Peddlers (Similar to Trade Routes in Civ4BTS) [OPEN]

[raystuttgart]

Hi guys,

I have a very old concept that I currently call "Peddlers".
Basically adapting the "simple gold generating" Trade Routes of Civ4BTS.

Meaning the Unit does not carry actual goods. (And there is also no beaming of goods.)
It simple travels between 2 cities and whenever it arrives at a city it will generate a bit of Gold.

Edit:
Concept has been adjusted and simplified.
Due to suggestion of using existing Oxcart.

General Concept:

• The Unit used for Peddling will be the "Oxcart", thus buildable in your Cities. (So it will have 2 functions: Smallest size transport and "Peddling.)
  
• Oxcarts are not actively Player controlled when "Peddling". (They do it fully automated similar to "Whaling".)
• A "Peddler's Route" can only be started in one of your own Cities. (The button "Go Peddling" is not visible otherwise.)
  
• Conditions for a City being a valid "Peddling City" (as a start / end destination of a peddling route): Market exist, min City size 10, ...
  
• When wanting to start Peddling you just click Button "Go Peddling" on the Oxcart and it will then justs asks: "Where should I go for trading to Mylord?".
• You can then select other European Cities that fulfill the same conditions and are also on the same continent and are at peace with you.
  
• Travelling between 2 of your own cities is possible as well, but generates much less gold.
  
• Once you select its destination, it will travel between its origin and destination back and forth.
• Every time it arrives at the destination or origin it will generate a bit of gold for the owner and also for the owner of the destination city.
  (So you have an incentive to let other Player's Peddlers travelling to your cities live or even protect them.)
  
• The distance, attitude of the other player and size of both cities added will influence gold amount.
  
• Once the City the Peddler is travelling to is not a valid destination anymore, it will stop "Peddling" and ask for a new destination.
• If you are not happy anymore with the route the Oxcart is travelling you can click it again, cancel its command and give it a new destination to trade with.
• You can never send 2 of your own Peddlers to the same destination City. (So no exploit like "I send all my Peddlers to the same most lucrative City".)
  
• Robbing / killing a Peddler of another Nation will give minimal gold but it is not worth it compared to the gold it generates when trading in your city.
  (e.g. with a Buccaneer, which has hidden Nationality and can attack without declaring war)
  
• UI (Mouse-Over Peddler) will show origin and destination city of the Peddler (also for other players) and the expected amount of Gold (only for yourself)
  
• I would have an XML setting in GlobalDefinesAlt.xml that could completely deactivate it. (All other XML balancing for the feature will also be in that file.)

-----

Basically that is it.

Impacts:
It would offer a bit more incentive to stay peaceful with your European neighbours.
Maybe you might even start building Roads to their settlements to make trading easier.
With Buccanners you might even start hunting Peddlers of other Nations not travelling to your own cities.

 

[Mr. ZorG]

I would even suggest using an existing oxcart for this (if possible). I doubt that someone builds it to transport goods - it is not effective.

 

[Alignn]

I dunno, I feel like this kind of unit exists in ex. Civ5/6 as a simplified abstraction of reality - IRL traders bring goods from a city where they're cheap to another city where they're worth more, and selling them there. But this is already simulated pretty well by WTP, with goods being brought to a city being sold in the domestic market.
It'd be a bit like if you could build farms and mines as buildings in colonies, in addition to the tile improvements - feels like it duplicates an existing feature.

 

[raystuttgart]

I would even suggest using an existing oxcart for this (if possible).

Ok we could also add the "Peddle-Feature" to the Oxcart, so it could be used as both a "low level transport" and a "peddler".
(And probably also still allow to build it - since the possibility to use "Peddling" is limited by available trade partner cities anyways.)

I actually kind of like that idea because it gives the "Oxcart" a bit of more purpose.
(I also never really use it in my games and directly go for Wagon Trains instead.)

 

[DARCK-PHOENIX]

Great idea ... sad that is not about transporting actual goods that are consumed by citizens(automating fulfilling citizens' needs ).

 

[raystuttgart]

Great idea ... sad that is not about transporting actual goods that are consumed by citizens(automating fulfilling citizens' needs ).

I considered it when reading my old concept for it and realized it would not be worth the additional effort and trouble for myself to be motivated to implement it.
(Using actual goods, implementing it without conflicting with all other "trade related systems" and teaching it to AI is basically not double but 10 times the effort. Not even sure I would succeed.)

With actual goods there is too much complicated logic (effort and risk of bugs) to be written and too much calculation (performance) to do it reasonably without going crazy as programmer.
This feature is already much more complicate than it sounds. Especially AI logic would get almost impossible if it was about real goods trade between different nations by transports.

Summary:
Let me implement a "simple version (gold)" please before discussing "full blown deluxe version (goods)".
The version I suggested above is basically the limit that I could implement with reasonable time and effort.

 

[devolution]

I am concerned that these magical gold producing trade routes overlap too much with what colonization is supposed to be about, namely trading physical non-abstract yields. This mechanic, if introduced, would bring the game closer to Civ4 (which is a brilliant game, make no mistake about that!) and partially remove what colonization is supposed to be about.

Rather than introducing this feature, I propose that we add some form of automation to transport said yields to their destination in return for another yield. However, if we do add this feature, then I think that we should take it to its logical conclusion and abstract entirely the yield trading process.

 

[raystuttgart]

I propose that we add some form of automation to transport said yields to their destination in return for another yield.

I simply could not implement this myself ...
I could implement the "gold variant" but I could not implement the "goods variant".

I would simply not be able to teach it to AI or implement it without breaking performance.
Also, when it is about goods UI gets much more difficult. (With gold I just need a button.)

As I said, the difference between "gold variant" and "goods variant" is a factor in effort/complexity of about 10.
(And for so much effort and risk to introduce bugs it is most likely not worth it - at least not to motivate it to implement it myself.)

Rather than introducing this feature, ...

Well ok, this would not be implemented any time soon anyways.
I will just keep it on my list as a "reminder" or potential idea.

 

[devolution]

Actually I did start implementing AI yield trading with the native, that code is bit-rotting somewhere

I am just concerned about all the features that return an endless stream of gold in return for a one-time effort like this list (not exhaustive): taverns (monetizes culture), trader.
The proposed feature is very similar to resource trading in Civ4 though and it may be better to implement it through the diplo system. However, that would just be a form of beaming goods. (though we are already beaming gold!)

 

[raystuttgart]

Actually I did start implementing AI yield trading with the native, that code is bit-rotting somewhere.

Hm, if we would have partial code / an existing blueprint that already existed it would be another story.
(If AI logic is already there and performance is not an issue anymore, adding the UI and rest of the feature logic is doable.)

It would still be a massive feature ...
(Much more effort than the "simple gold variant".)

But it would also be more interesting.
(Since you need to do more thinking with actual goods.)