<Nexus>
Traveler of the Multiverse
Maybe those could be displayed collectively, like this?
- 3 American cities
- 14 Carthagian cities
- 1 Japan city
Buildings with Trade Routes Tags Discussion
- Thread starter os79
- Start date
Maybe those could be displayed collectively, like this?
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
There is still a iTradeModifier active In xml/Terrain/CIV4YieldInfos:
Overlooked perhaps? Or doesn't matter?
JosEPh
Code:
<YieldInfo>
<Type>YIELD_COMMERCE</Type>
<Description>TXT_KEY_YIELD_COMMERCE</Description>
<iHillsChange>0</iHillsChange>
<iPeakChange>0</iPeakChange>
<iLakeChange>0</iLakeChange>
<iCityChange>0</iCityChange>
<iPopulationChangeOffset>0</iPopulationChangeOffset>
<iPopulationChangeDivisor>0</iPopulationChangeDivisor>
<iMinCity>1</iMinCity>
[color=red] <iTradeModifier>100</iTradeModifier>[/color]
<iGoldenAgeYield>1</iGoldenAgeYield>
<iGoldenAgeYieldThreshold>1</iGoldenAgeYieldThreshold>
<iAIWeightPercent>80</iAIWeightPercent>
<ColorType>COLOR_YIELD_COMMERCE</ColorType>Overlooked perhaps? Or doesn't matter?
JosEPh
Afforess
The White Wizard
It doesn't matter. It means that commerce earns double with trade routes, but since trade routes don't exist......
I'm a bit worried about the simplifications and the problems that might follow with this trade routes => connections change.
Der_Zorn_gottes and Spirictum have raised valid concerns, and I agree very much with those. Foreign trade and it's importance should be simulated in some way, and also perhaps the value of the connection? Connecting that backwater size 2 tundra vassal city shouldn't be anywhere near as valuable as connecting to a size 25 foreign friendly capital on another continent.
It also seems like there's a lot of balancing to do with commerce values. Building Temple of Artemis in a backyard production powerhouse shouldn't be straight up 30 commerce, it should depend on .... well, trade routes
I'm almost against this change, but on the other hand I'm still confident you guys can convert it to something great eventually. But this change needs some serious tweaking and balancing still!
Der_Zorn_gottes and Spirictum have raised valid concerns, and I agree very much with those. Foreign trade and it's importance should be simulated in some way, and also perhaps the value of the connection? Connecting that backwater size 2 tundra vassal city shouldn't be anywhere near as valuable as connecting to a size 25 foreign friendly capital on another continent.
It also seems like there's a lot of balancing to do with commerce values. Building Temple of Artemis in a backyard production powerhouse shouldn't be straight up 30 commerce, it should depend on .... well, trade routes
I'm almost against this change, but on the other hand I'm still confident you guys can convert it to something great eventually. But this change needs some serious tweaking and balancing still!
I'm agree with 46852, we lost something important with this changes.
We had had penalty for war, especially with good trade partner, but now we almost haven't.
We lost a big bunch of diplomacy.
But I also must say that the game now is more-more fast even on big maps.
We had had penalty for war, especially with good trade partner, but now we almost haven't.
We lost a big bunch of diplomacy.
But I also must say that the game now is more-more fast even on big maps.
Afforess
The White Wizard
Any attempt to rework connectedness into something similar to trade routes will lose all the performance aspects of the change. Trade routes were so slow because it forced each city to find the "best" trade route amongst all the cities of the world. Any change towards that effect will defeat the whole reason for simplification.
I'm open to changes but I recommend thinking outside of the box, at least in terms of trade routes. We can not go back.
I'm open to changes but I recommend thinking outside of the box, at least in terms of trade routes. We can not go back.
How much of a performance issue trade routes actually are? I'm totally clueless with the code part of Civ4 and stuff like this...
I haven't actually paid that much attention to trade routes in my Civ4 past, but now that I checked some details about them, they seem like a very cool mechanic. Probably more of a "under the hood" thing for most of the players, but they seem to represent trade quite well in their unmodded form. I'd be sad if that kind of working mechanic would be replaced with a simplified model.
What I'm most worried is how can foreign trade be reflected well enough with connectedness, and how can connectedness be balanced to simulate trade in a meaningful way, like trade routes have done (without opening exploits, like domestic city spam).
Anyway, about balancing routes vs connectedness: in my Epic/Large/Monarch game, my size 17 Babylon had 5 trade routes in 400BC (gamespeed balancing needed there, I was in medieval age a bit too fast
), and Temple of Artemis yields 9.50 commerce there. That would be around 12-13 commerce if I also built Port and Paved Roads. I updated to r768 => Temple of Artemis gave 30 commerce, because I had 15 cities. Quite large disparity there. Angkor Vat seemed to be a lot more powerful with connectedness (sp?) too.
Afforess
The White Wizard
Fairly significant. There are more detailed discussions earlier in this thread.
Anyway, about balancing routes vs connectedness: in my Epic/Large/Monarch game, my size 17 Babylon had 5 trade routes in 400BC (gamespeed balancing needed there, I was in medieval age a bit too fast
Ok, those seem like good examples of imbalance. I could make Artemis give 1
per instead.
<Nexus>
Traveler of the Multiverse
How about connectedness being affected by diplomatic relations? Attitude increasing the "yield" by % ?
45°38'N-13°47'E
Deity
This looks like a good suggestion to me. It could decrease income when you declare war to someone else because possibly some other civs would dislike you.
On this subject, would it be possible/useful to make other civs dislike you more when you attack a small, backward civ and take this into consideration when you declare war (of course the same should be applied to every AI civ)? Maybe that way we could somehow "protect" some small civs giving them some more chances to develope? What do you think Afforess?
Afforess
The White Wizard
I think part of the problem with connectedness appearing "too" easy to attain is that the AI loves open borders and will ask for them with nearly everyone they are not at war with.
It would be better if the AI instead opened borders with the minimum number of players needed to satisfy their foreign connections. If the AI only needed 3 trade partners to satisfy their foreign connections, you would have to fight to be one of their best friends to gain one of those spots.
It would be better if the AI instead opened borders with the minimum number of players needed to satisfy their foreign connections. If the AI only needed 3 trade partners to satisfy their foreign connections, you would have to fight to be one of their best friends to gain one of those spots.
Afforess
The White Wizard
I think it was missed in the initial list here, but I fixed it in one of the previous revisions. I don't have the game handy here at work.
Afforess
The White Wizard
Didn't find any newer discussion on trade and and connectedness, so I figured I'll continue with this one.
Has there been any finetuning going on with connection bonuses after last summer's trade route rehaul? I just reported a glaring error in the building thread, so I figured this feature may have been left alone, so to speak.
I also ran into an issue with foreign connections and contact trading. For some reason I got connections to overseas AIs way before my ships could traverse the seas, through "chaining" contact trades. I'm not quite sure how my neighbors got the overseas contacts in the first place (may have been a land bridge I haven't explored yet), but in any case I find it highly unrealistic to be able to trade contacts from the other side of the world before late medieval era (optics perhaps?), and thus gaining high amount of foreign connections for practically nothing, usually something like a handful of coins or a meaningless rebel contact.
Another thing is that unexplored AI contacts with only capital revealed through embassy give foreign connections for all their cities after open borders. Not that realistic, especially when it happen well into the BCs. Is it possible to delay contact trading to later era? It opens up at Alphabet or Writing now?
Has there been any finetuning going on with connection bonuses after last summer's trade route rehaul? I just reported a glaring error in the building thread, so I figured this feature may have been left alone, so to speak.
I also ran into an issue with foreign connections and contact trading. For some reason I got connections to overseas AIs way before my ships could traverse the seas, through "chaining" contact trades. I'm not quite sure how my neighbors got the overseas contacts in the first place (may have been a land bridge I haven't explored yet), but in any case I find it highly unrealistic to be able to trade contacts from the other side of the world before late medieval era (optics perhaps?), and thus gaining high amount of foreign connections for practically nothing, usually something like a handful of coins or a meaningless rebel contact.
Another thing is that unexplored AI contacts with only capital revealed through embassy give foreign connections for all their cities after open borders. Not that realistic, especially when it happen well into the BCs. Is it possible to delay contact trading to later era? It opens up at Alphabet or Writing now?
Another problem I have problems with the current trade system is that no matter how small your city is and no matter how much your connected foreign cities hate you, as long as you gave open borders you get full benefits to ALL cities. That makes the max commerce limit on the trade buildings almost the only value that matters, and that's bad. Building Paved Roads or Tollhouse in fields of ice shouldn't equal to developing five villages around the capital in river grasslands over a hundred turns.
How hard would it be to code a city size multiplier for the foreign/domestic connectedness? That would alleviate at least part of the problem? A diplomatic multiplier for foreign connections would be absolutely awesome, especially if the AI wouldn't agree to Open Borders so easily. Or even a Trade Agreement deal that could only be formed between close friends. Right of passage = 0.2x connections, Open Borders = 0.5x, Trade Agreement = 1.0x.
PS. I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself over several threads ( or even in one post ), I'd just love to help out in having this part of the mod fixed.
How hard would it be to code a city size multiplier for the foreign/domestic connectedness? That would alleviate at least part of the problem? A diplomatic multiplier for foreign connections would be absolutely awesome, especially if the AI wouldn't agree to Open Borders so easily. Or even a Trade Agreement deal that could only be formed between close friends. Right of passage = 0.2x connections, Open Borders = 0.5x, Trade Agreement = 1.0x.
PS. I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself over several threads ( or even in one post
), I'd just love to help out in having this part of the mod fixed.Similar threads
- Locked
