Multiple trade routes....

[Kitana]

I've been working on a Perfectionist/Isolationist strategy and have come across something interest.

First Isolationist means that I avoid all contact with other civs, unless they are on my starting continent then I wipe them out. I build cities on my continent and then move my capital to the center.

I build caravans from all my cities and send them ALL to my capital. The effect is as follows: When a caravan from a city reaches the capital and there already exists a trade route for the comodity, say Silk. All other cities that produce silk can now build another caravan. I don't know if the designer's meant for it to work this way but it is a nice way to continually get the science bonus from establishing new trade routes.

------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese

[East Street Trader]

That certainly is an interesting observation, Kitana.

But can I just check I've understood you.

You have one or more cities that have built and delivered a silk caravan. In that city/cities "silk" is bracketed where the three commodities produced by the city are set out, to show that when another caravan is built in that city you will not be offered "silk" as an option for the new caravan.

But when a quite different city delivers a silk caravan to your capital the effect in such cities (all and any such being on your home continent) is for the brackets to come off and for silk once again to become available for new caravans subsequently built there.

Is that the effect you have observed?

[Kitana]

Yes, you have it right.

I send a Uranium caravan to my capital from a city. That city has Uranium bracketed. Then I send another Uranium to my capital and the first city loses the brackets and can send another Uranium caravan to the capital. And so on and so on and so on... Makes for a good boost early in the game and doesn't hurt in the late game with the Uranium caravans.

At least this is what I have observed with MPG edition, might have been fixed in TOT.

Edited: I should add that you don't lose the trade bonus when your city can build another caravan of the same commodity.
------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese
[This message has been edited by Kitana (edited January 24, 2001).]

[Edward]

Kitana,

That's a great observation! I had always wondered what caused some of my "tied up" supplied commodities to become available again.

It also solves the problem of city A having all of it's supply commodities tied up, thereby leaving only food caravans as an option for city A to make. If city A supplies say cloth to Rome, just have another cloth making city (say city B) send a cloth caravan to Rome. Voila! City A can now make cloth again!

Your strategy of sending all caravans to the capital makes it easy to know which city (always the capital) city A was sending its cloth to.

One question - does the new route always "take over" the old route? Of course city A retains its permanent trade arrows for its cloth route with Rome, and of course city B gets permanent trade arrows for it's just established cloth route with Rome (unless city B had three better ones already), and of course Rome gets permanent trade arrows for it's best three routes, BUT from whom does Rome officially get its cloth? In your gameplay, the capital (Rome) will almost always have three routes (since all caravans are going there). Rome only benefits (permanent trade arrow wise) from its three best routes. Does this mean that if city B is small and crappy, that (while both city A and city B get permanent trade arrows for their routes with Rome (until they get better ones)) Rome will keep as one of its three best (and therefore official) routes its route with the large and trade-rich city A and city A will therefore still have it's cloth supply be in brackets and unavailable (while city B despite having just made a cloth route to Rome will surprisingly still have cloth as a build option)?

I hope you can understand the convoluted sentences above. To put it differently:

Does Rome tie up the supply of the city that most recently gave it a commodity that it demanded? Or does Rome only tie up the supply of the cities that give it its three best routes (thus enabling Rome to have 3 routes but still have some unmet demands, because not all of its three best routes (permanent trade arrow wise) are something it demands)?

Hope you can make some sense of my question.

[Kitana]

Edward,

I understand what you are asking but I'm not sure of the answer. I haven't taken a close look at what trade routes my capital saves. I can take a look and see but I suspect that you are right, that the city keeps it's best routes.

------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese

[Kitana]

Edward,

I understand what you are asking but I'm not sure of the answer. I haven't taken a close look at what trade routes my capital saves. I can take a look and see but I suspect that you are right, that the city keeps it's best routes.

------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese

[Kitana]

Edward,

I understand what you are asking but I'm not sure of the answer. I haven't taken a close look at what trade routes my capital saves. I can take a look and see but I suspect that you are right, that the city keeps it's best routes.

------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese

[Kitana]

quote: Originally posted by Edward on 01-25-2001 01:46 PM Does Rome tie up the supply of the city that most recently gave it a commodity that it demanded? Or does Rome only tie up the supply of the cities that give it its three best routes (thus enabling Rome to have 3 routes but still have some unmet demands, because not all of its three best routes (permanent trade arrow wise) are something it demands)? Hope you can make some sense of my question.

I think I understand what you are asking. From what I can tell Rome keeps its 3 most profittable routes, not necessarily what it demands. So say Ottawa is supplying Uranium to Rome for +30 trade and Toronto sends Cloth, something that Rome demands then Rome keeps the Uranium trade route, unless the cloth gives a bigger trade route.

------------------
Kitana
Shogun of the Japanese

[Hawkman]

I always dump my caravans in a foreign, overseas city, preferably the American capitol. Picking just one foreign city means the AI doesn't get as much benefit from trade as they would if I picked multiple cities. My cities always benefit from the three best trade routes they each establish with the designated city, but it only benefits from three trade routes from me. In other words, I can have a hundred trade routes benefitting me but the AI only gets three.

[Caesar the Glutton]

quote: Originally posted by Hawkman on 01-25-2001 07:37 PM In other words, I can have a hundred trade routes benefitting me but the AI only gets three.

That's a good strategy. I'll have to try that next time.



------------------
Nam si violandum est ius, regnandi gratia violandum est: aliis rebus pietatem colas

[Adam Smith]

quote: But when a quite different city delivers a silk caravan to your capital the effect in such cities (all and any such being on your home continent) is for the brackets to come off and for silk once again to become available for new caravans subsequently built there.

It does not always work like this. The well runs dry about the 10th or 15th time you do it , and you cant produce silk in the origin cities any more no matter what you do. You can, of course, wait for oil to become available. Why this is, I dont know. See the Repeated Commodity Trade Strategy Thread, available in the Great Library or Archives.

[This message has been edited by Adam Smith (edited January 26, 2001).]

[Stuff2]

My observation is that a city always keep the two most valuable trade routes but the third can be replaced anytime no matter if it's to the better or the worse.