Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Mind-bogglingly popular game series that you follow from early on and cannot stop, waiting for new installment like a drooling addict.

Long-runner soap opera you're too invested into to just stop watching it.

A fun little comic strip in the daily newspaper that's been around forever.

3/6

Who said it's fun? I didn't for sure.

I'm just waiting here for it to die horribly already so it will stop showing on my Unread Posts list.

[Prophet]

B

[Rockeater]

C

[milo christiansen]

B

[mightymushroom]

When we traded salt before it did give us a consistent happiness bonus: I assume that is still in play. BUT only 1 in 6 years showed profit money-wise back then, and our passage tax probably means our merchants will have trouble breaking even now. Our cash flow is so limited that I fear the years when we lose money on the salt trade. Keeping gemstones local is a sure thing.

I have no experience what the furs will trade for, either here or as a pass through item. I agree with Weirdsound that chain trading is going to be trickier with the passage tax.

A

I will vote for the fiscally conservative stance, although I don't think trade for salt would be the end of the world. However we already get +0.5 happiness from glassware, if we stop pushing unpopular reforms for a bit it should rise anyway.

[ZBridges]

B

[Maximum Spin]

I'm leaning C.

[Blood_Librarian]

Uh.  I dont think the traversal tax goes on caravans which sell crown mandated goods.

c

[birdy51]

C

Happiness prevents rebels, which prevents population death, which makes us money.

[mightymushroom]

Uh.  I dont think the traversal tax goes on caravans which sell crown mandated goods.

c

You might not think so, but this seems to say otherwise:

Passage Tax provides +1 with no negative impact cuz you guys have no exports going out, no imports going in (and glassware is sold locally and thus is exempt), and settlement policy isnt on. I sometimes try to flip a coin to get negative event outta this but RNG has been blessing you about this since '42.

Which agrees with my assessment of the edict page text: we get constant income, but the price we pay to get it is reduced outcomes on import/export stuff. Since free traders do not appear to exist as a regular thing, crown trades are our only trades to which it might apply.

Edit: Think of it this way, the burden of the passage tax means fewer people show up to our auction, and don't have as much to spend when they do.

[omada]

B or A anything but don't bring the salts

the salt will bring 0 profits to +1, but the +1 only comes with a 6 last time, AAAND, we will be losing -1 of the gems, the furs seems like they will be sold for high prices maybe rolling a bad number will be the same as not selling the gems which is enough

[Criptfeind]

B

[Maximum Spin]

B or A anything but don't bring the salts

the salt will bring 0 profits to +1, but the +1 only comes with a 6 last time, AAAND, we will be losing -1 of the gems, the furs seems like they will be sold for high prices maybe rolling a bad number will be the same as not selling the gems which is enough

The idea with the salt is to hopefully increase happiness, which will allow us to expand our population, increasing the tax base and making the kingdom generally better.

[omada]

increasing the tax bring problems over time

population takes time to grow, I don't think the salt will help this fast, want population? spend on settlement policy and people might flock into methiant soil to get funds to colonize somewhere new, specially when war takes hold everywhere

We will be spending 1 wealth to increase 1 hapiness and waste 1 hapiness to get 1 wealth



i'm just thinking something about the orcworld... what were those abandoned constructions? uruk abandoned? why? raided by orcs? a bigger problem hidden there?

[Maximum Spin]

increasing the tax bring problems over time

I'm not suggesting increasing the tax rate, just having more people to tax at the same rate.

[Criptfeind]

I'm not sure if settlement policy will increase population. Maybe it will, but that'd be weird with what we know of population, which is relative, not absolute. Adding more lands to the empire that are sparsely populated should bring population down overall, not up.

Settlement policy seems like it'd probably be more useful for finding resources to further exploit in new lands, but that's probably gambling. Or maybe there's an absolute size stat somewhere that'll give bonuses as we get big enough... But there's some somewhat weak nations that are very very big. (On the other hand I'm pretty sure NPC nations are normally just as strong as they need to be for the narrative, so if we're helping them they are weaker in order to justify our help, if we're attacking they are stronger in order to put up resistance.... So there's probably no correlation to size.)