View Full Version : Trade Organizations
Dec 17, 2008, 09:30 AM
We're going to use a new screen for trade organizations.
Those are the ones we will almost certainly include. Let me know what I am missing.
Almost the entire world is represented by one of these. (India, Australia come to mind as being left out). Africa will start off being exploited by corporations and in no trade org.
Dec 17, 2008, 09:33 AM
Note: The EU trade org will include the EU civ and NATO.
Dec 17, 2008, 09:40 AM
The idea as it stands is to have the financial benefits that come from being in the trade org increase or decrease for everyone in the group as member economies collectively grow or shrink. Civs will attempt to make others convert to their organization in the same way they attempt to make others convert to their religion.
There will be degrees of membership. Full member, probationary, whatever. We have to work out the details.
There will be corp/religious style units to spread the org... when it is spread to a new civ through open borders, they become a trading parter, and have the option to join that organization. We will have to figure out restrictions that will prevent them from becoming full members right away, etc etc.
It would be fantastic if we could allow two civs to get together and start their own trade organization.
Another great idea NikNaks came up with is having one of the existing members of the trade org have to approve a new civ switching to them, but this may be tricky to accomplish. If we can't, it may have to be that if you don't want someone in your trade org, you just don't spread it to their cities at all. Or add other restrictions, like you have to be friendly with every existing member to join.
Everyone please feel free to add your ideas about what we can do with this!
Dec 19, 2008, 01:30 PM
I'm not sure if I agree with the "missionary" style spreading idea. It doesn't really make much sense, as I don't recall that happening with any of these. However, I want to see what everyone else thinks. I've probably got the wrong end of the stick.
The degrees of membership should be something like this:
Dec 19, 2008, 03:40 PM
The degrees of membership should be something like this:
I'm not sure if I agree with the "missionary" style spreading idea. It doesn't really make much sense, as I don't recall that happening with any of these.
My thinking was that the unit would be like a finance minister, negotiating to increase trade relations. Just a first draft, I'm sure we can come up with something better.
However, I want to see what everyone else thinks.
Dec 24, 2008, 06:49 PM
I began to discuss this in the corporations thread...
Requirements for eligibility to enter Observer status:
NAFTA- having one of America's corporations in one of your cities.
EU- having ING or HSBC in one of your cities.
ASEAN- must have one city inside defined south east Asian region (hopefully we can do this).
SCO- Having Russia or China's corporation in one of your cities.
MERCOSUR- must have one city inside defined South American region.
OPEC- Must have (x) oil stored, (x) number of extra oil resources, (x) number of oil resources currently being traded.
In addition to:
-must be currently trading with at least (x)% of current trade organization member civs.
-must have at least cautious relations with every civ in the trade org.
-must have open borders with (x)% of civs in the org. (entering the org automatically gives open borders with all member civs?)
-some civic/ideological restrictions.
Your IMF rating (which will basically represent the overall health of your economy), should affect whether the organization lets you in or not once you meet the requirements. The better your rating, the more member civs should try to lobby you to join, and once you've joined, increase your degree of membership. This can all function very similarly to the way religions are spread and the AI asks you to convert.
Dec 24, 2008, 06:51 PM
son of an economist lol
Dec 24, 2008, 06:59 PM
This is how we can represent real world trade better. Resource/tech trading between countries is great but is hardly represents all the trade that takes place. This model isn't perfect, but it will be a heck of a lot more dynamic and realistic (and fun) that anything I have seen elsewhere.
This and the other economic related modifications we are going to create, including the improvements to the corporation function, will better represent the income countries get from taxes on increased trade, as well as the exploitation and negatives that go along with it when you factor in corrupt government, etc. And also, how it affects relations.
Dec 24, 2008, 07:09 PM
We have to decide how the benefits from being in a trade org will work.
My basic idea is that every member civ will simply get a certain amount of extra dollars (gold) every turn. In addition to that, members should charge each other less for resources and techs than they charge non-members. 5% less for observers, 10% less for Partial Members, etc etc.
Each trade org will generate a pot of dollars every turn. The amount is based on a calculation that includes the total number of civs in the org, and their respective GDPs and IMF ratings. The pot increases/decreases along with the mean gdps/imf ratings of member civs.
The pot is then distributed based on the size of each members GDPs, and how much resource trading they are doing inside the group.
When a country starts running big deficits, has too many loans, etc and their IMF rating falls, they should start to decrease the pot. As this occurs there should be a possibility of the civ being bumped down a membership level and eventually thrown out of the trade org. This occurring could vary based on how many member civs are friendly to the poor performing civ.
Dec 24, 2008, 07:28 PM
I think observers and partial members should be able to be in more than one trade org.
To become a full member, you should have to leave any other trade orgs you are in. This hurts relations with members of the orgs you quit. This should then also be the line where the benefits greatly increase.
So depending on what corps are in your cities, who you're trading with, how strong your economy is, how strong the group's economies are, etc etc etc, all these things factor in on which org(s) will benefit you the most. One civ may be best off being a partial member of OPEC and of NAFTA, while another may be best off being a Permanent Member of SCO.
The AI will have to understand this better than the player and always be working towards joining the most beneficial org(s) possible in the best positions possible. For the player there will be some degree of guesswork involved.
Dec 24, 2008, 07:36 PM
Opec will have to have a fake HQ location (Saudi Arabia?), as NikNaks pointed out their HQ is in Europe.
Other than that we have to decide whether we just want to place the headquarters of these trade orgs in their real cities, or have them be dynamic, changing to the member with the best GDP.
And with that, we have to decide if having the hq means you get a bigger share of the pot than you would otherwise.
Dec 24, 2008, 07:42 PM
FYI: The pot I'm describing won't be in the game necessarily, it's just a way to calculate the bonuses.
Other than being the page where you change what orgs you are in and at which levels, the trade organization screen could (I think) also show some statistics about each of the orgs. How much trade is taking place (basically the pot I guess), which countries are benefiting, etc etc. All this info is available to anyone on earth in economic magazines or wikipedia, so like statistics, I think everyone should be able to see all this info updated all the time regardless of espionage points.
Apr 26, 2009, 07:20 PM
Quick thought: NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Organization, so it makes sense only nations in North America should be able to join it. Same with EU (European Union). However, there should be some restrictions on who can join regional organizations. US shouldn't be able to simply conquer a nation in Southeast Asia and join ASEAN because it still wouldn't be considered a Southeast Asian nation. Maybe it could require X number of plots there or require a nation to have its capital there. As for whether or not regional organizations are even possible, I know RFC had regional stability (civilizations became unstable if they overexpanded) as well victory conditions that depended on having cities in certain areas so I imagine it would be possible. Maybe you could ask Rhye how he did it?