idea for trades: penalty clauses

it is well-known that the human is rather unfairly penalized for breaking of trade routes and so forth that is out of their control. A trade route may be broken due to an enemy pillaging roads of the enemy you are trading with, destroying harbors, and so on. In such circumstances, it is clearly not your fault, but you seem to always get the blame, simply because the game doesn't know how to work out whose "fault" it really is (something that is reasonable, since this would be rather difficult for the game to do).

However, an idea that could solve this problem is the idea of a "penalty clause" in trade agreements. The AI could tell you how much gold they consider a deal to be worth, and if the trade route is broken, or you can no longer supply the goods, instead you simply pay them the gold equivalent, and don't suffer a stain on your reputation.

For instance, suppose you were buying a technology from the AI. The AI would accept 28 gpt for the tech, or it would accept a supply of iron for the tech. You would be notified when doing the deal that the "penalty clause" for failing to supply iron is 28 gpt. You agree to the deal, and 8 turns into the deal, you lose your supply of iron. Very well, then you must pay the civ 28gpt for the remaining 12 turns of the deal in lieu of iron.

It would likely work the other way as well, but this might be a little harder, since the player could possibly exploit it.

I think this proposed solution is *much* better than the current way of doing it, and is actually rather similiar to the way contracts work in real life. What do other people think?

-Sirp.

mmm there needs to be something but the thing you describe might not be the best way. What you should do is try to exploit how the game does it, and destroy someone elses rep by pillaging THEIR roads.

How could you exploit it if it was the other way around?

good idea, thoug it will need some refining. After all, the AI values resources extremely high, so it would always be a huge penalty - and who keeps that kinda cash handy? And it could be exploited by cutting the road, then simply going broke. Cost you 1 improvement a turn, hell, I' d buy tech for all my lux and res, then simply cut the road

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
And it could be exploited by cutting the road, then simply going broke. Cost you 1 improvement a turn, hell, I' d buy tech for all my lux and res, then simply cut the road

Click to expand...

Um, I don't quite understand this exploit. If you cut the road, then you would have to pay the "penalty clause" (the gold), and if you couldn't afford it (like if you went broke on purpose), then your reputation would be ruined. (And this time it would be fair; it was YOUR fault.) Oh, and that's not "the other way around."

Originally posted by willj
How could you exploit it if it was the other way around?

Click to expand...

Well you could buy resources for cash up front or tech and then cut the supply route so that the AI was the only one reneging on the deal, or you could run around the place cutting trade routes between rival civs who have trade deals with each other. The latter certainly sounds like a good plan, and the former could perhaps be worth the expense if it insured you against solid aliances between your rivals.

If it was the other way round, you could possibly exploit it if, e.g. you wanted iron to make war; and then during the war you captured some iron, well by rights you should still be getting the now relatively-useless iron from the other civ; but you could pillage the trade route instead, and get their gold. Or, you could watch out for them being a little low on cash, and then suddenly cut the trade route to make them run out of cash.

Also Killer, in case you didn't notice, people hate your guts if you run out of cash to pay them. It's almost never worth it. I think the AI values resources at reasonable rates, but if it doesn't, then that's a problem with its valuation of resources, not with my idea.

willj: I wasn't talking about the other wy round, and what's a ruined rep to a warmonger????

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
willj: I wasn't talking about the other wy round, and what's a ruined rep to a warmonger????

Click to expand...

Since you mentioned the exploit right after I asked "the other way around" question, I guess I assumed you meant the other way around. Sorry for misunderstanding. And even if you're going to kill all the civs eventually anyway, a ruined rep could be bad since they might not trust gpt deals. Of course that may not matter to you, like you said.

An alternative, but vaguely similiar idea is this: of all the trades you have going, you can negotiate with the other party to honorably cancel them early. For instance, if you are supplying someone with iron, and are 12 turns into the deal, you can meet with them and say "hey can I cancel that deal in exchange for me giving you 800 gold pieces and 8 gpt instead". You could also for example, mutually decide to make peace against a foe you have a military alliance against. Often I am in a military alliance against someone, and I think to myself "now I want to stop this alliance, and I'm betting they do too; but we can't until the 20 turn is up!" it'd be great if you could meet with them and ask them if they want to cancel it, you could also offer them gold to sweeten the deal - "I'll give you 400 gold if you agree to honorably cancel our alliance against the Persians".

Now, this would also work if you were selling the French your iron, and you lost your souce of iron, the game could automatically bring up the cancel trade negotation screen. You offer them something to get out of the deal - you might say "we'll give you 500 gold if you release us from our obligation to give you the iron for the next 12 turns". If negotations break down at this stage, and you are unable to reach a deal with them, of course you will still suffer a reputation hit.

It's another way to achieve the same sort of effect.

-Sirp.

or you could just reduce the mandatory time frame for those deals...

willj: it doesn't mater if you go warmonger, it does otherwise. But as the game is now I can never deal to full capacity because I have to fear the silly rep hits for the reasons Sirp mentioned, and that is even worse

On a slightly related topic, I wish it were possible to demand luxuries/resources as part of a peace settlement. As it is you don't have a viable trade route until you've agreed to peace, and then your leverage is gone
Admittedly it's better just to physically grab the cities that will give you the resources, but if I'm fighting a war on another continent there's always the distinct risk that the city with the coveted tile(s) will just flip back.

Originally posted by Eklektikos
On a slightly related topic, I wish it were possible to demand luxuries/resources as part of a peace settlement. As it is you don't have a viable trade route until you've agreed to peace, and then your leverage is gone

Click to expand...

You can put resources in a peace treaty thing if you renegotiate peace (while you already have a treaty)

Originally posted by bobgote

You can put resources in a peace treaty thing if you renegotiate peace (while you already have a treaty)

Click to expand...

True, but I'd like the ability to extract resource deals from my rivals when I've got them really scared for their own existence. After 20 turns they usually start acting bolshie again and won't part with much even in a peace renegotiation. Perhaps I'm just not dominating effectively enough...

I think the civ also suffers from bad trade deals. If your in late midevil era and take a city with luxes, watchs various civs start attacking him!*though it might be in a few turns but they do...*

Sirp: You are SO right!

By the faulty rep mechanics... In the tail end of the bronze era I had given the Germans horses as a gift to help them along (They had just entered a war and were going to need them)... Because of the size of Germany at the time (Second largest next to me) I didn't think I'd have to worry about the trade route getting screwed (We had harbors). However, Germany got rogue-stated and was wiped out in about 15 turns... Regardless of the fact that the horses were a gift AND that everyone else had committed genocide on the Germans I was still hit with a poor rep for being a shyster.

Sheepy: check the date on the last post. How did you even find this thread??

But yes, there are some faults with the trade system, not really what this thread's about tho.

To me, the best addition that could be made to the trading system would be a kind of 'patent' or technology licensing.

For instance, France has furs, I want them and they want my robotics. For my own reasons, I want to hold on to my robotic advantage for a while and I don't want the other Civs to have it. I know if I give the French access to my mechanical marvels within two turns the whole world will covered in clockwork men and Joanie will have a big fat bank balance. I would love to be able to license the robotic technology to the French which would allow them to gain it's benefits but didn't allow them to sell it on - at least without causing a diplomatic penalty. The French would be free to continue their own robotic research if they chose, which they could then trade freely, or indeed buy from elsewhere without strings attached.