Shouldn't commercial allow for cheaper commerce-based improvements?

[David Murray]

Religious = cheaper religious-based improvements
Scientific = cheaper scientific improvements
Agricultural = cheaper agricultural improvements
Seafaring = cheaper sea-based improvements
Militaristic = cheaper military buildings

Commercial = all improvements have standard cost

What was the reasoning for this? Why doesn't commercial allow for cheaper marketplaces, banks and stock exchanges (as well as making Adam Smith's cheaper)? We all talk about commercial being dubious in the ancient age. Well, reducing the cost of marketplaces would help to make commercial civs seriously rich in the early part of the game.

Does anyone else agree? Or are commercial improvements already cheaper and I just haven't noticed?

[vmxa1]

Marketplaces or banks should be enough.

[Theseus]

Commercial civs should have more gold overall, yes? And thus are able to afford all improvements more easily.

(But I had the same thought too, back when.)

[asleepathewheel]

what about expansionists getting cheaper grainaries?

[Kuciwalker]

No, I'd say that pretty definately falls under Agricultural.

I think Commercial should get cheaper Marketplaces, at least. That alone would be a nice boost.

[Caesar2760]

I don't think that Expansionistic should get cheaper Granaries; that is agricultural. Cheaper Courthouses, though, that would make sense and perhaps the Forbidden Palace would be nice too. As to Commercial, I would think cheaper Marketplaces, Banks, and Stock Exchanges would be a nice touch. Perhaps Commerical Harbors, as well.

[asleepathewheel]

at cheaper courthouses. that would be a useful addition [sarcasm]

I see how you would think cheaper graineries=ag, but cheaper graineries=faster growth=greater expansion, imho.

[Kuciwalker]

Expansionist doesn't really need a boost, but cheaper Courthouses (and maybe Police Stations) couldn't hurt.

I just had an idea - why not cheaper Aqueducts (and maybe Hospitals)? Cheaper Aqueducts = more growth = expansion, and it lets us leave Granaries as Agricultural.

Oh, and I think "Commercial Docks" should probably be Commercial

[ErikM]

Expansionists are easy - they should get cheaper settlers . Either in shields or food or both. Isn't it pretty much the definition what (non-militaristic) expansionism is all about?

And I'd rather give scouts to militarists.

If commercial worked as advertised - ie reduced corruption - that would be #1 trait. As it stands now, it's kinda silly: it helps large, far-flung empires a little bit. But if you have managed to create such an empire, you obviously don't need any extra help

[Kuciwalker]

Cheaper settlers isn't possible.

[Guynemer]

Perhaps Ind = cheaper factories/power plants/Hoover? Much later in the game than the other traits, but that is cushioned by the increased worker rate.

[Guynemer]

In fact, has anyone ever considered making all wonders cheaper for those civs that share that wonder's traits? If a wonder is com/ind, a exp/ind civ could build it for 25% cheaper, and a com/ind civ could build it for 50% cheaper?

[Kuciwalker]

That is also impossible.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Perhaps Ind = cheaper factories/power plants/Hoover? Much later in the game than the other traits, but that is cushioned by the increased worker rate.

Industrious doesn't need a boost.

[The Mad Monk]

I don't think we're discussing what is possible versus impossible, since it is equally evident that we cannot change the traits, but they can with a patch.

That said, half-rate buildings and wonders of the appropriate type makes perfect sense to me.