Tile Upkeep? WAT

[Nero1024]

Who the hell thought it's a good idea to add this? How is this realistic? Does in real life anyone pay to upkeep unused land?

[Chief Kay Strongbow]

Uhh, yes, property taxes exist irl.

[🐺Blue Wolf]

If you aren't against using mods, 529 tile mod is pretty much a must to play the game now. You can set the upkeep cost to 0% while still being able to unlock the tiles.

Originally posted by Chief Kay Strongbow:

Uhh, yes, property taxes exist irl.

Tile upkeep is nothing at all similar to property taxes irl.

[Chief Kay Strongbow]

no ♥♥♥♥, doesn't mean there is no realistic example of pay to upkeep land

[dulany67]

Originally posted by 🐻 Veles:

Tile upkeep is nothing at all similar to property taxes irl.

However land does have to be maintained. And if the land was seized by emminent domaine, it still needs to be paid for and given the size of a tile, a city would have to issue bonds to pay for it which also incurs costs.

[🐺Blue Wolf]

Originally posted by Chief Kay Strongbow:

no ♥♥♥♥, doesn't mean there is no realistic example of pay to upkeep land

Then what are the realistic examples?

Originally posted by dulany67:

Originally posted by 🐻 Veles:

Tile upkeep is nothing at all similar to property taxes irl.

However land does have to be maintained. And if the land was seized by emminent domaine, it still needs to be paid for and given the size of a tile, a city would have to issue bonds to pay for it which also incurs costs.

Seeing as the upkeep costs go up the more you buy, it seems beyond ridiculous that water tiles (with no land) could bankrupt a city later in the game, just to get a harbour or access to perhaps an island.

The high costs for tile upkeep also don't justify any minimal maintenance costs...also why not charge the fee on the starting tiles which also have to be maintained?
If I have a service building that services said land, perhaps the cost of those should go up instead.

Even if C/O decides to keep upkeep costs, there is zero chance it remains as-is with the costs. It completely destroys the idea of sprawling cities, or expanding to the edge to bring in rail, new highways or pipes.

[dulany67]

And how far have you gotten on this patch? Because the further you go, the less the upkeep becomes a real factor. Also. a piece of land with a natural harbor or water views would be even more expensive to purchase.

[🐺Blue Wolf]

I turned tile upkeep off as it's an anti-fun game-y mechanic that has no basis in reality for a city builder.

I would agree that PURCHASING certain tiles (perhaps water and land ones) could cost more. Maintaining them? Absolutely not.

Also purchasing tiles with only water on them to access shipping, should then in turn cost nothing since there is nothing on them to maintain.

[***Astera***]

You should be patient, the patch clearly needs a little bit more re-balancing but it's a huuuuuge improvement. I understand why they did it. It was a balancing thing to make the game just a bit more challenging. I think it needs re balancing though, There is hardly any fertile land/forest on normal vanilla maps. But if you use a custom map the upkeep is way too high just because all of the land is fertile or there are a lot of trees or something. It does really seem like an anti-fun mechanic currently. Then again it adds challenge so I don't know that I want it completely gone.

I'd personally really like to see it just reduced, by like 25% across the board and re-balance them so resources don't have such a big impact. (maybe more like just buildable area could be the main factor. Or something like that. If they ever add difficulty the upkeep could maybe scale appropriately.

[dulany67]

Originally posted by 🐻 Veles:

Originally posted by Chief Kay Strongbow:

no ♥♥♥♥, doesn't mean there is no realistic example of pay to upkeep land

Then what are the realistic examples?

Originally posted by dulany67:

However land does have to be maintained. And if the land was seized by emminent domaine, it still needs to be paid for and given the size of a tile, a city would have to issue bonds to pay for it which also incurs costs.

Seeing as the upkeep costs go up the more you buy, it seems beyond ridiculous that water tiles (with no land) could bankrupt a city later in the game, just to get a harbour or access to perhaps an island.

The high costs for tile upkeep also don't justify any minimal maintenance costs...also why not charge the fee on the starting tiles which also have to be maintained?
If I have a service building that services said land, perhaps the cost of those should go up instead.

Even if C/O decides to keep upkeep costs, there is zero chance it remains as-is with the costs. It completely destroys the idea of sprawling cities, or expanding to the edge to bring in rail, new highways or pipes.

Again though, to purchase the land they would issue bonds and have to service them. It's an abstraction. Also, waterways do have to be maintained, depending on the depth and possibility of the waterway jumping its banks during flooding. Use of a waterway would also require dealing with the EPA and ecological impact.

Or it could be a simple mechanic to balance their economy. Who knows?

[john.glossop]

Originally posted by 🐻 Veles:

If you aren't against using mods, 529 tile mod is pretty much a must to play the game now. You can set the upkeep cost to 0% while still being able to unlock the tiles.

Originally posted by Chief Kay Strongbow:

Uhh, yes, property taxes exist irl.

Tile upkeep is nothing at all similar to property taxes irl.

[john.glossop]

I think you could all (well most of you) could do with a lesson on land taxes.
Yes, I understand that you aren't finding them easy, and you think that they are in error, but in fairness, they do have a real life equivalent.
For those of you who want to understand just what is the basis for this tax from real life, you'll find a primer on what it is, and why it is used here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
II'm not going to even try to argue whether the CO version of Land Tax is in any way a true reflection of how it operates in a real economy, but would rather pint out that this is a game - not a simulation of real life, no matter how many of us appear to want it to be so.
Why was it implemented? Well, I'd guess that it was included in the Economy patch because so many players , when polled, actually asked for more realistic economy, and this was one of the items that they COULD model in a relatively straight forward manner, and so they did it.
Another is the cost levied for some assets, such as hospitals.
Health care is an ever-increasing impost on the community, partly due to the shortage of qualified medical practitioners, partly due to the cost of developing new pharmaceuticals, partly due to the current litigious attitudes of so many of our communities, and partly because of the cost of acquiring and maintaining a whole range of state-of-the-art equipment. There are many other reasons, but that should be enough to be going on with.
And it doesn’t matter whether health is a public or private concern – the costs still have to be met by the community, either from the private, or the pubic, purse.
And hospitals aren’t alone in their costs. Many human endeavours are, in individual terms, expensive, and that is why the community shares the cost. Just think yourself lucky that CO hasn’t decided that our cities should have modern armed forces, because then you’d know just how like water out of a hosepipe, the expenditure that the military can generate for the commuint that it is protecting.

[john.glossop]

In my last post, a link was automatically removed. The article that it was pointing to was in Wkipedia, and was titled "Land Value Tax", for anyone who is interested.

[peterslee9]

Originally posted by john.glossop:

article

[peterslee9]

Originally posted by Nero1024:

Who the hell...

Everyone handled their own in game economy finances in CS.
Be it hard mode, standard, unlimited money, with or without mods or at any level.
Rarely any financial discussions needed.
CSII, although impressively expanded, is no different.

If they cannot grasp it, in/out, eco of scale, etc.
not only is it that maybe the game isn't for them.
Moreover,
they really should not be a Mayor.

No one should be assisting anyone in balancing another's budget
in relation to how they chose to build their regions.
This is not Merrill Lynch or Barclays.

In the end, this WILL BE on you.
And only you.


https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3280682933
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/economy-2-0-dev-diary-1.1682626/
https://www.paradoxinteractive.com/games/cities-skylines-ii/news/dev-diary-economy-part-two [/quote]

[john.glossop]

Originally posted by peterslee9:

Originally posted by Nero1024:

Who the hell...