Trade model ideas

[Cannes]

After reading through these forums I have come up with some ideas about how trade/global economics could(should) work in CivIII.
Imagine an ancient era civ in a lush flat forest land. Where would they get the granite needed to build the pyramids?
resources should be something you should worry about when founding your civilization:
"Here is an iron deposit and mountains where I can quary stone. This is needed for my factories and buildings. I must get a settler here immidiately and found a city which needs to be developed quickly, so I can utilize the natural resources!"
If you want to build a SR-71 you need titanium... If you don't have any in your empire you are going to need to buy from another civilization for a steep price, because they propably need it for themselves. Other things like stone would not be so expensive. So if you are building the pyramids from a mostly flat empire you could import some stone every turn from one of your neighbours. Perhaps paying with lumber which is scarce in your neighbours empire.That way you could have tons of trde routes that would actually have some impact on the game rather than just be a way of getting more income. It would also be great for warfare times with embargos. "No one may export coal to the Zulus! We need to slow down their war machine. Or they will overrun us all!"
All this said it should not be too micromanagement like. It could easily become much too complicated...

[JosefGiven]

I totally agree with you, your point is superbly put. Sid and his crew would do well to take heed.

Having said that, God alone knows how to implement it.

Throughout history, trade, introduction of new manufacturing methods, transportation of goods and many other factors have totally overhauled the lives of millions of people and the civilisations they live in. This, I feel, has not been adequately represented in Civ II.

Imagine the cold-hearted joy of providing your 'friend' with enough oil to wage an expensive and costly war, and then slashing his supplies when he needs them the most! Highly comical!

Right, a few ideas about how to tie trade supplies into the game.

I like Civ CTP's trade route model, with all the scope for piracy that this throws up...This should definitely go in.

Rather than the basic resource bonuses that your cities get with each of it's 'special' squares, a worked coal square, for example, would yield a certain number of 'coal' units. These resource units then go to a national stockpile, which can then be used in manufacture in the domestic economy; or they can be traded in the CTP vein. This would eliminate the ambitious, but ultimately unrealistic 'monopolies' concept.

Trade treaties, and even alliances, could be formed around the basis of the continued flow of these trades. Forced war reparations could even be paid for in industrial goods, like the Germans suggested they do after the First World War.

Perhaps someone else might like to come up with ideas concerning what goods should be dealt with in this trade model? i.e: steel, timber etc. Should there be scope for refining/purifying? i.e:
iron ore=useless, steel=very useful
raw uranium=worthless and dangerous, military grade plutonium=highly desirable and VERY VERY dangerous!

------------------
Josef Given
josefgiven@hotmail.com

[New Yorker]

Bagdar, u r right, this would end that problem w/AIs fighting wars from beginning 2 ending of the game

Back 2 trading model, civs shouldn't limit their trades, in other words, u should be able 2 trade industized goods, this would help out nations that r similar 2 european nations; no natural resources but heavy industries

while talking about trade & economy, the idea about corporations & companies come up. i know there was a good topic started & explained very well by Youngsun, i think. these ideas on trade models would go nicely w/ Youngsun's ideas on corporation

if anyone has the link to the topic i am talkin', please put it up

----------------------------------------
when a cheese is takin' its picture, what does it say?
[This message has been edited by New Yorker (edited January 13, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by New Yorker (edited January 13, 2001).]

[Socialist Dictator]

Bagdar, Sid did say something about oil. But do you think he meant getting it out of the ground and refining it? Because then you could get even more strategies.

But it would probably be too much micromangment. Too bad, I love micromanagment.

[young newbie forever]

I agree with the idea about resources, exept the part about having to have certain resources to build certain things . Instead I think that resources should boost your economy not decide wether youll have one or not. for example what you saying is that if I start in a dessert region and I dont have many useful resources im doomed to run my economy on trading. now that may force you to trade alot and I agree it would ad to the realism but what do I do until I find someone, build sand castles??

So my idea is that you can build anything as long as you've got the right technology. However if I have large deposits of iron that would meen my, say, legions are produced faster and are stronger than a guy with massive amounts of buffalo in his economy. But that guy has extreamly large and fast growing cities.

My idea takes what they did in civ 2 and expands it making speacial resources very useful but not a complete neccesity. so you can explore establish trade routes and get very powerful off trade, but not so powerful that that guy that starts in the dessert has no chance at all compared to the guy that starts in the green resource filled land.

[bagdar]

If I remember it correctly, either in Sid Meier's letter concerning Civ III, or in the old Firaxis FAQ, there was something about trade issues such as concentrating on oil production etc. If that is so, then what you have proposed is already a reality, and part of civ III, because it would mean that we will have strategies concerning the strife between the producers of valuable goods, and the people who need them. Imagine how that would widen the scope of Civ strategies!

[Cannes]

The egyptians didn't seem to have too much trouble with their architecture... Their invironment was very much dominated by desert, with the nile as the life source of their civilization.
In Ctp you always start at a river. Which very much makes sense to me since any large ancient civilization grew out of fertile river banks.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by bagdar on 01-13-2001 12:30 PM If I remember it correctly, either in Sid Meier's letter concerning Civ III, or in the old Firaxis FAQ, there was something about trade issues such as concentrating on oil production etc. If that is so, then what you have proposed is already a reality, and part of civ III, because it would mean that we will have strategies concerning the strife between the producers of valuable goods, and the people who need them. Imagine how that would widen the scope of Civ strategies!

I believe that Sid was talking about special resource spots - not generic resource-shields, although im not sure.

To fractionize those resource-shields into sub-level oil-shields, wood-shields, iron-shields, stone-shields or whatever, and then being forced to have certain resources in order to build certain improvements, would be a very bad decision, i think.
Too much player micro-management and definitely too hard on the AI, given all the other numerous demands and added complexities in the game.

I realize that every new idea adds a little to micro-management - thats unavoidable. That is however perfectly acceptable, provided that the idea simultaneously adds even more to the "just-one-more-turn" of fun- and suspense to the game.

In my eyes this idea of seems to deliver mostly "more work", and less of added "fun and suspence". If anything, I like Young Newbie forever's variant of the idea, much better.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited January 17, 2001).]

[Seeker]

Use the market system from Imperialism 1!!

------------------
You wouldn't like it
: You wouldn't like it here
: There ain't no entertainment
: And the judgments are severe

[Biddles]

quote: Originally posted by young newbie forever on 01-13-2001 03:37 PM For example what you saying is that if I start in a dessert region and I dont have many useful resources im doomed to run my economy on trading. now that may force you to trade alot and I agree it would ad to the realism but what do I do until I find someone, build sand castles??

You say doomed to run your economy on trading. The Arabs are traders, and they have a long standing culture and economic power. I wouldn't say that they are doomed to anything. The ancient minoans were well noted traders, and were one of the most powerful civs of the ancient world until an unfortunate incident with a volcano and a wave... The venetians were traders, and also some of the richest people during the renaissance. My point is that this could be a blessing, having to trade for survival could increase your trading prowess, and gain you power. As what to do until you meet other civs, well expand. Settlers should only be limited by your food supply, and you can expand until you find those rescources or trading partners. You can still research, so you aren't going to fall behind.

Some people will say that this will force you down a particular path. But hasn't this happened to civs all throughout history: They have been forced down a particular path by circumstance. I hope firaxis implements the idea as is.


------------------
- Biddles

"Now that our life-support systems are utilising the new Windows 2027 OS, we don't have to worry about anythi......."
Mars Colonizer Mission

[young newbie forever]

sorry my computers being really stupid tonight. i had a long post but im having trouble posting it so ill post it later



[This message has been edited by young newbie forever (edited January 20, 2001).]