Trade being too unrealistic?

[Alvin]

Trading always been a great part of economies of the world, I mean most of China's income comes from trading clothes, shoes and other common things. I never got past 100 gold per turn for trading. Another thing is how the blockade is so ineffective, I can never mantain a big blockade for more than a few turns because the enemy just kills one of my destroyers or frigates.
I don't know about everyone else, but the trading game in Civ3 isn't than realistic.
If you got any comments, please post.

 

[punkbass2000]

Of course it isn't. It's an abstract game. I think it models real trading fairly well, though. It's certainly better than Civ2, and I expect Civ4 will continue to build on this.

 

[FinnMcCool]

Alvin is being too polite, punk. What I think he's really trying to say is that the Trade AI sucks so bad it's ripped a hole in the fabric of space. WTH. Taunts are fun when they're WELL AND KINGLY SPOKEN, not when they're a continuous barage of demeaning put-downs. And this thinly-disguised plot to extract tribute from the human player by "offering" a trade of map for map and 60 gold, then being "offended" by a human's rejection, (and the human takes a rep hit for this??) is tantamount to programmer lazyness on a Biblical scale...



BTW Alvin, I love your siggy

 

[punkbass2000]

...You don't take a rep hit for that...

 

[Trade-peror]

Many other players agree with this sentiment, Alvin.

A look in the Civ4 Ideas and Suggestions forum would offer many different models for remedying this. Just for starters, ybbor's Current Topics thread categorizes many suggestion threads and one of them is Economics/Trade, which might interest you.

 

[FinnMcCool]

tradeperor injects a good, cool-headed reply, thanks. i've looked at the suggestions thread for Civ IV, I hope the programmers are up to the task. CivIII has MUCH better graphics, which is a lot of fun to watch, and it makes the gameplay very smooth. That seems to be the common direction of all PC games these days. But the strategy of the AI should be worked on heavily in a STRATEGY game...

as for the rep-hit question, I'm not so sure. If you turn down such a proposal, the next time you meet with that civ, he is now "annoyed" and if you keep rejecting his outrageous demands, it ALWAYS leads to war.

 

[punkbass2000]

That's Attitude, which is not Reputation. That an Attitude-hit would be taken seems reasonable to me. How do you feel when an opponent (human or AI) won't make a deal that you think is reasonable?

 

[AA-battery]

Yeah, usually the AI gets all worked up when you tell it no or something and then it leads up to it signing alliances with civs already against you. The AI needs to calm down too and not take such an aggresive stance, especially in the modern era. It also demands more gold from you in a deal if you have a lot of gold. I really don't appreciate getting ripped off by it.

 

[Babbler]

My big problem with trade is the fact that one resouce can supply an entire empire, reducing the importance of obtaining new resources.

 

[AA-battery]

My big problem with trade is the fact that one resouce can supply an entire empire, reducing the importance of obtaining new resources.

Yes, I've found that odd too, its very unlike other games, where more is better. However I think that instead of you stocking up resources you stock up gold, which may be part of why one is enough.