Rules (Final Comments)

[Nobody]

PLEASE PLEASE any questions or issues with the current rules please bring them up.

Apart from being generally unhappy and feeling ignored?

• Well you still have some BPs mentioned occasionally. And formulations that indicate the existence of something else else besides $.
  
• in Naval infrastructure and maintenance -> Miscellaneous: you have two different limits for "small" ships. One is "no (dry)dock for ships under 1000 tons required" and the other one is "1 dock for every ship over 2000 tons" - what about the ones in between?
  

• International trade is the lifeblood of nations. The volume of trade between industrial nations accounts for 20% of the total economy [...]. Half of this trade is short-distance, within a continent, and carried by rail or coastal vessels. The other half of this trade is "long-distance", between continents.

  I don't like this limit, it is too fixed. I think it would be better to define a lower limit of a quarter or a third for either.
  
  Anyway, is that added to the GNP? So that we actually start with something like 3999.6$ Or is that supposed to be part of it? In which case I have to ask what happens if we don't have enough trade.
  If it adds to the economy, does it improve growth?
  
• is colonial trade part of normal trade or extra?
  
• What does

  The colonial trade volume is 20% of the economy, but it contributes only to GDP growth

  mean?

[Tanthalas]

I would say that things looked mostly good to me.  Nobody coverd my question on trade so I wont, I wonder if tech the tech costs arnt to high though 5 bucks per tech feals a bit excesive.

[miketr]

• Well you still have some BPs mentioned occasionally. And formulations that indicate the existence of something else else besides $.
  

I will read through again and look to purge them.  Thanks

• in Naval infrastructure and maintenance -> Miscellaneous: you have two different limits for "small" ships. One is "no (dry)dock for ships under 1000 tons required" and the other one is "1 dock for every ship over 2000 tons" - what about the ones in between?
  

Weird, 1,000 tons is the number.

• International trade is the lifeblood of nations. The volume of trade between industrial nations accounts for 20% of the total economy [...]. Half of this trade is short-distance, within a continent, and carried by rail or coastal vessels. The other half of this trade is "long-distance", between continents.

  I don't like this limit, it is too fixed. I think it would be better to define a lower limit of a quarter or a third for either.
  
  Anyway, is that added to the GNP? So that we actually start with something like 3999.6$ Or is that supposed to be part of it? In which case I have to ask what happens if we don't have enough trade.
  If it adds to the economy, does it improve growth?

The BASE trade is PART of your GDP.  So its 3,333.  If you don't have enough trade routes at the start of the game we will find trade partners among NPC's. 

If in game you don't have enough Merchant Marine for your trade then you and whoever is your trade partner looses some of your effective GDP.  Yes its heavy handed and not perfect.  At the same time trade warfare will mean something. Which is why we did the 50/50 split between short distance and long distance trade.

Now what CAN add to your taxable GDP is trade with the semi-civilized nations.  Note its not tacked on to your GDP and does NOT grow as your core economy grows.  So you don't do something like German GDP N$3,333 establish trade route with South Africa worth N$40, new GDP of Germany N$3,373, growth rate, etc.  That is wrong.

The trade value only comes into play when you calculate your tax income. 

• is colonial trade part of normal trade or extra?
  
• What does

  The colonial trade volume is 20% of the economy, but it contributes only to GDP growth

  mean?
  

Poor phrasing... sorry.  Old version of rules where at one point it was talked about having colonies be a bonus to growth of home nations.  Idea was discarded as being too much effort for too little return.

What it supposed to be is that there is trade route, with associated Merchant Marine equal to 20% of the colonies economy with your home nation. 

Does this answer the questions?  I will work on making the edits by tomorrow.

Michael

[miketr]

Let me address trade routes a little more.

We did the fixed 50/50 split in the interest of KISS. 

Also

1) If people have more trade via long distance trade then they are more vulnerable to having their economy disrupted.

2) We wanted trade %s of people to be even chunks.

3) We wanted commerce warfare to MEAN something.  Having 10% of your economy on the line for long distance trade is a big deal.

Michael

[Nobody]

Mike I understand #3, but read this example and then tell me were you see KISS:

Imagine country A manages to get a .25% higher growth rate than his trading partners, then he has to talk to all kinds of people every year talking about cents, just to make sure that he even gets that hard earned bonus. Would the limit be a bit more loose there would be room for variations and negotiations could be less frequent.

#1 & #2) even if the chunks are the same size they are still largely different. Take Poland: Short range trade between PCs? Only if D & Au allow it. See trade: Only if he can leave the Baltic. And the North Sea and...
Contrast UK or any American country: Just open Ocean.

My conclusion from your requirement would be at least 50% sea trade, and no upper limit.



It's still not clear what happens if I e.g. only manage to get 10% trade.
- does that mean my economy shrinks by 10%? But then these 10% would be actually 11 and that means... *you see were this is going?*
- and what is that is all short distance, or suddenly loose the long distance one due to war? If I need a 50/50 ratio, than that would mean I (and the ones that agreed to trade with me) get actually no trade at all.

[miketr]

There are multiple reasons that I was AGAINST a player for Poland Ukraine.

As to increased trade on the seas we also want players to avoid wars to the knife in homelands hence the 50% local nations.  Wars aren't logical things (France was Germany's biggest trade Partner in  but we can add pain to going to war which is realistic enough.

Growth of economy is MOOT in terms of trade between players.

You don't care what each others growth rate are or even what their core economies.  A 5% trade treaty is just that, is 5%.

If Nation A has an economy of N$4000 vs. N$3800 for nation B we don't care.  Trade between players is done as a % of economy. 

This is KISS. (at least I think it is   ;) )

Michael 

[miketr]

Edited rules to purge BP references and fixed DD support size needed.

Michael

[miketr]

Any other comments that people have? 

In particular economics and trade?

Korpen has issues on Naval Infrastructure but that is being talked about in its own thread.  Anyone else have a comment?  I moved gun stuff to its own thread so it can be talked about there.

Michael

[Nobody]

You don't care what each others growth rate are or even what their core economies.  A 5% trade treaty is just that, is 5%.

If Nation A has an economy of N$4000 vs. N$3800 for nation B we don't care.  Trade between players is done as a % of economy. 

This is KISS. (at least I think it is   ;) )

Really? Then why is trade with NPCs and colonies in $? And how do they "translate" into each other? Or if I say have a 33.33$ trade with local NPCs would I have only 9% of GDP left for trading? But in the next year it would be 9.x%. So I would still have to negotiate every year with changing numbers.

[miketr]

You don't care what each others growth rate are or even what their core economies.  A 5% trade treaty is just that, is 5%.

If Nation A has an economy of N$4000 vs. N$3800 for nation B we don't care.  Trade between players is done as a % of economy. 

This is KISS. (at least I think it is   ;) )

Really? Then why is trade with NPCs and colonies in $? And how do they "translate" into each other? Or if I say have a 33.33$ trade with local NPCs would I have only 9% of GDP left for trading? But in the next year it would be 9.x%. So I would still have to negotiate every year with changing numbers.

You are not understanding at all Nobody.

Trade between Player nations is PART of your core economy.  Its that 20% divided between short and long distance trade.

Trade with Non Player nations is a BONUS, its NOT part of your core economy.  Its not expressed in terms of GDP but in term of money value, which is a function of GDP of the minor nation.  The economy of minor nations will grow at known and constant growth rates.  Odds are 1% but thats up to the mod team.

Trade with a minor / non player nation is added on top of your core economy.  Again for the example

Player nation A has trade treaty with Non Player nation B.  Trade treaty is worth $N50.

Economy of nation A is $N4,000

When player nation A figures is income from taxes he adds the total of his core economy ($N4,000) plus his trade treaties with NON PLAYER / MINOR Nations.   To come up with his total economy that can be taxed.

Does you understand this?

Michael

[Nobody]

That's how I thought the colonies would work. If that's the case then I do understand, otherwise I don't understand the colonies ;)

[miketr]

That's how I thought the colonies would work. If that's the case then I do understand, otherwise I don't understand the colonies ;)

Bangs head against monitor slowly...

Try Z....

There is no trade with your colonies, just a route where your Merchant Marine moves raw materials and goods back and forth.

The above description is for trade with the Non Player Nations, when you turn them into colonies your trade treaty goes away as you have just ANNEXED them.

Clear?

Michael

[Nobody]

Mike cool down, what I mean is that both are added to the GNP before calculating the tax income:

home GNP	3333 $
NPC trade	20 $
from colonies	50 $
tax base	3403 $
--> 3% tax	102.9 $

Right?

[snip]

*takes close notes to figure out how to do that part of his spreadsheet.*

[snip]

OK, so attempting to sum this up...

• Trade with Player Nations is considered part of our GDP and routes are all that need to be defined as the values are forced by the rules
• Trade with NPC's exists as adding into our base income at our individual tax rate. Routs need to be defined. Value depends on what?
• Colonies work like trade with NPCs, but the value is determined by how much investment is made in them (.5*N$ value?). Routes need to be defined. NPCs can become colonies. Is the opposite true?
• This collectively forms our base of taxable income, which we can then use however our hearts desire.

Aside from the few bold-faced questions, is this correct?