Why are Caravans 50% weaker than Cargo Ships?

compwiz1202 said:

Would be cool if you could make land routes more powerful by building roads between the cities and later Railroads. Just like I think everytime you research a ship tech with a faster ship, it should improve your sea routes.

Click to expand...

This, if for example having city connection with other civilizacion would increase land trade route value... that would be decent. If open borders would increase trade routes revenue... that would also be nice.

evilcat said:

This, if for example having city connection with other civilizacion would increase land trade route value... that would be decent. If open borders would increase trade routes revenue... that would also be nice.

Click to expand...

Land trade routes do get greater range with roads/railroads.

But I agree a road/railroad connection boosting value would be good.

Polisurgist said:

Let's turn it around: what compelling reason is there for making caravans and cargo ships equal?

Click to expand...

Balance, game variety, player choice.

As it is, it is ALWAYS better to make Cargo Ships if possible. This is very boring.

I see people mentioning realism. Yes, cargo ships can carry much more than land trade methods. But there are ~5000 cargo ships in the entire world, and over 2 000 000 transport trucks in the US alone.

Cargo ships should carry more, but you should be able to have twice as many land routes as you could have sea routes.

KrikkitTwo said:

Land trade routes do get greater range with roads/railroads.

But I agree a road/railroad connection boosting value would be good.

Click to expand...

I thought I read it somewhere, but the only thing I see on the tech tree is nothing for the wheel and railroad adding a route. Is it explained somewhere how roads/railroads affect land routes?

Alzadar said:

Balance, game variety, player choice.

As it is, it is ALWAYS better to make Cargo Ships if possible. This is very boring.

I see people mentioning realism. Yes, cargo ships can carry much more than land trade methods. But there are ~5000 cargo ships in the entire world, and over 2 000 000 transport trucks in the US alone.

Cargo ships should carry more, but you should be able to have twice as many land routes as you could have sea routes.

Click to expand...

The other thing I think too is that there should be X land routes and Y sea routes based on your tech. If you get horseback riding and sailing you should get one land and one sea route not two of either. Then land based techs should add land and sea based techs should add sea. And Petra should add land and Colossus should add sea, etc...

Perhaps there could be separate trade route slots for land/sea if people aren't happy with the balance?

Or perhaps you could have a trade route "currency" which increases as you reseach key techs, and advance through eras. e.g you have 100 "Trade route points", and setting up a trade route could be a function of distance and type of trade route. So for example an inland 6 tile route, could cost 2 but an oversea 6 tile route could cost 3. Balance the points such that caravans and cargo ships are considered evenly matched when all the risk and rewards of each are factored in.

Caravans also happen to cost less as well and are far easier to make. Caravans are only harder to protect when you have on high barbarian count, but in a regular game it's far easier to protect because eventually... they just go away.

I don't have a problem with the current system. Before BNW there was all sorts of moaning about coastal cities and how much they suck and the removal of gold from ocean tiles would kill of any incentive to settle on a coast at all.

Now you have incentive. Where is the problem?

It is just a perk for settling on a coastline, much like settling near a river or mountain. Given the choice of only being able to pick one of the three, I'd still rather settle near a river or mountain and use land routes. They can't be that imbalanced where there are still plenty of situations where it isn't ideal.

I suppose I could see the argument for late-game play. After all the techs are researched and you can trade to anywhere, there isn't much incentive to keep using land trade. Perhaps all that is needed is a tech that fudges with the late-game numbers. Perhaps something like after Railroads, you get either more gold from land routes or get additional land route connections. It would also be a nice perk for players who go to Railroads, as many ignore it and go straight to Labs and such.

Matthew. said:

I don't have a problem with the current system. Before BNW there was all sorts of moaning about coastal cities and how much they suck and the removal of gold from ocean tiles would kill of any incentive to settle on a coast at all.

Now you have incentive. Where is the problem?

Click to expand...

You only need 1 coastal city from which every naval route can start...

I don't mind naval routes being more valuable, but maybe x2 is a bit too much. Resource diversity should count double, but leave the rest intact.

Also, I think a negative modifier (-25%?) for trade routes to city states would improve gameplay. A lot of times, I don't want a trade route to another civ because it would benefit them too much. So I opt for city states a lot. I don't like that actually, but the mechanics push me in this direction.

Yes. And you also need coastal cities to trade with, need to invest in that early coastal city, and use hammers on things you wouldn't normally need.

For the first half of the game, I think the trade-off is balanced.

I also got the impression that the discussion was partly on the insane internal food routes, too. In which case you need to invest in even more coastal cities.

Like I said, I can see the point for late-game discussion, but for the first half of the game I don't find myself prioritizing a coastal city and trying to get up sea routes.

What is wrong with needing "only one coastal city?" How many real wars have been fought over deep water ports (lots). Getting that one port city should be important.

If you ask me, having a port still isn't important enough. How is it that whole armies can be embarked across oceans by landlocked civs?

evilcat said:

Oh please, can we stop arguments like "this is moar realistic"?
Someone want to tell me something about realism in the GAME about Ceasar nuking Washington before he send Giant Death Robot against him? Or xbowmane upgrading into maschine gun and losing range?

Click to expand...

YEAH! People need to stop --

evilcat said:

Sure a singular ship carries more than singular truck, but the volume of trade is often biggest with nearest partner. Since there are thousend of this truck.

Click to expand...

Umm...

Montov said:

You only need 1 coastal city from which every naval route can start...

I don't mind naval routes being more valuable, but maybe x2 is a bit too much. Resource diversity should count double, but leave the rest intact.

Also, I think a negative modifier (-25%?) for trade routes to city states would improve gameplay. A lot of times, I don't want a trade route to another civ because it would benefit them too much. So I opt for city states a lot. I don't like that actually, but the mechanics push me in this direction.

Click to expand...

You can crank a bunch of trade routes from a single coastal city, but if you have multiple cities, you can send them all to a single high-yield port in another empire.

As for city-states, they already have far lower yield than most international routes, so your penalty is baked in.

Game balance reasons:

Coastal tiles are not as good as land tiles (unless you have a lot of seas resources, which are awesome) - so coastal trade routes represent the trade off for having coastal cities - they produce lots of income.

Those landlocked cities, on the other hand, can plop trading posts all over the place, get more gold, and get science if you do rationalism, and get more gold during golden ages.

It's for balance, it doesn't seem far off, but I do wish you could only have x trade routes from one city. Having all your routes going from one city (which almost always happens), doesn't really feel like building a trading empire.

tommynt said:

its good game design - if u dont see that u r blind ..

if it wasnt for crago ships why d ANYONE WITH BRAIN build coastal cities instead inland cities at mountains for observatories?

Also with this caravan center they get kinda equal anyway

Click to expand...

This. The food from cargo ships can make for some glorious sized cities that caravans just can't touch. This alone is why I generally only make coastal cities now.

Civmike said:

Because ships conduct the vast majority of trade in the world, and have done so for a long time. Simple logistics: it is far far cheaper per ton to travel by water.

Click to expand...

from a realism standpoint, this right here. Trade via water is just way more efficient and has been for a long time. Historically, overseas trade has been a huge factor in the development of cities...that's why most of the major cities in the world happen to be situated in natural ports.

Tommy touched on the gameplay/balance argument, which should be pretty obvious....coastal cities would be pretty bad without it, especially now that they've removed the gold from water tiles.

So it fits realism AND gameplay...what's the issue exactly?

There should be air trade-routes if both civs have an airport in the relevant city. These trade-routes could pressure tourism (instead of religion, since it is late game only).

bison21 said:

There should be air trade-routes if both civs have an airport in the relevant city. These trade-routes could pressure tourism (instead of religion, since it is late game only).

Click to expand...

I did think indeed that having air travel factor into trade routes would be interesting. I considered maybe it could indeed buff land trade routes, in that they could provide double gold if between two cities with airports. This would represent what the immediate advantage is of air travel: ability for a city be a center of trade and travel without requiring access to water. Plus, you see cargo trucks and stuff radiating from airports all the time.

goods aren't really shipped through the air IRL...it's not efficient. The advantage of air travel in the game is reflected in the airport building, which increases tourism, plus the ability to airdrop units.

chazzycat said:

goods aren't really shipped through the air IRL...it's not efficient. The advantage of air travel in the game is reflected in the airport building, which increases tourism, plus the ability to airdrop units.

Click to expand...

It really depends on what you think a trade route represents, but this is more or less true. Things are shipped though air traffic, but you don't move mass quantities of anything that way unless it's very valuable for its mass or extremely perishable.

Not that I think the game needs the complexity, but maybe an air trade route where the value is increased more for resources like gems, pearls, crabs and fish, decreased for others...?

And hell, while we're at it, throw online trade routes in there that are weighted differently for other stuff. Have it unlock the Cats and Pornography luxes?

I think right now coastal trade routes might be a bit too good. Specifically food routes. If your capital is coastal and you found a quick second city on the same coast, then set up Granaries in both and make food routes to each other, you can have two size 20 cities in no time at all (under 100 turns in my current England game on Standard speed, and I didn't even play optimally). Then you can found a third and fourth and get more routes... It just escalates from there. All my trade routes are oceanic food trade routes right now, and I'll only found cities inland if there's very good resources or chokepoints to defend.

Also, iirc I've never seen a barb Caravel. The high seas (ocean) are clear of barbarians in the early game while the land is crawling with them, further stacking the deck against land routes. There might be Galleys on the coast but with city bormbardment and two Triremes I've very rarely lost even a single route.

As for solutions, I'm not sure. It's easy to tip the scales too far and make land routes better, meaning we're back to square one where coastal cities = lol noob. I suppose you could make land routes spread religion better and/or give tourism (with a tech), since land merchants tend to interact more with their trade partners than sailors and sea captains (who basically unload their cargo, go get drunk in the local bar and then sail back home).