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

Trade Route Balance Discussion

Discussion in 'General Balance' started by Gazebo, Nov 27, 2018.

  1. Gazebo

    Gazebo Lord of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    17,848
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock
    Hey all,

    Let's chat about trade routes. Do you feel that trade route yield balance is okay at present? Are trade routes producing too much gold/science/culture/pressure?

    G
     
  2. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    The rewards for routes are big, but I don't feel they're overwhelming or anything, just the balance of the two types is off. I think internal ones are inferior. To have them be comparable in might to externals, I often need renaissance+ Mendicancy. It's probably okay considering you need to fall behind or get a CS allied to get really good external ones, but I think there should be more benefits to internal ones, maybe stuck on a building. Like an additional +1 Production and Food to Caravansary if the city is the target of an internal route.
     
  3. phantomaxl1207

    phantomaxl1207 King

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    769
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Indiana
    Internals just don't scale as well as Externals. I would attribute it to that no Buildings benefit Internals outside or allowing Food and Production to be sent.
     
  4. Enginseer

    Enginseer Salientia of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    3,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere in California
    I would prefer if food buildings and production buildings increased internal trade route yields (locally), so a city with a ton of food buildings can definitely be my historic foodbasket city, etc.

    Tourism over trade routes scales too hard especially for tall cities, but that's not much of an issue.
     
    Mauro Mezzina likes this.
  5. Mad Madigan

    Mad Madigan Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    384
    I only ever use Internal trade routes if I absolutely have to to feed a low-:c5food: city or to send :c5production: to my capital for a Wonder or a captured city that I need to get infrastructure built in ASAP. I've gotten in the habit of leaving 1-2 trade routes available for Internal in the Medieval+ eras for these purposes, but otherwise I use External. The yields for External always feel much more valuable than the :c5food:/:c5production: you get for internal routes, especially later in the game when you and your neighbors have Markets/Caravansaries/etc built to boost the :c5gold: output, and Allied CSs always give hard-to-top yields. I use one of the expanded trade route UI mods that lets me easily manage how to optimize the yields in my external routes, but usually I'll spread out my External routes to combat poverty/boredom/illiteracy in my less developed cities since I can always count on getting plenty of :c5gold:/:c5culture:/:c5science: from Allied CS routes.

    If I'm not going for a Domination victory my trade routes tend to break down as:
    - 2 internal routes for :c5food:/:c5production: injections as needed
    - 2-3 external routes to major civs from my Capital if I'm falling behind for :c5gold:/:c5culture:/:c5science:
    - All the rest as external routes to Allied CSs from secondary cities to combat poverty/boredom/illiteracy

    Overall I am pretty happy with where trade route yields are, but I agree that I wish Internal trade routes scaled better in the late game (without the boosts from Ideologies/Religion) as compared to External routes. I feel that Workshops/Grocers/Factories/Agribusinesses would be good places to add appropriate boosts to Internal trade routes originating in those cities (and it would give me more of a reason to even build Agribusinesses, as in some games I literally don't build them at all).
     
  6. Revolutionist_8

    Revolutionist_8 Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2016
    Messages:
    444
    Location:
    Hungary, Earth, M.W. Galaxy
    Agreed with what has been said before me, can't add much else :D

    I think they are in pretty good spot atm, maybe internals could use a tiny bit of more love.
     
  7. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253
    I think internals start off fine (early game they are very useful), but late game then they don't scale as well.

    I actually think the Trade Routes to CS allies are too good overall, late game I find I would rather send to them then other civs, they are really good yields, and much more consistent than trading with fickle neighbors or having to worry about sanctions.
     
    tu_79 likes this.
  8. Gazebo

    Gazebo Lord of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    17,848
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock
    One possibility I’ve considered is reducing the duration of WLTKD from all sources to 5, but making a finished internal route trigger one in the target city. Would be a nice way to control WLTKD. I also think there should be a cap on stored WLTKD turns, to keep from going infinite, but that’s a different topic.

    G
     
  9. YukiN

    YukiN Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2018
    Messages:
    361
    Location:
    Singapore
    Internal trade routes need a buff. Just food or hammers compares unfavourably to gold + science + culture each at comparable quanitities. Maybe adjust the yields a little and combine food and hammer trade routes, or add gold to internal trades too.

    If WLTKD is the direction we are going, I would suggest a trade route triggers it at the start to give more immediate impact and control.
     
  10. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253
    There are too many ways to abuse that. Things like starting a war so that all of your trade routes are pillaged, and then rebuilding them for cheap for immediate WLTKD benefits.

    The base idea (doing it at completed ITRs) I think has some merit.
     
  11. YukiN

    YukiN Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2018
    Messages:
    361
    Location:
    Singapore
    Sounds like an east way to feed your opponent a ton of gold. If you are rebuying caravans, might as well just buy the luxes with the gold. If you are hard building, that's still a fair amount of hammers and time spent missing the trade route yields.
     
  12. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253
    Nothing says I can't do both. This is simply one way the system could be abused, and we haven't even put the diety player roster on it (and they think of crazy things). If the ITR has to complete, the bonus is earned. If its on the creature of a new trade unit, I feel there is too much risk for abuse there.
     
  13. YukiN

    YukiN Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2018
    Messages:
    361
    Location:
    Singapore
    For what purpose? Turns in storage have no value until they are reached.

    In any case, let me make something clear here: I am opposed to the WLTKD effect. We have a numbers problems and do not need a new mechanic. It adds complexity where complexity is not needed and is difficult to balance. It is counter to all that has been said about what we need to do to go gold.

    I am also generally opposed to complex delayed effects. They remove consequences from original action, which clouds both balance and decision making. The Ottomans get simple yields, which is fine. WLTKD turns is itself a continous/partially delayed effect.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2018
  14. chicorbeef

    chicorbeef Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,359
    Gender:
    Male
    While the idea is radical (and do you mean all sources will be reduced to 5 turns?) it is kind of cool and makes WLTKD more active. I wouldn't be opposed to it.

    How long would the target cities WLTKD be?
     
  15. Gazebo

    Gazebo Lord of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    17,848
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock
    I'm thinking of dropping the base value of WLTKD for everything to 8 and creating a max turns cap equal to double your city's population.

    Right now, it's pretty trivial to get upwards of 30-40 turns of WLTKD in a city.

    This really belongs in another thread, though.

    G
     
  16. suriv

    suriv Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    44
    WLTKD for internal trade routes is a good idea. Maybe then I can plant my merchant :)
     
  17. tu_79

    tu_79 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Messages:
    6,939
    Location:
    Malaga (Spain)
    I'd be fine with grocer giving +x food to outgoing trade routes and windmills giving +x production.
     
    HalfEmptyMug likes this.
  18. chicorbeef

    chicorbeef Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,359
    Gender:
    Male
    I think it's just unnecessary yield introductions though. I really think Internal/External TR balance is fine.
     
    vyyt likes this.
  19. Legen

    Legen King

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2015
    Messages:
    759
    Internal trade routes are weaker, but also the safest and don't provide yields to another civ. I don't think they need a noticeable buff, at most getting the following:

    - have more policies buffing them;
    - form a city connection (not just address isolation);

    I don't remember if city distance affects ITRs. If it does, we could revise that.
     
    CppMaster likes this.
  20. Gazebo

    Gazebo Lord of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    17,848
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock
    I think that international TR should have their science and culture yields diminished by about 25% across the board. It's too much. I'd rather deflate those values than inflate internal ones.


    G
     
    vyyt, Txurce, CppMaster and 4 others like this.

Share This Page