A teammate and I are in (peaceful) disagreement as to the effect that tax
rates have on the ease of camp placement.
I maintain that lower tax rates increase the odds of successful camp
placement.
My opinion is based on an old article in GSI's "Whisper of the Woods"
magazine and subsequent articles on their website. I took this advise as
"gospel" and have always done well with a tax rate of 40 to 39%. I have no
statistical data of my own. It just seems to work well.
My teammate (who plays well and whose opinion I value) states that his
observations and studies show no direct correlation between tax rates of 59
to 60% and success (or lack there of) in the placing of camps.
What I am interested in here, is if anyone has some evidence to support
either argument. In this case, having an opinion based on game play or by
reading the same old articles I read will not settle the dispute. I would
point out, that on more than one occasion, "game lore " that I believed
turned out to be false
Jim
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I suspect that you've built on sand, and that it is in fact your team mate who is correct. I suspect that the original writer was trying to explain that "getting a lot of camps down early in the game" will be more easily achieved if you have a low tax rate. But that's not quite the same as saying the low tax makes camp PLACEMENT easier. The low tax means that your iffy, newly planted camps with loyalty hovering around 20 will not have their loyalty chipped down by a point or two each turn, and thus you'll keep them. So the low tax helps not in placement but in RETAINMENT of your new camps. It's a common goal to try "to have your cake and eat it" by whacking the tax up early, then planting some camps, then dropping the tax again, so that they get a loyalty boost. It tends not to be that simple in practice.
A teammate and I are in (peaceful) disagreement as to the effect that tax
rates have on the ease of camp placement.
I maintain that lower tax rates increase the odds of successful camp
placement.
My opinion is based on an old article in GSI's "Whisper of the Woods"
magazine and subsequent articles on their website. I took this advise as
"gospel" and have always done well with a tax rate of 40 to 39%. I have no
statistical data of my own. It just seems to work well.
Tax rate has the greatest effect on how long the
loyalty of a camp will stay up. Higher taxes, lower
loyalties and the shorter life a camp has. The
biggest effect on camp placement is the skill level of
the emissary or commander.
>A teammate and I are in (peaceful) disagreement as
to the effect that tax
>rates have on the ease of camp placement.
>
>I maintain that lower tax rates increase the odds
of successful camp
>placement.
>My opinion is based on an old article in GSI's
"Whisper of the Woods"
>magazine and subsequent articles on their website.
I took this advise as
>"gospel" and have always done well with a tax rate
of 40 to 39%. I have no
>statistical data of my own. It just seems to work
well.
I suspect that you've built on sand, and that it is
in fact your team mate
who is correct. I suspect that the original writer
was trying to explain
that "getting a lot of camps down early in the game"
will be more easily
achieved if you have a low tax rate. But that's not
quite the same as
saying the low tax makes camp PLACEMENT easier. The
low tax means that
your iffy, newly planted camps with loyalty hovering
around 20 will not
have their loyalty chipped down by a point or two
each turn, and thus
you'll keep them. So the low tax helps not in
placement but in RETAINMENT
of your new camps. It's a common goal to try "to
have your cake and eat
it" by whacking the tax up early, then planting some
camps, then dropping
the tax again, so that they get a loyalty boost. It
tends not to be that
simple in practice.
