taxable_income_bonus

[CPT Worsham]

What does "taxable_income_bonus bonus -15" mean? Does that mean you lose 15 gold per turn?

[Jean=A=Luc]

It means the tax income in that city goes down by 15%. Or that's what I believe at least.

[CPT Worsham]

oh that's not good. Thanks for the info!

[Brusilov]

Yes, that's correct - you lose 15% tax.

There are various buildings that are worse - I think the medical centre loses 60% tax - but it does benefit your settlement by boosting the heath. The idea is that you can balance this out by building a number of buildings that generate tax.

[Timefool]

Even 60% isn't that bad. Some treasuries give 5000% bonuses.

[Jean=A=Luc]

Since we're on the topic of buildings and taxes there are a few instances of both that I find confusing. For example roads. They increase trade but also decrease tax income. I find it weird to have such two opposing modifiers in a single building. I also have a feeling that the tax penalty by far outweighs any income provided by the trade bonus as tax income is huge in RS2. It just makes me wonder what's the point of it all. Of course some towns generate more trade than others so the effects of a road won't always be the same but still.

I feel similarly about many of the happiness buildings with tax penalties. Do I really want to lose like a 1000+ income for a 5% increase in happiness? It just seems like a very poor trade off. Of course happiness buildings will become necessary at some point but I find myself avoiding them like the plague whenever I can and it feels wrong.

But I still have little experience with RS2, maybe things will become clearer as the campaign progresses.

Just so it's clear I'm aware that the tax penalties are supposed to represent "maintenance".

[dvk901]

Since we're on the topic of buildings and taxes there are a few instances of both that I find confusing. For example roads. They increase trade but also decrease tax income. I find it weird to have such two opposing modifiers in a single building. I also have a feeling that the tax penalty by far outweighs any income provided by the trade bonus as tax income is huge in RS2. It just makes me wonder what's the point of it all. Of course some towns generate more trade than others so the effects of a road won't always be the same but still.

I feel similarly about many of the happiness buildings with tax penalties. Do I really want to lose like a 1000+ income for a 5% increase in happiness? It just seems like a very poor trade off. Of course happiness buildings will become necessary at some point but I find myself avoiding them like the plague whenever I can and it feels wrong.

But I still have little experience with RS2, maybe things will become clearer as the campaign progresses.

Just so it's clear I'm aware that the tax penalties are supposed to represent "maintenance".

That's a fair question, and I will answer it as best I can. Believe me, the settings may all be 'mysterious' and poorly explained, I admit, but they were well thought out for the overall scheme of things.

For one thing, we determined that negative trade bonuses do not work in RTW...at least they don't to the extent we wanted. So keep this in mind as I explain the rest.

Our intention and goal in RS2 was to create a 'dynamic economy' that at least acted like reality, even if it didn't appear to be reality. What I mean by this is that certain conditions lead to either healthy economic situations or poor ones, and certain government decisions and\or decisions or behaviors of leaders also effect the economic performance of a nation. This is not an easy thing to 'mimic' in RTW, because the economics in RTW was virtually on autopilot, and there were few settings that had much effect on it. Heck, many, many players just automanage everything and get away with it because RTW is so 'generous' with money. Indeed, there WERE no negative bonuses in Vanilla, so everything was meant to grow, make more money, pile up a treasury, etc....to the point where you had so much it was just stupid. I tried very hard to solve this in RS1.6, but was never very successful.

The REASON I was not successful was because I was trying to use trade bonuses and penalties to control economics...and they simply don't work that way in RTW. Trade bonuses basically 'increase the size of the pie' from which the player is spending, and you can't reduce the size of the pie enough with trade negatives to make any difference. Also, if you capture a region that already has a Market, or a Forum for example, you automatically gain ALL the benefits of that building...even though you didn't spend a cent to build it, nor would you in reality gain ALL of the benefits. You could tax it, but you wouldn't necessarily gain all the profits from it...which is what Vanilla RTW allows. So the goal here is to 'control the size of the pie' from which all pieces of spending occurs. You give a faction a more or less 'static' set of bonuses in regions they start with, or are considered their 'home', and you allow that to grow in the old RTW way. All the rest, everything you conquer, is a TAX benefit, but not a profit benefit (for the most part, until you reach very high level buildings).

Thrown into this you have unit cost and maintenance. If you are at peace, you need less troops, and you make more money. If you are at war, you need troops, you spent a crapload, and your economy starts to take a dive. I've seen cases where one has a lot of money in the treasury, but it is all TAX money (or most of it). You do a ton of spending to build projects, recruit troops because you're at war, and all of a sudden your treasury is in the red. That's because your tax income isn't keeping up with profits...so it can sometimes take a while for everything to normalize and start showing a profit again. This exactly the sort of dynamic we wanted, because it essentially mimics a REAL economy. And it is for this reason that tax bonuses are used generously in RS2...because they allow this kind of control.

Now, another part of this is the negative side of tax bonuses. In Vanilla and most RTW situations, you build a road and you reap the benefits of that road for the rest of the game...for hundreds of years. Same with aqueducts, temples, etc. Never mind that in a hundred years much of this would become overgrown or fall apart, RTW would have you believe that once you build something, you never have to maintain it or think about it again. However, in RS2 we tried to address the 'reality' of the situation. Infrastructure requires maintenance, repair, upkeep to keep it working and healthy. In RS2, for example, you rebuild or maintain Wonders....you just don't inherit Wonders that either no longer existed, or would at some point involve a 'cost of possession' (the Hanging Gardens didn't just grow themselves, somebody had to maintain them). So, in infrastructure buildings and roads you basically see a tax penalty that pays for upkeep. Every turn, as part of your earnings and taxes go to building maintenance, just like it does to unit maintenance.

If I could've hidden all these penalties I would have...but RTW doesn't allow it. Because I know it's a bit disconcerting to see a penalty in a building that may (in your mind) outweigh it's usefulness. But here's another twist to all the buildings added to RS2. One of my major complaints about the game was that you so often reached a point in your 'inner-empire' older cities where there was absolutely nothing left for you to do. You built everything. People get unhappy and you can't do anything about it except let them rebel and kill them all. And it just gets boring, to be honest. And even in cities where the AI has built a lot of things, you STILL have a lot of things you can do.
For me, this adds 'immersion', shall we say. "I conquered this place, and now I'm responsible for it. And I CAN do some things to make these people happy, even though it will cost me some money." Thus, the many Temples of RS2, for example. Sure, they don't offer a great deal. There isn't much they CAN offer in RTW without getting ridiculous. But they do offer a bit of law, a bit of happiness, a bit economic growth, a little public health and so on.
You lose tax revenue...yes...as you would in reailty. But so far it has been our experience that the campaigns can be won, and you have 'enough' to do it....just not huge treasuries from which to pull unlimited amounts of cash.

Still another aspect of the RS2 economy is the Leader of your particular nation. The goods and bads, I will admit, are modeled after the more well documented cases of the Roman Emperors. Good Emperors had the respect and loyalty of their troops....at the very least the content of the people....and the respect of their Nobles and peers. In these cases, generally, the economic health of the Empire was good. On the flip side, a bad Emperor would spend lavishly on his own pet projects...bankrupt the economy with senseless spending....earn the disdain and hatred of the soldiers, people AND other leaders. The subsequent attitude trickles down into all positions of government leading to corruption, economic stagnation or failure, and a lot of unhappy people. So in RS2 there are a system of traits that reflect the abilities and good or bad traits of the Leader. In short, if he's a nitwit and a corrupt idiot, everyone will hate him. If he's a good guy...he'll be respect, maybe even loved. Every Governor in RS2 'looks' at the faction leader for these traits...good or bad...and inherits either a good economic trait or a bad one. (And to encourage players to HAVE Governors in cities, a sitting Governor has a tax bonus that negates a negative tax bonus built into the building tree, and acquires a small trade bonus. So it is a good thing to have Governors. This was to DIS-courage the 'auto-manage' option and try to ensure that the trait system works as intended. So you can choose NOT to have Governors at a cost of 30% every turn in tax revenue.)

Why all the fuss for that? Well, to create a situation where players have to be concerned about their leaders...both Faction and Heir. To throw a 'wrench' in the mechanics...so to speak...and afford the possibilities of great economic prosperity with a good leader, and maybe even economic depression with a bad one. Now, if your leader is a pervert, a narcissist, a cruel leader, or a coward (just to name a few) your whole faction suffers until you get rid of the jerk!

I'll grant that the whole system is subject to tweaks and adjustments....but this is essentially what it's all about.

[Kelborn]

Apologies for resurrecting an ancient thread, but my question pertains to this matter and opening a second topic would be unneccessary.

Are negative tax modifiers computed without displaying on the settlement info panel? I receive no indication from the income display that building construction will have any effect on total income.

[the.phoenix]

Apologies for resurrecting an ancient thread, but my question pertains to this matter and opening a second topic would be unneccessary.

Are negative tax modifiers computed without displaying on the settlement info panel? I receive no indication from the income display that building construction will have any effect on total income.

AFAIK they will be displayed on info panel.
As for your problem, i guess sometimes settlements tax is so low that there wont be any further deductions, it happened to me in newly conquered provinces, and also in negative happiness or law bonuses : some buildings are supposed to give negative but they dont give as we are already low .... !!!

[Brusilov]

Don't forget that upgraded roads allow you to move your armies around faster.

[Jean=A=Luc]

Don't forget that upgraded roads allow you to move your armies around faster.

Of course, goes without saying. It's just the income bonus/penalty combo that looks odd to me but it's not that important overall.

[Ferdiad]

Dunno,I know they're not computed automatically at least.

[Head of the Heavy Chargers]

I've grown to ignore those tax penalties. Every building is valuable. Some get -10 tax, but increase law and so decrease corruption. Some temples give some happiness and -15 tax, but after a while ur characters get traits that give trade bonuses and such. Hospitals and such take away a lot of money, but give doctor trait to ur generals.

I build all temples, academies and other learning centers in one of my capitals so I can start producing great generals and governors. Generals get good traits and lose bad ones. It is an investment that doesn't pay off in the first turns, but does help in the later game.