Reputation hits

[gozpel]

It can simply destroy a good game, where I trade some luxury/recource to another civ...and the traderoute gets broken by some pillaging spearman on the other side of the world. Now the whole world hates me and I'm stuffed for the rest of the game.
If there was a way for me to "protect" the traderoutes, then it's ok, but now too many things out of my hand can destroy my reputation. I don't want caravans or things like that, but I could live with some sort of "bad luck penalty". For example, I have to pay 2 gpt or something for the rest of the tradingdeal to the tradingpartner and I would therefore still be in the good books as a reliable merchant.
And also, if there was a way to flag the unit/civ who destroyed the traderoute in the first place and they get the blame instead of me...I wouldn't mind that at all.

 

[dexters]

Yea, it's a problem when you get blamed for things you didn't intentionally cause.

There was a suggestion in this forum that they implement a "compensation" system whereby if a traderoute is broken, the AI calls you up and ask you to explain yourself and pay them compensation. Only when you refuse this compensation will your rep take a hit. This way, if you really want to break a trade, you get punished, but if the trade route was cut accidentally, you can pay up.


This adds new depth to the game. If Civ A is paying you 6 gpt for a luxury, and Civ B is willing to pay you 12 gpt, then the good Finance / Business mind will immediately see that as long as they pay less than 6 gpt in compensation (the difference between the two trades), they can break the trade with Civ A by paying a sum, then sell the luxury to Civ B.

Outside of pure hard cash compensation, I also suggested that aside from cash payment, you can also enter into arrangements whereby the Civ in question "owns" the right to trade the resource that was cut off. So that when the trade route is re-established, the remaining turns left in the trade are continued.