[.86] Trade is Pointless

Maybe the road should be to the nearest 'enemy' city rather than their capital?

I agree. Trade seems to be "tacked on" at this point, now that it's gotten stripped down. More than gold, there should be incentives to trading resources. Resources that reduce unrest, increase production, increase food, increase gold, increase mana, etc.

It would add more to diplomacy, too. I don't have much reason to talk to any AI players except to tell them I plan on stomping them into dust.

It would be a shame if trade was left as is or removed because without it Elemental feels much less like a real living world. Historically trade has had a huge effect on civilization and to me having no trade is about as big of a hole as having no boats.

I think they should continue with the current road system but separate the trade system from it and add some depth.If you choose to try and maximize trade then you should be able to generate some Gildar but it shouldn't be necessary. It also shouldn't be overused and should have some opportunity costs. You should also be able to create trade cities, tons of historic examples exist.

One system I have though up is you could make an improvement that allows you to set a trade route to another city, instead of having to send a caravan it would be better if you could just press a button and click. The improvement would have an upkeep so it would only be worth building in some cities. You could only form trade routes to cities you have connected to with roads, so this is what economic treaties would do. Also instead of being a blanket 10% gold bonus to your city it should boost your city's gold production by a factor of the other city's gold production(before tax). The higher the gold production in the city you create the trade route to the higher the gold multiplier in your own city. This way you would only have an incentive to build trade routes between high gold cities instead of everywhere. You would also have a reason to create trade routes to the cities of other factions instead of just your own. I like this system because it is both simple and yet could result in interesting scenarios.

There is alot to be done in the XML with trading. Any resource can be traded. So you can make a treaty that gives any one resource for any other. I hope this gets attention by the devs at some point so that we have better trade options than gold for gold.

I think that trade and the resulting income should be separated from road-building. Roads can be either for trading or for war, as stated. And I also much prefer the civilization tile-by-tile road building, and the possibility for me, monsters or enemy nations to destroy them if I need to. With road-building separated into a separate 'construction' research branch of some kind, and given more tactical control, it makes it a bit more feasible to also incorporate into that branch things like wall-building and fort-building as world-map tactical options. With these kind of technologies in the game, it makes more sense to have separate research branches for the construction projects versus income-boosting trade options.

Where there are trade routes there is pirating/pillaging.  Got to like. 

Don't forget the pathing fun that caravans introduce, forcing your armies off the roads.    IMO, they should dump the level 1 road graphics and use the level 2 or 3 graphics instead.  Roads are impossible to see in some situations.

Agreed that multiple stacks on a road is frustrating, and roads should be clearer

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

yes but i still dont get it

can you think of any real, non flawed,  non lame use of a trade ?

i just cant figure any at all

whatever trade i could do there is ONLY ONE reason and just that to do it: because im getting something i really need and giving away something i dont need or something worth nothing to the player im giving it

there is no way with ai to have a fair trade, never ever

if anyone can figure out just 1 scenario where its possible i would be interested to know it

I hate trade, the more automatic and less in the way the better for me.

Ya I would love to see more incentives to both raid and protect caravans. I think it would be really fun to be able to play bandit and raid your enemies. Long trade routes through dangerous territory should be rewarding but also dangerous. If you don't want to have to protect it from other players and monsters don't build it.

I tend to look at it from a macro view instead of a micro one. This is why I love caravans, they have the unrealized potential to simplify trade but still make it deep and interesting. Instead of getting into the nuts and bolts of trading different resources you instead just get a economic boost. In real life it works pretty much the same way, trading allows people to specialize more and boosts an economy regardless of whats being traded at a micro level.

I suggest you read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. You trade your excesses for something you have very little of to a player in the reverse situation.

yes in real life

in a game the ai has no conscience at all about what is neeed and what not

maybe in a game like command and conquer with 2 resources at all its possible

in a game so much complex like this its not

also you didnt answer my question, why would i want to give the enemy something he has little of when i can give him crap?

I think you should wait until diplomacy is added to the game before making a conclusion. The value of a given resource to the AI will be dependent on an equation that considers the natural worth of a resource and the amount the AI has vs the amount you have. I am guessing that is how it will be set up. Also, different factions already value certain resources more than others. 

yes but you dont get my point

the average value of resource means nothing in a strategic game

lets talk about civ

im 500 research far from nuke and i trade 500 research with an equivalent kind of stuff

my 500 research is worth 600 10000 times more than anything else

lets translate into FE

im about to recruit a lvl 9 champion and i miss 500 gildar, or i am about to build the brand new researched army and i miss 100 metal or crystal

i will make a "fair" trade following the economic logic but it will ALWAYS be a cheat for the player because he will only do the trade in a moment where the reserouce he get is worth much much more to him

thats the point

i think that logic wise a trade is the same loophole as the tactical "move non move" dilemma

basically the ultimate goal of everyone in FE is the same: win the game

so just for this reason we have reached an empasse

WHOEVER ask for trade thinks ofc that trade gives him an advantage, a mean to get 1 step closer to the ultimate goal of the game

so no one ever should accept a trade

the only reason to accept a trade is cause you ignore the true relative value of the good to the player you trade with, and so you may think its good for you but truth is it cant be (unless who offered the trade made a huge mistake)

Well, hopefully there is a more Modern ecnomic theory, Nash equilibrium maybe, that supports that two nations can both help themselves and help each other to gain their goals.  There is a diplomatic end to the game too.

Unless you are trading with an ally or the relative short term benefit from the trade outweighs the negative long term harm. For example you accept a trade from someone which you know will benefit them more than you but without the metal from the trade you would die within a few turns. Anyway this is pretty estoric stuff and basically irrelavent to gameplay.

Another possible spin on my above caravan idea would be instead of making the amount of gold generated by a trade route directly dependent on the gold produced by the other city you could make it depend on a new local resource, let's call it Goods.  This resource could be produced by city level and improvements like Merchants and Bazaars, on top of existing gold boosts. You could even add natural luxury goods like in Civ. They would be tiles that you could build improvements on like Iron Mines that produced Goods instead of Metal. The more Goods your city produced the more other players would want to send trade routes to that city, which would benefit you as well.

I would mod this but the caravan system is pretty much totally unmoddable, plus I'm not sure the AI would be smart enough to prioritize cities with Goods.

Ever play Settlers of Cataan? By that logic you should never trade in that game either, except that trading is often the best way to win. As long as a trade is mutually beneficial, both parties will come closer to winning and thus have an advantage over the rest of the players in the game. Your theory on trading only works in a binary system. Of course you should never trade with a direct rival or a warmonger that has shown his true colors.

Trade partners are a good thing if you are on good diplomatic terms and are working towards the same goals. For instance, as Tarth I would always want ton trade with Pariden and Altar. This is because they will tend to be looking for an Alliance victory, which means we can win together. I would not be as likely to trade with Empires as anything I give them will be used against me as you have said. I would also want lots of trade with a faction that is currently very weak and of the same allegiance as me. I want them to be able to hire heroes and build armies in order to make war. Since I cannot attack them without losing my other allies, I must trade them resources to build up their nation. Trade is more complicated than you imagine. 

The question the devs to need to ask is if their efforts in diplomacy will facilitate these extremely basic mechanisms. Anything less than what I describe would be a total diplomacy failure for the game. But we have no way of knowing much about the diplomacy intelligence until we see it in the beta. I am confident Fb has some smart mechanics in development.

The thing that irritates me the most about Trade is actually the Trade Agreement because the AI seem to value it based upon YOUR benefit rather than their own. 

Most recent occurrence, I had a nation I was warm with who was going to get 3x the per-turn benefit out of the contract and still wanted me to throw in another 270 gold to get the contract going. The AI really ought to be more willing to engage in trade that has a disparity in their favor and ask for a little on top near balanced and then ask for more and more as the trade deal works out more in your favor.

More to the OP, I never ever EVER trade FOR anything except gold. I have a bunch of horses laying around, I'll pawn them off on someone, but I never actually ask for materials since they are always way overpriced.

I like the idea of a goods resource but would make it more comprehensive.

Instead of just recieving "goods" from buildings (bazzars) and special resources (Spice?) you could add both those things but make most resources have a "goods" value as well. Horses, Grain, Honey, Clay should give some small goods value that would make the nearest city a receive extra gold from caravans. It would be great if you could tax caravans that go through your cities as well. Goods could also have an effect on unrest.

I hope the devs at least make a Mod like this possible. It would be great if trade was expanded because it would add more to non military teams and allow more interesting diplomacy victories. No one will aim for a diplomacy victory with the current system unless they are just bored of their game.

True and annoying. The AI factions should have a goal and they should be trading between factions to accomplish that goal, whether buying horses or metal for military victory, buying crystal for magic victory or just amassing gold for whatever. I would love it if land(Outposts and Cities),troops and technology could be added to trades.

I think this is spot on for what I feel trade should accomplish in a game, the thing I need from 8.6 trading is being able to trade over time (I give them 1 horse each turn, they give me 10 gildar each turn, (ofc. they should work against ppl breaking these treaties for instant gain).

Also I need the AI to realize what stuff is actually worth for both partners, I usually cant trade unless I get a ton of "Diplomatic Capital", which seems to be a freeway for free resources, and a free resource drain for a Computer opponent, since said "Diplomatic Capital" have no use in the game except grab all the enemies resources.

I would love to see the player trading expanded, but I don't like the idea to be able to trade with a marketplace, or npc store. Where I am not trading with another player that gain a  benefit, but some wall of resources located on some far away island. I tend to find these kinds of trade's... Hard to translate,  but they don't give me the eerie feeling of strategic victories, but rather another system to be "abused" to gain access to resources more easily, and would be another excuse to let the AI cheat abit more gaining free resources to hold up against a player using said marketplace.

Atm I like the idea that resources should be found physically in the world before accessible, doing so "Sparse" amount of resources will be a battle over the important strategic resources like iron and horses.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

This sound about right. Especially the Settlers of Catan bit, love that game ... although if your the best of the group you can pretty much exploit humans too ... (as in Monopoly, as in real life, etc. :p)

Concerning trading with the AI (slightly different from just the economic concept of trade) am I the only one who thinks that it would be a neat function of caravans to be the mechanic through which I trade resoirces with the AI?

Essentailly, the negotiation screen would be where we come to agreements, then each party sends caravans from their closest cities to the enemy closest city. Or, if the AI can handle it, the parties also negotiate the trade route. When the caravans finish their route, the resources are then gained. If the caravan gets destroyed, the resources are lost or stolen by whoever destroyed it.

This would make it a bit more problematic and important to actually protect those caravan roads, and would introduce a nasty way of breaking a treaty, too.

Such trades could be a one-shot or periodic.

I love the idea of caravans being the actual body that moves a resource, but it would cause so many problems I would not recommend it for this game. But it would be a sweet mod. Nice idea!