Neutral Traders (non-playable Civ for Features and Events) [ACCEPTED]

How should the "Neutral Traders" Civ be called ingame?


  • Total voters
    31

raystuttgart

Civ4Col Modder
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
9,672
Location
Stuttgart, Germany
The actual name of the Civ is still in discussion.
  • Fugger Trading and Banking House
  • Welser Trading and Banking House
  • Republic of Genoa
  • Republic of Venice
  • Something else ...


Original Post
-------------------


Hi guys,

there are actually several concept ideas that would require another neutral and non-playable Civ.
The civ that could match this best is most likely the Republic of Genoa.

They were known Traders and Bankers with lots of wealth and power during the period in which WTP plays.
(They had e.g. financed the venture of Christopher Columbus - thus having their share in the discovery of the New World.)

Not being powerful enough to challenge Spain, Portugal, France, England, ... directly as Imperial Powers,
they focussed on making money as the partners of these Nations. (e.g. they lended huge sums of money to England).

When introducing the Republic of Genoa as a new Civ (with a leader "Doge of Genoa"), we could e.g. implement e.g. stuff like:

------

A) new DLL-Diplomacy Dialogue Features:
  • Money Borrowing / Lending (for interest)
  • Hiring Mercenaries (maybe new Units)
  • Influencing Market prices of Goods (by bribing)
  • ...
------

B) Genoese Trade Ships on the Map:


"Neutral Ships" appearing on the Map, sailing to the closest Colonial City, triggerning some trade event, then sailing back to Europe and after some time coming back to trade again.
(This could become a simple implementation using just small event messages or something more complex depending on how much time we invest on the implementation.)

This could make a "Pirating Strategy" much more interesting. Hunting civil trade ships.
(e.g. when they come from Europe they could have European Goods and when they depart they would of course carry some Colonial Goods they had bought.)

Of course the "Genoese" would get pretty angry if Pirates capture their ships in your sea territory.
(So you should try to defent them and not let them simply get captured or even capture them yourself.)

But well, in other Colonial Nations sea territory ... who knows of which Nation that evil Pirate was.
(So in other Colonial Nations sea territory you could go "Happy Genoese Hunting" with your Pirates.)

------

C) Additional Python Events


Additional nice story stuff. As we already know, possibilities are just limited by imagination.
e.g. We could have "Contracts" requiring like e.g. to "Bring / store 1000 Fur to Quebec".

------

Remarks:

  • The Nation would never get settlers. (Thus never have colonies.)
  • The "Genoese Ships" would have a special AI - to do the "Trade Ship Logic".
  • The Nation would be "always at peace" - nobody could declare War to it.
  • Every Colonial Nation would have contact with it right from the Start.
  • You could trigger Diplomacy with it just like e.g. with "Church".
  • Getting good relations would result in benefits considering all their features.
  • Getting bad relations could result in additional bad events.
------

Well, it is just a possibility and concepts for stuff like this already exist.
In fact implementing a new Nation (with a leader) is much less difficult than some may believe.

We did it already for the "Church". (Which I consider a success.)
So why not do it again for "Republic of Genoa"? :mischief:
 
Last edited:
...
there are actually several concept ideas that would require another neutral and non-playable Civ.
The civ that could match this best is most likely the Republic of Genoa.

They were known Traders and Bankers with lots of wealth and power during the period in which WTP plays.
(They had e.g. financed the venture of Christopher Columbus - thus having their share in the discovery of the New World.)

Not being powerful enough to challenge Spain, Portugal, France, England, ... directly as Imperial Powers,
they focussed on making money as the partners of these Nations. (e.g. they lended huge sums of money to England).

When introducing the Republic of Genova as a new Civ (with a leader "Doge of Genoa"), we could e.g. implement e.g. stuff like:

------

A) new DLL-Diplomacy Dialogue Features:
  • Money Borrowing / Lending (for interest)
  • Hiring Mercenaries (maybe new Units)
  • Influencing Market prices of Goods (by bribing)
  • ...
------

B) Genoese Trade Ships on the Map:


"Neutral Ships" appearing on the Map, sailing to the closest Colonial City, triggerning some trade event, then sailing back to Europe and after some time coming back to trade again.
(This could become a simple implementation using just small event messages or something more complex depending on how much time we invest on the implementation.)

This could make a "Pirating Strategy" much more interesting. Hunting civil trade ships.
(e.g. when they come from Europe they could have European Goods and when they depart they would of course carry some Colonial Goods they had bought.)

Of course the "Genoese" would get pretty angry if Pirates capture their ships in your sea territory.
(So you should try to defent them and not let them simply get captured or even capture them yourself.)

But well, in other Colonial Nations sea territory ... who knows of which Nation that evil Pirate was.
(So in other Colonial Nations sea territory you could go "Happy Genoese Hunting" with your Pirates.)

------

C) Additional Python Events


Additional nice story stuff. As we already know, possibilities are just limited by imagination.

------

Remarks:

  • The Nation would never get settlers. (Thus never have colonies.)
  • The "Genoese Ships" would have a special AI - to do the "Trade Ship Logic".
  • The Nation would be "always at peace" - nobody could declare War to it.
  • Every Colonial Nation would have contact with it right from the Start.
  • You could trigger Diplomacy with it just like e.g. with "Church".
  • Getting good relations would result in benefits considering all their features.
  • Getting bad relations could result in additional bad events.
------

Well, it is just a possibility and concepts for stuff like this already exist.
In fact implementing a new Nation (with a leader) is much less difficult than some may believe.

We did it already for the "Church". (Which I consider a success.)
So why not do it again for "Republic of Genoa"? :mischief:

The Republic of Genoa never had any colonies or settlements outside the mediterrenean and black sea
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Repubblica_di_Genova.png
and most of the time they were overshadowed by their venetian rivals even there.

Columbus received the finances for his exploration of "America" from Queen Isabella. Depending on the story from selling a few jewels or convincing her husband that the exploration would cost only the same as a few state banquets. Sounds much better than being financed by Genoa.

Genoa and Venice both "lost contact with time" when Portugal and Spain discovered the seaways around the southern tips of Africa and South America. Even when Portugal was already importing spices from India, cutting out the Mamluks who controlled the western endpoints of the silk road and the western end points of indian trading, Venice and Genoa both imported from the Mamluks and paid their demands becoming less and less profitable.

If we look at who did finances then it was not "Genoa" - the Doge certainly did not lend out money to Spain so that they could better cut him off from spice profits - but the Bank of St. Georgio in Genoa.
And if we implement a bank we might better use the Fuggers or the Welsers (the former financed the Holy Roman Emperor, the latter for a short while tried to exploit Venezuela).

Why not use those parties that already are in the game?
e.g. the player is the Governour of New England - but England itself had ships trading with it´s colonies too. Just as any other nation already implemented had them and most of them were outside the control of the local colonial administration.
 
@ConjurerDragon

The Republic of Genoa never had any colonies or settlements outside the mediterrenean and black sea
I know, that is why I was not going to give them any colonies. :thumbsup:
All I want to do with them is have them for events and a few features.

Columbus received the finances for his exploration of "America" from Queen Isabella.
Correct, I had mis-remembered. He was just born in Genua. :thumbsup:
But it is true that Genua was a big trading and money lending power.

it was not "Genoa" - the Doge certainly did not lend out money to Spain ... but the Bank of St. Georgio in Genoa
As I explained several times, this is just a game and we need to simplify sometimes and allow abstractions. :dunno:
Making no difference between "Genoa" / "Dodge of Genoa" / "Bank of St. Georgio in Genoa" is meant to make things easier for the player.

And if we implement a bank we might better use the Fuggers or the Welsers
Because 90% of our players have never heard of them. :dunno:
It is something that we Germans or historical experts know.

Why not use those parties that already are in the game?
Because I want to heavily limit the capabilities of this Civ, which I can not do with Kings.
It is also a matter of atmosphere, immersion and feeling I want to create with that Nation.
It will also make the implemenations much much easier, since I will always just have 1 dedicated player to grab.

----

Will it be better if we call it just "Italian Traders"? :think:
Somehow "Republic of Genoa" sounded much better though.
And also if I call it "Italian Traders" which Leader should I chose ? :dunno:

Will it be better if we call it "Venetian Traders"? :think:
It is ok for me actually. Player will be able to connect it as well.
Also we could then simply have "Doge of Venice". :thumbsup:

----

Comment:

There is some historical correctness in "Republic of Genoa".
But using "Republic of Venice" instead is perfectly fine for me as well.

Those are names that average players may recognize and understand.
(If I tell them "Fuggers" or "Welsers", how many people do you honestly think will know?)

It did trade a lot all over the world (although in fact mostly focussing on mediterranean / black sea).
And it did lend huge sums to other Nations - also for discovery or colonization ventures.

It may not be perfect, but I am also not trying to create a historical sim. Thus always argumenting with "not 100% perfect" will not help.
This is kind of "Alternative History" already by the fact that e.g. French or Dutch Colonies can conquer all of the New World and fight the WOI.

----


Summary:

I want to separate it from Kings for good reasons.
If I implement this it will definitely become a new "neutral player".

And I want to create something that is easily recongizable for every player.
Still open for better suggestions considering Civ / Player though.

If "Republic of Genoa" / "Republic of Venice" are not good enough, I have a problem. --> Average Players may have heard of them.
("Welsers" / "Fuggers" are simply almost unknown for average people around the world. --> Only Germans and historical experts know them.)
 
Last edited:
The Fuggers or other merchant-powerplayers of the unrepresented countries could be an alternative to Genua or other trade republics.

The concept itself is a good one! More trade, more events and more interactions are all great additions to the game (especially the middle part of a campaign).

Regards
XSamatan
 
The Fuggers
Well, I am German - I know who the "Fuggers" are / where. :)

I am even "Swabian" myself and the "Fuggers Family" is / was also "Swabian".
(For everybody who does not know "Swabians" are a sub-tribe / sub-culture in southern Germany. There are e.g. also "Bavarians" and many others.)
Something like "Texans" or "Californians" in the United States.)

----

Jakob Fugger "the Rich", might have been the richest private person of the world in his time.
But how many people outside Germany have ever heard about this fact?

----

If I tell the average player "Fugger Trading House" / "Fugger Trading Company" he most likely will has no idea what I am talking about.
In contrary he most surely has heard of Venice or Genua - those cities are famous world wide.
 
Last edited:
Well, I will simply ask community. :)
I will open a poll. :thumbsup:

Edit:
I made 2 options selectable in case somebody can not decide.
 
Last edited:
By the way, I was not wrong about Genoa. :)
(I was quite certian I had read about their involvement in the New World.)

Read e.g. here:

-----
Golden age of Genoese bankers

The opening for the Genoese banking consortium was the state bankruptcy of Philip II in 1557, which threw the German banking houses into chaos and ended the reign of the Fuggers as Spanish financiers. The Genoese bankers provided the unwieldy Habsburg system with fluid credit and a dependably regular income. In return the less dependable shipments of American silver were rapidly transferred from Seville to Genoa, to provide capital for further ventures.

From about 1520 the Genoese controlled the port of Panama, the first port on the Pacific founded by the conquest of the Americas; the Genoese obtained a concession to exploit the port mainly for the slave trade of the new world on the Pacific, until the destruction of the primeval city in 1671.
-----

You will find similar articles and proves of involvement in New World trade of the Fuggers and Welsers as well of course. :thumbsup:
(And also "Venetians" had their share.)

To my opinion the most historically correct candidates would really be:
  1. Republic of Genoa
  2. Fugger Banking and Trading House
  3. Welser Banking and Trading House
  4. Republic of Venice
 
Last edited:
Basque Traders or the Kingdom of Navarre

Basque Traders and Whalers are the ones I encounter most in literature about European colonization of the Americas. They had a pretty extensive legacy throughout the Americas from Canada and Newfoundland to Colombia. The term "Iroquois" is even suggested to have derived from the Basque language.

I am also fairly certain they were independent of the Crown of Castile.
 
I support the idea.

I also, however, would really love to see new small playable civilizations which are gimped in some way. E.g. not getting free immigrants due to crosses. I believe it would make the game more challenging and engaging for experienced players while adding fun and flavor for everyone. It would be sad if a name suitable for one of these is taken by the traders.
 
I support the idea.

I also, however, would really love to see new small playable civilizations which are gimped in some way. E.g. not getting free immigrants due to crosses. I believe it would make the game more challenging and engaging for experienced players while adding fun and flavor for everyone. It would be sad if a name suitable for one of these is taken by the traders.


I do not think you would be at risk of running out of possible additional civs, especially ones with substantial handicaps. The only additional European civ I can think of off-hand would be the German/Austrian colony of Klein Venedig, but I imagine you could also base a civ off the speculative Chinese colony postulated by oceanographer Gavin Menzies.

It was my understanding that the team was, understandably, moving away from adding additional civs right now though.

Either way, I think this neutral trader civ is a great idea, and I would love to see it in the game!
 
  • Like
Reactions: nci
It was my understanding that the team was, understandably, moving away from adding additional civs right now though.
Not something like a "fully playable Colonial Civ" because creating all those UnitArtStyles and all the rest for it takes too much effort.
But something like a "Neutral Trader Civ" with only a handful of Units for it - maybe just one (new) Ship Type - is a piece of cake.

Once we found a good Leaderhead the rest of the graphical stuff is easily found and created for it.
(After that rest is mainly just programming and texts - and our team is pretty good at programming and texts.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nci
The problem is that you would have an WIC for every colony ...
Exactly. :thumbsup:

There was no such thing as a single "West India Company" ...
There were many of those that for some reason all used that term because it seemed to be "cool".

Also the "West India Companies" were not "neutral", they were heavily in favour of their own nations.
Thus I was not thinking of using one of those but getting a neutral power into the game like the "Republic of Genoa" I suggested.

Edit:

But for the sake of simplification we could also pretend that something like a single and neutral "West India Company" existed. :think:
(A bit similar as we did it with the "Church" for all players which also was heavily simplified.)

Edit 2:

I am ok with it actually. :thumbsup:
(As long as we do not give it a "nationality".)

I added a new choice in the poll: West India Trading Company
(The poll is set up so you can change your choices.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nci
Just bumping "ACCEPTED" old concepts so they get further up in the queue again.
Is it possible for the players to make contract deals with neutral traders? I'm thinking the similar one like in the Civ4Col Age of Discovery Mod. So, by fulfilling the contracts to the neutral traders, they can gain their favor (earning trusts of the neutral trader) thus receiving benefits such as better contract deals or others.

Contract for example "The colony needs to deliver some amount of products in exchange for gold before due."
 
Last edited:
The actual name of the Civ is still in discussion.
  • Fugger Trading and Banking House
  • Welser Trading and Banking House
  • Republic of Genoa
  • Republic of Venice
  • Something else ...
Is choosing a -static- name really needed?

I see much better to just have a list of names (whether they are fictional or historical) and assign one on every new game.

While this doesn't seem a great change by itself, it helps on replayability.

Also... it may be expanded in the future. i.e. it would be trivial to take the name-list concept and design it from the start as a trade nation-list concept with fields for:
  1. Name
  2. Flag (optional)
  3. Fav resources to trade (optional)
  4. Specific thematic quest (optional)
While also sharing all of them the same logic and basics. Designing it right from the start would not mean more effort, since you may intentionally leave all the fields blank and just use the name. And IF/WHEN you want to expand it, multiple trade nations could be added. The main effort is anyway all the things you have suggested, this is just 4 configurable fields (with a new XML file) which would customize a bit the nation while being thematic. And lets say you only want to add one nation with its flag, resources, etc... then just fill the values for a single nation, but letting it to be expandable on the future. The work will be the same since all those things have to be added, either hardcoded or configurable.
 
Is choosing a -static- name really needed?
Yes. :)

Anything else is unnecessary overhead to program something with basically no gameplay value. :dunno:
We would simply implement them with the existing XML capabilities for Leaders and Civs as a Player / Nation.

So yes, we need to chose which Player and Nation we implement to keep efforts reasonable.
And we will definitely not implement 5 nations with graphics, texts, ... if only one is needed to make the feature work.

------

While this doesn't seem a great change by itself, it helps on replayability.
"Not a great change" ??? :confused:

You are talking about implementing several nations instead of just one.
(XML setup, texts, graphics, more difficult logic to assign it, ...)

Seriously, let us please stay realistic with efforts please. :thumbsup:
There is no need to increase effort by 500% without any gameplay benefit.

------

In short:

We will have only one single nation with just one leader as "Neutral Traders".
(And for immersion reason I would like to give them historical names.)


For the Nation / Leader setup I would implement them using default XML capabilities.
(There is really no point for me to waste time implementing something new.)

Otherwise somebody else would have to implement this. :dunno:
(But my time for modding is limited and I will
not waste it.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom