> > And where do you take your reasoning that taxation should
> > generate more income than trade? If you're thinking of real life
> > you're in the wrong. At the aproximate same era as olympia is played
> > the richest nation on the ocidental world was holland,
>
> I didn't know Holland existed in a
> fantasy era with mages and spells. I suppose that if you visit
> a hash bar in Amsterdam you might think you can fly, but that's not
> quite magic.
If you note my post correctly, I said _if_ your thinking.... Anyway, Olympia
is a simulation, and simulations exist to simulate something else. And altough
Holland didn't exist in a fantasy era with mages and spells, it surely existed
in an era with trade and taxation, and that is the issue at hand, not magic.
> > It is a proven historical fact that trade is the most profitable
> > enterprise you can take, especially in a medieval era.
> Actually, it isn't. But you can argue with the historians whether or
> not Venice's wealth was due to glass production or glass trade, and
> whether or not they would have been so wealthy had similar glass beads
> been produced as efficiently elsewhere. I'm not a historian, but I
> do know that very few things are "proven historical facts".
Whoo... you touched a familiar subject, the example is even better than
Holland. Actually the venetian families wealth came from a combination of glass
production and glass trade of which glass production was an extremelly smaller
amount. The combined trading fleets of the rich venetian families was the
largest fleet operating in the mediterreanean at the time and it was trade that
provided the support income for the struggle of power of 1412-1492 in italy.
Both Venice and Genova made their riches during those times through trade. Even
the Turks which had a considerable large warfleet used to raid the southern
shores of Naples converted most of their ships for trade even with the menace of
a Spanish invasion.
> > According to the rules a full qty of a tradegood sold in a city will
> > generate 2000-3000g. Do you know how much land you need to have to
> > generate that amount of money?
>
> Well, my character in the game is an earl, so I'd say "yes". But
> before the game started I didn't know how big the world is nor the
> frequency of cities, so I still didn't know the relative value of
> trade verses castles. You didn't know it either; you guessed.
Even if cities would be so sparse as to have to take 2-3 months to reach
one, it would still be a more sane investment (money wise) than setting up a
castle. Mind me, I have nothing against castles, and they are a necessity in the
game regardless of their income. We do in fact own several castles.
Best Regards,
--
Rogerio