Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: A Harder but faster Trade Balance

  1. #1
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    150

    A Harder but faster Trade Balance

    Negative trade balance also taxes income. A negative trade balance of significant amount (one that incurs a 5% trade tariff), adds a penalty to Income but helps clear a negative trade balance faster. -10% income while you have a 5% trade tariff... but trade balance is reduced by the amount of GC taxed from income.

  2. #2
    Forum Addict Bo To's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,229
    Why do we need that? In most cases -TB is normal for chained attackers who don't have much income anyway and at some situations t/ms(the one who take too much runes/gc/solds at the beginning of a war).

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    626
    Wouldn't this just give you a spiral effect? Province needs aid, gets negative TB which gives lower income, now needs more aid, lower income etc

    What is the purpose of the suggestion?

  4. #4
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    150
    During war, once you’ve been chained down, yes. It would make it slightly more painful to sit at the bottom max gaining to keep your army alive or to retrain offense/defense, or to contribute to dragons or w/e. But the point is, it becomes another drain on resources during war. And when the war ends, your negative tb clears faster, but at a cost. As it stands, TBs spiral anyway because there’s no real give and take to them. I mean you can send land or other resources after a war to fix your own tb, but in doing that you mess with others TB, plus if you’ve been chained down, after a war you aren’t exactly in a position where you can be throwing out massive amounts of aid to everyone. Though, I think TMs this age are feeling the negative TB more. If your KD has thrown up back to back rituals since the start of the age, then it’s probably pretty likely your TMs have been receiving mass amounts of runes. But with training costs and scientist spawn with labs vs just abducting a bunch, imho TMs are probably constantly in the negative with only small fixes to TB during war.

    With 10% income taken after wages have been paid (or before, really just looking at TB in isolation), then it’s easier to balance out between warring. Though I guess the balance wouldn’t quite be balanced anymore. But you could also do +10 income while having a positive TB - which could encourage aiding and that. Not sure how it would effect the people who constantly ask to right their TB, even during war.

  5. #5
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    626
    So the purpose of your idea is to try to help people with negative TB to clear their TB more quickly? I thought it was intended to make aiding more difficult. If we had this and made it opt in, there's no way I would opt in to have my income removed just to clear my TB. I appreciate that your idea wouldn't be opt in, but if it is intended as beneficial and people would prefer not to use it if they had a choice that suggests it's not as helpful as you might imagine (I have made a jump from my view to other people's views, but I suspect I am not alone in preferring to keep a negative TB vs clear my TB at the cost of actually losing income.

  6. #6
    Forum Addict Bo To's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,229
    +TB decreases slower than -TB. Such thing as your suggestion will make explo even stronger than already it is.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •