DESIGN/PLAYTEST: Trade & Caravans

[Flinx]

I have never noticed any bugs.

I opened the Trade Manager, and selected "All" and set "Cities Per Good" to 2.

[Flinx]

After trading Elephant from Ottawa to Moosonee this is the situation

[Flinx]

As you can see, the colour of the good changes from black to red, to indicate that the good is currently being traded, and the second best option is now listed first.

Normally, you would only have "Cities Per Good" set to 1 so in that case what you would see is

Before
Ottawa Elephant (black) Moosonee 116 32
After
Ottawa Elephant (red) Chesterfield 113 35

Note that
Ottawa Elephant Moosonee 116 32
now shows up on the "Trade-Summary" tab

[Ekmek]

Nice work! I hope you guys are dedicated enough to really improve the rade aspects of the game (like those mentioned in the trade thread)

[Gilgamensch]

Some more ideas about trade and caravans:

Why not make the cost age dependent? (including # of caravans needed and cost of each?)

So like in the early stage cheap caravans and low cost for each. BUT to offset this having a limitation onto the overall number of traderoutes allowed, let's say max. 4

Next age:
# of caravans goes up slightly (like 15%)
cost for each: also up, but like 20%

Same for any following age, till the discovery of factory or similar, when cost shall go down drastically, but maybe the number still up.

This would reflect better (IMO) the real situation.

The really old trade routes were limited, but bringing for 'cheap' money/resources far more back in short time. (like the silk-street, or the salt-street, but they were already later)

Only later (like the East/West Indian Company) it was quantity over 'quality'. And for the last ~100 years the complete bulk freight transport of goods, made them cheap.

Just and

[The Big Mc]

I would go for the kiss approach. (Keep it simple stupid)

Trade has too purposes one get goods to places that don’t have them. (it is no good trying to sell ice to the Eskimos). The second reason is to make money .

As for age dependent how about more caravan types.

Lets say

Ancient: Camel
The one my spell checker dos not get : Wagon
Modern: Truck / fright
Genetic: Supper fright air ships
Diamond: Transporters (like in star trek ) ha ha ha ha

[Gilgamensch]

Originally posted by The Big Mc
The one my spell checker dos not get : Wagon

Are you sure about the spell checker, might it not be you? (no offense meant).

[The Big Mc]

If in don't blame the guy that don't speak English.

as my spell checker dos not speak English I am blaming it.

[Gilgamensch]

Originally posted by The Big Mc
If in don't blame the guy that don't speak English.

as my spell checker dos not speak English I am blaming it.

What do you expect from an American spellchecker? Shall they really know Oxford English?

Those neighbors neighbours are sometimes weared

But shortly coming back to your idea:

This would only change the cost of producting, but I'll would like to see also differences in the income of it. The ancient trade routes were far more valuable than nowadays.

Just think of pepper, there were times were pepper was more valuable than gold. Same goes for silk by the way. But this isn't reflected at all.

[The Big Mc]

The Americans, don’t get me started .

But really my idea is that the value of caravans each one represents is increased.

Well won’t that be included in a nice idea of goods going out of thw window. Like tobacco being pointless pas the genetic age.

[EPW]

I can't stand America! We should have the option of chosing state flags rather than the American flag

Great work on the whole trading thing, though IMHO its still useless. Introduce strategic resources and all will be well.

[The Big Mc]

Originally posted by EPW
I can't stand America! We should have the option of chosing state flags rather than the American flag

Why what state would you have

Great work on the whole trading thing, though IMHO its still useless. Introduce strategic resources and all will be well.

Not strategic recourses. positive recourses maybe

[Ekmek]

California of course!

yes, strategic resources, must have strategic resources...

Actually with trading to, it would be nice to see a market alue for goods and be able to adjust the price and compete with other traders in the old ctp2 model (if you can beat them in the market place then beat them in war!)

of course it would also mean there would have to be an incentive for trade (happiness or something in exchange) but that goes back to the other trade thread

[The Big Mc]

E instead of strategic goods I am all in favour of positive goods.

These are where a good increases something in a unit or city.

Example one

A city which receives oil can make a tank that goes 1 movement point further.

Example two

A city that receives wood has an increase in production

Example three

A city that collects sugar has an increases in foods same with the city that receives it.



This system allows for goods to add a strategic element to the game without causing a civ3 style stupid tech acquisition like tank where you can’t get oil.


Also remember ctp is set post modern so if we do strategic recourses some one has a lot of work to do making post modern goods.

[Gilgamensch]

Big Mc,

sounds good (the examples). But I see it in the moment only as an exploit for the H player.

So long we can't teach the AI, it would be no fun..........