...putting on the historians' robe...
Colin wrote:
> Despite what any one says the only historical empires to be succesful
> used the land they controlled to trade and reap the benifits to feul
> their armies to grab more land
It's true that "success" is a notoriously ambiguous term to define.
However, Dutch trade powered the Hapsburgs to amazing hights, especially
in comparison with the amounts of power Denmark holds today. Don't they
still have an orange parade in Ireland? Talk about a legacy. Likewise,
we know that much of America's strength relies on its historically
unprecedented world trade.
On the other hand, China was amazingly powerful _before_ they opened
their markets (think 1950s-1960s). Trade didn't seem to affect them
much at all. We can say the same of the Soviet Union in the 1930s:
they traded some with Germany--but not extravagantly. Mostly they
created the highest growth rate ever achieved before or since by
themselves.
However, these comparisons are not necessarily to the point since a
faction which owned no land can in no way be compared to a nation, since
all nations own land by definition. More to the point would be relative
power, in which case you might make comparisons of Morgan & Roosevelt,
for example, asking yourself who was more powerful. This is even more
difficult than defining success, & I know better than to wade into these
waters.
> The only way things would be historically correct would be for the
> castle holders to have some contrrol on the trade in their holdings at
> the moment there is none you can control all the cities but unles you
> prevent others trading in themn and you trade instead of them then you
> will only reap the taxes of your people, which is never enough.
If you want to mimic history--a silly proposition IMHO--than all you
need to do is do what the monarchs of history did: declare a tax in the
local paper & then designate a noble & a bunch of tuffs to go enforce
it. You may need a coast guard to catch dodgers, a massive army to
deter contempt of the law, & an easily cowered merchant class.
But to make the game itself tax the traders makes the traders into
commoners, & they're not, they're noble. & the only way to can tell a
noble what to do is by putting an elite guard on his head: as
historically is true.
best wishes,
Mark,
ABD