OOC Thread and Chatroom 2

[Zim]

If that's a reference to me, I was writing my post when you posted your own. I was trying to run with Woad's idea and add a way to allow infrastructure improvements as well as armies for the new state.

[ULC]

And I was trying to take care of the financial situation

Thoughts?

[TheFlax]

A static amount, while simple makes every province absolutely equal, let's say in the example above you have the three worst provinces of the Empire, you shouldn't be able to pull out as much troops as if you had the three best. Also it makes building any economic improvement buildings largely irrelevant for their cost.

Then again, if we don't implement something static like YLC's proposes then we risk over complication for nothing. I don't think we should need an accountant to make this rule work.

[Ignoramus]

Why don't we rank the income on the level of the settlement, with city settlements generating more than castles?

For example:

Village: 300 florins
Small Town: 500 florins
Large Town: 750 florins
City: 1000
Large City: 1500
Huge City: 2000

Castles:

Motte and Bailey: 200
Wooden Castle: 450
Castle: 600
Fortress: 900
Citadel: 1250

Something like that. It would mean the secessionist didn't get as much value as the real in-game income, but that's the price for being a rebel.

[TheFlax]

I like that better than a plain static income.

Could economic structures give a % bonus on the settlement's income?

Then there is the matter of setting taxes, why set them at anything but low in this system?

[Zim]

And I was trying to take care of the financial situation

Thoughts?

I think that pretty much what we all are doing.

A static amount, while simple makes every province absolutely equal, let's say in the example above you have the three worst provinces of the Empire, you shouldn't be able to pull out as much troops as if you had the three best. Also it makes building any economic improvement buildings largely irrelevant for their cost.

Then again, if we don't implement something static like YLC's proposes then we risk over complication for nothing. I don't think we should need an accountant to make this rule work.

That's pretty much the my biggest concern with my plan.

As far as the armies, Houses already get their required armies without concern to settlement quality, and poorly developed settlements would make weak armies. They also have cheaper upgrades, which may balance things out a bit (more developed settlements generally making more money, but also having more expensive upgrades).

YLC's plan greatly simplifies figuring out the secessionist's income, and is reasonably fair (slightly less so if their settlements contribute very little income or are richer than average, but I'd imagine most decently sized groups of contiguous settlements would average out as, well, average).

I could see some problems. For example if Woadistan was lucky enough to secede with several full stacks under their control (perhaps after getting a friendly Megas or offering to join a war important to him) they'd be costing an upkeep far out of line with the contribution of their fairly small number of settlements to the faction's coffers, and they'd still be getting the same percentage of the faction's income. In a way they'd be taking money from loyalist settlement contributions to pay their upkeep.

[Zim]

Bah, I'm posting too slowly.

Iggy, under your plan would the secessionists have to use that money to pay upkeep on their units or would they always make a profit?

[Ignoramus]

They would have to pay the upkeep of their units. Maybe there could be a reduction, considering the secessionists would obviously command a lot of local loyalty and prestige.

[KnightnDay]

As a newcomer, I have to tell you honestly I think this is not a good idea.

Getting into the game in the first place with the SS Mod and LOTR patching and all, then figuring out who's active, who is not, what are the houses, etc... it's a pretty daunting exercise. Really, look who has come on board lately. They're not exactly lining up now, and if you add this in, my feeling is you'll be hard pressed to get any fresh interest by adding in more complex rule sets.

I realize that many of you HRE vets are dying for more civil war action and PvP battles. Personally, that's not why I joined but I understand that it may be the price of admission. IMO, TC has done a phenomenal job in running this game and the active players do a great job doing what they do.

If my count is right, there are about 14-15 people currently active in the game. About 8 for one reason or another are essentially inactive. If you want to go down this path, I'd just ask you to consider exactly what the game might look like down the road in terms of participation if you want to substantially modify the game to include a brand new set of rules with a whole layer of accounting to the mix.