The ministry of Trade thread - Page 2

Kuciwalker · July 16, 2002, 20:14

The chance of them is close to zero. We only saw it through cultural expansion, and we would have seen any galleys.

Aggie · July 16, 2002, 20:54

Thats a good plan though the gpt are aliitle expensive. I would suggest we do the last 3, then see where we are in a few turns, since the current gpt will expire is 6/7 turns. However I am only one voice and if everybody else wants to trade the world map that is ok. I am just giving suggestions.
Keep up the good work
Aggie

FrostyBoy · July 16, 2002, 21:08

Let me ask this:

What is the value of the maps outside of American and French territory? Take note that we are preparing for war with America.

Inverse Icarus · July 16, 2002, 21:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Sn00py
Let me ask this:

What is the value of the maps outside of American and French territory? Take note that we are preparing for war with America.

and we basically see all of american territory. the maps will be of little value (see if they have iron, their road network, etc), but i think it's worth it.

i dont care about anyone else's map right now

Spiffor · July 16, 2002, 21:45

American territory map : 4 gold
French territory map : 6 gold
Greek territory map : 21 gold
Roman territory map : 19 gold
German territory map : 13 gold
English territory map : 21 gold

FrostyBoy · July 16, 2002, 23:35

The cost of the world maps are not worth it, at least not now, but the cost of the US territory and even the French territory are certainly worth buying.

As UberKrux points out, other people's maps (non US)aren't going to be that useful right now, especially if the world maps are going to cost as much as they do.

Kloreep · July 16, 2002, 23:57

The territory map deals all look nice; however, I don't think we should buy either mapmaking or world maps, since both will eventually devalue - mapmaking as more civs get it, world maps as our scouts explore more.

mtgillespie · July 17, 2002, 05:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor

(note : to design this project, I had to play ahead by buying MapMaking to the French for 195 gold. I did not accept any deals involving maps. thus, I don't have more geographical knowledge than any of you)

Can i just clarify this, please. I understand you haggle with each of the civ's to see what price we can get a trade for. If it is a tech (for instance), do you then say yes to the deal, and see what we can trade the new tech for? Or have i misunderstood?

Papa Chubby · July 17, 2002, 06:09

I thought that it would be one of our first priorities to get mapmaking after discovering the lands across our capital, need ship to go check what it is. Therefore I support buying Mapmaking, but have to say that the others ain´t all that good, especially trading world maps for Mathematics. That does not sound like a good idea. As for trading our maps, I thought the AI always knew the terrotorie, that it was one of those infamous AI cheats, better ask Coracle to clarify.

Spiffor · July 17, 2002, 08:10

mtgillepie :
I often just haggle until I am at the very limit when the "foreign advisor" in the upper right of the screen says "this deal will probably be acceptable". Once I know the needed amount of gold, I say "never mind" to the AI wihtout agreeing to the deal.
In my second idea, where I traded maps with those who didn't have mapmaking, I had to have Mapmaking myself. That's why I agreed to the deal with the French. Then, I haggled with the non-mapmaking civs without agreeing for their maps.

mtgillespie · July 17, 2002, 09:16

This concerns me a little. The haggling part is fine, and indeed necessary. However, us discussing how much we could sell/buy maps for, when in game terms we do not have the technology to make such items, is for me playing ahead. In fact, this is how you yourself described it. Does anyone else have a problem with this, or have just got my pedantic head on today

Inverse Icarus · July 17, 2002, 09:22

I consider that playing ahead, because in the real game you wouldnt know what you could sell it for.

you're taking a lot of the risk out of trades.

Spiffor · July 17, 2002, 13:26

UberKrux :
If you want, I completely stop playing ahead. Next time we'll have to know what we can get for what prices, I'll do this during the turnchat. And people will have to wait 10-15 minutes for the plan to be devised. Is that what you want ?

Inverse Icarus · July 17, 2002, 13:40

I'd rather you trade for mapmaking first and work out the map trades for a later date.

maybe i should play ahead to see if there are any units in the way of my troop movements, to save time.

Spiffor · July 17, 2002, 13:46

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
I'd rather you trade for mapmaking first and work out the map trades for a later date.

You're right, I should have done this, which is a reasonable and efficient thing to do. I'll do like this next time.

Captain · July 17, 2002, 15:01

Spiffor, I'm glad you've changed your mind and are not going to play ahead anymore. I know you were only doing so with the best of intentions but I think we can all agree that playing ahead can be avoided. Especially if we implement allowing trades between turnchats (which has a great deal of support at the moment in the discussion thread but no official poll results).

Epistax · July 17, 2002, 15:07

Quote:

maybe i should play ahead to see if there are any units in the way of my troop movements, to save time.

There are huge differences, including

a) he doesn't press end turn
b) what he does, doesn't have to be undone. he finds the lowest price for something, buys it, then sees trading after. he doesn't ever go back. then he posts his suggestion.

----

thinking about it, I don't think there is any military equivalent really. The information he is getting, prices that people will pay for things, should already be known, but it isn't because the game designers didn't think of it.

----

(another edit) How about this-- The values for goods with certain civs comes from specific formulas. If we can redevelop these formulas, we wont have to trade anything to know how much anything will be worth to anyone. The problem with this would be estimation of the value of maps. It's probably related to surface area, and the newness of the information, in relation to them.. distance from capitals, shores, actual terrain in question.. (insert scream here). But predicting the value for techs, pacts, etc should be a simple formula.

Aggie · July 17, 2002, 15:14

Spiffor, can you do mapmaking trade and then repost the save so this will be done by next tunchat(tomorrow).
Hopefully we can do it on this forum one step at a time and by turnchat we will all be able to see new and interesting land. I guess you would have to ask the ninot and trip to let you do this, but it is a reasonable thing to do.
Aggie

Spiffor · July 17, 2002, 15:45

Aggie : sorry, but I have no decision power in trading MapMaking. Such a decision has to be met by the Foreign minister (Sn00py) after he consulted the Science minister (civman2000) and myself. He can also consult other people, or even create a poll.
That's why I won't post a save where I traded mapmaking. Doing so was a mistake, and I can't guarantee we'll trade MapMaking now.
Edit : but, if Sn00py wants to trade MapMaking, he can say this in the turnthread : any orders we'd like to give in 1450BC can be given there. The prez will follow them.

civman2000 · July 17, 2002, 17:36

well, my election closes in about 20 minutes now

. Asap i'll examine our situation and post a thread with info and stuff.