Trading, Anyone?

[Roland Johansen]

What if Rambo just happens to hitch-hike and join the caravan bacause he's going in the same direction and he wants to go undercover. Your tank is doomed

 

[Moulton]

I like the idea. But a visible caravan/ship route has to be protected somehow. Either the units themselves have a high defense score -- think hiring caravan guards-- or assuming that the ship has escorts automatically. But no attack. It becomes a non-combatant. Like stage coaches in the old American West, they do not attack anything, but the shotgun rider better be good. And often the stage coach would have outrider escorts as well. Then attacking a caravan would be an act of war, or terrorism,
Imperialism had a trading system. You had to build merchant ships capable of carrying your goods, and then establish a trade route, but did not have to actually plot each ships course. Then if your ports were blockaded -- and that was a Mission, putting the ship(s) on blockade duty--your merchant ships had to stop, or try to run the blockade.
Another problem if the caravan has to use roads, what happens if the road is blocked by a lazy swordsman or something -- the kind that just stand on your roads and rails turn after turn, blocking traffic.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I think this will be the of trading. Or at least as we know it. The blockading, attacking and disrupting power is too big.

Unless, The odds are in favor of surviving for the caravan. This can be accomplished by control of the route the caravan takes, by paying for some kind of insurance (higher protection, lower chance of visibility, better odds), have a new special unit that travels as fast as the caravan, on land and on sea, with low attack, high defense and the ability, can only attack / defend when on the same square as a caravan. Otherwise it's captured. He is returned to your Capital the moment the caravan reaches it's destination. And building the unit should be cheap, as you would need at least 20 for each trade. And maybe even more in case a deal is continued.

I also have doubts on the distance. If I meet someone on the "end of the world" and I want to see where he lives and trade world maps; I have to wait till his caravans have reached my lands; this may take hundreds of years.

Also I might cheat, by sending my caravan traders on a route I choose I know isn't the fastest and when I received the caravans from my tradingpartner I let them sink.

I think it's a nice plan but not realistic.

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by Gengis Khan
However this(for me at least) would severly limit trading in the ancient times. When I start 9/10 games I focus almost solely on pumpin out settlers as quick as possible. I don't even have enough units to protect my cities much less protect trade routes. Factor in that I normally am trading with 3-6 civs(standard/8 civs) within the first 20 turns.
These trades wouldn't be possible if I was having to protect all those routes, knowing full well that the computer wouldn't protect them seeing as you take the blame regardless who's caravan got attacted(something else that would have to be addressed if this was added)!

I shall address everyone queries here:

@gengis, within the first twenty turns of all of my games, I don't think I ever (rarely) have contact with anyone, let alone 3-6 people. There's little to trade then, since no one has roads to resources, no one has mapmaking, one could trade money, but that's about it.

@Sailorstick, no, you wouldn't have to micromanage the caravans at all. They would automatically start moving to the destination immediately.

@Crowpocalyptic, yes, I'd say that one defense in the ancient (or maybe none, and you could enslave the caravan workers), 1 defense in Middle ages, 2 defense in the industrial, and 3-4 in modern. This would be land caravans. Naval ones would be as such: 0,1,2,4, respectively.

@Moulton, yes, they would have some minor defenses, see my previous statement to Crowpocalyptic. It would be up to you to REALLY defend them, though. And to your next point, I guess the caravan would have to use roads, but why would the recipient not want to receive his goods that are due to him (to cause an international incident, of course! )

@Rik Meleet, interesting idea about the "caravand defender". Can't regular units do that job instead, though. However, it is noted. In regards to distance, that's the point, I believe. Yes, you may be half-way around the world from your trading partner, but just as in real life, goods ans services don't appear instantly. They had to travel long distances, often through other cultures, and this took a long time. It makes the game more challenging (But for everyone, human and computer) but it also makes it more realistic, in my opinion. As to your cheat, you have no control over the caravans. They are seperate merchants, thus they begin sailing/moving towards their destination the first turn the deal is signed, along the quickest KNOWN route, and they each follow the one in front like lemmings, one being made each turn. The only variable you control is the ships/troops to send with them as they leave the docks/gates, respectively. I suppose you culd leave them undefended, but as I stated in a couple posts earlier, the trading recipient woulld get mighty mad that he wasn't recieving his goods. He would get mad at the person stealing them and you (unless the person stealing was using privateers).

 

[cavemanf16]

I agree with this thread - trade UNITS are good! I much preferred the Civ2 trade system, which also made the 'popping' of the World Wonders very important, and highly useful in every Civ2 game. Civ3 fails with respect to the trading strategies. I love the resources idea, but that should have been combined with a beefed up version of 'trade by unit' system in Civ2.

 

[bru]

I also like the idea. I agree with Cavemanf16 about Civ2!1

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

The things I like about the Civ 3 trading system are that you have to have a road to the resource or luxury item before you can use/trade it, and that you can use it as a bargaining chip when trading for technologies/maps etc. What I would like to change is that all trades are set up for 20 turns; perhaps the timescales for the deal should be up for negotiation as well.

 

[Benderino]

Yeah, that can still be done.

 

[rickyson1]

Originally posted by Benderino
I hope this hasn't been mentioned, but I've have this interesting idea for some time now. What if, when a trade agreement was brokered, ships (of caravans, if the two civs are on the same land together) move from your capital, or the largest port city, and a new one is created each turn (so that there will be twenty sent in all, one for each turn), and they each automatically head for the recipient of the goods. They have a movement of 3 or four or so. Maybe that can be increased as time passes and technology improves. The caravans and ships can change over time, from being mere triremes to cargo ships and steamers, or freights.

Oh, and in the modern age, it could be sent by planes. That way, people would have to protect their trade routes (very realistic, that's why I like it) and it would make navies more valued. If a cargo boat was attacked, the recipient might get angry that he's losing his resources.

The boat/caravans would have no attack, and a weak defense. Privateers would become much more significant. There could be highwaymen or merauders (landlubbing pirates) that can attack the land caravans.

And you wouldn't have to move these boats/caravans, they would go automatically (since they are private companies of course, you authoritarian you ).

And the GPT or lump sum must also be sent by boat or whatever, so if an enemy ship attacks it and wins, that country gets the gold from that particular boat. So, if the GPT is 20, then each boat will cary 20 gold on it and there will be 20 cargo boats.

I think that will add a great dimension to diplomacy and trade. Any ideas?

interesting :die:

 

[Rhino Ryan]

Here are a couple more suggestions to help this go along
Maybe have double color lines going across quares and this indicated the trade routes from civs like maybe if Persia and Rome were trading there would be a red and green line connecting the two capitals and any violation between attacking caravans or blocking trade units has an extreme affect on his reputaion (I mean huge). It may be a little confusing on huge maps with max civs but ese lines would only show up during active trades and when a caravan or boat is near and on the next turn it will be block the trade advisor will pop uo saying "Oh no you must move you soldier or else we will be blocking a trade route" and it will take you to the blocking points.

Another idea would be to have techs/wonders that would increase the defense of trade units. Also you can have a special command button that is guard trade units. Then it will follow trade units back and forth.

but one question would the caravans have to come back? And if they do is it a crime to attack those boats??
I myself am really, really fond of the idea and must see this implamented in the next Civ game.
good luck


P.S. I am also all for the nagotiation of how long a trade will last for

 

[Benderino]

No, I don't think the boats would have to come back, that's just pointless. Sure, its neat and realistic, but it doesn't add anything really. I'm glad you like the idea so much, thanks.