Part 1 of the 2 proposals that aim to reduce gold income. This conflicts with the proposals that try to change gold yields and gold buildings like the Market one, but is not exactly a counterproposal.
Glossary:
buy price = the maximum value the buyer is willing to offer for the resource
sell price = the minimum value the seller is willing to sell the resource for
deal price = the actual value that the resource is being traded for
The proposal:
AI offers to buy a luxury resource from human at the average of their buy price and the perceived sell price of the human. This price CANNOT be increased (AI treats this as their actual buy price for deal purposes). Both AI and human gain trade opinion modifier with each other based on the difference of deal price and buy/sell price.
When human wants to buy a luxury resource from AI, AI should charge them the average of AI's sell price and the perceived buy price of the human. This price CANNOT be decreased (AI treats this as their actual sell price for deal purposes). Both AI and human gain trade opinion modifier with each other based on the difference of deal price and buy/sell price.
Example 1:
Civ A, a human player, is trying to sell Cotton to Civ B, an AI player. Using resource valuation, the AI is willing to pay 72GPT for the Cotton, and it thinks the human wants to receive at least 6GPT from selling it.
CURRENT behaviour: AI offers the deal at 72GPT, and the human happily accepts it.
PROPOSED behaviour: AI offers the deal at 39GPT, the human cannot increase the price but still happily accepts it, and the AI likes the human more now as if the human just gifted it 33GPT.
Note that if this was an AI-AI trade instead, the deal would have gone through at the same price, and both sides gain the positive opinion.
Example 2:
CIv A, a human player, wants to buy Silk from Civ B to start WLTKD. Using resource valuation, the AI is willing to part with the Silk for 4GPT, and it thinks the human is willing to pay at most 32GPT for it.
CURRENT behaviour: AI offers to sell at 4GPT, and the human happily accepts it.
PROPOSED behaviour: AI offers to sell at 18GPT. If the human accepts it, the AI likes the human more as if the human just gifted it 14GPT.
Note that if this was an AI-AI trade instead, the deal would have gone through at the same price, and both sides gain the positive opinion.
Rationale:
1. The human is gaining a lot from luxury deals as sell price and buy price differ too much. This is unsolvable through changing the valuation formula since a duplicated luxury really does worth nothing 99% of the time.
2. This reduces human gold income and may make working merchants and building gold buildings viable again.
Note: This only affects luxury trades, but if devs think it's easier to code if this extends to all deals, I can modify the proposal.
Glossary:
buy price = the maximum value the buyer is willing to offer for the resource
sell price = the minimum value the seller is willing to sell the resource for
deal price = the actual value that the resource is being traded for
The proposal:
AI offers to buy a luxury resource from human at the average of their buy price and the perceived sell price of the human. This price CANNOT be increased (AI treats this as their actual buy price for deal purposes). Both AI and human gain trade opinion modifier with each other based on the difference of deal price and buy/sell price.
When human wants to buy a luxury resource from AI, AI should charge them the average of AI's sell price and the perceived buy price of the human. This price CANNOT be decreased (AI treats this as their actual sell price for deal purposes). Both AI and human gain trade opinion modifier with each other based on the difference of deal price and buy/sell price.
Example 1:
Civ A, a human player, is trying to sell Cotton to Civ B, an AI player. Using resource valuation, the AI is willing to pay 72GPT for the Cotton, and it thinks the human wants to receive at least 6GPT from selling it.
CURRENT behaviour: AI offers the deal at 72GPT, and the human happily accepts it.
PROPOSED behaviour: AI offers the deal at 39GPT, the human cannot increase the price but still happily accepts it, and the AI likes the human more now as if the human just gifted it 33GPT.
Note that if this was an AI-AI trade instead, the deal would have gone through at the same price, and both sides gain the positive opinion.
Example 2:
CIv A, a human player, wants to buy Silk from Civ B to start WLTKD. Using resource valuation, the AI is willing to part with the Silk for 4GPT, and it thinks the human is willing to pay at most 32GPT for it.
CURRENT behaviour: AI offers to sell at 4GPT, and the human happily accepts it.
PROPOSED behaviour: AI offers to sell at 18GPT. If the human accepts it, the AI likes the human more as if the human just gifted it 14GPT.
Note that if this was an AI-AI trade instead, the deal would have gone through at the same price, and both sides gain the positive opinion.
Rationale:
1. The human is gaining a lot from luxury deals as sell price and buy price differ too much. This is unsolvable through changing the valuation formula since a duplicated luxury really does worth nothing 99% of the time.
2. This reduces human gold income and may make working merchants and building gold buildings viable again.
Note: This only affects luxury trades, but if devs think it's easier to code if this extends to all deals, I can modify the proposal.