Market Mechanism

Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
710
Location
Adelaide, Australia
I think rather than negotiating with other factions for resources, it should all be handled by "the market".

Essentially any excess resources not being used by a faction automatically are put on "the market" and are available to be bought by any other faction. No negotiating with other factions (although we could make use of "open borders" to make it cheaper and/or "trade embargo" to make it more expensive).

As an example lets say England has no Iron and clicks to build a Swordsman. The nearest source of Iron is the French city of Paris. As England clicks to build the Swordsman, x amount of gold is deducted from England and delivered to France for the Iron.
Bonus points for a trade route appearing between the city building the Swordsman and Paris.

(I may be basically lifting this from the hexarchy demo)
 

MistroPain

Chieftain
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
72
Could treat it like how Open Borders works in some games, its Open until you place a trade embargo disallowing sales of your goods to a particular civ.

I like this idea; seems simple, adds a vastly improved trade system (over what we have), could work in mechanics like tying cost of sale to distance needed for the good to travel, with that cost elevated further if it needs to go around a civ that has an embargo placed on you. Might work better if luxuries were reworked to being actively consumed though, that way you can also tie this in with luxuries.
 

bene_legionary

Don't lose hope!
Joined
Apr 16, 2020
Messages
144
What's the price of a resource? What would the interface look like? What civs would it take from?

I think some people might be confused when they're building swordsmen and end up spending too much gold, when they need to buy more iron and don't realise it. It might be worse if someone's getting ready for a war and they start building swordsmen only to find out they've been undercut by their opponent (or someone else) buying their iron from them and building swordsmen first.

Maybe a good solution is to put your goods on 'the market' instead of the market taking it from you automatically. We can avoid the problem of excess and make it simpler for players to understand. The issue is making it visible to the player, and avoiding gaming the system, which is a big problem with diplomatic trading in Civ 6.

I think trading resources needs to go beyond strategics and luxuries to food and bonus resources as well, and getting rid of the incredibly easy self-sufficiency that civ 6 provides. There wouldn't be trade with a country having sufficiency anyway. Potentially a way to do that is for stockpiling resources but that might be too much.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,396
Location
Texas
Maybe a good solution is to put your goods on 'the market' instead of the market taking it from you automatically. We can avoid the problem of excess and make it simpler for players to understand. The issue is making it visible to the player, and avoiding gaming the system, which is a big problem with diplomatic trading in Civ 6.
I don't know why but I'm picturing something like a civilization version of eBay where you put up something to trade and other players/leaders have a certain number of turns to outbid one another, which could be interesting.

I too am wary of the idea of late game how possibly oil and uranium can just freely go to whoever it wants, without the player, who owns it, consent. :shifty:
 

Marla_Singer

United in diversity
Joined
Oct 24, 2001
Messages
13,133
Location
Paris, west side (92).
Maybe a good solution is to put your goods on 'the market' instead of the market taking it from you automatically. We can avoid the problem of excess and make it simpler for players to understand. The issue is making it visible to the player, and avoiding gaming the system, which is a big problem with diplomatic trading in Civ 6.

I think trading resources needs to go beyond strategics and luxuries to food and bonus resources as well, and getting rid of the incredibly easy self-sufficiency that civ 6 provides. There wouldn't be trade with a country having sufficiency anyway. Potentially a way to do that is for stockpiling resources but that might be too much.
The idea of a market is interesting, I like it. But maybe it would be too easy if one would only need a harbour to have access to everything that is available in all foreign harbours?

Considering how control of trade routes has been strategically decisive all accross History, I believe that aspect would deserve being detailed a bit more in the game. It would be interesting if trade routes would physically appear on the map and would require to be properly defended to avoid getting plundered by steppe hordes, privateers or pirates.

Another aspect which would be interesting is if civs (both human and AI) wouldn't only buy what they need, but also buy in order to sell back to others. We could therefore simulate something similar as trading powers (Phoenicians, Byzantium, Venice, Arabs, Portugal, etc...). The idea would be to see emerging hubs that would become strategic cities to control (Antioch, Malacca), and why not being able to establish trading posts in order to secure the control of trade routes. Alright, maybe I'm pushing it too far for a general audience game... :blush:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,396
Location
Texas
The idea of a market is interesting, I like it. But maybe it would be too easy if one would only need a harbour to have access to everything that is available in all foreign harbours?
Maybe this is a good idea to give Stock Exchanges something else to do? :mischief:
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Messages
349
I too am wary of the idea of late game how possibly oil and uranium can just freely go to whoever it wants, without the player, who owns it, consent. :shifty:

Players could set a stockpile (akin to the strategic limit) above which resources automatically go to market. As for oil, uranium, aluminum, etc. perhaps the solution would be to dismantle improvements if you are concerned about others having access. This would balance improvement yields against security concerns and would also pair nicely with exhaustible resources.

On a side note, I would also like to see some sort of dynamic pricing.

The idea of a market is interesting, I like it. But maybe it would be too easy if one would only need a harbour to have access to everything that is available in all foreign harbours?

Trading posts could help with this. Any power (or even city) that a trade route can reach could be part of the player's market. Certain technologies would probably have to massively increase the current range to represent early modern trade. Airports could lead to a global resource market. Admittedly, this sounds rather simplistic to me, as historically (and prehistorically) material access was often very diverse, but it nonetheless could work in-game.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
710
Location
Adelaide, Australia
I actually imagined the gold price of the resource being paid completely upfront, with the trade route appearing while the swordsman is in production. No price fluctuation while the unit is in production.

I pictured trade units sort of moving about the map "during turns" sort of like how animal resources might move while it's your turn. The entire trade route needs to be protected, rather than just one unit.

I sort of put forward an automated aspect to it as I was thinking about how during WWII Americans were being shot at by the Japanese with weapons made in America. Really, I think if you the player don't want to sell, you should need to take steps (trade embargo/war) to prevent it from happening. The default position should be resources within a range are useable.

Pricing wise, well as a starting point I was thinking we don't actually accumulate resources over a number of turns. You never have an economic reason not to sell (you can argue about I don't want to equip my enemy with weapons, in which case embargo them). But one deposit can generate multiple uses, even during the same turn. Each use increases the price, unless you are the player with the deposit (since you aren't paying yourself). Then you might have factors like distance increasing cost.
The exact numbers though, well it all depends on game balance really......

I had this trade route range in my head, lets say 6 tiles around a city to start the game. As you progress through the game, the range increases. Like you don't just get access to literally every resource on the map. I can't say I had like middle-men empires in mind, although I don't see a reason why they can't just automatically get a cut when the buyer selects to make the relevant unit if the resource is somewhere far enough away.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2021
Messages
60
And if Paris doesn't want to sell ?

Good question, and it's why I think working strategic tiles needs to require more effort than other tiles. If working a horse tile cost 6 food or a wheat resource a turn it might be worth trading those Horses if you don't need them. And you may have to adjust horse stockpiles so that you loose one every turn because of attrition.

I'm pretty sure that most trading in the past was exchanging one good for another but I'll let someone more knowledgeable speak about that.
 

rocksinmypath

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 13, 2022
Messages
45
Hey, guys. First time poster here.

I had a similar idea a while back, but maybe a little bit simpler. All excess resources go to a "pool" accessible by everyone meeting some requirement (e.g. unlocked a relevant civic, built a market). Instead of buying from a specific seller, players can buy from this pool, and reward is distributed to players who contributed to this pool based on their contribution. Like suggested by others here, there's no negotiating of prices between players, and the game determines what's a fair price for the buyers to pay (maybe based on supply and demand?).

Example:
A contributes 50 iron
B contributes 30 iron
C contributes 20 iron
D purchases 10 iron at 10 gold

A gets 5 gold
B gets 3 gold
C gets 2 gold

We can also introduce a monopoly dynamic to this system. In addition to gold, sellers can be awarded another yield like diplomatic favour or influence, which under normal circumstances (w/o monopoly) is divided up proportionally among sellers. When a seller has a monopoly, they can "steal" a portion of the influence that would otherwise go to other players. (Note: this yield is not extracted from the buyer)

Also, we can introduce the concept of price spread, so that buyers generally pay more gold than what sellers receive. A monopolistic seller gets a "better deal" than other sellers, meaning their spread is smaller.

Example w/o monopoly mechanism:
A contributes 50 iron
B contributes 30 iron
C contributes 20 iron
D purchases 10 iron at 20 gold

A gets 5 gold and 5 influence
B gets 3 gold and 3 influence
C gets 2 gold and 2 influence

Example w/ monopoly:
A contributes 50 iron
B contributes 30 iron
C contributes 20 iron
D purchases 10 iron at 20 gold

A gets 7.5 gold and 7.5 influence
B gets 3 gold and 1.5 influence
C gets 2 gold and 1 influence

The skew can scale with how strong A's monopoly is. In the example above, A's spread improved from 100% to 50%, and it stole 50% of the influence that B & C would've received.

The existing economic alliance feature can be expanded to allow players with non-majority control over a resource to form a cartel to obtain the monopoly bonuses together.

Example:
A contributes 40 iron
B contributes 40 iron
C contributes 20 iron
B & C form a cartel
D purchases 10 iron at 20 gold

A gets 4 gold and 2 influence
B gets 6 gold and 5.33 influence (4 + 2 * 40 / 60)
C gets 3 gold and 2.67 influence (2 + 2 * 20 / 60)

Both B & C's spread improved from 100% to 50% and they split 50% of A's influence between themselves according to their relative contributions.
 

Skybuck

Warlord
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
253
I would also like to see a market/exchange in civilization 7.

Where resources can be sold or bought. Especially oil is very interesting as in todays world ! ;)

Where prices can fluctuate based on supply/demand...

Also keeping certain nations friendly could help with that, otherwise enemy/angry nations start up driving prices or so... :)

Or if they get destroyed they can no longer participate in the market/exchange which could hurt other civs and piss them off and try and stop the destruction !

A bit like BRICS and Saudi Arabia en middle east etc :)

Also uranium for power plants be interesting to sell and buy.

Maybe even the price of gold ! ;) =D Not sure what gold could be used for... maybe to produce computer chips/military stuff ! ;) =D

Being an economic power house that way sounds interesting !

Or perhaps a rare civilization with some rare resources that the rest of the world needs ! LOL =D
 

Zaarin

Diplomatic Attaché to Londo Mollari
Joined
May 14, 2016
Messages
10,795
Location
Babylon 5
Endless Space 2 had something like this. It worked so-so, though I think that's more a result of the market being nerfed to oblivion in successive patches rather than the idea itself being bad.
 

Skybuck

Warlord
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
253
A great example of a exchange is Star Trek Online.

The exchange is a game in itself !

Highly fascinating ! =D
 
Top Bottom