 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Dealing with RECESSION
|
 |
|
 |
 |
by Citizen DMF - 5/7/2003 1:25:43 AM
[This is not intended to be a cross-post, the sucky newsy forum sw can't figure out which group to put it in.]
I got a recession that not only didn't end, it was race-specific.
Actually, the "recession ended" panel did appear, but I never could get anywhere near the pre-recession production afterwards.
First, this is my first Galciv game since the OS/2 version. Doing well and staying in front of the Altarians (barely). Built up a nice treasury (6000+). Star Federation and first in Influence, Economy, Tech, and Military. Got the "recession" warning screen but blithely ignored it until I hit -800 negative treasury. All my worlds went bad on Morale, but I had remembered to build Transports at all systems so I was able to keep up morale by reducing the population.
There's two issues here. First, f you drew a line down the middle of the galaxy, all races with HQs on one side were unaffected. Production did not drop [b]at all[/b]. All races on the other side tanked - Terrans, Drengin, a couple of minors. What is this, an optical illusion?
I waited out the recession (the Drengin didn't make it), but production never did come back up to previous levels. Post-recession, overall Morale was okay - about 48%. Tried various tax and spend ratios. Nothing worked. After a couple years the Altaraians attacked an ate my lunch.
Obviously one trick is to moderate spending [i]before[/i] going negative. But having recovered to a positive Treasure, what could be affecting output?? How does one deal with a recession, and especially, how does one recover?
       
| |
|
The way I deal with them is to sell some goodies to the AI to alleviate the cash flow problem.
But it sounds like you were being destabilized after the recession.
| |
|
Trade is unaffected by the recession event- so its the one thing trade is more reliable for.
You say production didn't drop for one half of the galaxy - do you mean the economy? The computer players can keep production up by cutting back research, spending their treaury etc. If it was their economy which was unaffected, I don't know why they were not affacted.
  
| |
|
|
|
#4
by Veteran Za H - 5/12/2003 4:32:59 AM
Just lower your spending, why fiddle with taxes at all? The only thing you achieve by lowering taxes is to further magnify your deficit by decreasing income and increasing production capacity. If anything, you should be increasing taxes to put a break on population growth and milk a couple more BCs from your people.
| |
|
Noticed when I ended my last game that the AIs have all set their tax rate at 39%. Do they know something that we don't? 
I usually set mine at 40% and leave it there for the whole game.
     
| |
|
|
|
|
|
#8
by Veteran Za H - 5/12/2003 10:27:01 PM
I suppose I'm the complete moron for not understanding what your problem is then. What I have deciphered so far in chronological order is:
1): You mention your morale dropping and how you fixed that by shuttling off population, but morale has nothing to do with recessions. Are you trying to argue that recessions affect morale?
2): You claim that this recession only hurt some races while others were unscathed. I guess if this were a bug report, I would expect to see a few more details. How exactly were you measuring production to arrive at the conclusion that it did not drop for some races for example? The mini map displays are not an accurate measure of production since they are capped in size.
3): You said that your production never recovered to their pre-recession levels, which begs the question of how you were accurately measuring production again. No distinction was made between potential and actual production either. For one thing, if you were shipping off your population, your production capacity will have dropped substantially and it would have taken quite a while for your population to recover.
4): You mention post-recession morale, but again, morale has nothing to do with recessions.
5): Next you mention spending, but make no distinction between potential and actual spending again. Let's not forget that spending is not the same as production either.
6): You said you lowered taxes to restore some kind of spending, which prompted me to suggest that you increase taxes instead, yet you reply as if I was pointing out the obvious and that was exactly what you did.
To summarize it all, I just don't have a clue what you are talking about it, so I apologize for sticking my nose into this thread. In fact, I don't even know how Mojo, RayChua, Wazz, and the people that posted in your other thread could answer your questions given these uncertainties. Am I an idiot? Perhaps. I'd like to think I'm being careful though.
| |
|
#9
by Veteran Za H - 5/12/2003 10:30:45 PM
For what it's worth, the Torians were able to conquere the Yor in one of my past games. They basically saturated Yor space with hundreds (yes, I counted) of Dreadnoughts, Rangers, Avatars, Overlords, and sent in a few unprotected transports to invade the planets. It was crude, but it worked, and it scared the hell out of me too 
| |
|
Hey Wazz, if you read the manula it tells you that at a certain point people stop declaring their taxes. Thats why taxes drop considerably at a certain point. It also tells you this at the end of year report when it tells you your population has increased by X billion.
| |
|
#11
by Citizen Harcon - 5/13/2003 11:44:17 AM
Just thought I would mention to the original poster that the only link with money and moral is having a negative balance. This can be an in-direct link via recession, as recession casus you to have less money. You can counter this be having less spending.
Nuff Said.
| |
|
#12
by Veteran Za H - 5/13/2003 12:20:30 PM
Uh... #9 up there is obviously in the wrong thread
| |
|
#13
by Veteran Za H - 5/13/2003 12:49:05 PM
Harcon:
Incidentally, the morale penalty from debt has never been very severe in any of my games. Usually I just let the population ride it out, and it wouldn't take more than a few turns for morale to reach equilibrium again. No planet would even be close to rebellion unless I upped taxes at exactly the same time.
I still have no idea what DMF's problem with production is...
| |
|
|
|
#15
by Veteran Za H - 5/14/2003 2:39:07 AM
How long did it take to bring your treasury back up to -500 after you noticed the recession? It is very difficult for debt induced morale penalties to cause rebellions unless you remain in debt for a very long time.
How much population did you ship off your planets during the recession? Did you return that population after the recession ended? If you had killed off a big chunk of your population, it is only reasonable to expect your tax income and production capacity to take a big dive too. There is also the possibility that some amount of destabilization on your empire had been accumulating before the recession hit. By significantly reducing your population, you may have inadverdently magnified the effects of that destabilization many times over and trapped yourself in a vicious cycle.
There is no clear remedy to low tax income (is that what you are trying to fix?) unless you find out what caused your problem in the first place.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Copyright 1995-2024 Stardock Corporation. All rights reservered.
Site created by Pixtudio and Stardock, designed by Pixtudio.
|
 |
