orionsyndrome wrote:
Wow, that explains my futile attempts at backtracking the income factors in order to determine which improvement I should scrap.

So here's my suggestion:



There are three different settings per star system: Frontier tax | Outer tax | Core tax

An outpost would receive the Frontier tax automatically and that would be set in stone until the said outpost earns a Colony status.



From that point onward, player can change between the other two tax settings at will.

This is utterly, completely, totally brilliant, with one caveat.



Don't let the player change between tax settings. A system is taxed at the Outer tax rate if it's a Colony and less than some specific population level (50/75/80/90%, depending on what works best for balance).



I literally can't count the number of science fiction stories I've read where the political tension is generated because the highly populated worlds (having a majority in the equivalent of Congress) are taxing frontier and outer rim worlds to death.



This would at least be a nod to that. Have the unhappiness generated be a factor of the population affected. Initially, the inner colonies would be outnumbered by the outer colonies and outposts. Then, as more outer colonies reached the threshold for inner colonies, and outposts became outer colonies, the balance would shift. It might shift back and forth several times, in fact, depending on exactly how a game went -- for example, if an empire was blocked in because of a bottleneck for a while, it would have more inner colonies than outer and frontier colonies. If it then took over a system that allowed it to expand again, it might undergo a period of expansion which changed the balance... and thus the level of happiness.



Happiness/unhappiness shouldn't change instantly. It should take time, unless the change in taxation is truly dramatic (say, have a set time factor of e.g. 10 turns, modified by the _reciprocal_ of the change -- so a change of 10% taxes 9 turns (10 * (100% - 10%))to reach the happiness of the new tax rate, and a change of 66% takes 3 turns (10 * (100% - 66%))), thus encouraging the player to think ahead.



Having per-system tax rates is, I think, too much micro-management -- but three tax rates is perfectly reasonable, and likely to keep the player from just picking a tax rate and sticking with it.

I think better in-game guide and balancing are good enough for now (A better rework always welcome)

Maybe add a number in the tooltip, read: "under current tax rate"



For example, Careful Swee...

Okey I know 15% tax rate of people before me mentioned this before...

I have to agree with the OP - this is exactly the type of less-than-intuitive subtle spreadsheet trick that we, as alpha testers, are supposed to be investigating. Players will cry "foul" until the end of time if a dust-only improvement actually causes them to lose income based on tax settings.



The problem here seems to revolve around the lumping of all costs together, so to provide good game-play treatment to say, xenotourism, would require cost reductions applied to warships. Perhaps the only solution would be to make dust-only improvements more difficult to build but have a lower per turn cost.



A better way, in my opinion, would be to create a two-staged economy where

- each system's internal economy has a calculated gain/loss based on its dust production + trade - costs of civilian infrastructure

- the tax rate is applied only to gains - any loss from above is passed on fully

- at the imperial level all of these gains and losses are aggregated and modified for inefficiency / empire size

- from this total the costs of all military + imperial improvements + diplomacy + heroes are subtracted



So in abbreviated and somewhat simplified terms:



{ Sum of [(Systems'Income-Costs)xTaxRateonlyifpositive] } - costs of heroes, ships, diplomacy and military structures

Ghost73 wrote:
On a side note: I also think that dust production improvements should not have an upkeep simply because they are meant to boost dust production, not reduce it.

I disagree. Having a dust requirement makes it more tactical. Some systems will make a net loss off of the improvement, some systems will turn into a net profit. Everything else is good.

Let me explain what I mean when I say the tax system is convoluted:

Suppose you are thinking of building the Xenotourism improvement. Xenotourism boosts Dust by 1 per pop on certain planet types for an upkeep of 3 dust. Intuitively, a person would think that they need just 3 pop on the correct planet type to break even. However, this is not the case: It depends entirely on your tax level as to how many pop are required to break even.



With a tax level of 10%, the dust multiplier is x0.2, so the dust bonus that Xenotourism would provide is multiplied x0.2.

Since it requires an upkeep of 3 Dust, at 10% tax you would need a minimum 15 pop to break even (3 upkeep/0.2 = 15). (The 0.2 is how much each pop gains from Xenotourism at 10% tax)



However, if you raise the tax level to say 25%, the bonus becomes x0.5, and then you would only need 6 pop (3 upkeep/0.5 = 6) on the correct planet type to break even with Xenotourism, which is just one reason why I think this system needs an overhaul.



More information here: Dust Production

i agree it really does need an overhaul like that suggested in the OP, the current system is just not intuitive.

25% tax rate isn't 25% "dust to empire." It's 50%. Any tax rate about 50% is a bonus to dust production.



You also forgot about all the positive modifiers (e.g. Hero +25% dust ability). Which is after taxes. And negative modifiers, such as an outpost adjacent to or being covered by the influence from an enemy colony. (a -25% modifier that is also after taxes).

In fact the %age should be remove and replaced by the exact thing you need to know : what percentage of what you're creating is really earned ?

So instead of 50% you would have 100%

VieuxChat wrote:
In fact the %age should be remove and replaced by the exact thing you need to know : what percentage of what you're creating is really earned ?

So instead of 50% you would have 100%

Yes, that too.

Draco18s wrote:
25% tax rate isn't 25% "dust to empire." It's 50%. Any tax rate about 50% is a bonus to dust production.



You also forgot about all the positive modifiers (e.g. Hero +25% dust ability). Which is after taxes. And negative modifiers, such as an outpost adjacent to or being covered by the influence from an enemy colony. (a -25% modifier that is also after taxes).

Good point, which makes it even more difficult to try and figure out if an improvement is beneficial or if changing the tax level will make improvements less useful.

The current system is just too complicated.

If they would list what they consider the base and what the percentages for bonuses are it would be much less confusing,

VieuxChat wrote:
In fact the %age should be remove and replaced by the exact thing you need to know : what percentage of what you're creating is really earned ?

So instead of 50% you would have 100%

Exactly, trying to calculate dust production in a system shouldn't require inside knowledge.

I like the complexities of dust production. It's mentally challenging in a way that economic optimizing rarely is in these games, and it leads to unexpected results that wouldn't occur otherwise. With enough Dust bonuses, Careful Sweeping becomes profitable to build on systems with ONE moon!

Platescale wrote:
I like the complexities of dust production. It's mentally challenging in a way that economic optimizing rarely is in these games, and it leads to unexpected results that wouldn't occur otherwise. With enough Dust bonuses, Careful Sweeping becomes profitable to build on systems with ONE moon!

How? Hero bonus on dust production maxes out at about 40% and you'd need 50% taxes AND a 50% hero bonus to break even.

Draco18s wrote:
How? Hero bonus on dust production maxes out at about 40% and you'd need 50% taxes AND a 50% hero bonus to break even.

65% taxes - quite sustainable on ecstatic with morale-boosting technologies. +20% Dust production from Automated Investment Intelligence. Miscellaneous Dust bonuses from resources. +10% dust production from Colonial Rights. I don't believe this needs a hero.

The taxation system as it is now is extremely confusing and actually affects the production of dust in your systems as opposed to taking a portion like a regular tax.



Please read this thread outlining Dust Production before continuing: Understanding Dust Production and Income in a System



There are 2 problems with the tax system in game right now:

1) Taxation before upkeep

This means a system's dust improvements produce less dust at lower tax levels. If an improvement turns a profit at 50% tax, why should it have a deficit at a lower tax?



2) The Tax is a Multiplier

The tax slider is not what it claims to be. It is nothing at all like a tax. Unlike a regular tax, it directly affects what the system produces, not the amount the government takes like a regular tax. Compounding this problem is that the tax slider is non-linear and that the game does not explain at all how it works. So even if players knew the tax was a multiplier, they would assume 50% means a 0.5 multiplier, but it doesn't. Confusion and frustration ensues.



Instead of the tax level acting as a multiplier on the production of dust in a system before upkeep, have it be exactly like a regular tax, but after the upkeep.



So a system producing 150 dust and 50 upkeep in an empire with 25% tax would give 25 dust to the empire: (150 - 50) x 0.25 = 25

(Production - Upkeep) x tax rate = dust for empire



Much more intuitive than how it is now: (150 x 0.5) - 50 = 25

(Production x tax multiplier) - Upkeep = dust for empire



This would also have the added benefit of make it much easier for players to know if a dust boosting improvement is a net gain or not on their system AND not having to worry about the tax level when building them (see The Multiplier vs. Improvements section in linked thread).



On a side note: I also think that dust production improvements should not have an upkeep simply because they are meant to boost dust production, not reduce it.



Edit:

OthobRithol provides a better explanation of my idea here: (see below)

OthobRithol wrote:
A better way, in my opinion, would be to create a two-staged economy where

- each system's internal economy has a calculated gain/loss based on its dust production + trade - costs of civilian infrastructure

- the tax rate is applied only to gains - any loss from above is passed on fully

- at the imperial level all of these gains and losses are aggregated and modified for inefficiency / empire size

- from this total the costs of all military + imperial improvements + diplomacy + heroes are subtracted



So in abbreviated and somewhat simplified terms:



{ Sum of [(Systems'Income-Costs)xTaxRateonlyifpositive] } - costs of heroes, ships, diplomacy and military structures

Platescale wrote:
65% taxes - quite sustainable on ecstatic with morale-boosting technologies. +20% Dust production from Automated Investment Intelligence. Miscellaneous Dust bonuses from resources. +10% dust production from Colonial Rights. I don't believe this needs a hero.

Its true that you can eventually boost dust production with enough bonuses, however in early game dust boosting buildings are still useless until you can get the resources and pop to support their upkeep. Also, if for some reason you need to lower your tax level, the improvement that used to be giving you dust, is now draining it. The system that is in place now is counterintuitive and extremely confusing for new players, and just look at how many people did not even realize the ridiculous intricacies this system has even now after playing for weeks.



I am a believer in Occam's Razor, and the fact that people will simply have more fun if they are able to understand it. The way taxes work needs to be simplified.

OthobRithol wrote:
IThe problem here seems to revolve around the lumping of all costs together, so to provide good game-play treatment to say, xenotourism, would require cost reductions applied to warships. Perhaps the only solution would be to make dust-only improvements more difficult to build but have a lower per turn cost.



A better way, in my opinion, would be to create a two-staged economy where

- each system's internal economy has a calculated gain/loss based on its dust production + trade - costs of civilian infrastructure

- the tax rate is applied only to gains - any loss from above is passed on fully

- at the imperial level all of these gains and losses are aggregated and modified for inefficiency / empire size

- from this total the costs of all military + imperial improvements + diplomacy + heroes are subtracted



So in abbreviated and somewhat simplified terms:



{ Sum of [(Systems'Income-Costs)xTaxRateonlyifpositive] } - costs of heroes, ships, diplomacy and military structures

Yes, this is something that is much easier to understand for everyone. This is exactly what we need, thanks for clarifying my idea.

I agree with the simplification based upon the explanation of how the tax system works in another thread that was linked to this one.

/#/endless-space/forum/33-strategy-guides/thread/14057-understanding-dust-production-and-income-in-a-system



A dust improvement should actually be an improvement is essentially the reasoning; it should not drag down dust production because a player does not understand the finer mathematical details of how taxes operate. The simpler a tax system, the more a player can understand the direct implications of his or her actions. Taxes and improvements should not have to be studied in order to be understood for the purposes of playing a game.

I've played for close to 30 hours now, and never realized this. Granted, I haven't really tried to maximize Dust, because I haven't been using much (actually just realized last night that you could hurry production... as a long-time Civ player, I am a little disappointed with myself). The system as it stands seems really silly, and a more intuitive system would be nice. Here I was thinking that I would benefit from using Careful Sweeping in a system with 3 moons...



The 2-stage system detailed above makes a TON of sense, should go with that!

{ Sum of [(Systems'Income-Costs)xTaxRateonlyifpositive] } - costs of heroes, ships, diplomacy and military structures



This equation implies that raising taxes won't ever produce income on systems that aren't covering the costs of their structures, if tax rates are only applied after maintenance costs are fully deducted. This results in systems having the same (negative) dust production at 0% and 100% taxes. The exact same. Tax raises won't affect anything for systems that are spending more on civilian infrastructure than they're raising in income. That's counterintuitive. Shouldn't tax rates adjust the income before costs are subtracted?

Platescale wrote:
{ Sum of [(Systems'Income-Costs)xTaxRateonlyifpositive] } - costs of heroes, ships, diplomacy and military structures



This equation implies that raising taxes won't ever produce income on systems that aren't covering the costs of their structures, if tax rates are only applied after maintenance costs are fully deducted. This results in systems having the same (negative) dust production at 0% and 100% taxes. The exact same. Tax raises won't affect anything for systems that are spending more on civilian infrastructure than they're raising in income. That's counterintuitive. Shouldn't tax rates adjust the income before costs are subtracted?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: The tax takes what a system produces, so if a system has a deficit, then what can the tax take? If income is taxed before upkeep, the system won't have enough to cover its operating costs at a low tax value. This causes improvements that turn a profit at 50% tax, to have a deficit at a lower tax.



There are 2 problems with the tax system in game right now:

1) Taxation before upkeep

This means a system's dust improvements produce less dust at lower tax levels. If an improvement turns a profit at 50% tax, why should it have a deficit at a lower tax?



2) The Tax is a Multiplier

The tax slider is not what it claims to be. It is nothing at all like a tax. Unlike a regular tax, it directly affects what the system produces, not the amount the government takes like a regular tax. Compounding this problem is that the tax slider is non-linear and that the game does not explain at all how it works. So even if players knew the tax was a multiplier, they would assume 50% means a 0.5 multiplier, but it doesn't. Confusion and frustration ensues.



Note: Changed first post for clarification.

I agree, the taxation system is unnecessarily brain-bending and obtuse. It really needs to be simplified, and the player needs more resources to break down what the economy is doing. I'd have to alt-tab to Excel to figure out whether my xenotourism is turning a profit right now. Built structures should indicate how much income they're generating or sucking out of the economy.