 |
| |
|
|
kolpo
|
|
For me at least was the main use of money in civ3 paying maintenance and to pay for my small peacetime . Only in times of war or when I was in a cultural war over a city(and had to rush build) became money more important.
So I guess civ4 needs something new to spend money on if they shall no longer have maintenance, remove maintenace from civ3 and I can easily live with very low taxes and all the rest in science especially when i'm a communistic government(they get huge numbers of troops free of support anyway).
One of the new things to spend money on could be civics if they include things like health care, federal police and social security. Because there no longer is maintenance could they also have raisen the support cost of units. What new ways of spending money could there be you think?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
petermarkab
|
|
Debt and the Right of Irresponsibility
i think you should be allowed to go into debt up to a pre-determined level; 10% of your GDP for example.
this would stop daft situations where you have zero capital, your expenses exceed your income, and the only assets you have are your about-to-claim-the-luxury-city settler, or your stack of death sitting at the enemy's doorstep, which of course disappear on the following turn!
Income Tax
i think luxury payment should become over time compulsory. think of it as representing the public's net income - income after tax deductions - which none of us would do without.
if the average income tax rate today is around 33%, then your luxury slider should be set at 7! this doesn't give you - the head of state - much money to spend on anything.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
The way I play I always wind up in the hole, I guess because I can't resist expanding as much as possible. So for most of the game I have no money to choose how to spend.
I guess we could just recieve less money/ have things cost more.
Health care, social security, etc sound like good uses for money in the game.
A certain amount of allowed debt sounds good too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
petermarkab
|
|
In one of the other threads, Aussie_Lurker suggested paying maintenance for terrain improvements and transport infrastructure, an idea which i very much agree with.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Modo44
|
 |
in western Poland
Jul 2004
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by petermarkab
Income Tax
i think luxury payment should become over time compulsory. think of it as representing the public's net income - income after tax deductions - which none of us would do without.
if the average income tax rate today is around 33%, then your luxury slider should be set at 7! this doesn't give you - the head of state - much money to spend on anything. |
The idea is good, but overdone a bit. I don't know how exactly this will work, but in all Civ games to date citizens were getting food, and places to live, from the state. Also, many structures are kept running by the state (Banks, Factories, Harbors, Airports, ...). Count this into taxes, and you'll get to a nice (and bearable) mandatory lux level, around 20-30%.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Sinister
|
|
Happiness maybe, but population? I'd rather say the opposite, since they help spreadings STDs...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
To be fair, Shogun and Straybow, it would be a HECK of a lot more simple than that.
Basically, all your terrain improvements would be funded out of a single infrastructure budget-which would work along the same principles as your luxury/science slider in Civ2. As you build more terrain improvements, your slider increases automatically to cover the cost (and your treasury is depleted accordingly). You can, though, raise and lower this slider manually-if you wish. Lowering it causes your terrain improvements to become less productive, raising it makes terrain improvements MORE productive. Also, if you lower it, there is a % chance of some of your terrain improvements disappearing altogether.
One of the key benefits of maintainance for terrain improvements is that it helps to curb the ever-present 'Snowball Effect' of the game-helping to detach success from total area of land controlled (as it is now!)
EDIT: the most complex I would see it getting is to split farming terrain improvements from mines/roads and rail-making the former part of your 'agriculture' budget, and the latter ones being 'Infrastructure'.
Another point is that traits would help lessen the per turn cost of certain terrain improvements-so agricultural civs would get cheaper farms, wheras industrial civs would get cheaper mines. Expansionist civs would get cheap roads and rail.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-12-2004 23:43
|