Announcement

**Deathwalker** · October 16, 2000, 04:44

Good idea

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

**Evil Capitalist** · October 16, 2000, 07:08

That would be very useful in scenarios, but I can see one flaw- the major powers are all important domestic arms producers anyway.

**Slax** · October 16, 2000, 09:54

Yes, Evil, I think this would tend to make small civs weaker, and large civs stronger.

**Roman** · October 16, 2000, 11:13

Just what I was thinking about... It's a very good idea.

**Dom Pedro II** · October 16, 2000, 14:05

Its a fact of life. However, I don't think it should be part of the market system. If this market system is based on trade routes going from city to city between civs, armament should not be a part of it. There should simply be a market where you can sell a unit and another civ can buy it. No exportation. There are online civ-like games that already have such a system.

And I don't think it would make the bigger more powerful. On the contrary, it would allow the smaller (yet richer) civs to buy units without the hassel of production. (Of course, I think all units should be bought even when cities are producing them).

------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu

Dom Pedro II.... aka Hannibal3

**Adm.Naismith** · October 16, 2000, 17:37

It's an idea already proposed many times; use the search to find more about it.
I remember I suggested to solve the problem of units trade with a twist: sell city production, instead.

If a civ need help building a unit (or city building, or a wonder), he can ask for a certain amount of shield per turn per category (he must said if it will use shield to build armies, buildings/civil units or wonders). The two civ must agree on a payment per shield due every turn, for a time period or a total amount of shields, from a city to another city.

It will look as a kind of "capitalization" of shield in source city (with better return), while it will be added in target city like supply unit income in SMAC.

It will solve the logistics of units ferry, because the unit will be produced on target city, simulating the most common weapons trade: selling some parts, letting the final assembly and production to be done locally.

It will work without too many change to current Civ model: not bad for Firaxis developers

Comments and improvement to this suggestion are welcommed.

**Shogun Gunner** · October 16, 2000, 23:04

If Civ III can handle more civilizations at once (I'm thinking twenty+) then arms exporting would be very interesting. In a seven (or less) country game it would not be as interesting.

Imagine coupling arms export with smarter AI and cool negotiations!!!

Think North Korea (leverage money or trade by giving up weapons), breakup of Soviet Union (arms all over the place), Switzerland (optimizing money, not military).

If Civ III could be developed in such a way that not every country was heading the same way (build bigger and more powerful with the same things) then it will be a more interesting game.

**Shogun Gunner** · October 16, 2000, 23:08

quote:

Originally posted by Dom Pedro II on 10-16-2000 02:05 PM

And I don't think it would make the bigger more powerful. On the contrary, it would allow the smaller (yet richer) civs to buy units without the hassel of production. (Of course, I think all units should be bought even when cities are producing them).

I would agree...it would seem to level the playing field and give the smaller countries an opportunity in escaping the crushing power of "Economies of scale"

This would also seem to neutralize science advancement. No big deal if you don't have mobile warfare, just buy some tanks from Argentina.

**rremus** · October 17, 2000, 02:47

It should be usefull in order to defend less advanced civ's. They don't have the technology to create superior armament, so they buy it in order deal with another, more advanced, civ.
Also, it can be important in order to protect your allies Now you can only offer then units as gift, not very tempting...

**UltraSonix** · October 17, 2000, 04:35

quote:

You should be able to sell/buy units. They should be extremely profitable for the seller

I'm sure I've mentioned this before! But adm.smith's point above is also valid - maybe buying shields is better...

As to:

quote:

magine coupling arms export with smarter AI and cool negotiations!!!

The problem with this is that it'll never happen. We've raged over this before, and I just don't think it can be done...

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...

**Shogun Gunner** · October 17, 2000, 23:03

quote:

Originally posted by UltraSonix on 10-17-2000 04:35 AM

As to:

magine coupling arms export with smarter AI and cool negotiations!!!

The problem with this is that it'll never happen. We've raged over this before, and I just don't think it can be done...

**Shaka Zulu** · October 18, 2000, 03:55

I'm very pro the idea of the small civs to catch up to the larger civs in terms of technology. (perhaps when a large civ makes an advance obsolete, then if a civ hasn't reseached the obsolete advance, it should be automatically given to them) This is at the very least, of course. I don't think any civ should be more than 5 techs ahead of second place.

The way the larger civs can maintain their advantage over the less developed nations could be (unlike technology) the fact that they have made economies of scale with particular goods, and products do not require as many shields over time.

Also, civs that have been producing a product for a long time, should be the dominate force in production of that good. eg. Boeing for USA. And other civs will rely on buying products from that nation, because it is much cheaper for them to do so than producing it themselves. ie., trading networks.

**rremus** · October 18, 2000, 04:06

quote:

Originally posted by Shaka Zulu on 10-18-2000 03:55 AM
And other civs will rely on buying products from that nation, because it is much cheaper for them to do so than producing it themselves.

That's definetly a good ideea! Of course, as much you produce something, the cheaper it should get to produce it! This is how economy works, your workers gain more experience, specialisation occurs.

**Dom Pedro II** · October 18, 2000, 16:18

quote:

That's definetly a good ideea! Of course, as much you produce something, the cheaper it should get to produce it! This is how economy works, your workers gain more experience, specialisation occurs.

Well, what may be even better would be to base it on how much it cost to construct the unit. In other words, if a city has a production rate that is very high, the unit you produce should cost less on the open market allowing you to undersell opponents. It has been true all throughout history that the country that has the highest industry can sell their products for cheaper.

Of course the problem with this means that you can't just sell it and let someone else buy X number of the units available to buy. You'd have to buy that particular unit from that city.... okay, that may be too complicated. If anybody has a reasonable way of taking manufacturing into account without too much complexity, I'm all ears.

I think the simplest thing to do is just have a sort of open market where a civilization sells the unit to the market not to another civ. Then another civilization can buy a certain number of a unit. They won't necessarily get THE unit the other civ produced. The Earth: 2025 game has this, and I think it works quite nicely.

Announcement

Commerce with armament

Commerce with armament

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment