ideas and idea groups for a new economic model, as well as the ablity to adapt to situations in a new way, such as being threatened by a superior power in a war, raising Emergency Taxes, recruiting ALL THE MERCS and turning the campaign on its head, and knowing that an enemy could do the exact same thing to you given a chance.

Not to mention a whole slew of possible new events and decisions and even a new disaster or two based on tax protests, or on a lax tax policy potentially opening your nation up to commercial explotation of one flavor or another as your nation surrenders control of its economy to the private sector. For example, a decision chain based on the South Seas Bubble triggered by high national debt, or the Tulip Crisis, would be both period and very interesting.

It would also mesh very nicely with what you were doing with the new development system in Common Sense and make that DLC more attractive in retrospect, which is only a good thing for Paradox Development Studious I think. and new DLC that synergizes with an old DLC and can increase sales of both is a good thing.

I think this suggestion has some serious legs if the developers want to take the idea on board and I'd be excited to buy a DLC based on this kind of proposal. I think the new dynamics it created could radically open the game up especially in peacetime and the fact that it opened up an entire new kind of playstyle for EUIV makes me hope the devs take this idea or one very like it very seriously. Fingers crossed.

Thoughts?

 

[zbyrne]

I do like emergency taxes, as an alternative to war taxes, or loans as a way of dealing with war financing. taxation in the aftermath of the seven years war for example, was one of the catalysts of the american war of independence.

brutal taxation could also hinder or regress development, as another angle to the development system?

 

[Imgran]

Well that was a specific part of the proposal. Basically provinces couldn't develop at all without a full Loot/Affluence Bar, so Emergency Taxes gradually lowering the loot bar in exchange for a massive boost in immediate revenue is literally sacrificing the future for right now. High taxes also slow down province growth because when a province develops the loot bar empties and when taxes are high it takes longer to fill the bar.

What would be great is if the cap was higher the more developed a province was, so a high development province that's stripped to the bone takes a lot longer to get back to normal than a province that's just 2 huts in the wilderness. Not only does that make sense (it does take longer to rebuild and repair a major city after a brutal war than it does to clear the weeds and ashes out in the boonies and start planting again) but it would create a mechanic where underdeveloped nations could catch up a bit which I think would be nice. It would also mean that well developed provinces right on the border could be highly problematic and force you to defend them very aggressively.

Also if development was fluid rather than static, it would be interesting to see a Pillaging system that could give a lot of loot and lower development in a province, increase Power Projection, and add instant AE or another similar malice to all same culture/same religion nations. That would emulate the brutality of the religious wars in an IMHO very interesting way.

 

[zbyrne]

well personally any tax decisions should be global, or at least on a national level (that can vary obviously - so pick one colonial nation, or a constituent country, such as only Scotland in GB), rather than county by county.

and my bit on hampering growth isn't so much that it slows down development, but actually sends it backwards, sort of urban decay sort of thing - too much tax, not enough investment.

but all in all i like your thinking op.

 

[Imgran]

Yeah, like I said in my proposal, tax policies would be set in the national windows, in specific the economy window, same place you set how much you're funding your army and such. It's the impact of those decisions that would be demonstrated on the individual province level because we now have a modifier that measures affluence of each province so we can do that now.

Basically national policy, but the impact would be felt in each province individually, but the overall impact would have major ramifications nationally. Imagine that, an actual direct, measurable interaction between the provincial and national level. Actual policies that directly impact provinces rather than abstractions like Autonomy. We haven't seen such since Province Decisions didn't make the grade from EUIII to EUIV. Thanks to the loot bar such strange things can be dreamed once more.

BTW guys thank you for making me point out stuff I thought I'd mentioned in the OP, just to make sure I'm communicating my suggestion clearly I want to know where the miscommunications are.

 

[zbyrne]

BTW guys thank you for making me point out stuff I thought I'd mentioned in the OP, just to make sure I'm communicating my suggestion clearly I want to know where the miscommunications are.

well actually im at work and thus not meant to be on the forums, so im skimming rather than reading in-depth as im only on here for a couple of mins at a time, so it may not be your lack of communication, and more my half reading of your posts haha.

but im still supportive of your suggestions. +1

 

[Imgran]

Thank you. I just hope I can make the devs realize what they have here. For the first time economic growth does not have to be abstracted to events, decisions and DLC mechanics! There's a modifier already built into the game that abstracts it already, there to be played with, without having to sacrifice its current role as a loot mechanic at all, in fact augmenting and catalyzing the original point of the feature to add significantly to the dynamism of the game as a whole.

The potential here is very real,, if the Devs can seize on it.

 

[Chief of Staff]

This almost sound similar to tax laws in CK2, where you can set taxes for feudal vassals, cities, and church vassals at different levels. Sounds like a good idea, make administration of countries more interesting. I support this. Rated Agree.

 

[Imgran]

Well what I'm proposing is a national tax policy that would express itself by affecting the provicinal modifiers. You wouldn't necessarily control the tax level for individual provinces (not that you couldn't do it that way, but that would be a lot of micro).

 

[Chief of Staff]

As far as I know, tax laws in CK2 is realm-wide. I have only played a kingdom so far in CK2 so those tax laws applies across the kingdom. I think you can apply it across your duchy too but haven't played a duchy yet. Either way, I was thinking of your proposed tax laws as on country level, applying to all provinces at once.

 

[Imgran]

Ahh then yes, that's what I'm suggesting. I really hope the devs are paying attention because like I said, this is material for a fantastic DLC that would really add depth to the game.

So my question is whether it should cost a number of Admin points to raise or lower taxes. Personally I'd be fine with that if it cost about 150ADM to change tax policy since it's not the sort of thing you should do all the time anyway and it would emulate the legal process of implementing tax and economic reform.

 

[BrokenSky]

I read in another thread (proposing developing provinces by spending money) a suggestion where provinces develop over time based on how they're used; provinces with military buildings or near borders with rivals get more manpower and defensiveness (defensiveness bonus from base manpower), provinces used for trading (have trade buildings in node with merchant etc) might get more base production (production would give small bonus to trade-power as well as development, so it's better at raising trade-power than base tax, but not by that much).

In this system, maybe the actual thing getting developed could be chosen at random with things like buildings already present, the value of the trade goods, the proximity of enemies and current development being used to work out the probabilities of each type of development?

 

[Philadelphus]

Interesting idea. Perhaps rather than a monarch point cost to change it could instead have a cool-down period, which would affect all nations equally (instead of favoring those with more MP) and represent the bureaucratic inertia required to change tax policies. At least 1 year, maybe more like 5, so that choosing to change tax laws is a weighty decision.

I feel like this could also tie into the proposal I made for naturally improving development over time (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-proposal-for-naturally-increasing-development-over-time). Instead of looking at war or peace, increment the improvement value based on the state of the Loot Bar: >75%, increase the value; 25-75%, don't change; <25%, decrease the value. That would reward keeping your provinces un-looted, whether by enemy looting action or excessive taxation.

 

[Imgran]

Yep. As you can see the potential for strategic play is massive, maybe even enough to create real peacetime content in EUIV for the first time.

With the new building mechanics not being nearly as much of a cash sink ducats are just kind out there flapping in the breeze, the only thing to spend them on is buildings and units and once you're at your force limit cash is kind of an orphaned number. But the opportunity is there thanks to province affluence being tracked by a new modifier to fix that.

I would also love to see the ability to take money from the treasury and boost the loot bar of a province with direct federal aid. That might be another interesting DLC exclusive feature for the DLC I'm proposing.

Honestly nothing here seems like it would be beyond the capacity of a really good modder. Too bad I'm not one.

 

[Imgran]

I feel like this could also tie into the proposal I made for naturally improving development over time (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-proposal-for-naturally-increasing-development-over-time). Instead of looking at war or peace, increment the improvement value based on the state of the Loot Bar: >75%, increase the value; 25-75%, don't change; <25%, decrease the value. That would reward keeping your provinces un-looted, whether by enemy looting action or excessive taxation.

Here's how I'd handle it directly.

Every month the loot bar is full, each province gain .5% in their chance to develop, so that in January the chance for a development gain might be at 34.5% but at February i's at 35%. When the dev chance fires, the loot bar goes down by about 3/4 (so there's still SOME loot to be had) and the counter obviously resets.

Being sieged and looted resets this counter. Having enemy troops in a province at any time resets this counter. Rebels reset the counter. And of course, Emergency Taxes reset all the counters throughout your nation. More developed provinces fill their loot bar progressively more slowly so if they're fully looted it takes a much longer time to recover than undeveloped wilderness, and also carry a lot more loot that can be pilfered away from them by sieging troops. other things that would slow the development of affluence include religious tensions, separatism and unrest, but actually NOT Autonomy, since autonomy represents the same thing we're emulating here, the province simply running itself.

This is also why I think that low tax policies should allow autonomy to go up, since prompting internal development increaes a province's self-sufficiency, meaning to maintain low taxes without losing control of your nation you'd need to have some other means of reducing autonomy, such as the Economic idea group.



As for development type preference , I think it should be possible to stack the odds of a given development in a given direction by 10%, going 40-30-30 in favor of a desired kind of development. This could be done in the economy window as well, with 4 options favoring Manpower, Production, Base Tax and of course a Balanced approach. You would still have a 60% chance of any given development point not being in the area you wanted it but it would average out in your favor.

 

[Naeven]

Very interesting.
Some thoughts from my side,
Divide the dev cost needed per dev type, so increasing a type that is already higher cost more than the lower stats.

Every month the loot bar is full, x% chance to reduce price of one type by 1 MP.

If a cost reaches 0 MP of any type, automatically upgrade it.

Use MP to force next level (only paying what is missing rather than the whole).

 

[BrokenSky]

Maybe have autonomy increase the speed of natural development, but also the cost of using monarch points to boost development? If the province is autonomous it kinda runs itself, but it's harder for you to intervene?

 

[Imgran]

Some interesting mechanical ideas. I could see either of these adding interest to the game. However I want to keep the natural development feature on the core game side, it's got to be the hook that makes the other DLC-exclusive features interesting without sacrificing core gameplay, so merely reducing MP cost for a DLC-only feature isn't something I'd particularly love to see. But if it goes down to 0 it develops naturally so I could get behind that

 

[MWSampson]

We have national focus. I feel that should impact, maybe. Perhaps this weights the chance of the MP decrease should be related to this.

More particularly though the numbers in post #15 give an average MTTH of about 16 months.
Reducing to 0.1% change per month gives a MTTH of about 36 months.
Both are far too quick. And you need a figure that increases the MTTH as development increases.

A 1/1/1 province should reach what point naturally over 100 years of peace? A 3/3/3 seems unrealistically fast, and from a gameplay perspective tripling manpower in 100 years seems broken. Though, maybe not for 1/1/1 provinces. I assumed for this that MPs land perfectly.

Then we need 315 'successes' on average.
315 successes of 1200 chances puts the base chance at about 1/4. Not satisfied with this I proposed the following:

A 10% Base Chance (for 'undeveloped' provinces) - floor chance of 5%. With the following monthly change: Numbers chosen semi-arbitrarily

• With extreme taxes bar will deplete.
• -0.5% High Taxes (MTTH 8 months. So after 1200 months you'll be a 2/2/2 - just about)
• +0% Medium Taxes (MTTH 6.5 months. So after 1200 months you'll be 2/2/2 - with a small bonus of 30ish MP)
• +2% Low Taxes (MTTH 4 and a bitish months. So after 1200 months you'll be 3/3/2 - if v lucky with your rolls)
• +5% No Taxes (MTTH 3 and a bitish months. So after 1200 moths you'll be 3/3/3)

So with "3/3/3" being hard to obtain rapidly but 2/2/2 the natural location, I feel this seems about right.

I then feel you need modifiers for development. Perhaps the base chance being tech related minus a provincial development score. So at tech 1 10% base chance, at tech 5 a 12% base chance, at tech 10 a 14% base chance, etc. Subtracting 1% per level of development beyond 1/1/1. (Or perhaps an 'ahead of time' bonus)
Perhaps the floor would disappear past a certain level of development also.

As with everything there needs to be modifiers to take account of:
- Colonial Nations. +0.5% per month causes little difference in relation to the effect of taxation but would make about a month difference to the MTTH for medium taxes, or roughly 30 MPs per territory per 100 years.
- Stability (causes more investment)
- Kingdom Level (This should be inversely related imho, maybe to do with number of provinces instead)
- Capital City. A 1/1/1 capital shouldn't be lasting long should it?
- Subject Nation. (Though dev costs already higher)

 

[BrokenSky]

1/1/1 -> 3/3/3 in 100 years on unmodified terrain (i.e. not rough) seems if anything a little slow over the later periods, but ok for earlier period. Probably. Presumably the speed of increase should increase with tech and good terrain, and decrease with bad terrain. In addition to decreasing with production levels.

Since most non-rough terrain 1/1/1 provinces are new world ones, the baseline to be thinking of is how fast are colony's provinces going to grow (1/1/1 - good terrain), how fast should the really developed provinces in Europe develop (8/8/4 - good terrain) and how fast should the provinces in north Africa (1/1/1 - awful terrain) grow?

In addition the possibility of high development in provinces having a non-zero probability of changing the terrain type from for example grassland, steppe, marshes or forests to farmland is an interesting one to consider. a lot of the "developing" that is happening in these provinces is cutting down the trees and draining the marshes after all.