[Prodigy9]

This tax system is to stop people who are not active, from holding their realms.
Someone like you wouldn't face the brunt of this tax. As in the tax would only kick in if you were offline for a week or so.

Source?

[Agentred]

Intelli told me the closer realms are to spawn, the more tax would cost. He said realms at the border of the map might cost a few hundred credits. He also said you can put down credits if you are going to be inactive.

So, I could pay a lot in tax, and all my realm wouldn't disband for ages.

[Bonejunky]

I'm gonna sell all of my belongings so I don't have to deal with taxes. Live my Minecraft life as a true nomad, instead of one with a couple of properties.

[Prodigy9]

Intelli told me the closer realms are to spawn, the more tax would cost. He said realms at the border of the map might cost a few hundred credits. He also said you can put down credits if you are going to be inactive.

So, I could pay a lot in tax, and all my realm wouldn't disband for ages.

And how often is the tax assessed? Weekly, monthly?

[DrHetterscheidt]

I like the idea of realms being taxed after a couple weeks of inactivity. Maybe even if it started with realms closest to spawn and, once you ran out of credits, disbanded weekly or monthly one at a time going away from spawn.

[Emershaan]

Intelli told me the closer realms are to spawn, the more tax would cost. He said realms at the border of the map might cost a few hundred credits. He also said you can put down credits if you are going to be inactive.

So, I could pay a lot in tax, and all my realm wouldn't disband for ages.

Right now, this sounds to me like the taxes for any realms within a ten minute walk of spawn are going to be grotesque.

I have a moderate-sized (A dozen or so realms) lump of land at the very edge of the owned land around spawn city that I build, plant and maintain for myself and a friend of mine, and I want to continue being able to explore and build for enjoyment, as well as keep having a life outside minecraft, instead of carving out most of my time for digging public realms down to bedrock just to be able to keep what I've already earned.

And this is just me, in the middle class of the server here. People with larger land holdings are boned beyond belief unless they sell off most of their work, opening it up to regular griefings, and move all their assets into a storage realm a long way off from spawn.

If it's several hundred credits (per month, I presume) per each realm out near the very edge, and only gets more expensive closer in, that just sounds like too much to maintain a decent sized area without taking in a constant credit flow from large-scale slave labor. No more megabuilds, no more protected subways and highways. Enormous amounts more griefing means enormous amounts more work for the staff.

If realms are getting disbanded in huge numbers, that doesn't make the server look nice. It makes spawn city a gigantic mass of abandoned, griefed and looted ruins. However, if the tax were to be in the form of simply increasing the prices to buy more realms depending on how many are owned, then it would make people actually use their current land instead of buying more they don't need, without forcing them to devote their lives to endless strip mining. If I wanted to buy more on top of what I've got, I'd be fully willing to save up even several tens of thousands, because I can do that at a reasonable pace by playing the game normally.

tl;dr - Increasing /realm purchase prices good. Huge recurring fee on current property bad.

However, I would also be alright with a system that's based on inactivity time. Most people who sincerely care will log on and actually play regularly, but ones who just buy up all the land they can and pop in once a month should need to put in some real effort.

[DrHetterscheidt]

Increasing the amount of credits per additional realm would not solve the problem of people abandoning their realms and coming on once a month to not lose them.

[Emershaan]

Increasing the amount of credits per additional realm would not solve the problem of people abandoning their realms and coming on once a month to not lose them.

It wouldn't stop the current ones, but it'd stop more from happening. However, in that respect, a system based on inactivity time would be much better.

[Prodigy9]

I like the idea of realms being taxed after a couple weeks of inactivity. Maybe even if it started with realms closest to spawn and, once you ran out of credits, disbanded weekly or monthly one at a time going away from spawn.

That would be good. The credits from disbanding realms could be used to pay off tax for a while, giving the inactive player a somewhat generous window to come back without losing absolutely everything. Or, to narrow that window a bit and speed up the process of disbanding realms, the tax could increase gradually over time, so it's a slap on the wrist after a few weeks of inactivity, but a massive fee that forces the rapid disbanding of realms after a few months.

tl;dr - Increasing /realm purchase prices good. Huge recurring fee on current property bad.

As a matter of personal preference, I fully agree, although as Doc said and you just acknowledged, it wouldn't resolve issues that people have with realms that are already owned.



As I see it, the most objectionable part of any such tax is the recurring nature of it, and yet that's the part that makes it possible to free up realms owned by inactive players. Intelli, if you're reading this, please please PLEASE consider DrHetterscheidt's proposal. It would resolve the problem of realms being "tied up" by inactive / marginally-active players, while minimizing the burden on the highly-active players who are often among the server's top property owners.

[awydontucry]

I like the Inactivity Tax personally. That's what I vote even if there is no vote.