The topic of how citizens will react the their regime is an interesting one. I suspect that the main barrier for people fleeing to greener pastures will not be the difficulty of travel, but rather the fact that they'd have to leave everything behind.

With regards to medieval Europe, everything I've read seems to indicate that taxes were far lower than they are in modern times. In many places, nobles didn't pay taxes at all and the revenue just came from peasants and landowners. However, taxes would swell during times of war.

About the US, aren't many of the states with the highest taxes also very populous ones (for example, California)? I'm not sure taxes as are the best indication of an oppressive regime in the modern world. Then again, I can't see what other forms of oppression rulers might use in CoE.

Posted By MReal at 6:04 PM - Tue May 02 2017

Then again, I can't see what other forms of oppression rulers might use in CoE.

Mandatory military service and road tolls come to mind

Posted By Huntsmaster at 9:12 PM - Tue May 02 2017

Posted By MReal at 6:04 PM - Tue May 02 2017

Then again, I can't see what other forms of oppression rulers might use in CoE.

Mandatory military service and road tolls come to mind

Ah, good examples. I have a feeling we may see quite a bit of "encouragement" of military service.

California remains the most populous state, however the population outflow has grown to match the inflow. It's facing the prospect of null growth in census and apportionment for the first time.

You may have a case that Western Blue states aren't in the same shape as Eastern Blue states, but after factoring in an E-->W migration baseline, the general dynamic of Blue-->Red is large and unmistakable.

I would be curious if your appraisal of 'low taxes' in Medieval times takes into account the standard of living of those taxed. I wouldn't be surprised if general population incomes qualified for what we call 'Deep Poverty' by today's standards, and those low taxes really weren't so low considering.... Admittedly, I am no expert.

Re: Other forms of oppression...any rulers interested in some ideas, please PM me! :P

I'm not so sure we can call mandatory military service 'oppression.' For a despot, that's arming your potential opponents. Quite the strategic error.

Boris Y: 'You can build a throne of bayonettes, but you can't sit on it for long....'

Posted By Ecir_Edyah at 9:22 PM - Tue May 02 2017

California remains the most populous state, however the population outflow has grown to match the inflow. It's facing the prospect of null growth in census and apportionment for the first time.

You may have a case that Western Blue states aren't in the same shape as Eastern Blue states, but after factoring in an E-->W migration baseline, the general dynamic of Blue-->Red is large and unmistakable.

I would be curious if your appraisal of 'low taxes' in Medieval times takes into account the standard of living of those taxed. I wouldn't be surprised if general population incomes qualified for what we call 'Deep Poverty' by today's standards, and those low taxes really weren't so low considering.... Admittedly, I am no expert.

Re: Other forms of oppression...any rulers interested in some ideas, please PM me! :P

Unfortunately I can't post links, but if you Google "medieval taxes" one of the first results is an article referencing a study on taxes in Sweden between 1320 and 1550. Before 1363, the average peasant was only paying the equivalent of 2% of their farm's value in taxes, or 32 grams of silver. Also, most of the taxes were not in cash but commodities. However, the taxes jumped dramatically after a regime change. It also mentions taxes in England were equivalent to just 10 grams of silver in the 1370s.

Most medieval "states" were extremely decentralized compared to the modern world. Local power was far more significant, nobles had huge pull on the crown and were legitimate threats. The states didn't do much infrastructure building and things that we would consider social services (health care, education, caring for poor & disabled) were handled by the church. The king mainly handled external threats. The oppression of these times wasn't mainly due to government but rather economics and social structures (although it could be argued that the church was basically a government).

As for migration in the US, forgive my ignorance as I'm not an American myself (which might actually explain differences in views on taxes). Isn't it the case though that the blue states have most of the population? If so, wouldn't that mean that migration would tend to go blue->red just due to simple statistics?

That Boris Yeltsen quote is great by the way, never heard it before. (Edit: damn autocorrect changed "Boris" to "Boring")

I don't think anyone can be truly ready for a medieval elyria but what I do think will influence the secondary wave of players coming into the fold (primary being day 1 and backers) is the amount of freedom one provides. Naturally people are going to gravitate towards places that don't inhibit their playstyle. Another factor to worry about is how much people there are in a city or town. I feel a lot of people are going to try and strike the wilderness with smaller groups. I could be wrong about that however.

Posted By Ecir_Edyah at

How plentiful and affordable will mounts be? How free will the market for mounts really be in the first place?

I can answer that question, at least for me personally, I plan to be a breeder and tamer, as such, I will be breeding mounts, pets, companions, and pack animals for as long as my line lasts, I also plan on being fair to any customers I have, weather it will be renting a mount to get to one town to buy something really important that you need, and then returning the mount to me at a later date (via contract), or if you buy the mount outright, depending on the type of mount and how difficult it is to tame and breed, I may ask a premium, or if it's just a simple horse (not a purebred), I could ask a low price because while I do value my animals, I am not greedy or unwilling to help those who may need it.

Posted By MReal at 9:09 PM - Tue May 02 2017

Unfortunately I can't post links, but if you Google "medieval taxes" one of the first results is an article referencing a study on taxes in Sweden between 1320 and 1550. Before 1363, the average peasant was only paying the equivalent of 2% of their farm's value in taxes, or 32 grams of silver. Also, most of the taxes were not in cash but commodities. However, the taxes jumped dramatically after a regime change. It also mentions taxes in England were equivalent to just 10 grams of silver in the 1370s.

Most medieval "states" were extremely decentralized compared to the modern world. Local power was far more significant, nobles had huge pull on the crown and were legitimate threats. The states didn't do much infrastructure building and things that we would consider social services (health care, education, caring for poor & disabled) were handled by the church. The king mainly handled external threats. The oppression of these times wasn't mainly due to government but rather economics and social structures (although it could be argued that the church was basically a government).

As for migration in the US, forgive my ignorance as I'm not an American myself (which might actually explain differences in views on taxes). Isn't it the case though that the blue states have most of the population? If so, wouldn't that mean that migration would tend to go blue->red just due to simple statistics?

That Boris Yeltsen quote is great by the way, never heard it before. (Edit: damn autocorrect changed "Boris" to "Boring")

Freakin' awesome post as usual, MReal.

2% value on a farm has a pretty contemporary corollary to modern state property tax. (The house I just bought will rack up about 2% per year I owe my great state.)

I wonder if perhaps the Romans had a rougher tax burden due to the infrastructure advances? (Not to mention an army that rarely got bored.)

In both cases, tax collectors weren't reliably 'exact,' they had little motive to be...so long as they passed what was expected up the chain, nobles wouldn't begrudge them keeping the overages.

I agree completely we should include Church as government institution & income.

Re: the US, it's probably more accurate to say Blue states have the greater population density. There's fewer of them, but they constitute about 40% the population anyway.

Not sure I understand your question, but if I'm reading it right you're suggesting Blue states recede population due to reaching a saturation point of population density. That could theoretically explain California's plateau at a blushing glance, but not actual population loss of the Northeast. That's not saturation point of population density, it's a regression of it. Did I completely misunderstand your question? A particular statistic suggesting a causality?

Boris was a trip. If you get a chance, read the memoirs of Michael Gorbachev...put a whole new light on Russia's first democratic president! Yikes! (I have Boris' book, too...but I haven't finished it yet.)

Posted By Mahrin at 9:27 PM - Tue May 02 2017

[About Threats At The Border] I have seen the interviews with the kings/queens online on "Better Know A King" [1]. I like most of their stances politically. I think that it is possible to maintain their political stance and still protect the people of their territory... to a point. neutrality does not always mean they will allow themselves to be pushed over if you harass their people. hopefully, the hard-working citizens of the kingdom will be prepared and strong in their own right. Just as in the medieval days, sometimes, you'd have to take the law into your own hands. In times of peace a humble farmer, in times of war a cunning soldier.

[On Economics And Economic Warfare] I'd assume that travel will be key to economic success for you and your kingdom; however, overall production of craft goods -in my opinion- would be more valuable than travel in general, because foreigners could travel to you for goods (at a reduced cost to cover travel and protection), but the larger your scale of production the bigger a target you become to outlying lands or thieves that may have fallen on hard times (see: About Threats At The Border).

[In the beginning] From what I have seen and heard of the budding Kings/Queens, I don't think that tyranny from your governors or national war will be the prevalent issue in the beginning. There are thieves and assassins guilds already sprouting up that will threaten your success from within. That is not even mentioning the vampires that maybe hiding in your midst. ultimately, I don't think people will rebel against the nobles in the beginning. I think that much stress will be put onto the land's rulership, when they have to raise the defence budget (and as a result raise your taxes). When the people grow uncomfortable with that, you wind up with two things 1) they flee for greener pastures or 2) they overthrow the king.

Citation:

Youtube, (Better Know A King) DM21 Gaming, Bicycle Walrus. (wont let me post url's. SO, NO LINK FOR YOU!) lol.

I think you may be right on all counts, Mahrin. If enough people share a common vision, they can make it happen and live the dream. There will be plenty of aggressors to make 'em earn it, though...maybe enough to where martial concerns take up more of the game than most wished for. That's sandbox!

I liked the BW interviews too. I only caught 3 of the "Better Know A King," were there more that I missed?

Posted By Personman00 at 9:39 PM - Tue May 02 2017

I don't think anyone can be truly ready for a medieval elyria but what I do think will influence the secondary wave of players coming into the fold (primary being day 1 and backers) is the amount of freedom one provides. Naturally people are going to gravitate towards places that don't inhibit their playstyle. Another factor to worry about is how much people there are in a city or town. I feel a lot of people are going to try and strike the wilderness with smaller groups. I could be wrong about that however.

I'd bet your right. There will be no shortage of players anxious to escape the clique-ish stench of the major urban centers. Opportunity will call out to the industrious who want to do it their own way.

It's the 'barbarian' element that's the real X-factor of it all...

Posted By Rokatsa at 9:41 PM - Tue May 02 2017

I can answer that question, at least for me personally, I plan to be a breeder and tamer, as such, I will be breeding mounts, pets, companions, and pack animals for as long as my line lasts, I also plan on being fair to any customers I have, weather it will be renting a mount to get to one town to buy something really important that you need, and then returning the mount to me at a later date (via contract), or if you buy the mount outright, depending on the type of mount and how difficult it is to tame and breed, I may ask a premium, or if it's just a simple horse (not a purebred), I could ask a low price because while I do value my animals, I am not greedy or unwilling to help those who may need it.

Good on ya, Rokatsa!

Let me ask, though---what happens if your Baron, Count, Duke, or King comes to you and says, "You'll sell your stock to us--and only us. It's the new law. We're the new wholesaler, and we'll decide who needs mounts." Do you oblige? Do you rebel? Do you roll with the punches and secretly sell a few on the black market? Do you funnel some to the Resistance? Or do you make a desperate cattle drive across the border to freer lands? Or just pack up your family and flee counting yourself lucky?

Or does it all depend on what price the "central planning" nobles offer you?

P.S. I've visited the Animal Husbandry Association website--you guys rock. I'm really tempted to join the profession....

If someone tells me I can't do something with something I made by myself, I either tell them to go away, or I do things under the table. I don't think it'll come to that in my home county though, the king seems pretty levelheaded, and the county I plan to be part of is also level headed...I could also forgo anything like that and just keep my county instead of trading it like I planned, and therefore make my own laws on the sale of my animals. Likely won't do that, but the option is there until it's not.

Edit: My sig should also contain the kingdom, duchy, county, and guild I'm part of, but it seems to be getting cut off...

Kingdom of Bordweall (NA-E) | Grand Duchy of Caeruleum | County of Shade | Guild: Marskirs Breeding Company