Foreign Policy : General Trade Policy

[DaveShack]

Do we want to have a general policy on trade? I think it would be helpful to organize a trade policy, as long as we understand that it doesn't tie us to handling all future trades the same way. Instead, it should be thought of as a guideline for the starting points. Then if a trade opportunity comes up, the starting position for discussion can be the action which meets the policy, and we can decide to deviate from policy or not.

An example policy might be:

1. Don't trade resources with the 1st or 2nd place team (whichever we're not)
2. Don't trade away spaceship techs
3. Don't give advanced strategic resources (coal, aluminum, oil, uranium)
4. Trade something with each friendly civ each 20 turns, if there's anything at all that can be traded that doesn't break the above rules.
5. Gift the most obsolete tech to the most backward civ each 20 turns, to help them compete with their other-continent neighbors, until the only things left to gift are spaceship related

So, do we want a policy? If we do, what things should be in it? I can propose, but you need to decide.

 

[Joe Harker]

Option 2 and 3 are a no-brainer and should be apart of any trade policy.

Basically any trade should be benefitting us and if possible, not to benefit the other guy too much for it so i dislike the idea of having to trade, or advised to trade when there is no benefit from it.

Perhaps something like in tech trading the deal shall not be too unbalanced, say no more than 10% more beakers for what we get

 

[dutchfire]

Don't give away anything. Screw the other continent. Monroe-doctrine.

 

[Provolution]

Nixon doctrine

We trade where it hurts most. If two civilizations on the other side hate each other, we better feed that hatred. If one civilization is outgunned, we arm the other, making sure none of them manage to develop peacefully.

 

[Cer]

Regarding posts # 3 and 4, I tend to agree with Provolution. Best way to screw up the other continent is to get them in wars that are fairly evenly-matched.

If possible, we want to bribe them into nasty wars that hurt their economy.

 

[fed1943]

Trade with friendly civs?

But there is no friendly. Just one cautious, all others annoyed.

Perhaps that change in the future, but until now, so it is.

And they have not much to sell us; just two/three techs, which together we

can research in few turns.

From your references to Monroe-Nixon I see you also know that far planet:

A true bold and adventurous move (perhaps not wise) to arm and train the

civs that within few turns will blast your cities.

I believe wise Mongolia shall never do that mistake.

Best regards,

 

[HUSch]

Trade allways, if we get the best part.

 

[grant2004]

I'd say we should always sell health resources when we can get gold per turn for it, happiness resources shouldn't be traded unless we are getting a good amount of gpt, or other resources for them, and strategic resources shouldn't be traded unless they are either obsolete, or if we want to use them to prop up a weak nation.

As for getting them to declare war on each other, it's a good idea but we'd have to keep an eye on the continent and be ready to send aid if one of them starts to win, but that's clearly a ways off.

 

[ice2k4]

I feel that rule #2 in the example policy should allow exceptions. Why not trade a spaceship tech for another spaceship tech. At prince level I've never seen the AI win a space race, mainly because they can't manage their production times coordinated with the other cities, and for some reason they don't make it much of a priority (I play mostly prince games.) I especially don't see why we can't trade it away to a civ that doesn't even have a high production level. If they're not a threat to a spaceship victory, why wouldn't we trade a spaceship tech for another spaceship tech?

 

[xr006]

is broker tech on or off?

 

[dutchfire]

That's a BtS option as far as I know.

Tech trading is on.