Community Input: Taxes, service/terminal revenue and factional income

BioXide

Founder

Staff member
Lead Developer
Management
Jun 1, 2017
453
Portland, Oregon
Guns of the Conclave
Rank: Princeps (R7)
Service Points: 999999
We had a long discussion of the topic in discord and here's what we wrapped up with:

Bold means it's a variable and will change.

Service/Terminal Revenue
The faction that owns a service/terminal will receive a x% flat cut (starting with 25%) from the service cost (mining, producing items, buying tickets, market, etc) plus x% of taxes, which are set by the owner.

The world owner will receive a x% from the total service cost (set by the world owner to that specific service).

The senate will be able to approve which worlds will offer a x% cut from all the services to TU.

Faction Money Printing
Players will be able to print money in the form of daily contracts which get randomized every 24h, once you complete them all you'll have to wait for them to reset. This is new money injected into the economy (we're not doing closed economy) which is something similar to EVE's bounties. Players can also kill AI to print money, but it drops as a credit chip, so you have to pick it up and deposit it into an ATM to save that money.

Factions should have some sort of a welfare system that injects new money into their funds every x amount of IRL days, this will eliminate the need of having GMs injecting money into faction funds once they go bankrupt. This money could be calculated depending on the faction's income, members, services owned, etc.


Income will be balanced out close to 1:1 with money sinks, we're mainly trying to prevent:

- Inflation
- Recycling money and being able to use services for free


Feel free to give your input on this, all of this is still on the table and can be changed or tweaked, the only non-negotiable is closed economy.
 

Ranfre

Taxpayer

Bronzed Donator
Alpha Tester
Sep 15, 2018
30
Seattle
Avalon Enterprises
Rank: Junior Partner (R5)
Service Points: 0
Factions 'going bankrupt' shouldn't be the norm. It should be hard and annoying to fix a factions finances, so that HC take it seriously and don't just act dumb or impulsive because they know it will be auto fixed real soon.
 

BÅĒTA

Taxpayer

Bronzed Donator
Alpha Tester
Jun 17, 2017
35
The Syndicate
Rank: None
Service Points: 0
Factions 'going bankrupt' shouldn't be the norm. It should be hard and annoying to fix a factions finances, so that HC take it seriously and don't just act dumb or impulsive because they know it will be auto fixed real soon.
I agree, but it will probably still happen, wars are expensive. Peace can also reduce market activity. I think BioXide is saying give them enough to allow them to operate, pay their members, keep player retention. They should still feel the weight of their bad decisions reflected on their finances. HC can always be replaced too.
 

Hari Seldon

Advocate

Bronzed Donator
Alpha Tester
Jun 17, 2017
230
Cloning
Followers of Eternity
Rank: Abbot (R6)
Service Points: 0
The faction that owns a service/terminal will receive a x% flat cut (starting with 25%) from the service cost (mining, producing items, buying tickets, market, etc) plus x% of taxes, which are set by the owner.
Just to make sure I have this right; The owner gets 25% of the minimum possible cost to the user and can add on an additional charge giving you the total actual cost to the user.

Can the additional charge be differentiated by factions?
Can the additional charge be negative if for some reason a faction wants to run a terminal at no profit/cost?
Will there be maintenance costs for terminals regardless of their usage?

The world owner will receive a x% from the total service cost (set by the world owner to that specific service).


This presumably can only be within the range of the 75% of minimum cost left or is this an second additional charge on top creating a new total actual cost?

If the latter all of the above questions again for this second additional change and is the 75% of minimum cost lost as assumed running cost?

The senate will be able to approve which worlds will offer a x% cut from all the services to TU.
I would rather see the service branches budget be levied direct as a tax on the Corp factions that nominally support and need them as that is a hell of a lot of content in wrangling over budgets, cost efficiency and understanding figures. You will still get some of that this way but I feel it promotes map yield based security review conversations rather than the more subjective necessity based scopes.


Be nice to see the welfare real low to keep alive the necessity of economic activities, possibly some sort of direct TU % ownership for Corp factions that need a bail out until they can buy off the public financed debt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: John White

John White

Dilettante

Supporting Donator
Jul 23, 2018
148
Avalon Enterprises
Rank: None
Service Points: 0
I'm guessing part of the money used on terminals that gets deleted counts as upkeep cost?
Instead of making it an automatic deduction during the terminal usage process, make it automatic deduction at the end of the day from Faction fund. So faction will receive all the money from the terminal, but at the end of the day most of it or all of it will be taken from FF and deleted from economy.
This will force faction HC to balance security and greed. As clans can siphon the income, corps will be getting less of it, but the upkeep cost they need to pay at the end of the day will stay the same. Thus if corporation is unable to properly defend it's property it will loose money for owning terminals. This will dissuade factions from overextending and taking over the whole map.

Now for bankruptcy.
Auction could be one way to deal with it. Auction off all the territories faction still holds and IPs if there will be such things.
If it's totally screwed, TU can give it a loan with interest.
A debt prison can be introduced where members of failed HC go to work off faction's debt while new HC is appointed.
An emergency government contract can be issued to produce items for agencies to cover faction deficit.

Those mostly apply to corps.

As I remember in FoM agencies would usually run out of funds.
We can restrict their access to faction funds. Have TU be responsible for managing it, or voting to give HC ability to access it.

Corps should have full access. If they run out of funds they loose access, payout is set to 0 (or very low non 0 number) and faction starts operating in kind of low energy mode with inability to hold territories. Maybe take away their ability to fire legal weapons, unless in self defence and increase PP awarded to people attacking members of this faction.

For clans, they can siphon, so it will be hard to run out and won't really require bailout. If it does happen an emergency election can be started.
Depending on how monolithic their structure ends up being, clans can do without a faction fund at all. Instead each family will have their own to manage and if they run out they disband.

Mercs shouldn't have a faction fund at all. Each cell should be managing their own finances, like setting payout amount and such.


As for keeping it 1:1, just adjust money printed by net of previous day.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Pablo Hernandez

Pablo Hernandez

Citizen

Golden Donator
Alpha Tester
Jun 13, 2017
71
Mars
Guns of the Conclave
Rank: Adjudicator (R6)
Service Points: 0
"Mercs shouldn't have a faction fund at all. Each cell should be managing their own finances, like setting payout amount and such."
lol wat
 

John White

Dilettante

Supporting Donator
Jul 23, 2018
148
Avalon Enterprises
Rank: None
Service Points: 0
"Mercs shouldn't have a faction fund at all. Each cell should be managing their own finances, like setting payout amount and such."
lol wat
Mercs can't hold territories, or at least shouldn't, don't have any passive income, so how do they benefit from having a faction fund?
I haven't been part of mercs, so I am curious.
 

AtrocityLone

Citizen

Silver Donator
Alpha Tester
Jun 5, 2017
56
Charleston, SC
Civil Protection Commission
Rank: Commandant (R6)
Service Points: 0
Factions 'going bankrupt' shouldn't be the norm. It should be hard and annoying to fix a factions finances, so that HC take it seriously and don't just act dumb or impulsive because they know it will be auto fixed real soon.
no bailouts
Which is why I agree with Sir John Michael's and your comment. It creates a situation where HC needs to think of the possible consequences before making decisions.

If an injection/bailout kind of system was to be created I think it needs to be loan based and approved by the senate which would require the TU to have a pool of UC to pull from. This would hopefully keep the millions of UC from popping out of nowhere and has the ability to create content if said faction isn't paying the loan back.. Even then I'm not sure if im for it