Clarification on Standing-Army Tax

[Emperor Giulio]

If one possesses Free Units, such as the six Foreign Legion troops awarded after unlocking Volunteer Army, in the Freedom ideology tree, does that player still have to pay a tax on those troops? Moreover, does the same apply to units that are made free, if stationed in cities after unlocking Oligarchy in Tradition?

 

[OmniPotent42]

I would venture to say no, even though I haven't tested it out. Free is free, and what is most likely happening is with that resolution is that it just takes your base unit maintenance and multiplies it by 1.25.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The thing about SAT is that if you have a healthy economy, it won't hinder you at all. But if a civ has a poor economy, this will only make their lives worse. So a rich warmonger will not be inhibited, and it might cause his poorer neighbors to delete units in order to stay in the black, thereby indirectly feeding them to the warmonger.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

I would venture to say no, even though I haven't tested it out. Free is free, and what is most likely happening is with that resolution is that it just takes your base unit maintenance and multiplies it by 1.25.

I will find out for sure after I get home from work and play, I'm a few turns away from enacting it (if it passes, luckily I do have the most delegates around. Moreover most of the world will probably vote to repeal an early embargo I made on Indonesia) I'll let you guys know what happens, if this goes unresolved.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

The thing about SAT is that if you have a healthy economy, it won't hinder you at all. But if a civ has a poor economy, this will only make their lives worse. So a rich warmonger will not be inhibited, and it might cause his poorer neighbors to delete units in order to stay in the black, thereby indirectly feeding them to the warmonger.

Luckily, I've been working to imperil my greatest military threat in my current game. After I saw they were going for Autocracy, I made two of Indonesia's exclusive luxs illegal, and I placed an embargo on them. I'm hoping the standing army tax will drive a spear right into their hearts. They are currently poor, and experiencing a lot of unhappiness to the point of massive civil dissent.

 

[pintocat]

The world congress is neat, but by the time I got Poland embargoed (dropping him to -192 GPT), he had over 14000 gold (!) saved up so he was still fine... It took everything I had to bribe fellow civs and a couple CS's for the votes to do it, because he had all the CS's allied and had tons of votes..

 

[Emperor Giulio]

The world congress is neat, but by the time I got Poland embargoed (dropping him to -192 GPT), he had over 14000 gold (!) saved up so he was still fine... It took everything I had to bribe fellow civs and a couple CS's for the votes to do it, because he had all the CS's allied and had tons of votes..

I used to be a die hard war-monger, but I have to admit, there is something sadistically enjoyable about crippling a foe economically, and alienating them politically.

 

[Babri]

The thing about SAT is that if you have a healthy economy, it won't hinder you at all. But if a civ has a poor economy, this will only make their lives worse. So a rich warmonger will not be inhibited, and it might cause his poorer neighbors to delete units in order to stay in the black, thereby indirectly feeding them to the warmonger.

SAT is more like a preventing a civ to become run away than stopping a runaway who already have conquered many lands. Earlier on warmonger civs have underdeveloped economy due to sheer focus on military. But once it conquers some wealthy lands, chances are that they will quickly amass huge wealth. So as you mentioned SAT would hurt others more. A better way to stop them would be banning luxuries they have & embargo them.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[Lyoncet]

SAT is more like a preventing a civ to become run away than stopping a runaway who already have conquered many lands. Earlier on warmonger civs have underdeveloped economy due to sheer focus on military. But once it conquers some wealthy lands, chances are that they will quickly amass huge wealth. So as you mentioned SAT would hurt others more. A better way to stop them would be banning luxuries they have & embargo them.

Very good point. Thanks for the insight.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

I was never able to enact the SAT; it got shot down every time. I did win the cultural victory though.

Unfortunately, the answer to this question remains to be seen.

 

[viri4to]

I think SAT doesn't help you reduce the army of AI civs...
If you'r bankrupt, your units will be disbanded but with AI it doesnt work like that at least in my game. I was able to enact SAT and other major civs with huge armys have 0 gold and a income like -727 (Denmark),-339 (Portugal) and they can mantain their full army units... It is only affecting my economy since I'm only produced +100 GPT..

 

[georgie]

I can't think why on earth it would apply to FL. 6 units will no longer be added to your total number of units when unit maintenance is calculated. Can't confirm though.
Same with Oligarchy. A unit should be exempt from being added to the total number of units when unit maintenance is calculated.

 

[redwings1340]

I've found the SAT is a huge trap when I've tried it out. It tends to make computers with large militaries really angry at you, and when they're angry at you and have a large military, they tend to go to war with you. When their units die, they lose that costly army maintenance in a productive way. In the end though, by proposing it you're just proposing a damaging DoW with the computers with the largest militaries.

 

[phillipwyllie]

I believe units only disband if you fall below the support threshold. The consequence to negative gpt(-5gpt) is when you run out of gold you don't generate science, and possibly buildings get sold(can't comment on this though).

With SAT passed, civs with a large army have 2 options:
1.)Stagnate but be able to kick ass;
2.)Disband units and not kick so much ass.

 

[FeiLing]

So anyone is thinking that paying more gold for their huge ass army harms an Ai that cheats with gold anyway? Even if your army is small, you'll pay 20% more than you paid for it before. And those 20% always cripple you, never the AI. Doesn't matter how huge their army is. I'd never enact SAT.

Concerning the free units: All units cost the same. When you have 20 units, but 6 are free, you pay for 14 units. SAT is not something extra, it just increases the standard unit maintenance cost by 20%.

 

[Polisurgist]

So anyone is thinking that paying more gold for their huge ass army harms an Ai that cheats with gold anyway? Even if your army is small, you'll pay 20% more than you paid for it before. And those 20% always cripple you, never the AI. Doesn't matter how huge their army is. I'd never enact SAT.

The AI "cheats" with gold (a "cheat" you allow by setting a difficulty higher than Prince), but a heavy warmongering AI will still often push its military to the point where its net income is close to 0 anyway. If income is around 0, it'll still go negative when SAT is enacted, and will either have to go pillaging or disband units in order to keep up.

However, you're right about it having a disproportionate effect on smaller civs. This is why I actually love enacting SAT when I'm #1 or #2 in military power and have a strong economy. Do that, the weaker ones like you for it, declare some friendships, then go after the next strongest or next weakest military, then repeal SAT. Great way to double the size of your empire quickly, at little cost to you and while maintaining diplomatic relations.

 

[Johnpecan]

On higher level difficulties it's not very efficient because the AI doesn't know how to use gold. Often in deity games, I've seen AIs with over 10k gold even post fall patch. So to a strong AI with a big military and lots of land (the target of SAT), no big difference is made. It just means the ridiculous lump sum of cash they have sitting in their bank goes down a little.

 

[viri4to]

worst is when they have negative income and 0 gold in their treasury and they still not disbanding their units and still get gold for gifts to City States every turn... This is happening in emperor dificulty. I think they don't suffer the disbanding penalty or r selling buildings, idk..