Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Intrepido

A more reasonable approach to dev´s idea of taxes.

Recommended Posts

It is well known that we have 2 kind of taxes: 100k for owning a port and 500k for setting a timer. A total of 600k.

The result is a costly fee that very few clans can afford or are willing to make the requested daily grind. As a consequence, more and more ports turn into neutral (and some keep this status for weeks now (despite its strategical location)), people care less about ports, more empty PBs and RVR dies miserably.

 

My proposal is something in between devs´s idea of taxes and the situation we had before (no taxes): Make taxes related to the BR of ports.

 

Deep Water ports:

_Low BR ports (2500-3000). Ports thought for small clans. A tax of 200k (instead of 600k).

_Medium BR ports (5000). Ports thought for medium size clans. A tax of 400k (instead of 600k).

_High BR ports (8000-12000). Ports thought for big clans. The current tax of 600k.

 

Shallow water ports:

_1100 BR ports. A tax of 300k (instead of 600k).

_2500 BR ports. the curent tax of 600k.

 

 

This way we can standardize almost everything aroud the BR of the ports: required hostility, taxes and logical owners.

 

 

Discuss.

 

Important note: RvR still need tweaks in other important areas to be fully appealing. IMO, this is a step forward to revive conquest.

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to fight the cause of disease, not the symptoms.

Worthless port could be tax free, and it would still be worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If clan control the entire region/county, all ports on that region become "free" cost and timer costs 50% less.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All ports should just make a steady profit, as long as there are no special features enabled. So a clan could capture multiple ports to finance having a defence timer on 1 port.
For example a clan captures 5 ports, each bring in 100.000 per maintenance. On 1 of the 5 ports they enable a defence timer at a costs  of 500.000 per maintenance. The rest they leave with out any special features enabled, so they bring in 500.000 per maintenance. 

All the ports would be useful, and the grind to support owning ports with defence timers could be replaced with capturing ports.   

Edited by Tiedemann
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fenris said:

Need to fight the cause of disease, not the symptoms.

Worthless port could be tax free, and it would still be worthless.

Consider this - Port generates weekly from 6 to 25 Victory Marks. One Victory Mark can be sold for about 1m gold. We get about 6-25m gold benefit weekly. If tax will be lower, ports will be actually more beneficial on their own. We can always go further, but that's a step forward. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said:

Consider this - Port generates weekly from 6 to 25 Victory Marks. One Victory Mark can be sold for about 1m gold. We get about 6-25m gold benefit weekly. If tax will be lower, ports will be actually more beneficial on their own. We can always go further, but that's a step forward. 

Selling Vic marks gives no steady income, which matters, if you need to pay every single day 500 000 for a port which generates zero income. I don`t know, this doesn`t fit in my calculations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do get the OP intention, but I don't believe it is the right way to proceed. Having timers on ports should be expensive so we keep it at a minimum and they do not become standard for all ports. The defensive timers deny other time zone players from being able to attack the ports, and if you look at the timers in use ingame now many of them are set in the middle of the night, right before or after maintenance.. By EU clans!

So in many cases the defensive timers are used to avoid combat/PvP/pbs..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ports costs will never balance out until the game starts increasing its daily population, regardless of how cheap you make them.  

It’s an OK suggestion though.  

We need more players and less nations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hethwill said:

If clan control the entire region/county, all ports on that region become "free" cost and timer costs 50% less.

I actually like this, but my main issue with Tax's is that if you have  a timer and pay the 600K+ for the port you pay pretty much 50% tax on any thing over 1 million you make off the port.  Which eats big time into your profits that you need to go towards paying for other ports that don't make crap.  We have only one good profit port that pays for it self and others and a port that some times pay for it self.  Not counting Cabo (the deep water port CSA own) we where able to pay for all our shallow water ports and make a little profit.  Once we put the deep waters on the list we where loosing 3 million a day (back when we had 3-4 deep water ports) cause they didn't make any money being behind enemy ports no one wanted to use them.  That is a lost of 21 million a week 84 million a month we where pay for ports as a routhly new clan to the game (not players) that came after the merge with little to nothing RvR in our name.   I get some of these big clans that been around for a long time and didn't have to pay for timers for a long time and made a very big profit got tons of money stacked up to pay for ports.  I bet you if we did a wipe tomorrow and let folks get new ports you find out a lot of folks won't have the money to support more than one or two ports for a good while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's say a region of 5 ports.

Your clan owns all.

You pay no basic and only pay 250k for timer / each.

1.25 mil with Conquest windows for an entire region with whatever resources it has plus any bonuses.

The infrastructure cost is a balancer for snowball effects. Meaning every port is a platform to conquer the port next to it if there's no mechanic to keep it in check, so a clan/nation does not expand more than it can possibly support :)

But.... a coalition of clans in a nation CAN control most of the map.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not connect all the MARKS to GOLD currency. You can sell them to ADMIRALITY, not to the shop. So Victory Mark is 750k, Pvp Mark is 75k and Combat Mark is 1k. Just like selling to shop, but it can not be sold to players again. So this will give more use to MARKS.

Also there can be a tax from profit of ports which is taken by admirality. So there should be difference between ports, paying 600K for La Navasse, Nassau, Gracias Adios or Arcas, is not logical. Nassau is one of the most profitable ports and list, and Arcas is worthless, so why pay 600k for each timer ?

Nassau = 2.5 million tax income and 600k timer

La Navasse = 2.2 million tax income and 600k timer

Gracias Adios = 110k tax income and 600k timer

Arcas= 3.6k tax income and 600k timer

source: https://na-map.netlify.com/ (select tax income from tools menu)

Ports should have fixed timer cost according to BR as stated before, and %40 additional tax from profit for the timer.

if all the 4 ports are identical BR ,

Nassau = 2.5 million tax income and (200k base + 1 million tax cut = 1.2 million timer)

La Navasse = 2.2 million tax income and (200k base + 880k = 1.08 million timer)

Gracias Adios = 110k tax income and 200k timer ( 244k timer)

Arcas= 3.6k tax income and 200k timer ( 201k timer)

just and idea :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your shallow water prices are a little off. In my opinion, shallow ports should have cheaper maintenance than deep water.

So 1200br would be 200k (instead of 300k)

2500br would be 450k (instead of 600k)

Also, I highly believe that tax/maintenance can be further enhanced by additions I suggested in the past. @Hethwill has made a suggestion here which I had thought to be a wonderful incentive for RvR (and owning useless ports)

I have the details here further 

 

Edited by Teutonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×