That's true, but considering you could place more useful things where those morale-boosting improvements are, the price you pay for that higher tax rate becomes too unappealing. The fact remains that it's there to keep people from setting the tax rate over %80.

Personally, I'd rather see a steady increase over the entire range of tax rates, that achieves the same basic result; and such seems to be the general consensus here.

The fact remains that it's there to keep people from setting the tax rate over %80.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that it was a good or viable tactic to go beyond 81%; merely that it was actually possible to do so and keep something vaguely resembling a healthy morale.

And it's big enough that it will drop all planets for any civ to 0. Even with all morale wonders and 3 morale resources maxed out, morale still drops to zero on every planet. Accept it.

Do you need me to send you a save game of a game of mine where I could hit 81% and still have 67% happiness? Maybe I'll throw up a screenshot when I get home.

I think the tax rate cap makes perfect sense people can tolerate things up to a point, if you push even a little past that point people get pissed. Also like someone said you can only shrink things so much but they probably should be a bit higher like 160% maybe I don't know. However ignuss stop flaming Marcathonas all he did was make a valid point there is no need for you to be such a prat he isn't a fanboi.

Edit: omg, I'm a thread necromancer Haha, I should have kept reading instead of having the overpowering desire to respond to that one post... especially considering that's *exactly* what happened last time. Well, my opinions are more expressed in this recent post, so I'll leave it as is if nobody minds.

And 100% taxes is stupid and unrealistic.

Actually, that's called Communism. I don't think its unfathomable that some sort of world-wide communal system of living couldn't be possible in this futuristic setting... they take 100% of what you make but then provide you with all the things you'd spend money on; free entertainment, free shopping (perhaps with a limit on what you can "spend", i.e. everyone has the same allowance), free food, etc. Its only unrealistic when you're stuck in the capitalistic mindframe.

I would like to see more government options with meaningful changes to gameplay, rather than just "improved" governments that are researched... as things stand there's no real reason one would ever stay as an imperium with the progressive bonuses of the other government types, especially since even as an imperium there's that 81% hardcap.

I agree with the original poster, the hardcaps are unnecessary and seem like an "easy" way to prevent the player from getting 100%. Now I'm not necessarily against hardcaps like that existing in the game, but I do feel like it should be according to your government, not universally applied.

100% stupid and unrealistic? Damn, how do you make screenshots in this game?!
I have achieved 100% several times, with the total approval of about 70-80%. Trust me, it's not impossible. Hard, yes. Impractical, yes. Ultimately unuseful, yes. But not impossible.
Hell, in the last few games alone, 81% taxes would produce about 20% approval. Just by accident.

*sigh*

Another necrothread. Do note that the first several posts are from MAY before replying, people.

Let's put it simply...

In the 'hive society' example there would be no taxes.

End of story.

Every person in the community would work for the government (because noone would have money, and therefore there would be no private corporations) and not be paid; they would have nothing to give back to the government, because the government would never give it to them. On the flipside, nothing would be bought or sold on an active market. There would be no revenue anywhere, and money would nominally be a non-issue.

The only thing people would get is food, shelter, and probably some median form of entertainment.

But things aren't actually that way in-game...

This is why there is a 'cap' at 80% taxes; any more than that and the economy would break down (without government intervention). The consumer would have very little to spend (regardless of the current cost of living), and therefore they would be extremely displeased that their efforts are for naught and they would be generally destitute given the level of technology; these fancy and advanced techs would not be widely available, and certainly never cheap. Again, the government would have to provide. Because GalCiv is extremely economy-centric, it's necessary to keep the illusion of the free market in place, along with the pros and cons of your taxerates on a society.

I always assume that the people are used to the 33% rate the game starts with, and this is why morale falls as you raise it. You're changing their lifestyle.

I agree with a previous poster about miniaturization, the cap is fine, but the fact that Yor never fully get their advantage's worth seems cheap. Being machines, they should have the greatest miniaturization of all the races. Though there should be an option to duplicate this with a cusom race.

I have no idea how a society could function when the government is sponging 80% of its subject's earnings.

Come live here in Sweden (or any other Nordic country).
Works just fine.
Everyone has mandatory health care, education and insurances.
Of course,,no one likes handing "the man" lots of sough,,so inventing ways of avoiding that is like a national sport here too