The Camel is Dead!

Father Beast · May 16, 2001, 15:18

from the gamespot preview

quote:

Firaxis is focusing much of its efforts on creating a more dynamic and entertaining trade system than the one found in previous games. "Trade was really abstract in the two [previous Civilization] games," Briggs said. "You would build caravans and move them yourself from city to city, moving them in the right place. I thought that was cumbersome." To change all of that, Firaxis is implementing two types of resources--luxury items and strategic resources--and depending on your strategy, you will want to make a concerted effort to control as many resources as possible. If you don't control as many valuable resources as other civilizations do, then you can either take the resources by force or establish strong trade relations.

this seems to mean that they won't be using camels, and the corresponing trade bonuses (matthew's infamous 1000 gold and science bonus) are probably history, too.

This system will probably be interesting, but I can't help but feel a sense of loss.

It was the trade routes that I would set up that I loved so much. the AC version never turned me on. it was kind of like the MoO version - just turn it on and watch your funds increase. hopefully this will be more interesting.

ancient · May 16, 2001, 15:25

so you mean they will trade with out camels? how will the goods get from one place to another?
[This message has been edited by ancient (edited May 16, 2001).]

BeBro · May 16, 2001, 15:44

quote:

so you mean they will trade with out camels? how will the goods get from one place to another?

Horses? Trains? Ships? Cargoplanes?

Hey, I can live without the good old camel. Let´s face it, it was not very wise in civ2 that all nations, american, european, whatever had camels as traders!

------------------
Civ2000 hosted by CivII Universum

Father Beast · May 16, 2001, 15:46

I get the feeling that it will be some sort of negotiations between civs.
since it depends on what resources are connected to your Capitol, I guess you would make trade agreements with a neighboring civ for useful items

such as:
"we see that your civilization, although nearly insignificant, may be of some use to us in supplying us with silk. We are prepared to trade horses with you in exchange"

Agreed. let's make this trade agreement.
No way, we don't need your useless horses.
We would prefer you to supply us with Iron

That's what I'm currently envisioning. it seems to make sense, since they have indicated that any cities connected to one with a special resource will have access to it. so I suppose that if you make a trade agreement, all your connected cities could take advantage of it.

ancient · May 16, 2001, 15:50

but camels are cool..

BeBro · May 16, 2001, 15:56

quote:

but camels are cool..

Real Camels.

But to be serious I didn´t like the trade system in civ2, it was a bit boring to move all these slow camels around. Father´s idea sounds not bad to me.

------------------
Civ2000 hosted by CivII Universum
[This message has been edited by BeBro (edited May 16, 2001).]

raingoon · May 16, 2001, 17:24

True, it would seem that "connectivity" is the key word now, and the physical action required is building the road.

In a sense this new way is wiser because road-building IS trade route building; but I confess to being one of those who spent many a Civ 2 game doing little else but happily moving my camels around the map setting up trade routes. I can envision enjoying building roads, etc., if the emphasis is on clarity and functionality, which are VERY different from simply being "hassle-free" (see CTP).

Hassle-free I don't need; direct control over imagining and creating my trade empire, YES, and to that end I must say I'm encouraged...

Adm.Naismith · May 16, 2001, 17:33

May the Camel rest in peace. Amen.

I never loved that loooong voyage till a distant city, just in time to discover they don't need my goods anymore, nor I liked to forget where the beast was going, if anything stopped it mid voyage.

I agree, SMAC was too much automated, not funny. It seems Firaxis is doing better this time.

Ralf · May 16, 2001, 18:15

quote:

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith on 05-16-2001 05:33 PM
May the Camel rest in peace. Amen.

I never loved that loooong voyage till a distant city, just in time to discover they don't need my goods anymore, nor I liked to forget where the beast was going, if anything stopped it mid voyage.

I agree, SMAC was too much automated, not funny. It seems Firaxis is doing better this time.

I copycat above. Feel exactly the same about this issue. Bury that animal, thats what I say.

Bereta_Eder · May 16, 2001, 18:26

Don't know. I kinda loved the incertainty of the long voyage, the protection it required, the planning. The rush of making it to the city and get the gold and science was pretty good too.

Chronus · May 16, 2001, 20:15

"I kinda loved the incertainty of the long voyage, the protection it required, the planning. The rush of making it to the city and get the gold and science was pretty good too."

I agree. I'll miss the camel (and truck) as well.

me_irate · May 16, 2001, 20:36

I personally invision a need for caravans to trade. I see three basic ways caravans (and possibly tradeships) could possibly still be implemented with this new system.

1.as in ctp you wont acctualy move them but you might need so many to make a trade route. and once it is established with a certain civ you can trade as much as you want.

2. (still using the unseen units) or you might need so many caravans for each trade route no matter how many routes allready excist between you and the civ.

3. finally you might need to move a caravan to establish a trade route with the civ, but once it is established, you can trade whatever you want.

but then again they might do away with caravans completely.

DarkCloud · May 16, 2001, 20:46

They should implement trade by using a "Trade Screen" where your diplomats can trade for better rates based on your congeniality rating with the enemy nations.

SerapisIV · May 16, 2001, 22:12

I want a minigame shoot-the-camel, for me it would be just as fun as the earlier discussed shoot-the-herald. After Civ3 comes out and you guys have a break at Firaxis, would someone please design these games for the more vicious of your Civ followers?

Youngsun · May 16, 2001, 23:13

Trade between civs should be done/managed by trade agreements and constructing the right infras.

Once trade agreement is made, trade route can be established. Then you assign your caravans(if the route is land based)or merchant ships(if the route is water based)to the specific trade routes.

Athens(Greek)<--------------------------->Alexandria(Egyptian)
25 merchant ships assigned

Corinth(Greek)<-------------------------->Crete(Cretan)
18 merchant ships assigned

Athens(Greek)<-------------------------->Ukraine(minor civ/tribes?)
20 caravans assigned

You don't have to move each merchant ship or caravan but those ships and caravans are simply shown in your civ's trade capacity pool.

Provost Harrison · May 17, 2001, 06:21

Well we coped fine on SMAC without having to manually establish trade like this. It would be nice to see something a little more sophisticated than SMACs...but when I had a large empire in Civ2 and had to haul vast numbers of caravans/freight to optimal points around the world could get to be very mindnumbing. A special menu for it would be ideal. Just click on it...although perhaps it may be interesting to have some kind of maintenance for a merchant navy required depending on the size of your trade interests.

Grumbold · May 17, 2001, 06:44

The most compelling reason for removing the camel/truck is the ability to instantly build a Wonder. Multiple cities should be able to assist such giant projects but not stockpiled in advance of their discovery.

Father Beast · May 18, 2001, 16:25

checking the gamespy preview Snapcase turned us on to, it seems that trade is now incorporated into the diplomacy screen.

Sid Promised us that we would be able to negotiate for just about anything in diplomatic negotiations, and it seems that he has. check the diplomacy screen sreenshot.

it looks like goods to be traded will be just one more thing up on the bargaining table. Fascinating.

Father Beast · May 18, 2001, 16:31

About the demise of the camel...

The Good:
having it as part of diplomacy and interciv bargaining chips makes a lot more sense than the involuntary trade routes that persist through thick and thin. I listen to the news and hear various nations bickering about those very things.
I am also going to enjoy the fact that war deprives enemy nations of our trade goods, giving them and us an incentive for peace.

The Bad:
I'm going to miss those gold and science bonuses.

raingoon · May 18, 2001, 16:33

Father Beast, I interviewed someone inside the Civ franchise for my next column that speaks to the heart of the camel issue. I think you'll be surprised...

Bereta_Eder · May 18, 2001, 16:50

The Camel is dead. Long Live the Camel.

ajbera · May 18, 2001, 21:01

quote:

Originally posted by raingoon on 05-18-2001 04:33 PM
Father Beast, I interviewed someone inside the Civ franchise for my next column that speaks to the heart of the camel issue. I think you'll be surprised...

This sounds quite exciting, especially given how excellent your previous contribution was. When can we expect to see this?

Poldavo · May 19, 2001, 10:50

Camels were very realistic way to represent trade in ancient and middle ages (think in Roman boats to Indian silk rivers or Marco Polo's private initiative to establish a trade route between Mongol's Beijing and Venice), but the last proposal (included as diplomacy option) is more realistic for modern times.

Cannot there be the two options, timely separated (by an advance, for example)?

Father Beast · May 19, 2001, 18:34

quote:

Originally posted by raingoon on 05-18-2001 04:33 PM
Father Beast, I interviewed someone inside the Civ franchise for my next column that speaks to the heart of the camel issue. I think you'll be surprised...

Looking forward to it. more info is always good. hope they post it tonight!

Oh, and for those who liked his last article, check the column archives. Raingoon has written several good articles in the past.