Trade Tax

[Maha]

when all nations can pay decent stipends then there is even less need to own a port.
with the enormous cost to keep a port up it attracts 2 kind of players; those who put value in it through gc and TI and those who get only value out.

players who are attracted by stipends will not put up the dough to take control of a port.

[Haron]

Im also starting to agree with having less than 20-25 nations but its another topic:)

Soon we who agree on this will be a majority, and the revolution can start!

*** Do you hear the people sing, singing the songs of angry men... ***

[Shadowood]

How many nations do you want again Haron? 10?

[Haron]

Yes, I think 10 would be sufficient - plus pirates. Take a look at the nations today, and see how many really matter.

You have the port holders:

Egypt
Spain
IoM
Bermuda
Tokelau
USA

Then there are a few other noteworthy ones:

Australia
UK

And three nations who may seem big, but are really only "one man nations" with one big player:

India
Ireland
Niue

All the other nations are really not worth mentioning at all. We only have 21 ports. Most nations will want more than one port. I think 10 nations is a nice number, but if someone insists on 15, I'll try not to cry too loud :-)

Anyway, we're hijacking this thread. Sorry. Now back to the tax debate.

[Mugiwara]

if im not wrong he mentioned around 10 nation. i tried to find his topic but couldnt find it:)

you right about nation counts but let me say one thing Australia reached that point in two months. they had a few newcomers and worked to build together. it may happen for other nations too but lets be honest. if a nation not popular couldnt have a chance to get attention or newcomers. like my nation Turkey. there isnt much newcomers.1-2 in a month maybe but for nations like USA, Australia, UK they are popular nations with a lot of newcomers.

[Most Lee Harmless]

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2919

[Maha]

since the topic starter seems ok with the hijack...

10-15 nations could divide up the ports nicely, no need for strive all are happy.
25 nations will cause a problem by the lack of ports to supply all nations.

haron your reasoning of relevant nations has a flaw imo. how large is the group of irrelevant nation players? do they form a large enough entity to justify a few more nations?

with 5000+ player and 25 nations we have 200 players per nation. probably no more lone king nations will exist. with only 10 dukes+1 king per nation and 21 governors, 1 out of 9 of the playerbase will get duke profits, that's still a huge number, but at the same time it allows for new players to compete for those ranks. with even less nations the duke ranks and benefits would all be privileges for the well established players.
the gap between the have's and have not's would be too large to cross and for that reason inner nation strife would be virtually absent.

[Malachi Constant]

I think what Mugiwara is trying to accomplish is the incorporation, involvement and development of smaller nations.

With this in mind, if you added to the Nation Diplomacy tab an option for alliances with conditions to be met and % of tax revenue shared.

Example of Diplomatic Alliance

USA offers Fiji

15% of Tax income in port of Goroum

Fiji offers

Minimum 10,000,000 influence held in Goroum(counts toward port owners total)

Hostility against one nation in alliance counts towards other.

Fiji now has an interest to increase population and it's own income and positions itself for future action.

There are small nations growing and organizing right now and reducing the number of nations will just further solidify the map and result in less action in the game.

[Mugiwara]

I think what Mugiwara is trying to accomplish is the incorporation, involvement and development of smaller nations.

With this in mind, if you added to the Nation Diplomacy tab an option for alliances with conditions to be met and % of tax revenue shared.

Example of Diplomatic Alliance

USA offers Fiji

15% of Tax income in port of Goroum

Fiji offers

Minimum 10,000,000 influence held in Goroum(counts toward port owners total)

Hostility against one nation in alliance counts towards other.

Fiji now has an interest to increase population and it's own income and positions itself for future action.

There are small nations growing and organizing right now and reducing the number of nations will just further solidify the map and result in less action in the game.

This is really well explained and nice suggestion. +1 for that one:)