Paths of Civilization

Malevolo · May 25, 2017

DakkaMania said:
Except that isn't how it works. At least today. Land leases generally continue forever unless terminated for some reason. Either the price got too high for the farmer (rare as the owners know what they can get away with charging) or it's interpersonal. Otherwise, the same plot of land stays decades or longer in the possession of the farmer. Often longer as the successor just continues on. And decades are enough time to ruin a field, so good practices will stay if they don't want their yield to collapse (as the leasing costs stay the same)

The advantage of us leasing is that we can kick idiots off the land that ruin it. Basically, declare eminent domain on it.

And don't forget that any improvement of land value in leased land will incur in a decrease of the lease, so everytime they improve the land, they can ask for a deduction of the lease tax. In a communal economy like ours this is a major boon for invention and improvement, because everyone would want a tax deduction.

Random Shinobi · May 25, 2017

[X] Look around for more reasonable people (Main Sailing Mission)
[X] Main provinces (Chance of stability loss, +2 Econ)
[X] Suppress this new movement (+1 Stability, WotG removed, Challenge failed)

Kiba · May 25, 2017

I agree that leased land is a good idea, if only because centralized planning becomes increasingly impossible to work out as the complexity of our economy grows.

Malevolo said:
And don't forget that any improvement of land value in leased land will incur in a decrease of the lease, so everytime they improve the land, they can ask for a deduction of the lease tax. In a communal economy like ours this is a major boon for invention and improvement, because everyone would want a tax deduction.

Such a headache on the tax assessor. I prefer we stick to something simpler.

pblur · May 25, 2017

In general, I don't recommend changing how we distribute land until it's actually causing a problem. Functional systems come out of natural evolution far more often than design.

SyntheticSynthia · May 25, 2017

pblur said:
In general, I don't recommend changing how we distribute land until it's actually causing a problem. Functional systems come out of natural evolution far more often than design.

I agree with this

Kiba · May 25, 2017

pblur said:
In general, I don't recommend changing how we distribute land until it's actually causing a problem. Functional systems come out of natural evolution far more often than design.

I remember the tax reform debacle. It was horrible. We should definitely try to be gradual as much as possible.

Andres · May 25, 2017

Kiba said:
I remember the tax reform debacle. It was horrible. We should definitely try to be gradual as much as possible.

We would've succeeded entirely if it weren't for the Stallion assholes.

SpeckofStardust · May 25, 2017

Andres110 said:
We would've succeeded entirely if it weren't for the Stallion assholes.

Cute, the only reason the Stallions were a thing was because you tried to push to hard.

pblur · May 25, 2017

Andres110 said:
We would've succeeded entirely if it weren't for the Stallion assholes.

But, as AN said, their existance was scripted. Someone was bound to object to it.

We don't really know if we'd have been able to swing it without Cwyriid, who was the only known aberration from the script.

Citino · May 25, 2017

pblur said:
But, as AN said, their existance was scripted. Someone was bound to object to it.

We don't really know if we'd have been able to swing it without Cwyriid, who was the only known aberration from the script.

And considering what the STs did for us since then, I think they've more than earned their forgiveness.

pblur · May 25, 2017

Citino said:
And considering what the STs did for us since then, I think they've more than earned their forgiveness.

St-St-Stallion-kun! No baka!

Rakuhn · May 25, 2017

Andres110 said:
We would've succeeded entirely if it weren't for the Stallion assholes.

The stability loss wasn't caused by the faction. If we had crit failed against the nomads, instead of crit succeeded, and the Stallion Tribes never formed, we still would have lost stability. We pushed too hard, too fast, and it caused extreme economic and social harm. Many of our farmers weren't farming, our artisans weren't producing, nobody knew what was expected of them. This was represented by the loss of stability. The Stallion Tribes were just telling us that we were causing massive harm to our civilization, they weren't causing it themselves.

We can blame the Stallion Tribes for providing an ultimatum before we had finished. We should not blame them for the stability losses.

Andres · May 25, 2017

Citino said:
And considering what the STs did for us since then, I think they've more than earned their forgiveness.

Oh yeah, definitely. I will always hate the Young Stallions for ruining a great thing and holding us back by centuries, but I have to give respect to the Stallion Tribes for shielding us from the nomads. Whatever our differences, at the end of the day, they're still Ymaryn.

Reader of all · May 25, 2017

Andres110 said:
Oh yeah, definitely. I will always hate the Young Stallions for ruining a great thing and holding us back by centuries, but I have to give respect to the Stallion Tribes for shielding us from the nomads. Whatever our differences, at the end of the day, they're still Ymaryn.

Like it or not the tax as it was, was a failure it was way too complicated for the people and SOMEONE was bound to oppose it due to that had we just gone with the tax we have now and slowly move to the tax people wanted OOC we would have made it.

Andres · May 25, 2017

Well, I can at least console myself with the knowledge that we'll get to try again when we get currency. We should stock up on Stability before we get there, though.

Candesce · May 25, 2017

Andres110 said:
We should stock up on Stability before we get there, though.

We're at stability 2.

Granted, that's likely to drop if we break something with this most recent vote.

NotteBoy97 · May 25, 2017

Reader of all said:
Like it or not the tax as it was, was a failure it was way too complicated for the people and SOMEONE was bound to oppose it due to that had we just gone with the tax we have now and slowly move to the tax people wanted OOC we would have made it.

Yeah but if an opposed hero hadn't spawned we would of had more leeway during the crisis and we were close enough that one more turn might have allowed us to meet the requirements.

pblur · May 25, 2017

Much as I hate to interrupt SV's unexpected renouncement of hubris...

To be fair, we did get the Law and the Mysticism reserve we later used to unlock iron out of it.

Reader of all · May 25, 2017

NotteBoy97 said:
Yeah but if an opposed hero hadn't spawned we would of had more leeway during the crisis and we were close enough that one more turn might have allowed us to meet the requirements.

But then we would have one of our secondaries locked with fighting off nomads so no we wouldn't have been able to complete it

Kiba · May 25, 2017

pblur said:
Much as I hate to interrupt SV's unexpected renouncement of hubris...

To be fair, we did get the Law and the Mysticism reserve we later used to unlock iron out of it.

That was sheer luck.

notgreat · May 25, 2017

Kiba said:
That was sheer luck.

(To bring up the old argument again...)No, The Law (or something related) was explicitly a major and expected benefit of stressing the system. All went roughly According to Keikaku. It went a bit further than some expected, but I'm really not sure why anyone would expect otherwise. I went against it since I felt that we had other things to deal with at the time that were more important than stressing the system, but that's what people wanted and expected to get.

Kiba · May 25, 2017

notgreat said:
(To bring up the old argument again...)No, The Law (or something related) was explicitly a major and expected benefit of stressing the system. All went roughly According to Keikaku. It went a bit further than some expected, but I'm really not sure why anyone would expect otherwise. I went against it since I felt that we had other things to deal with at the time that were more important than stressing the system, but that's what people wanted and expected to get.

I was thinking more of the roll that got us iron.

Candesce · May 25, 2017

notgreat said:
No, The Law (or something related) was explicitly a major and expected benefit of stressing the system.

Personally, I rather suspect we would have unlocked The Law for most of the picks other than "no, what we've got is fine."

NotteBoy97 · May 25, 2017

Reader of all said:
But then we would have one of our secondaries locked with fighting off nomads so no we wouldn't have been able to complete it

There is spectrum between we beat the nomads no more warmissions required and we crited against the nomads causing a hero to form and a March to be spawned. If we had just beaten the nomads back our chances of passing the tax would have increased even if the young stallion movement would have eventually spawned a hero.

ETA50M · May 25, 2017

NotteBoy97 said:
Yeah but if an opposed hero hadn't spawned we would of had more leeway during the crisis and we were close enough that one more turn might have allowed us to meet the requirements.

Actually we were far away from meeting the requirements. Even now we still don't have full literacy.

Paths of Civilization

Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn

Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn

Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn

Reminiscing over the halcyon days of Ymaryn