The Trade Model

[Shadowstrike]

Lately, I've been playing CTP2 quite a bit, and I've got to say that I'm impressed with some of its features. The trade model for one.

Civ2 uses a method involving getting caravans into distant cities. Not too realistic by any means but it was effective enough for Civ2. CTP2 uses a differnet approach. It puts every caravan unit produced in a "pool", and you can establish trade routes by using up a number of caravans and sending a "good" (more like a terrain special) from a city you control to another city. The longer the distance, the more caravans are used. The profit is calculated from a formulae which incorperates the distance of the destination, the size and who controls it.

While CTP2 does use a more realistic, and more effective system, it is far from perfect. Small tweaks, such as allowing the sending more caravans for extra profit (since they can carry more) and conversely less for less profit (when the caravans are not readily availible).

Your thoughts on this?

------------------
*grumbles about work*

"Where hope has no champion, evil reigns supreme." - Magic the Gathering
"Peace and Prosperity through Democracy" - UAS Motto
"And thus begins Ragnarok, the end of all things..." - Starchild & YYYH

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, I think its a good system. It was a bit difficult to manage though. It gets a little screwy at times. I would prefer to have it so that the financial return is determined by the type of commodity and its rarity (i.e. how many people currently sell it).

To import, you would have to actually pay out of your pocket. And then you can use the raw materials you import to build units or increase luxuries, or to use the materials to manufacture other commodities that can be exported later or used to build units, etc.

I've said this many times over. Read my other posts.

[Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto]

I have not played CTP2 yet, but it sounds like a good system, could you explain it a little more to me?

[Grumbold]

The biggest flaw in the CtP2 method was that the caravan 'cost' of transporting goods seemed only dependent on distance and took no account of the ability of road, rail or air transport to affect it. The routes chosen are frankly ludicrous, make no effort to stay away from hostile powers and cannot be set by the user, either.

[Pangaea]

Yes, I never understood why my sugar from London to New York would go through Beijing?

the Chinese would be like "thanks for the Sugar, yankee"

heh

Also, as you get more advanced, you change from sending sugar and spices to sending cars, and electronics, and the more "luxury items" and such your city aquires, the happier the people are....

Also, maybe have trade depot tiles, where all the good for a certain area can be dropped off/picked up, and dispersed to cities in the surrounding area (like the warehouse) because to get, for example, Belgian Chocoalte from Belgium, you wouldn't need to make a trade route with every city you want to sent it to.... you send it to a distributor, and they get it out.

just my two cents, but at the way the US-Canadian exchange is, is worth about 1 cent

------------------
-=Pangaea=-
31291353

[Shadowstrike]

Those are some good ideas. The advancement of goods as time passes.

However, the inclusion of goods as something you must manage to buy and sell as well as make will make the game much more complex. For one thing, micromanagement would go through the roof. Consider that eve if a simple system is implemented, one where iron could be imported, and converted to cars in an Automobile Factory (a city improvement) and then sold off, that would quickly add up. 10+ routes would be hard to manage. That said, one-step manufacturing chains like this one would be relatively easy to manage, but once we got started on the complex chains, micromanagment adds up.

In my dreams, Civ3 should not exceed a hundred goods, and there should not be a single two-step chain (i.e. iron ore to steel to automobile). However unrealistic, we must balence with acceptable gameplay. The game would bog down too much if we tried to recreate the entire economy. We can create a "global" economy, but we can never hope to duplicate the real world inside a strategy game based on running a nation!

I hope Firaxis reads this idea....

[weird god]

the CTP2 trade sytem is based on the rarity of goods. there more you have of one, the less money you get...also you have to use carvans to establish routes - more caravans for geater distances which pay more gold/turn.

i think this is a good idea though the simple civ2 systems makes managing easier. i´m not sure it does any good in multiplayer games because it favors large civs even more - caravans are expensiv, trade routes can easily be pirated by a strong army and if you owe a large territory you can hardly be pirated yourself and have lots of goods......all in all it strenghten big civs even more - keep the civ2-system for civ3!!

[Shadowstrike]

I'm BUMPing this.... Surely there are more opinions on this.

[Dom Pedro II]

I don't think my plan is so far-fetched. I mean, the trade route remains open and trading a certain number of a particular commodity per turn without any management on the part of the player. Conversion to manufactured goods is automatic and functions in the same way.


They only time you have to be responsible for whats going on is when: war is declared, a city is taken, when a blockade or embargo is formed, or when you are establishing a new trade route.

[Dom Pedro II]

The diplomat, your two examples are ones I myself have used. I have posted many many posts promoting a system just like this. It is the most important change I think that needs to be made. In fact, if Civ 3 DOESN'T have a market economy with tile resources to be used for raw materials for unit production and city management, I don't think I'll buy it. Simple as that. I'll stick to CTP2... without the market economy, it would be the same thing anyway.

[Pangaea]

heh, if it didn't have a different trade model, it'd be like Sony TV over a Panasonic... sure they have different names, but its pretty much the same on the inside... heh

But, I digress...
I like Don's ideas about making the elephants from elephant trading places.... but it shouldn't only be cities, it should be through your entire empire (for things like elephants) so that if one of your cities is trading elephants, all the cities close by can make them too....

Also, maybe having resources added to the map as you go farther along... like people didn't really find a lot of the Oil in the middle east until fairly rescently....

And maybe make fresh water a resource... because there is so little of it in the real world....cities in a desert would have a heck of a time geting water, unless someone was shipping it to them (in the modern times, when water consumption is high, and you can build pipe networks)

------------------
-=Pangaea=-
31291353

[Nikolai]

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat on 12-22-2000 12:29 PM For example, spice would increase happiness in the city. A "Elephant" special ressource would enable the "war elephant" unit ...

Yes, and what if the Romans discovers 'Computers', and you are the only one in the world witch have silicon? They would have to pay exactly what you want, or they would have go to war! So if you just have a good enought military, you would 'rule' them!

Maybe you could even trade the advance, and so deny to sell them the resurce...

------------------
Who am I? What am I? Do we need Civ? Yes!!
birteaw@online.no

[Rollo Tomasi]

I don't think it would be too hard to find silicon, it's the second most abundant element in the earth's crust

[This message has been edited by Rollo Tomasi (edited December 22, 2000).]

[Shadowstrike]

You have some good ideas there Diplomat. This would create an accurate repesentation of supply and demand, without excessive micromanagement.

[The diplomat]

Maybe this has already been offered but what if special ressources had unique benefits. For example, spice would increase happiness in the city. A "Elephant" special ressource would enable the "war elephant" unit ...

This would make special ressources more important to have. For example, a civ with unrest problems would then want to buy spice from a neighbor.

This would make trading and possessing these special ressources more important. And I think this is crucial to making the trade/ressource better! It is based on the simple principle that particular ressources are needed for civs to develop.

------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.