I'm against the cap system in general, but if there has to be one it should take your total economy into account. The same limit for a tiny galaxy with 5 habitable planets and a gigantic one with 400 is a bad idea. (And this applies to all kinds of reductions possible.)

I first got edified about the 20k cap when I posted to ask if you can have too many economic mines. I balked hard at the cap, but have since come to appreciate it somewhat as another aspect of the GCII system that's designed to keep you paying attention to details and re-thinking your strategies. Buying ships is certainly not the only result of wanting to avoid that "lost" income.

That said, I would not mind seeing the spending motivator changed to a morale penalty b/c that makes more narrative sense to me than the flat 20k. Re the micro-mgmt problems of spending, an option to Upgrade All Ships of This Type *in This Fleet* would really help reconcile the 20k cap with the "need" to upgrade large groups of ships without clicking ad naseum.

Re Brad, "business," and incremental budgeting, BP OMowe is correct that public/private sector is irrelvant. But things can be different if the organization is using zero-based budgeting (admittedly rare in business and not common in gov't).

ZBB has merit b/c it forces all units in an organization to re-justify their budgets annually, but it demands much more work than the much more common pattern that sees so many office workers being handed supply catalogs in the last month of a fiscal year and being told "just order stuff, we have too much money in account X."

Given what a hassle ZBB is IRL, I can only imagine that a good AI would need Octo-Core processors to handle it

Why not do something similar to Civ4

Civ4!!! oh how dissapointed i was after bying that game and tried to use my faithful ever so reliable artillery to bombard enemy units... You know, like your ALLOWED to in civ3. Complete dissaster.

As for the budget issue.... i think the cap should take into account what it costs to buy at least one dreadnaught with high end technology - about 60k

On the contrary. A company or goverment hoarding cash will suffer consequences,,be it stockholders demanding larger payouts or paxpayers demanding that the cash is spent on inprovements that while giving the citizens an easier life doesn't improve the goverment's income.

consequences are another thing (and would be the better solution as stated further below) - but RL govs. still don't have a cap (except maybe some floating point number overrun bug in accounting systems)
(but then i guess RL governments would be lucky to get a positive balance anyway - like clintons black zero !)

lets stick to game terms:

as a galactic ruler (you know stalin-style

i don't have stockholders ! (no, voters don't count - they are sheep like in rl)
my taxpayers in dictatorship gov. are only resources to be used as - btw. exactly as in the manual written - tax-base and soldiers !
and even going the nice republican route the player is the single entity in total control - and if making all planets approval does not prevent me to make zillions of credits then change the maint. cost of happiness-increasing-building.

The more reasonable way to place a limit on cash "hoarding" would be to use things like the good ol' SM civ used to have (as rockoon already mentioned) : corruption, management waste, population demands, and civil unrests if not met, not to mention a possible spy-op to reduce cash-levels
or the far better solution : a real competitive AI that challenges you to decide either to run debts to defend vs. annihilation or dying rich in the not so far future

An unimaginative hard coded cap is the solution of (i am forced to say : "Anfänger")
...Or at least make the cap just a 32bit number

iven what a hassle ZBB is IRL, I can only imagine that a good AI would need Octo-Core processors to handle it

Me thinks that an AI would be better handling ZBB, cause it has a simpler solution to get to a goal without "thinking" about past experience and past budgets - but in a strategic environment this could lead rather to erratic behaviour if the decision making process is done every turn.
Since iam not an ai-programmer i just post the question if AI could work like the chinese gov. : making a 5year plan and executing it ?

Huh? You realize that the cap is present in GC1, GC2 and will probably be in Dark Avatar as well, right? It's nothing new for the expansion.

don' know gc1 but in gc2 i could save my 6digits of BC to make an empire wide small upgrade to my small ships - and i fortunately didn't notice a cash cap that would prevent me from saving the required half million BC to get that upgrade - and i had to made several of this upgrades. (i did it while the fleet-cost-more-than-each-ship-upgrade-bug were still active)

But it would be new if its at 20k even 200k would be low - unless all the other costs would be reduced by orders of magnitudes !

If you like resource caps try space empires 5 - there is at least a reason why your resources have a cap : storage capacity for the resources (there is no money)

in gc2 i could save my 6digits of BC

If your experience was like mine, you probably spend *lots* of time paying the penalty but had such a strong economy that you didn't notice it.

It took me building a ludicrously large economy and then an industry base that could spend those ludicrous sums before I got to a point where the over-20k penalty actually put my income in the negative.

If your experience was like mine, you probably spend *lots* of time paying the penalty but had such a strong economy that you didn't notice it.

Exactly. The cap artificially reduces the tax income when your treasury is above 20K, but it doesn't prevent you to have more than 20K.

This penalty frustrates the bejesus out of me too. Especially when I have a mind control center, and hit the economic event that doubles my income. I even lower my tax rate until I am at 100% morale, but usually still generate 5-10 k or so profit.

What I would *like* to see, is not a penalty, but a spending overdrive when you hit this limit. Like, I'm always maxed out at 100% capacity, but if I adjust my sliders I can still get way more or less out of my production/research buildings. It would be nice if I just spent my money to get each of these stats at 100%. More realistically, separate my research and total social/military production to get 100% on each, since the research buildings and social buildings have nothing to do with each other (save the capitol/initial colony).

I do also like the point about the ship upgrading. I've seen quotes for my upgrades around 800,000 bc. So it's nearly impossible to buy outright. And I'm usually afraid to make one of those long term investments that I can afford per turn *now* because my economic event might end in the middle of it, completely bankrupting me.

I guess I can just micromanage more =\.

*planet list*
*sort by social production*
*scroll to bottom*
*click, buy*
*click, up*
*click, buy*
*click, up*
&&&1 hour passes&&&
*click, buy*
*click, up*
hooray, now on to the rest of my turn... uh.... what was I doing?

I've seen quotes for my upgrades around 800,000 bc.

Are you sure you didn't slip a decimal point here? Or are you talking about upgrading all your ships of a current type at once?

I've upgraded a bare huge hull with engines only to a BB with 5 BHE's, and 9 or 10 of each top line defense for about 35K each. I've upgraded the same hull w/engines to a BB with 16 BHE's and no defense for about 29K each.

If you're talking about upgrading all ships in a class at the same time, this can easily get into the millions of bc's. One thing that I do to make this easier is to have two identical versions of the ship I want to upgrade then alternate which one I'm building and which one I'm upgrading each turn. One turn I'll build hull_a while I'm upgrading hull_b then next turn I swap. That way I can upgrade all of one type of ship and I only build as many of them per turn that I know I'll be able to afford to upgrade. This eases the micro management a bit.

If you're talking about upgrading all ships in a class at the same time, this can easily get into the millions of bc's. One thing that I do to make this easier is to have two identical versions of the ship I want to upgrade then alternate which one I'm building and which one I'm upgrading each turn. One turn I'll build hull_a while I'm upgrading hull_b then next turn I swap. That way I can upgrade all of one type of ship and I only build as many of them per turn that I know I'll be able to afford to upgrade. This eases the micro management a bit.

I like this idea. I like it a lot. I'd have to change the way I use the governors, but that's pretty darned smart.

Click Turn... Rev from taxes is 201379. Allocated spending is 236148. Net income -26723. Curent Balance +22576 (yellow). Click Turn... Rev from taxes is 284149. Allocated spending is 63408. Net income +228896. Curent Balance -4130 (orange). Click Turn... Rev from taxes is 201412. Allocated spending is 236148. Net income -26686. Curent Balance +224789 (yellow).

Wait... hold up... those last few numbers don't make sense just eying it up. Your balance went down on a turn where your net income was tremendous. Who let the guy building the abacus smoke opium again?

have two identical versions of the ship I want to upgrade then alternate which one I'm building and which one I'm upgrading each turn. One turn I'll build hull_a while I'm upgrading hull_b then next turn I swap.

I agree that this is a smart workaround, but it's still a workaround. From time to time, ship upgrades top my list of "UI Things That Are Weak for Long Game Players." Other fleet & ship mgmt things are in the same neighborhood for me--IMO, the planet mgmt is getting too far ahead of the fleets in terms of UI improvments.

At least the Colonies page has a new weakness for DA: no info about environment status re the 50% and 100% enviro techs.

Which line? I typed it in right off the Domestic Policy screen.

Net income -26723. Curent Balance +22576 (yellow).

Which put me past the -500 bc production halt.

Rev from taxes is 284149.

Rev went up because of 0 production.

Rev from taxes is 201412.

This is where I am on the downword trend again.

I agree that this is a smart workaround, but it's still a workaround

Yes. It's still a workaround. Someone (and IIRC it might have been you GW) had requested the ability to upgrade all ships within a fleet at the same time. This would also help ease the micro management pain of spending money.

I mean, I don't really care for this arbitrary limit either, but I worry that if I complain too much, I might get something far worse. At the risk of putting ideas into peoples heads, I fear something like a massive progressive tax that ends up being 90% at high income levels just to punish those that can efficiently develop an economy. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Which line? I typed it in right off the Domestic Policy screen.

I think the confusion might be realizing when the balance that you're listing is occuring. I think you're saying that with a balance of
-4130, your revenue is 284149, spending is 63408 and income is 228896. Still doesn't quite add up but trade and tourism probably account for the difference.

I could be wrong but I think nova took it to mean, with a revenue of 284149, spending of 63408 and income of 228896 the resulting balance (i.e. next turn) was -4130.

with a revenue of 284149, spending of 63408 and income of 228896 the resulting balance (i.e. next turn) was -4130

Yeah... oops... now that i look at it again it seems right if that is your *current* balance.

Thank goodness for curves or I would have failed accounting... Just cuz I can do integral calculus doesn't mean I can add and subtract lawl

Well, I may be a minority here. Or not. Frankly, I don't care. This is the stupidest, most ludicrous thing I've ever heard of. Where is the logic where people suddenly produce less taxes just because you have money? There is none. Putting an artificial cap on the treasury is a control effect only, put in by developers to "stabilize" the ability for players with high incomes to rush build their ships. It's ludicrous. It's aggravating. And it is completely without merit. No civilization in history has ever allowed people to pay less taxes just because they had a little surplus in the treasury. That's the whole point of building an empire. If you don't have money sitting in the treasury ear-marked for emergency situations (like, maybe, recruiting new units), then you are a sitting duck for an aggressor who comes roaring to your territory, blasting away a mile a minute and conquering you all because you didn't have the money to get new defenses in place.
In short, for the first time since picking up GalCiv2 in the stores, I am disappointed and disgusted. A poor call on your part, devs. Very poor.

Where is the logic

I certainly appreciate the core scoff here, but assuming you are trying to bring in formal logic, "the logic" doesn't really apply b/c this is a game.

In the informal sense, "logic" basically means "whatever passes for the local rules," and for GCII the 20k cap is part of a pattern of design elements that appear aimed at keeping player attention focused on the economy for every turn. I'm part of the camp who think the cap should be scaled to map size, but I've been converted to accepting the general concept as wortwhile even though I don't love the exact implementation.

here is the logic where people suddenly produce less taxes just because you have money?

They aren't producing less money,,they are just willing to hand them over to YOU.

Putting an artificial cap on the treasury

Let's get this straight once and for all.
THERE IS NO 20k CAP!
Once your treasury exceeds 20k,,you get an income penalty but unlike the 80% taxes morale penalty,,this one is easy to live with.

If you don't have money sitting in the treasury /.../ you are a sitting duck for an aggressor who comes roaring to your territory, blasting away a mile a minute and conquering you all because you didn't have the money to get new defenses in place.

I think you need to learn a bit more about running an empire then.
Manufacturing planets are the best way of getting defences ready,,and the ONLY viable defences are either fleets intercepting and destroying the intruders or to launch a counter invasion thus depriving the enemy of the resources to wage war.

Once your treasury exceeds 20k,,you get an income penalty but unlike the 80% taxes morale penalty,,this one is easy to live with.

Maybe you should like... read the post from the OP who shows you when it can be difficult to deal with.

We know it's not a "cap"... it's the generally accepted way around this forum of saying "hard coded value" (since it's non-modifiable).

I think you need to learn a bit more about running an empire then.

While you're saying things like this and ALL-CAPSING YOUR POST, why don't you just jump up and down screaming "n00bie n00bie n00bie!!!" instead?

Maybe you should like... read the post from the OP who shows you when it can be difficult to deal with.

Hence I need to be more specific.
Unlike the 80% tax issue,,you are able to get in a position where the 20k penalty doesnt matter.
The biggest problem is that this "feature" is not documented in the manual nor show up ingame in any other way than the effect of it (income dropping by 29%).

While you're saying things like this and ALL-CAPSING YOUR POST, why don't you just jump up and down screaming "n00bie n00bie n00bie!!!" instead?

All Caps and empathizing certain parts isn't the same thing.
As for screaming "n00bie",,it's a good suggestion.
Alas,,I need to wear out my keyboard so I can replace it with a G15 without the feel of guilty for being wasteful,,so I use lot of words instead.
(Alternativly,,I could offer you the defence of offering advice on how to adapt and evolve,,but that would make me look less... dispecable and hence isn't and option.)

As for screaming "n00bie",,it's a good suggestion.

I certianly hope you are not pointing this in my direction.

I certianly hope you are not pointing this in my direction.

Actually,,the original lines were for eravenheart.
With less than 150m the house I live in to the sea,,I wouldn't want to offend a salt even if you are unable to find our Swedish subs

Seriously though,,I know better than that.
I just found eravenheart in need of a little polish,,and when nnullvfour jumped the train he caught a dash by the spoon.

I agree that the cap should go. For starters we don't have have an economic advisor. Also we shouldn't be forced to micromanage our economy so.