Buildings with Trade Routes Tags Discussion

Could someone explain how connectedness really works?
For example:
-Does conectedness cease with naval blockade?
-Does conectedness cease with a foreign nation, if it is sorrounded with an other civ that you are in war with?
 
Could someone explain how connectedness really works?
For example:
-Does conectedness cease with naval blockade?
-Does conectedness cease with a foreign nation, if it is sorrounded with an other civ that you are in war with?

Connectedness, according to my research from game help, only happen within cultural borders and neutral territory. So I'm assuming if there's no closed borders between you and your prospective foreign trade partner, you're fine.
 
Connectedness, according to my research from game help, only happen within cultural borders and neutral territory. So I'm assuming if there's no closed borders between you and your prospective foreign trade partner, you're fine.

What about right of passage?
 
Could someone explain how connectedness really works?
For example:
-Does conectedness cease with naval blockade?
-Does conectedness cease with a foreign nation, if it is sorrounded with an other civ that you are in war with?

1.) It might. If your only path to a foreign or domestic city is through the coast/ocean and not a road network, a blockade will cause the connectedness to disappear.

2.) Since there is no path with the road network, yes, it does cease.

Connectedness, according to my research from game help, only happen within cultural borders and neutral territory. So I'm assuming if there's no closed borders between you and your prospective foreign trade partner, you're fine.


No, you're wrong. Connectedness has to do with the road/ocean network, not culture.
 
Yep. In general, all modifiers are possible, just a matter of time investment. ;)

What would you use them for?

Say we have the building Rail Station. Which gives +5 (random number) commerce per city connected with railroads. Meaning, if we have City A and City B connected with railroads, City A and B will receive 5 commerce. However, City C, which is connected with paved roads, would not provide commerce. Also, perhaps, if you lack the route type on the city tile, you can't build the connectedness building (although, considering that once you discover a new route type, it's built on all city tiles, so..)

And would be able the Port line of buildings to give commerce to only navally connected cities (if the engine can even make that distinguish a naval from a land connection)?

And to solve the vassal-city amassing for commerce, perhaps allies/vassals can contribute half the commerce a building gives from connectedness? (i.e, 3 for 6 normal commerce, 4 for 8 etc etc).
 
Say we have the building Rail Station. Which gives +5 (random number) commerce per city connected with railroads. Meaning, if we have City A and City B connected with railroads, City A and B will receive 5 commerce. However, City C, which is connected with paved roads, would not provide commerce. Also, perhaps, if you lack the route type on the city tile, you can't build the connectedness building (although, considering that once you discover a new route type, it's built on all city tiles, so..)

Eh.... I mean what happens when railroads get replaced with a better route type? Players are forced to wait or else lose their commerce?

And would be able the Port line of buildings to give commerce to only navally connected cities (if the engine can even make that distinguish a naval from a land connection)?

There is no distinction made internally, land and naval connections are treated the same.

And to solve the vassal-city amassing for commerce, perhaps allies/vassals can contribute half the commerce a building gives from connectedness? (i.e, 3 for 6 normal commerce, 4 for 8 etc etc).

The proposed solution, which I like best, is to treat vassal cities as domestic cities.
 
Eh.... I mean what happens when railroads get replaced with a better route type? Players are forced to wait or else lose their commerce?

Not unless you build the building which gives you the commerce bonus for the new route. Which wouldn't be available until you build the new route type on the city tile. Which, come to think of it, might be a half-baked idea.

Maybe it's best to scratch it, it's not a very good idea to pollute the mod with stupid and unworked ideas, I guess.
 
Not unless you build the building which gives you the commerce bonus for the new route. Which wouldn't be available until you build the new route type on the city tile. Which, come to think of it, might be a half-baked idea.

Maybe it's best to scratch it, it's not a very good idea to pollute the mod with stupid and unworked ideas, I guess.

It's not your fault, the Civ4 route system is rather half-baked. The railroad route is purely aesthetic.
 
No, you're wrong. Connectedness has to do with the road/ocean network, not culture.

Misphrased, sorry. I meant that my culture can't block connectedness along with neutral territory if the connecting reqs are met.
 
Ok, it seems like the other developers are ok with Afforess' suggestions because there had been no comments disagreeing with his suggestions. Please do comment if not true!

Now on to Technologies:

Trade
+1 Trade Route every city

Insurance
+1 Trade Route every city
+5% Income from Trade Route
+10% Income from Foreign Trade Route
+25% Income from Trade Missions

Logistics
+1 Trade Routes every city

These are only three technologies with relevance to Trade Routes revisions discussion. Suggestions?
 
Ok, now on to Civics with Trade Routes relevance:

Federal
+1 Trade Route to every city

Patrician
+1 Trade Route
+25% Trade Route Yield

Nationalism
No Foreign Trade Route

Coinage
-50% :commerce: from Trade Routes

Guilds
+1 Trade Route

Mercantile
+1 Trade Route
No Foreign Trade Route
-25% Income from Trade Routes with nations with this civic on
+25% :commerce: from Trade Routes

Free Market
+1 Trade Route

Planned
-1 Trade Route
25 trade income from nations with this same civic on

Corporatist
+1 Trade Route

Regulated
25 trade income from nations with this same civic on

Green
-1 Trade Route

Post-Scarcity
No Foreign Trade Route

These are all Civics with Trade Route relevance.

Suggestions on buildings, technologies and civics are welcome! So Afforess can implement his changes whenever he is ready.

Then I believe someone mentioned United Nations resolution with trade route relevance too. Suggestion for revising that too please.

I don't see any more game mechanics with Trade Routes relevance.
 
Ok, it seems like the other developers are ok with Afforess' suggestions because there had been no comments disagreeing with his suggestions. Please do comment if not true!

I've already stated that I'm ok with Afforess project. :)
 
Then I believe someone mentioned United Nations resolution with trade route relevance too. Suggestion for revising that too please.

That's me. Single currency resoultion and another one I don't remember now, possibly Open Markets or something like that. Giving trade routes with all civs (not even sure what it meant, actually) and maybe +1 trade routes.

By the way, thank you os79 for your work on reporting trade route connected issues. :)
 
Adapt or die! :borg::deal::cowboy:

JosEPh
 
45°38'N-13°47'E;13339569 said:
I've already stated that I'm ok with Afforess project. :)

Great :). I meant any new comments ;).

And you're welcome!
 
Ok, it seems like the other developers are ok with Afforess' suggestions because there had been no comments disagreeing with his suggestions. Please do comment if not true!

Now on to Technologies:

Trade
+1 Trade Route every city

Insurance
+1 Trade Route every city
+5% Income from Trade Route
+10% Income from Foreign Trade Route
+25% Income from Trade Missions

Logistics
+1 Trade Routes every city

These are only three technologies with relevance to Trade Routes revisions discussion. Suggestions?

I think there is no harm in removing the Trade tech's +1 TR, and not replacing it with anything. It still gives the Wheelwright +1 commerce, so it's still a good tech to grab.

Insurance requires advanced economy, and since we want to get rid of that option, we should just dump that particular tech too.

Logistics unlocks the International port and a few other buildings, so it should still be a worthwhile tech without the +1 TR as well.

Overall fixing the techs is relatively easy.
 
I think there is no harm in removing the Trade tech's +1 TR, and not replacing it with anything. It still gives the Wheelwright +1 commerce, so it's still a good tech to grab.

Insurance requires advanced economy, and since we want to get rid of that option, we should just dump that particular tech too.

Logistics unlocks the International port and a few other buildings, so it should still be a worthwhile tech without the +1 TR as well.

Overall fixing the techs is relatively easy.

I have no problem with this, but I'd like Vokarya's opinion as well. Given all the effort he puts into making techs valuable and not just empty techs and all links he planned between techs, I guess it's very important he agrees with these changes, especially removing techs. By the way I think there's also more advanced techs that use advanced economy: stock brokering and maybe something else? IIRC they all have canals icon, by the way.
 
45°38'N-13°47'E;13340291 said:
By the way I think there's also more advanced techs that use advanced economy: stock brokering and maybe something else? IIRC they all have canals icon, by the way.

Trying to find info about Tech Inflation I couldn't find anything valuable. There are only 3 techs with the field <iInflationModifier>: Stock Exchanging, Derivatives and Insurance. Also there is a field called <PrereqGameOption> in these 3 techs with GAMEOPTION_ADVANCED_ECONOMY, so I presume these techs only exist with Advanced Economy? This seems strange. Anyways the values for iInflationModifier on these 3 techs is 0, so it seems this is unused by now.

There you go
 
45°38'N-13°47'E;13340291 said:
I have no problem with this, but I'd like Vokarya's opinion as well. Given all the effort he puts into making techs valuable and not just empty techs and all links he planned between techs, I guess it's very important he agrees with these changes, especially removing techs. By the way I think there's also more advanced techs that use advanced economy: stock brokering and maybe something else? IIRC they all have canals icon, by the way.

The Advanced Economy techs are Insurance, Stock Brokering, and Derivatives. I am perfectly fine with giving all of those the ax; because they're Advanced Economy, I don't think I can safely tie anything major to them, and the ties they have with the rest of the tree aren't that strong because I have to account for Advanced Economy being turned off. Insurance only leads to Guilds and Derivatives leads to Megacorporations, both of which are in the next era. Stock Brokering is required for Economics and Marxism, but there are other techs required for those as well. We could even cut Conglomerates as well and move World Trade Center somewhere else, but I'd like to keep Megacorporations. In the future, we could do a Megacorporations component.

To be perfectly honest, there are other techs that I wouldn't mind cutting out. The Meteorology techs would not be very high on my list of techs to include if I was building a tech tree from scratch, although I think Weather Lore is pretty neat and Weather Control is fantastic for the Transhuman Era. I also think we've got maybe one or two too many naval techs and computer techs (although axing Neural Networks helped out there).

As far as the rest of this discussion goes, I've been kind of following it without it setting off any alarm bells in my head. I think it's because for me, it boils down to "some numbers go in, commerce comes out". If we can keep the numbers close, or even bring them down somewhat, then whatever approach you want to use should be fine.

I also do want to say that I did put some large bonuses on late-game buildings to account for several older buildings that they are replacing, as I want to never hurt players for upgrading their buildings. For example, Hypermarket is now the end of a building pyramid. Bazaar and Market are both replaced by Shopping District, so Shopping District inherits both of those buildings' bonuses along with its original bonuses. Grocer upgrades to Supermarket, so Supermarket copies all of Grocer's bonuses in addition to its own. Finally, Hypermarket is a replacement for both Supermarket and Shopping District, so Hypermarket has to inherit all the bonuses from Bazaar-Market-Grocer-Shopping District-Supermarket. That is where the +100% gold came from.
 
From the suggestions on the first page, I would cap the gold for international port at a higher value for foreign cities than for domestic. Not for gameplay reasons, but just because it's named "international" wich sounds to me as if the main income should come from external sources.

On the other hand, the paved roads sounds more like an interal thing, so I would count domestic cities here.

Both not important suggestions at all, of course.

More important to me, and maybe stated before already:
Will it be stated in the city screen to how many cities it is connected? Would be very important to have.

One more thing about the Great Lighthouse replacing the lighthouse: Does this work?
Can a wonder replace a normal building? If yes, does any other wonder do this?
What happens if the GL becomes obsolete?
 
Top Bottom