1903 Rules Patch

[snip]

Rocky's looks good. Simple for every $25 in revenue, IC goes up by $5.

[Kaiser Kirk]

So, proposal:

"Revenue" = sum of:

-->Taxes from population
-->Income generated by IC
-->Income generated by partly-owned IC in NPC nations

If Revenue is less than $25.00, IC cost = $10
If Revenue is $25.00 to 49.99, IC cost = $15
If Revenue is $50.00 to 74.99, IC cost = $20
If Revenue is $75.00 to $99.99, IC cost = $25
For each additional $25 increment of revenue, IC costs increase by $5.

[/i]

Tiered IC costs :
Good job Rocky, that's a good suggestion.
As to the $25 level as the start to the tier, I will note that Italy hit that level in 1901 H2, when many of my provinces still lacked any IC.
I would respectfully suggest it is far far to low.

Very simply, I don't want my IC costs to increase PRIOR to my being able to pay for my research, current army & navy and build a brigade and use all my own BP for my own needs.
Rounding up, that costs about Mil $21.43, double is $42.86,  Heck, since research is going up, call it $50.  France are OE slightly below that and Italy is further below.

Now, I do realise this is an incredibly Kirk-Centric way of looking at things, but quite frankly, I ran economic projections prior to taking Italy so I'd have an idea of how long I'd have to run until I could afford to do things. I don't like proposals that move that point in time further into the future.

[Darman]

Currently, Britain's cost under such a proposal would be $40 per IC, soon to be $45.  While I have no problem with paying more per se, I do believe that changing the starting value from $25 to $50 might be more beneficial for the smaller nations, and while yes, larger nations can still expand rapidly as well, it will also slow them down at the same rate, just held off for another few years of investment. 

[snip]

The US would have costs of ~$35, which puts me at about 2IC per quarter at a 50/50 split.

@Step size: Would larger steps with larger increases be something we should look at? For example, for every $50 in revenue IC cost doubles? That would allow smaller revenue countries to close the gap faster.

[miketr]

A reasonable compromize would appear to be to start things at $50 and increase cost of IC from there.  ANY reasonable level is going to have Germany already above it so whatever works for other people will work for me.


The question is do we start this 1903 or is there any respending of cash spent on on IC?

Michael

[Tanthalas]

I would say start in 1903, respending of IC leads to alot of us having to basicly redo reports.

A reasonable compromize would appear to be to start things at $50 and increase cost of IC from there.  ANY reasonable level is going to have Germany already above it so whatever works for other people will work for me.


The question is do we start this 1903 or is there any respending of cash spent on on IC?

Michael

Tweaked it to reflect mikes proposal, which was the same one I was thinking about

If Revenue is $0.00 to 49.99, IC cost = $10
If Revenue is $50.00 to 74.99, IC cost = $15
If Revenue is $75.00 to $99.99, IC cost = $20
If Revenue is $100.00 to $124.99 IC cost = $25
For each additional $25 increment of revenue, IC costs increase by $5.

this would substantialy slow growth for most of us imedietly, but I find it is reasonably fair acrossed the board.

[Darman]

I know that this makes it even more complicated, but what if we said that beyond $200 in revenue the cost increases by $10 per IC? or is that getting too complicated?

[miketr]

Tweaked it to reflect mikes proposal, which was the same one I was thinking about

If Revenue is $0.00 to 49.99, IC cost = $10
If Revenue is $50.00 to 74.99, IC cost = $15
If Revenue is $75.00 to $99.99, IC cost = $20
If Revenue is $100.00 to $124.99 IC cost = $25
For each additional $25 increment of revenue, IC costs increase by $5.

this would substantialy slow growth for most of us imedietly, but I find it is reasonably fair acrossed the board.

I dont have my spread sheets on my iPAD but looking at last budget I am going to guess that Germany is going to be in the $100 to $125, perhaps $125 to $150 so I think $30 and IC is what Germany is going to pay.

Michael

[miketr]

I know that this makes it even more complicated, but what if we said that beyond $200 in revenue the cost increases by $10 per IC? or is that getting too complicated?

So you are suggesting the following?

50 - 74.99 = $15
75 - 99.99 = $20
100 - 124.99 = $25
125 - 149.99 = $30
150 - 174.99 = $35
175 - 199.99 = $40
200 - 209.99 = $45
210 - 219.99 = $50
....

Michael

[Darman]

I know that this makes it even more complicated, but what if we said that beyond $200 in revenue the cost increases by $10 per IC? or is that getting too complicated?

Sorry for the confusion.  this is more along the lines of what i meant. 

50 - 74.99 = $15
75 - 99.99 = $20
100 - 124.99 = $25
125 - 149.99 = $30
150 - 174.99 = $35
175 - 199.99 = $40
200 - 224.99 = $50
225 - 249.99 = $60
....

[miketr]

That would certainly slow down the growth.  I am not sure if we need to go that far.  Perhaps see how the current changes play out first?

Michael

[Darman]

That would certainly slow down the growth.  I am not sure if we need to go that far.  Perhaps see how the current changes play out first?

Michael

The ceiling could be placed further back, at $300 in revenue, or even $400. 

But yes, growth beyond a certain point would definitely be slowed.  presumably, giving smaller nations a chance to sort-of catch up is the point? at least part of it?

[Logi]

3] Canal Projects
Natural waterways do not count towards the cost of a Canal, unless modification are made to the waterway. In that case, only pay for additional width/depth and locks needed to overcome the elevation change.

6] Population Relocation
Originally this was intended only to cover unnatural relocation.

People relocate naturally all the time and this level of structural unemployment/etc is expected to be ingrained into the revenue of the nation already. Relocation by government mandate by definition causes sub-optimal allocation of human resources. Naturally this should have an upfront cost and take time for break-even. The people of the slums are not earning significantly more than they the locations they came from. It takes time, even generations, before they actually earn significantly more. The same with immigrants.

My personal opinion as a player, is that modifying the original proposal by allowing provinces to move half it's population growth amount ever report is fine.
No-cost relocation enmasse won't be accepted. If that is what we are at, I'm going to have to say, as a mod, that relocations of any sort is a No.

@Tiered IC Cost
I think the +$5 per $25 revenue starting at $50 is good.

[The Rock Doctor]

So where are we at with this?

[snip]

RL blew out of control this week. Somewhat surprise audit at one job, coworker quit at the other (leaving slack on me). This week looks jammed to, but will try and get all the revisions done as soon as I can.