Holy Bejeezus, misquoted twice, by Photi and Victoria, about the same post. You have to read the whole thing, I addressed what you redundantly complained about within that very post! That was the whole point, having two copies of a luxury gets you nothing unless you trade it for something of value So, since having a second copy gets you nothing UNLESS YOU TRADE IT, you may as well get a gold per turn if that's the best offer available, because that's one extra gold per turn that you wouldn't be getting otherwise. Furthermore, in aggressively played games. which the forum seems to concur tend to be more successful than passive games, you're 1.) going to have lots of redundant resources, and 2.) no one else is going to like you enough to give you the deal of the century for them. But by trading each redundant copy, which you probably have many, many copies of, for the best offer available, which may only be one or a few gold per turn. they cumulatively add up to quite a bit.
Photi
Governor
actually, i woke up this morning and realized there was more nuance to what you were saying that shoulve prompted a different response from me.
The deals seem to be effected by who initiates the deal, and just how badly the AI wants their end of it, as is life. In all the following deals, i maxed out the gold, first with gpt and then up front gold. And not a penny more:
Spoiler Denounced :
Spoiler Allies, BFFs :
The scroogiest of the bunch was Victoria, even though she was an ally, so if @Victoria is playing her mainly, she might not have caught that
Last edited by a moderator:
Abraxis
☮
Your argument in your opening sentence was that multiple copies of the same resource have no value and this is a problem that's been plaguing the series for 7 years. You then went on to list all the ways they do have value in a dismissive tone, as though we should just agree with you because you presented the evidence to the contrary in a diminutive way.
This I expect is why people didn't accept your initial statement. Because you never actually argued your case. You just presented it, along with the evidence against, and you just kind of left it there as though that should make us see your point of view. It falls short, at least it did for me, and it seems as though it did for these two as well.
This makes me think you're taking basic evaluations for granted which the rest of us are not. But without more details, which usually come in the form of an argument, it's impossible to know what. You mentioned one gold per turn -do you think that's all you can get for a resource? You're only being offered one gold for extra copies because they hate you, it's meant as kind of an insult and a joke I think. This is one way they try to balance against the spoils gained from warmongering. It's also how they incentivise colonizing and conquering distant lands instead of neighbours, to get a diverse set of resources instead of more of the same.
If you really want to straighten this conversation out, you should probably explain why trading resources away has no value, because that's the point I think where you and we differ.
Or maybe I'm just confused, I found your posts kind of hard to understand to be honest.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
Apologies if it makes you feel better but I did not misquote you, chill
Your post starts
You then make reference in your second point to getting nothing if you trade it for something of value but you finish
using the words "absolutely nothing" and "no advantage at all" at the beginning and the end clearly clouded my judgement.... but the words bolded is what you are saying right? 1GPT?
I just replied the best deal I got was more than that. You can get a relic early AND some gol for 1 luxury.
I did not misquote you, I merely pointed out you seem unaware of this value and used the wrong statement perhaps. For that I apologise but your post seems inflammatory, my bad.
Last night I warmongered on deity without using the city gifting exploit and apart from the odd occasion for a few turns when most denounced me I had different allies through the game and most people unfriendly - friendly which was my intention as this post is about understanding how deals work in the game and there seems no difference between theses states.
Being denounced will get you at best 1 for 30 but that's what diplomacy is for. To be able to get better value out of the game even as a warmonger, seems you just annoy all the civs and don't give a..., your call on that.
I have to cover every post nowadays with warmonger exceptions because all the negative posts are from warmongers and the worst thing you lot do is assume you are the only people playing this game... you are not, I already mentioned in the post before then... unless you steamroller
Your post starts
You then make reference in your second point to getting nothing if you trade it for something of value but you finish
using the words "absolutely nothing" and "no advantage at all" at the beginning and the end clearly clouded my judgement.... but the words bolded is what you are saying right? 1GPT?
I just replied the best deal I got was more than that. You can get a relic early AND some gol for 1 luxury.
I did not misquote you, I merely pointed out you seem unaware of this value and used the wrong statement perhaps. For that I apologise but your post seems inflammatory, my bad.
Last night I warmongered on deity without using the city gifting exploit and apart from the odd occasion for a few turns when most denounced me I had different allies through the game and most people unfriendly - friendly which was my intention as this post is about understanding how deals work in the game and there seems no difference between theses states.
Being denounced will get you at best 1 for 30 but that's what diplomacy is for. To be able to get better value out of the game even as a warmonger, seems you just annoy all the civs and don't give a..., your call on that.
I have to cover every post nowadays with warmonger exceptions because all the negative posts are from warmongers and the worst thing you lot do is assume you are the only people playing this game... you are not, I already mentioned in the post before then... unless you steamroller
Last edited:
Alright, I'm not going to go on for pages and pages of arguing semantics, I'm just going to re-phrase, because I think the point does have some merit, and walk away from this thread. In my opinion (emphasis on opinion), it is somewhat problematic, certainly annoying, and quite illogical that there is no bonus to amenities from having multiple copies of a luxury IN YOUR CIVILIZATION'S INVENTORY, meaning that when you click on the resource tab, it shows a 2 or more next to the resource; I feel (again, opinion) that having more of it to spread around your populace should have a benefit, probably with somewhat diminishing returns on greater quantities. I am aware that you can get something from trading it, and that if relations are good you can get very good things. But IF YOU DON'T TRADE IT, there is no bonus that you receive from having it. This means that you are essentially forced to either trade redundant resources, or default on any bonus from them, there is no other option. If there were, this would be an opportunity for more strategic depth in the game by deciding what you do with redundant resources - "Should I trade all these for a better economy or have a happier and more productive cities?" "If I go to war with this civ, I'll need to stop trading quite a few luxuries to combat war weariness, what economic impact will this have?" and so on.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
I got that at the start, you really do not have to shout.
You also said originally that trading for 1 GPT was pointless and I was pointing out it's more than that if you could be bothered to play the diplomacy game.
There is quite a bit of depth in that trade, quite a few decisions to make
For a start I dropped into unhappiness for a short time to get the robes, you can drop into unhappiness if you want some cash, you give away iron AND gold to a poor civ who is fighting Gorgo and you want Gorgo stopped
There in fact the depth already there
That is what I have been telling you since the start.
Yes you have the choice of trading them or nothing, I get that.
Just one small example from real life.
A few years ago I saw a documentary on kiwi fruit (luxury).
There had been so much money to be made from them that lots of people invested
The documentary was showing these investors ploughing the perfectly good kiwi fruit into the ground because they could not sell them and also a glut in the market would lower their current value as a luxury item.
I think the design is fine. If they were to change it to move to your way of thinking they would have to reduce the number of luxuries on the board.
The fact in civ6 that you no longer have to set up internal trade routes and have kiwi fruit pictures flowing around the board is a blessing. The choice to send them overseas has depth.... I have 4 salt and Pedro wants salt.... but look Pedro has 12 cities and only 2 luxuries and is a threat..... no, I would rather salt my own ground that please Pedro.... or maybe you get desperate for cash, at least you have the option to.
From the beginning of civ 6 I have settled on luxuries everywhere AI can as Vicky, it's a monopoly game that has its own rewards.
Just playing around at the moment a bit. Have just started a game and found Kongo with a relic and I have truffles.
He has 113 gold and 8 GPT but is currently unfriendly toward me
He will accept a deal of relic for truffles and also give up to 5GPT extra.
Just for the relic I get +8 diplomacy points for a favourable trade so I loaded a few times and the favourable trade value changes a little so is a touch random. As favourable trade modifier degrades a point per turn it's not normally worth it but while he is unfriendly toward me he is +5 so the +8 is a shot st being friends with him. ... not that many want to be friends with Mvemba.... I think he will be rich soon just because he is mvemba so will be a good trading partner as I am now fairly sure the deal value is linked to current income
Last edited by a moderator:
cazaderonus
Actual Dad.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2014
- Messages
- 640
I tend to agree with @ShakaKhan , it's kind of a missed opportunities to not offer different options for copies of the same amenities. Still worth it to have in the game through trades. But having a choice in what you can do with it could be interesting.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
Fair enough, I respect both of your opinions on the matter ofc. I just find the trade options quite good and it is the price you pay for being a warmonger... its a faceroll strategy according to the experts so I guess it does not really need them.
While we are on the subject...I did some more testing classical through to industrial
Luxuries seem not to change in price between eras, its more about the gold you have by the looks... A luxury is worth about 6 gold for 30 turns but a richer civ will pay more
Strategic resources tend to be worth 1.5 - 2x that
I kept an eye on my happiness through the report and alwasy traded every lux I could afford to stay around 0 and also pushed to get luxuries as soon as possible. Its sped up my game a fair amount because of the gold.... not one gold CS on the map though which I noticed hit the other civs quite hard.
While we are on the subject...I did some more testing classical through to industrial
Luxuries seem not to change in price between eras, its more about the gold you have by the looks... A luxury is worth about 6 gold for 30 turns but a richer civ will pay more
Strategic resources tend to be worth 1.5 - 2x that
I kept an eye on my happiness through the report and alwasy traded every lux I could afford to stay around 0 and also pushed to get luxuries as soon as possible. Its sped up my game a fair amount because of the gold.... not one gold CS on the map though which I noticed hit the other civs quite hard.
Photi
Governor
I'm currently allies with Germany. on turn 154 i asked Frederick for niter and he says he will give it to me for 22gpt + 7 gold. the very next turn, i again ask him for niter (having passed the first time) and he comes back asking for 51gpt + joint war against Mvemba. the joint war is alright as i am currently mobilizing for a war against Kongo anyway (and i need the niter to upgrade my immortals), but dang 51 gpt an increase of 29 gpt from the turn before. would sure like to know what happened in the interim.
the second time around it shows Frederick as having aluminum which he didn't have before, so he either just researched radio and/or got an aluminum mine up and running during his turn. Another ally, Alexander, would be better for the joint war as he has many units closer to Kongo, but he and Mvemba are declared friends. Alex will give me niter for a few gpt cheaper, so if i went that route and then ask Frederick for the joint war, he will only give me 62 gold with no gpt to give, nor will he give up one of his spices.
just a weird game, i am playing a map i've already won, this time aiming for a SV, and on paper i am further ahead than the previous game around the same turn, but the AI this time around has really got a leg up on me. Mvemba has like a size 17 city, 15 or more great works and an archaeological museum already filled. Frederick is in the Atomic age and i'm stuck back in the Renaissance.
But what i really want to know is why did niter more than double in price over the course of one turn?
the second time around it shows Frederick as having aluminum which he didn't have before, so he either just researched radio and/or got an aluminum mine up and running during his turn. Another ally, Alexander, would be better for the joint war as he has many units closer to Kongo, but he and Mvemba are declared friends. Alex will give me niter for a few gpt cheaper, so if i went that route and then ask Frederick for the joint war, he will only give me 62 gold with no gpt to give, nor will he give up one of his spices.
just a weird game, i am playing a map i've already won, this time aiming for a SV, and on paper i am further ahead than the previous game around the same turn, but the AI this time around has really got a leg up on me. Mvemba has like a size 17 city, 15 or more great works and an archaeological museum already filled. Frederick is in the Atomic age and i'm stuck back in the Renaissance.
But what i really want to know is why did niter more than double in price over the course of one turn?
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
I guess he decided to go to war with Mvemba and needs it? after all a joint war was suddenly in the offering
Playing on a map and trajan declares wr on Mvemba, I offered him my horses and he offered me all his gold and open brders..... seems like you can be quite opportunistic in this game, I think I'm gonna grab lots of resources next game. Hopefully I can buy lief erikson and snowball it a bit
The 225 sounds about right for a normal trade
The key thing to check is how much money they have by clicking on their gold in the trade screen until it stops... it seems there is always more there than shows at first
Photi
Governor
i suppose that's the logical answer lol
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
Yes but was very useful to point out, I had not really thought about it just like I had not thought about Monty paying more for luxuries. Great post, thank you!
Hi - I am fairly new to Civ6 and appreciate it's complexity (having played Civ1-5 a lot). I bookmarked CivFanatics a long time ago to help me understand the game and to benefit from topics such as this.
My question for this topic is this : Most of the time I won't trade a luxury for 1-2 gpt since I don't know the equivalent benefit that my opponent is getting. Amenities give population growth and non-food benefits. Looking at 1 gold versus nothing, obviously I'll take the gold but what if my adversary is getting a benefit equal to 5 gpt or more ? Wouldn't it be better to refuse the trade ?
Thanks to everyone for their input.
My question for this topic is this : Most of the time I won't trade a luxury for 1-2 gpt since I don't know the equivalent benefit that my opponent is getting. Amenities give population growth and non-food benefits. Looking at 1 gold versus nothing, obviously I'll take the gold but what if my adversary is getting a benefit equal to 5 gpt or more ? Wouldn't it be better to refuse the trade ?
Thanks to everyone for their input.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
You are 100% correct, if the difference in luxuries puts the civ at +5% in 4 cities and they had a total income in those cities of 120 GPT then trading with you is very worth it because they break even on gold but also benefit from science/culture etc. But
1. At what stage are just 4 of their cities producing anywhere near 120 GPT between them?
2. The move between -5% and +5% and +10% is spread out a bit so Inwould guess the real value is around +5% in 2 cities which makes point A 240 GPT from 4 cities before happiness modifier.
The 6 GPT for a luxury seems standard from what testing I have done so the value is greater to you early and not so great later.
I cannot give you a whole answer because no-one here is an expert yet, the game is too young. This thread is a dis overly thread, please feel free to input.
Another good question is if Inhave a lux trade open with Qin will he consider this before war?
Of course trading with weaker countries is not such an issue, trading with a snowballing civ would be silly.
1. At what stage are just 4 of their cities producing anywhere near 120 GPT between them?
2. The move between -5% and +5% and +10% is spread out a bit so Inwould guess the real value is around +5% in 2 cities which makes point A 240 GPT from 4 cities before happiness modifier.
The 6 GPT for a luxury seems standard from what testing I have done so the value is greater to you early and not so great later.
I cannot give you a whole answer because no-one here is an expert yet, the game is too young. This thread is a dis overly thread, please feel free to input.
Another good question is if Inhave a lux trade open with Qin will he consider this before war?
Of course trading with weaker countries is not such an issue, trading with a snowballing civ would be silly.
shaglio
The Prince of Dorkness
It seems Civ 6 Luxury trading is much more complex than Civ 5 ever was. In Civ 5, the going rate for a Luxury was 240g, or 7gpt (210g total), or some combination in between where the total gold got closer to 240 the less gpt was involved. But if your theory is correct (that the gold amount changed due to Germany planning to go to war and needing to upgrade units), then that's is much more intricate than any trading Civ 5 ever had.
Last edited:
Seemed pretty clear what he was saying to me. He actually gave a scenario where he described how silly it is that having lots of citrus wouldn't make your empire any happier. As he said, people just seized on the one sentence without accounting for its context. And there was no dismissive or condescending tone directed at anyone, but rather sarcasm directed at the game. The point is pretty straightforward, actually: the game makes having multiple copies of a luxury only valuable for trading purposes, otherwise they sit in some warehouse somewhere collecting dust, of no interest to your citizens whatsoever (which is where Shaka's use of "absolutely nothing" or "no advantage at all" is very apropos).
With the amenities system introduced in Civ VI, it makes even less sense. If my amenities from citrus are only distributed to the closest four cities, seems illogical that additional copies of citrus provide no amenities to some fifth city that doesn't have it. It could me more efficient to diversify amenities by simply making it only the first unit provide the four amenities, and then each one after that provides only one.
At any rate, let's talk deals. As India, I managed to become friends with Gilgamesh before he could muster up the minor effort to crush my capital (doesn't seem to be stopping him from shuffling war-carts outside my capital though, but that's an unrelated matter). I settle a city to grab a copy of salt to trade. Guy likes me lots, that's not the problem. I'm not doing better than him either, that's for sure (I'm surrounded by desert and ocean). So, my thoughts are that this may be affected by a few things:
Difficulty (Emperor)
Gil's happiness needs (Four cities, pop 7, 3, 2, 2)
His likeliness of backstabbing me (who knows?)
The game feels like a throwaway, although if I can my varu out I may just turn the tables and march on him, but I'm willing to experiment as to what I should try here. Not crazy about giving him my horses even though India doesn't need them any time soon.
EDIT: Scythia just offered a deal. She is unfriendly despite a current net total of +5 modifiers. She has five cities (4,3,3,2,2).
Last edited:
Abraxis
☮
So... we're to accept "except for all the reasons this has value, it has no value" as fair and valuable criticism?
"
What you should accept is that the point specifically (and, to my mind, clearly) had to do with multiple luxuries being of no value "unless you are able to trade it for something". The proposed criticism is that copies of luxuries have no value beyond trading, rather than the criticism which was mistakenly read in (that trading luxuries lacks value). Even barring such acceptance, consider your own comments about coming across in a dismissive or diminutive fashion.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
@steveg700
When a civ offers luxuries instead of gold that's a good sign, not a bad one....
You have not said how much gold he has. Double clicking on his gold per turn is what I am interested in, he would probably give you 6 GPT if he is earning 8, you can try and suggest it instead of grapes if you want gold rather than lux.
If he is earning 8 or more and is not willing to give gold that's a bit odd, it does seem like he has a lot of lux so maybe he values them less?
I do not know all the answers but am trying to learn, what you provide is useful but I am not sure what you want from the deal or how much GPT he has. What is very interesting is ScythIs unfriendly offering a lux, has she got quite a glut and low cash? It's normally only when low on cash they will offer luxes first in my experience.
With regard to politics you are on +19... I have no idea how far through the game you are but getting to civil service and making an alliance with him is +18.
The best thing to do is a turn or 2 before the friendship ends be ready for a backstab and also if possible give him a good trade, maybe open borders and send a trade route.
When the friendship ends try to renew it and if he says no then wait a turn in case he offers or try and declare a joint war with him against someone else.
Hopefully he will renew, Gilgamesh likes friends and you are safe for another 30 turns.
Scythian unfriendliness at +5 is just a matter of time, she will eventually become neutral and possibly even friendly but you really need about +8-15 to get things going better.
When a civ offers luxuries instead of gold that's a good sign, not a bad one....
You have not said how much gold he has. Double clicking on his gold per turn is what I am interested in, he would probably give you 6 GPT if he is earning 8, you can try and suggest it instead of grapes if you want gold rather than lux.
If he is earning 8 or more and is not willing to give gold that's a bit odd, it does seem like he has a lot of lux so maybe he values them less?
I do not know all the answers but am trying to learn, what you provide is useful but I am not sure what you want from the deal or how much GPT he has. What is very interesting is ScythIs unfriendly offering a lux, has she got quite a glut and low cash? It's normally only when low on cash they will offer luxes first in my experience.
With regard to politics you are on +19... I have no idea how far through the game you are but getting to civil service and making an alliance with him is +18.
The best thing to do is a turn or 2 before the friendship ends be ready for a backstab and also if possible give him a good trade, maybe open borders and send a trade route.
When the friendship ends try to renew it and if he says no then wait a turn in case he offers or try and declare a joint war with him against someone else.
Hopefully he will renew, Gilgamesh likes friends and you are safe for another 30 turns.
Scythian unfriendliness at +5 is just a matter of time, she will eventually become neutral and possibly even friendly but you really need about +8-15 to get things going better.
Gil didn't offer a resource initially. I modified the offer from this:
He's earning 12 GPT. Tomyris is offering me the same (10 GPT).
Not that I need the grapes, but it seems to me the AI's aversion to 1-for-1 trades when its copies are currently collecting dust is a real bone of contention.
Last edited:
Similar threads
