Commerce

[Kataphraktoi]

has the formula for commerce ever been worked out? i have searched a bit of the forum manually,and have not found anything. not sure how it works at all

i know in cgn23 i got a boost from 193\turn with comm5 and got PE and went to 241\turn with comm6[from commerce only]. thats an improvement of 24% while the commerce rate only went up 20%.

without any testing i couldnt say if this trend increases.which is why im hoping someone figured this all out already...

[smacksim1]

I've never seen a comprehensive thread on commerce and have read on and off avidly since mid-year 2000.

I've been thinking about this same issue, so if anyone has some clues as to how commerce really works, spill the beans, please!

[NanoDingo]

From the Datalinks:

Commerce is computed base by base between factions with Treaties and Pacts, as follows:

(1) First, all bases for each faction are ranked from top to bottom by Energy output.
(2) Bases are paired off from top to bottom. If one faction has extra bases, these are ignored.
(3) For each pair of bases, sum the combined economic output and divide by 8, rounding up.
(4) Double this value if a Global Trade Pact is in effect.
(5) Now, for each individual base, the commerce formula is as follows:

(Value from (4)) * (CommerceTech + 1) / (TotalCommerceTech + 1)

(6) CommerceTech is the total # of Economic Technologies** discovered, plus
faction & social bonuses.
(7) TotalCommerceTech is the total # of Economic Technologies** in the game.
(8) Now, using the value from (5), divide by 2 if no Pact (e.g. only a Treaty)
(9) Add +1 if you are Planetary Governor.
(10) Reduce to zero if sanctions are in effect against either faction.

** Economic Technologies (as defined in alpha.txt/alphax.txt): Industrial Economics, Industrial Automation, Environmental Economics, Planetary Economics, Industrial Nanorobotics, Sentient Econometrics BUT NOT Adaptive Economics (counter-intuitive, I feel)

[smacksim1]

Conclusions are straightforward, if thought out:

If all your bases are identical (actually impossible if you have an HQ) then its equivalent to pact with two minor factions as opposed to one major one:

IE, if you have 20 bases and there are 3 other factions: With 10, 5, and 5, respectively. All other things being equal, you'll gain the same by pacting with the big dog as with the 2 minor factions. This is as with the 2 minor factions, your top 5 cities will each gain income from 2 pactmates, while your other 15 cities won't get a thing. On the other hand, pacting with the size-10 faction will give 10 of your cities one trading partner each.

However, things are never equal. Which is when this gets interesting.

Consider if the case is that your 'top 5' cities are real powerhouses compared with your other 15 cities. Their commerce is effectively doubled by taking the 2 minor factions. Obviously more pactmates is better than less, but in a Pbem its sometimes worth feigning being '#2' in the power perceptions of other players such that you'll have multiple pactmates, rather than 1 large one vs. the less well-to-do factions.

In SP commerce alone is reason enough to rebuild a conquered faction, however the math does get complicated when you consider spending production to build bases for your allies. Each turn you spend before gifting a city to the AI is a turn without its commerce coming back to you, yet a few rush builds of CPs in an newly conquered base can add future commerce fairly cheaply.

My usual plan is this: If I have 9 'core' cities, I'll rebuild the conquered faction to 9+ cities and then give them all to the vassal state in one go. It gets tempting to do a little infrastructure work for them as well, including terraforming, but there is a definite point of diminishing returns that is difficult to calculate outright. The game is pretty much in the bag anyways if I'm considering vassal-state commerce at all, but it is fun to play with nonetheless!

[Chaos Theory]

I suspect the discrepancy you observed is due to rounding - like almost everything else in SMAC, commerce income is truncated to an integer at each city, for each faction. Since these tend to be small integers, 4% is a reasonable discrepancy from the formula.

[Kataphraktoi]

Originally posted by Chaos Theory
I suspect the discrepancy you observed is due to rounding - like almost everything else in SMAC, commerce income is truncated to an integer at each city, for each faction. Since these tend to be small integers, 4% is a reasonable discrepancy from the formula.

that would explain it yes,i had assumed the datalinks entry was broken like so many areas. think ill do the math on a few example cities this afternoon to see

nice post smack

[Kataphraktoi]

are you sure? these 2 bases in cgn would seem to get 14 by trade with that formula. one has 69 energy,other 58 energy. it gets 9+ (my 58) and his +6(69)

so i should get 15,with comm5

i must have missed something.......................

(16) * (5+1) / 6+1)

and im plangov so +1 for 15

i know i was uplate last night and am tired but still...

[Kataphraktoi]

guys where are the genius one sentence reply that can explain the last post?

bump

[NanoDingo]

You do know that Energy Output isn't the same as Economic Output, right?

[binTravkin]

Lol, the genius answer is:

crawlered energy does NOT count!

I know which base you're talking about!

[Kataphraktoi]

oh that sucks

think the math works in that case upon looking.......
someone is playing by the math a little to much

[binTravkin]

someone is playing by the math a little to much

Guess you point at me.
No, lol, I play per math as much as I can easily remember.
In fact its reflexive/intuitive, I mean the math I use..

And I often screw up my b-drone limit - I just cant remember the formula!

[Leon Trotsky]

Does anyone know what the "commerce rate" number means at the status window?

Sorry for the bump.

[Maniac]

Commerce rate is your number of CommerceTechs. (See NanoDingo's first post)