Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Promoting Baliffs to Tax Collectors

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Promoting Baliffs to Tax Collectors

    Is the increase in taxes worth the revolt risk?
    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
    -Bokonon

  • #2
    And when the hell do the Ottoman explorers come by??? I've been waiting decades to colonize India...
    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
    -Bokonon

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, the revolt risk isn't all that great. Maintaining a +3 stability and eventually promoting Chief Judges evens it all out.
      "Let us kill the English! Their concept of individual rights could undermine the power of our beloved tyrants!"

      ~Lisa as Jeanne d'Arc

      Comment


      • #4
        Tax Collector +3, Chief Judge -1... I don't think +2 revolt risk is quite even, but they do something very important. If you raise the tax value, you can also raise more troops in the province. That's why some of my key colonies have this, so that I can raise armies more quickly there.
        "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
        -Joan Robinson

        Comment


        • #5
          -5 for stability, yes it does even out.


          "Let us kill the English! Their concept of individual rights could undermine the power of our beloved tyrants!"

          ~Lisa as Jeanne d'Arc

          Comment


          • #6
            Yeah, but I need that stability for other stuff, like war exhaustion.
            "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
            -Joan Robinson

            Comment


            • #7
              It certainly is worth it. The only time it wouldn't be would be in some backwater province that has a religion you hate, like Nussaybin for the Turks since they usually get it when they annex the Mamelukes. But otherwise, for religions you have favoritism cranked up to the max or near the max for, the downside is pretty meaningless. If a war is lasting long enough to blast through -9 to revolt risk, that war has been going on too long (what are you trying to do? Annex Spain?).

              Those extra 2 gold pieces rapidly add up.

              P.S. Ironically, speaking of Nussaybin... in my first real game I played the Turks, and in one early war, I managed to completely cut off Nussaybin from the Mamelukes because I took the two provinces that allowed contact to it- Syria and the one south of Aleppo and north of Lebanon. This was nice because Nussaybin was controlled by Rebel Scum that had arisen during my tenure of occupation. So after the war, the only Shiite province the Mamelukes had was controlled by Rebels! And there wasn't a damn thing they could do about it, since it was inland and couldn't move troops through my borders! Mwehehehe!

              I ended up quitting that game because my badboy was so high in just 1523 that I couldn't really declare war anymore without massive retalitation, which sucked because I had Sulemeien. I had taken over Moldavia, Georgia, the non-Shiite parts of Persia (including the Gold Mines of Armenia), all of the Mamelukes, and the Knights of St. John. Plus I had gotten a lucky random event converting the Moldavian heathens.
              [This message has been edited by SnowFire (edited March 13, 2001).]
              All syllogisms have three parts.
              Therefore this is not a syllogism.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thanks for the responses, but I have yet another question . I control Sierra Nevada, which is on the other side of the Mediterranean (occupies the same seazone from two of my vassals - Algeria & Morrocco). But I still can't annex Algeria (I didn't bother trying to get Morrocco back to 200 relations).

                Snow:

                Just change your badboy value . After annexing Crimea, the Mamelukes, Persia, Moldova, Hungary, Venice, Genoa, Milan, Savoy, the Knights of St. John, and Wallachia, by ~1540, I set my badboy value back to 0 (by that time, every non-Protestant, non-Ally declared war on me simultaneously every time I went to war ).

                Now I'm going for peaceful annexations, working towards a Pan-Islamic empire. I have 5 vassals currently (~1560) .
                "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                -Bokonon

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ramo: Yes, I know how to take the challenge out of the game. But why would I do that? Especially after such a commanding start.

                  I fiddle with the files for "fun" games (I took a perfectly reasonable game with England in about 1550, edited the file to give the main powers huge badboy ratings, started up again as Wallachia, and sat back and watched Armageddon) and for games where I seem to be doing terribly (like my attempted game as Sweden, gee, crap for technology and everybody's better than me and allied against me. Let's crank up Poland's badboy rating a bit for fun!).

                  By the way, why annex the Crimea? They're Sunni Muslim and were pretty well my only allies before. I don't care what Catholics or Orthodox or Shiite think of me, but annexing Sunni nations is bad for business.

                  And why annex Persia? Wouldn't that be revolt hell? For that matter, how could you explore all of Persia so you could be sure you conquered it all?
                  [This message has been edited by SnowFire (edited March 13, 2001).]
                  All syllogisms have three parts.
                  Therefore this is not a syllogism.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Actually, I peacefully annexed Crimea (the only power I peacefully annexed by that time). And, I was under the same impression as you, WRT Persia, but then I found out I was absolutely wrong. Believe it or not, Crimea was a much, much bigger revolt problem than Persia. In fact, the only Persian revolt I faced was during a decade-long war in Italy. Even if Persian revolts were a problem, many of the provinces are unpopulated enough to be converted to Sunni, and eastern Persia is rich.

                    As for cheating, do you really want to play a game without any allies, whatsoever?
                    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                    -Bokonon

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hey, I didn't say anything about cheating. Just that I don't want to stiff myself on challenge. Also, the only thing I can guess is that nationalism in Crimea was higher- but the Shiites were my favorite target for religious discrimination since I had almost none of them in my empire, and it would be annoying to have to be tolerant to them. Because if I kept my discrimination maxed against Shiites, you can bet Persia would be pissed.
                      All syllogisms have three parts.
                      Therefore this is not a syllogism.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        No, a war that lasts that long is a result of a three digit badboy value and a strong desire to beat down all attackers. Yeah

                        How, do you get it up to 1500? Mine is in the upper 400s and theres my allies, the major powers, and only two minor nations left. I own the world! And I still don't have a badboy that high.

                        Hey, I once cut off Warsaw from the rest of Poland... their capital was not only out of their control, but also had a steadily falling population because of the rebels' occupation That's what they got for repeatedly declaring war on me.

                        Isn't there a limit on the number of allies and vassals you can have? I've never had two vassals, or more than 4 allies at once, regardless of how good my relations were with other countries.

                        "And why annex Persia? Wouldn't that be revolt hell? For that matter, how could you explore all of Persia so you could be sure you conquered it all?"

                        -I did it as France (China helped too... (can you imagine China owning five provinces in the middle east? ))

                        "As for cheating, do you really want to play a game without any allies, whatsoever?"

                        -My badboy is 485... I have friends... I can get friends any time I want. I just takes a little money.

                        I don't think Persia has nationalism actually. Some nations don't. Japan doesn't I was rather surprised I could annex Japan that easily. I just declared war on it to get other people to declare war on me in Europe. I never imagined that the Mekong Regiment (size: 60) could take all of Japan. Reinforcements from Luzon (size: 17) were enough to finish the empire of the Rising Sun (God, I love powerful muskets )
                        "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                        -Joan Robinson

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X