1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Proposal: Luxury resources trade value scales with era

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by Cokolwiek, Jun 27, 2020.

?

Would you like luxury resource trade value to scale with era?

  1. Yes

    22 vote(s)
    84.6%
  2. No

    4 vote(s)
    15.4%
  1. Cokolwiek

    Cokolwiek Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    512
    Gender:
    Male
    Greetings,

    stemming from the points people made in the beta topic. Currently luxury resources lose any value in trade deals as the game goes on.
    Proposal is very simple: when the price was 4 gold per turn in ancient and classical, it will be 8 in medieval, 12 in renaissance and so on. Currently it will be 4 forever.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2020
  2. InkAxis

    InkAxis Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2020
    Messages:
    368
    Gender:
    Male
    Doesn't the price depend on how much the AI wants it? Like if the AI has happiness problems or cities demanding that resource, then they will be more likely to trade for it.
     
    Carloshooter and JamesNinelives like this.
  3. Cokolwiek

    Cokolwiek Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    512
    Gender:
    Male
    It is. This will change the base value. AI that wants will pay let's say 50% more from base value in renaissance, AI that doesn't need it only a half. So 24 and 8 respectively. Now most AI wants 4 or 8 all the game. I think that there is too much gold floating later in the game anyway.
     
    DeAnno and InkAxis like this.
  4. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    7,203
    I agree. Either luxs should scale or the AI should simply stop asking about them. Its not worth my time to conduct 3-4 GPT deals in the late game.
     
    saamohod and CppMaster like this.
  5. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    5,386
    Location:
    Beijing
    What's weirdest is they appear to pay more early game, like they'll pay 7 of their 10 GPT, but later on the same AI won't pay 4 of their 500 GPT.
     
  6. Vhozite

    Vhozite Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2019
    Messages:
    116
    Gender:
    Male
    I think it has something to do with early game happiness and the value of early game luxes, because I’ve experienced the same thing. Early on AI’s will pay like double the GPT for an early game lux, to the point where I look to trade so I can cripple their economy and slow their early game expansion.
     
  7. DeAnno

    DeAnno Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    377
    Gender:
    Male
    I would like to see the AI change its prices more aggressively based on its situation, paying very little when it didn't need the lux and very lots when unhappy, paying more to complete CS quests or WLTKD, etc. Not sure how feasible it would be. I also like this idea though, since gold values scale a lot quicker than happiness values.
     
  8. wobuffet

    wobuffet Barbarian

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,247
    Wouldn't the right solution to this problem be AI gold valuation in mid- and late-game? Presumably if the AI is too stingy with (i.e., is overvaluing) Gold in Lux trades past turn 200 or whatever, it's doing the same in non-Lux trades too.

    Maybe anchor AI Gold valuation to the median price of investing in a current-Era building, for example (where "Era" scales with other players' Eras too, perhaps).
     
    Carloshooter and JamesNinelives like this.
  9. JamesNinelives

    JamesNinelives Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2019
    Messages:
    1,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Australia
    I do feel like if the AI is valuing luxuries so low there is perhaps a more fundamental balance issues. For example, I've recently considered that settling near strategic resources can be of more overall value that settling near luxuries (beyond the early expansion phase anyway). I don't know if anything nessecarily needs changing in that regards, but I'm curious what other people have experienced.
     
    Carloshooter likes this.
  10. azum4roll

    azum4roll Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,304
    Gender:
    Male
    The AIs charge you for like 16GPT for one luxury though, so you'll have to prepare to pay 100GPT for WLTKD later on in the game.
     
  11. Vhozite

    Vhozite Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2019
    Messages:
    116
    Gender:
    Male
    I’ve only seen super high prices for luxes when its their only copy of it, with the value often being 1000+. What’s annoying is that if you try to trader your only copy of something it’s not worth nearly as much.
     
  12. Cokolwiek

    Cokolwiek Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    512
    Gender:
    Male
    What you propose seems to be more complicated to implement. And I don't think we can ask that of @Recursive and @Gazebo, considering how much they already gave us and the issues they have at hand with perfecting new official version, if we have a simpler solution to the problem that would be less demanding of their time.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2020
    Carloshooter likes this.
  13. Recursive

    Recursive Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,160
    Gender:
    Male
    It's probably an issue with resource valuation. I haven't touched that code recently.
     
    Carloshooter likes this.
  14. Tugboatspotter

    Tugboatspotter Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2019
    Messages:
    217
    Seems this is the wrong way around.

    The trade value of luxuries should remain reflective of what they are worth to a civ. If that base value never changes then, of course, the value will decrease as the game goes on. Changing the trade value doesn't make sense.

    If the value of luxuries increases every era then the trade value should automatically follow.
     
  15. Kim Dong Un

    Kim Dong Un The One & Unly Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2017
    Messages:
    810
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pyongyang
  16. Tugboatspotter

    Tugboatspotter Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2019
    Messages:
    217
  17. Cokolwiek

    Cokolwiek Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    512
    Gender:
    Male
    @Kim Dong Un So that was the original proposition I mentioned in the beta thread. I just twisted your scaling to linear scaling by era.
    @Tugboatspotter I see a perfect reason. It creates a more dynamic diplomacy and trade. It would reflect more the value of gold late game, which you tend to get tons of. It would go with line with increasing road and unit maintenance every era. It is also plainly more realistic. As empires grow and technological advancement permeates the economy costs rise. Demand grows, supply routes stretch, demographics explode, more people expect access to goods formerly seen as a luxury. The same sugar or incense that you needed to import in low quantities to your capital and was available to the king, aristocracy and high priests only, by medieval would be used in cathedrals and monasteries throughout empire, by renaissance by successful merchants in many cities, by modern becomes normal in many households.
     
    Kim Dong Un likes this.
  18. wobuffet

    wobuffet Barbarian

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,247
    Don't think my solution (bolded above) is more complicated at all. Much to its credit (and unlike vanilla), VP's trade system fundamentally doesn't peg AI valuations at fixed values for resources like Luxes. Manually inserting a time/Era valuation factor specifically for Luxuries seems, if anything, more complicated.

    All that needs to change here is some by-Era scaling of how the AI values Gold: as buying a single unit/building/etc. gets more expensive, so the value of 1 :c5gold:Gold falls. That's the underlying issue here, not anything about Luxury resources specifically (even if that's the most common manifestation of the problem!).
     
  19. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    7,203
    Agreed, although it is a two part problem.

    On the one hand, your right that gold value falls. On the other hand, so does the value of luxs imo. While luxs do scale to provide more happiness in the late game, I personally find that it takes so much happiness to move the needle in the late game that it often takes me 3 luxs to do what I could do with 1 lux in the early game. So there are competing factors.
     
    wobuffet likes this.
  20. Cokolwiek

    Cokolwiek Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2019
    Messages:
    512
    Gender:
    Male
    You surely knows more about how coding works than I do. It just sounded more complicated to implement than what @Kim Dong Un originally proposed.

    However I believe that resources base value should scale anyway because of how gold accrue and for realism sake. Your proposition looks more as an improvement to AI valuation of how much it needs them, which may accompany it, and is already in place.
     

Share This Page