My empire earns too much money

[currierm]

ORIGINAL: J HG T

Sounds like late game economy seriously needs some cash-suckers. In my opinion, this should be the next important mechanic to fix after the design fixes.

It might help to make the higher tech ships relatively more expensive. You can't go too wild with this- or it will just be better to build lots of cheap, old ships. But just checked my current game and my starting destroyer was 2800 credits and current generation destroyer is 5200. Rather than make all ships more expensive, which would hurt the early game, this would mostly effect mid and end game.

[Texashawk]

And to think, when DW first came out the whining was about how difficult it was to make money and that it was too easy to crash your economy. Sometimes, Eliot, you can't win for trying.

[solops]

As was mentioned earlier in the thread, if you have too much money, adjust corruption during the game setup. That should fix things up as your empire grows. If that does not fix it for you, fix it in the race file.

[adecoy95]

pretty sure this is a result of the features added in legends, between the colony govenors, new building system, and your empire leader, and research in general. there are a lot of new ways to get a ton of extra income.

it also does not help one bit that you can now increase colony taxes above 50%

[onomastikon]

Isn't the main problem one almost entirely for late game? In other words, one for which the solutions offered here are not really good, because they make the early- and much of the mid-game greatly unenjoyable at the expense of an only slightly improved late game. I think scaling (and hence NOT with global settings, or settings which primarily effect the first parts of the game, such as howeworld settings) needs to be in order, something which might, in fact, check the entire galaxy stock of resources and money and apply an inflation penalty on upkeep / future costs based on that.

[msnevil]

The corruption slider is the key, I forget the settings. But at Max, it should be very difficult to balance the "budget". Sort of like the real world. (Deleted real world allusions, there is no "split" divisions of public\private in the real world. Its Corporate Nationalism run amuck.)

Nerfing the economy based on mid to late game preferences seems a little extreme to me.

I use similar settings set like "J HG T" above, and find I don't have oodles of money just laying around. The default settings make the game too easy, try to expand your horizons, and nerf yourself. That’s why the game came with sliders, use them. [:'(]

[Robocrab]

The corruption slider is the key

The corruption slider is not key

Capital -> no corruption -> 95% budget

Example:

[solops]

ORIGINAL: Robocrab

The corruption slider is the key

The corruption slider is not key

Capital -> no corruption -> 95% budget

Your capital should always have low corruption effects, as should your regional capitals. The outlying planets are the ones most effected. At what corruption level are you playing?

[Harry2]

I don't like the idea of using a single parameter (like corruption) to throttle back the entire economy. It seems too superficial and contrived.

Much like the Colony Shere of Influence setting and the limits you can now place on colonization distance (thank you devs for allowing them to be set to effectively zero effect) : these are controls not based on any "realistic" factors in the game mechanics but just put there to push the game in certain directions.

If the game justs defaults to effortless cash flow that can be controlled by a single slider then what was the point of 30 or more resources types, miners, freighters, delivery routes and resource use for specifc components, etc? All that detail seems to be wasted. It should be put to use and balanced to provide the kind of throttles that make sense, and not just layer-on another "God Control" that ruins immersion.

[Robocrab]

ORIGINAL: solops
Your capital should always have low corruption effects, as should your regional capitals. The outlying planets are the ones most effected. At what corruption level are you playing?

Corruption level - Normal
The capital is always 0% corruption.
In the example Capital tax money = 2 364 000
With this amount of money the other colonies are no longer important

It is necessary to balance
1. Reduce the tax revenue from the colonies
2. Increase maintenance cost hightech ships
3. ...

[msnevil]

Maybe a resource amount slider might be a option? In the real world, fights are started over resources, why not galaxy in scale as well?

[msnevil]

ORIGINAL: Robocrab

Corruption level - Normal
The capital is always 0% corruption.
In the example Capital tax money = 2 364 000
With this amount of money the other colonies are no longer important

Do you control taxing or the does the AI control taxing?

[Robocrab]

ORIGINAL: msnevil
Do you control taxing or the does the AI control taxing?

I manually control taxing. But the secret is not in this.

1. Find a large planet with a good quality (in example diameter 32.5K, Quality 92%)
2. Bonuses from the Leader and Colony Governor
3. High development level (build all Wonders on this colony)

Result: one colony (capital = 0% corruption), a lot of money and a high tax (like Mechanoid)

[Fishers of Men]

In the policy screen, you can give the A.I. guidelines and let it control taxes, or you can manually control them. Unless I run into a question of the population becoming unhappy for some reason, I turn this job over to the computer.

The capital colony have 0% corruption is probably a result of the fact that your empire's leader resides there. The further from the capital a colony is, the corruption seems to increase. But I see your point about the lack of monitary importants of the other colonies. When DW was first released, there was a real challenge in the players' ability to raise funds for growth and not go into deep debt. The developers adjusted this to make cash flow more easily, but now it seems we have learned how to work the system and there is too much money and the challenge in making the difficult choices has been lost.

FoM

[Robocrab]

The capital colony have 0% corruption is probably a result of the fact that your empire's leader resides there.

No, Сapital 0% corruption always, without a leader or something else. This is game mechanic.

[Fishers of Men]

Thanks for the correction, Robocrab.

[feelotraveller]

ORIGINAL: Harry2

I don't like the idea of using a single parameter (like corruption) to throttle back the entire economy. It seems too superficial and contrived.

Much like the Colony Shere of Influence setting and the limits you can now place on colonization distance (thank you devs for allowing them to be set to effectively zero effect) : these are controls not based on any "realistic" factors in the game mechanics but just put there to push the game in certain directions.

If the game justs defaults to effortless cash flow that can be controlled by a single slider then what was the point of 30 or more resources types, miners, freighters, delivery routes and resource use for specifc components, etc? All that detail seems to be wasted. It should be put to use and balanced to provide the kind of throttles that make sense, and not just layer-on another "God Control" that ruins immersion.

Personally I am never short of things to do with my money (and also in the game [:D]). Crash researching, buying things from the computer players, and building huge fleets seem to be endless... But there is an issue with money being too readily available.

I'm with Harry2 on this. One rudimentary suggestion would be to progressively steepen the possible price range for resources, forcing a general upward trend over the course of the game rather than having them limited at an absolute value which never changes.

I say rudimentary because it would need careful balance, being a galactic (or is that universal...) figure. Must leave room for a struggling computer player or someone coming (back) from a ludicrous position in the game. Possibly making resources much rarer would fit in with this. Unfortunately after the howls of protest from newer players about resource shortages in the intial Legends versions they effectively made resources more available than ever. [:(]

[Fishers of Men]

I thought the price range for resources was based on the galaxy's supply and demand model, and not any fixed rates. But I do agree that we should go back to the release of Legends and make resources more rare. When I first purchased DW, I believed the conflicts in the galaxy would most always be centered around the resources. Whoever controlled the most strategic resources had a good chance of winning the game. Isn't this just like real world economics? But like was mentioned, the huge detail built into the economic model is not being used well. Maybe Elliot should revisit this part of the game.

[feelotraveller]

The price is determined by supply and demand but the limits to this price are fixed. Minimum 0.8, maximum 2.5 for strategic resources.

[Harry2]

One rudimentary suggestion would be to progressively steepen the possible price range for resources, forcing a general upward trend over the course of the game rather than having them limited at an absolute value which never changes.

Yes, as new components and technologies come online they require newer resources, and more of the old, which ramps up the price.

Imagine a resource that's cheap as dirt because no one has a use for it ...until a powerful component is developed that must have that resource.