[.915] The Sorry State of Trade and Caravans

from Elemental Forums

The amount of micro needed to maximize Caravans seemed to be one of the most hated things from WoM, and thus the devs removed them in .86. Now they only move between capitals when you have an Economic Treaty. This change was overdone and I would like to see Caravans come back as right now they have simply removed trade from the game entirely, adding to the two dimensionality of the game. Which is a shame because although caravans were done badly they had a lot of possible depth and added a lot to the atmosphere of the world. A good caravan system would really help with replayability, diplomacy, and city differentiation. Trade was such a huge part of human civilization so it is very depressing to see it removed from the world of Elemental completely.

A possible idea for a caravan system would be instead of making the amount of gold generated by a trade route a blanket 10% you could make it depend on a new local resource, let's call it Goods. The amount of gold produced by a trade route would  be dependent on the total Goods in both cities on the trade route. This resource could be produced by city level and improvements like Merchants and Bazaars. You could even add natural luxury resources like in Civ. They would be resource tiles that you could build improvements on like Iron Mines that produced Goods instead of say 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. Trade route spam could be prevented by either a hard limit tied to the amount to the amount of Goods in a city and/or a upfront gold cost for maintaining trade routes, so you would only build them to cities that would be profitable.

Also roads would still be produced through tech as of now but setting a trade route would also produce a road if there isn't already a direct route. To prevent road abuse, like there exists now, Economic treaties wouldn't spawn a caravan; it would simply produce the road between capitals and allow players to set trade routes to that players cities. Trade treaties could also be removed as they are kinda unnecessary.

The key to an interesting caravan system is to reduce micro and spam and make it non-essential but a interesting choice, a nice bonus, and a potential strategy. While building the Caravan unit could work I think having a button on cities that lets you set routes by clicking on a destination would be less micro intensive.  Also rewarding players with resources for destroying enemy caravans and punishing players for loosing them would add a great raiding mechanic to the game. Then we could even have pirates when we get naval content!

7,959 views 25 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

I love your enthusiasm, but I just don't want it to be honest. Cities and resources make me money, and I'm happy not having to fiddle with it too much. If this was more of a civilisation building kind of game, i'd see your point, but I'd really rather expend my micro effort on casting the right spells, designing units and going on quests. More than anything, as much as I'd quite like more detailed trading, if there was a way for me to make loads more money by making use of a trade system, it would just be even easier for me to dick all over the AI.

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

I agree with Lin04, in that there's very little room for merchant-building in this ravaged world--this is simply not the game to be strategizing about trade routes and potential customers.  That said, perhaps there is a happy medium more involved than the no-brainer it is now, and a little boost for those players who are focusing on rebuilding a civilization (heavy civics).  If whatever system is tedious or overbalancing, then it's better to have it the way it is (not much there, but that means no fuss).  I could see some city-level choices that increase your trade bonus (if you are running caravans from that city), reducing some unrest maybe.  But luxuries, extra resources dedicated to trade?  Not many of these races want fat-n-happy citizens; they want to carve out their empires in this crazy-dangerous world.

DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

I've never had a problem with caravan micro in WOM... I don't think there was even that much complaint about the micro, it was pretty easy to set up, built a unit, send it, done. The problem with caravans was that it was part of the city spamming strategy. You'd spam cities, make a caravan and send it back to your capitol, and you get tons of food/gold that offset pretty much any other penalties. So I'm not surprised that they were removed.

As for your suggestions, while I'm not completely against expanding trading a bit for flavor, to be honest, I don't really see the point. Gildar is really easy to get in the game as is, the only time that it's hard to get is in the very early stages (where you can survive on negative income with just your starting funds). For something like this to matter, you'd have to drastically cut down other sources of income or increase upkeep quite a bit, but then you'd run in the problem of warlike factions not being able to fund their armies. So yeah, while the current trading system isn't too great, I'm not sure it's worth the hassle to change.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Gorde, reply 2
I agree with Lin04, in that there's very little room for merchant-building in this ravaged world--this is simply not the game to be strategizing about trade routes and potential customers.
End of Gorde's quote

Except for that fact that you can build merchants, farmer's markets, and the merchantcross bazaar (which has flavor text about merchants coming from far and wide). And that Kingdom ideology is about rebuilding the world.

How about we just use GalCiv style trade- gold income  based on distance, tiny boost for the receiving party, limited number of routes. After the caravan arrives at the city, no more micro. Route can be ended by war, or by having too many caravans killed by a 3rd party (or, in this game, monsters). It's a good, simple system.

The best part about trade in GalCiv was that it was an important part of diplomacy. If you had lots of trade with another player, they would be less likely to go to war to you, so it was a good (but not infallible) way to suck up to big powers. Likewise, if trade with a weak empire was a big part of your income, you had to weigh the cost of going to war with them. Bringing this dynamic to FE would add another dimension to diplomacy. And since diplomacy is currently pretty lame, it needs all the help in can get.

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

Tradr and caravans are good as they are.

 

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

I think diplomacy is actually a lot better in the latest patch.  By trading for research points, you can reasonably often get on good terms with big powers before their relations get lower than cool.

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

I agree that trading could play a bigger part in this game, I would love to see more caravans, "Pointlessly" moving between my cities, and nearby trade partners.
Instead of trade agreements hanging over the course of the Main city alone (Making the first city WAY too important) I would much rather see some kind of trade goods resource being made from cities, which determines the current trading power you currently have.
Then the more trade treaties you have, the better you could take advantage of these trading goods (making the first 1 - 2 trade partners the most important).

But also I would love to see a very simple system for trading, I don't want to build caravans, and I would dislike to have to link every trading city together with weird rules and routes. Keep it simple really, either you have a trade agreement or you don't.

Then again, that would require AI players to be more.. dependable... I am unsure how dependable they are at the moment, the current AI knowledge in my head was replaced with stupid AI moves from other games, like CIV 5 ^_^ (Terrible AI, never dependable for an allied victory, or anything really)
So I hope the AI gets sensible, since it impacts the game alot to have the ability to cooperate with the AI for my personal feeling for the game, since the AI players are half of the game.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #8 from Elemental Forums Top

As I said in the OP the idea is to make caravans have depth but not require players to have to use them. They would be one possible strategy. If they aren't your thing that's fine but the small changes I described in the OP wouldn't be a big deal. It's silly to say there is no need for trade caravans in FE when it is already in the game, just done horribly. All I'm saying is that it should be done much better. If your play style or strategy right now doesn't include trade that's fine but for those people who do it should be a legitimate option with some depth not the horrible system we have now.

Reply #9 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting DsRaider, reply 9
If your play style or strategy right now doesn't include trade that's fine but for those people who do it should be a legitimate option with some depth not the horrible system we have now.
End of DsRaider's quote

I just hope the depth doesn't become horrid micromanagement, but boosting "trade luxuries" and trying to take advantage of every trade, instead of having to link every single of your cities with every single city of your trade partner with 1 million tiny click.

Because that was the impression I got from the original post ;)
PS. I havent played galactic civilizations... (alot) I skipped to sins instead :P

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #10 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Kongdej, reply 10
I just hope the depth doesn't become horrid micromanagement, but boosting "trade luxuries" and trying to take advantage of every trade, instead of having to link every single of your cities with every single city of your trade partner with 1 million tiny click.
End of Kongdej's quote

Well like I said it would only be useful to make trade routes between a few cities that have a high amount of Goods. This would be because of a upkeep cost on trade routes or a hard limit tied to the amount of Goods a city produces. There wouldn't be much micro involved as you would simply have to build a few improvements, like you already do, and set a trade route once because trade routes now re-spawn. Again it would be something most people could ignore if they don't want to bother. It would simply allow for a more living and in depth way for players to specialize cities towards gold production. Much more interesting then markets and caravans giving a % bonus don't you think?

Also roads would be generated through tech as they are now, but setting a trade route between cities would also generate a road if their isn't one.

Reply #11 from Elemental Forums Top

I agree that trade is in a bit of a sad state at the moment. I hope it's one of the things that gets looked at for the next beta, that should be all about civilization building. Which is a large part of this game imo, contrary to what some posters above said. It's not just a wargame with some rpg elements.

I like your Tradegoods idea. It could be a higher risk alternative to taxation to raise money. So you could either raise tax and lower production, or you could lower taxes, shift some of the created productivity into making tradegoods, which generates income through trade. (Now that I'm writing this, the tax-happiness-production relation again still seems a bit off, lets hope that gets looked at as well in the beta.)

One way to limit caravan spam and micro management could be by having the caravans be generated by a building. So by default no trade is possible, but after a Merchant (building) is build that town gets the option 'Create Traderoute'. This would allow you to select a town to begin trade with, either one of your own or of a friendly nation you have a trade agreement with. Other buildings like a Merchant Guild or a Caravansary would allow additional trade routes. This also fixes the weird fact that merchants generate money even when there is no-one to trade with, and it makes those types of buildings less of a no-brainer to build.

Reply #12 from Elemental Forums Top

Marketplaces are boring as a % increase on base gold (taxes and goldmines). Adding a simple gold from goods from resources modefied by trade routes system seems like a nice way to add some diversity to a generic and boring mechanic.

Some people in this thread seem to think it would turn the game into an unplayable mess but I think they are just letting their imagination take them way further than what OP said.

Quoting Satrhan, reply 12
It's not just a wargame with some rpg elements.
End of Satrhan's quote

Exactly. Frogboy has said tactical battle is not the point of the game and that you should be able to play never using it. Safe to say army movement and terrain control (Strategy?) isn't the point either. That leaves Economy.

Reply #13 from Elemental Forums Top


While tatical battles may not be the focus of the game, choosing not to use them and relying on auto-resolve is a risky venture at best.

If landscape mods were included in a battle, I imagine that it would be easy enough to average those mod's into a tile-mod if the combat were to be auto-resolved.

This way, those that wish to focus on that tatics, can do so, and those that wish to ignore them can still get a game out of it too.

 

Reply #14 from Elemental Forums Top

I would just hate to see the potential caravans have be unrealized. Most of the work has already been done and it's annoying to see it go to waste. Since the next beta will be all about city building it would be a good time to re-examine trade and caravans. I really don't care about the details so much but I would like caravans to make a come back and for them to be interesting, with the key part having them be non-spammy. It would be awesome to be able to build trade cities with caravans crossing the world instead of just a city with a markeplace in it.

Unfortunately while I could mod in the local resource and improvements with ease the caravan system is almost completely unmoddable, and the AI probably wouldn't understand it anyway.

Reply #15 from Elemental Forums Top

This would be the time to make changes to trade and the economy. I myself, also look for more of these features. Building up the empire feels boring and dull. I know that the economy/civics of the game have not been changed much since E:WoM, this in fact gives me some comfort. I would really like for the game to have some trade-resources like 'dye', 'ornamental metals or jewelery' or 'spices'. Not to be traded like in civilization buth to be processed by an industry sector in a city.

Reply #16 from Elemental Forums Top

The only thing I'd like to see changed is other people's caravan's hogging MY roads! Nothing worse than trying to rush somewhere only to have my army make a detour around a lone caravan sitting on my road. I think that unless you are at war with the owner of said caravan you should be able to pass through it.

Reply #17 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Leo, reply 17
The only thing I'd like to see changed is other people's caravan's hogging MY roads! Nothing worse than trying to rush somewhere only to have my army make a detour around a lone caravan sitting on my road. I think that unless you are at war with the owner of said caravan you should be able to pass through it.
End of Leo's quote

This one I have to agree with, would make any kind of trade system much less frustrating :)

Dunno If I remembered saying this, but thanks for starting the topic though, since I would like to see a little more trade, or well atleast trade not only dependable on the 1st city =)

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #19 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting b_rad136, reply 19
I'd like to see stardock take a lesson in economics, period  
End of b_rad136's quote

I think they know about economics, its just different when you have to put your knowledge down on paper, or even harder when you have to create a system around it.
Thats why we try to help them :D with all our good ideas, and all my bad ideas ^_^

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #20 from Elemental Forums Top

I wouldn't implement a trade system unless it called for a lot of strategy to employ correctly.  Otherwise it just becomes another worthless micromanagement time wasting issue if it does not add strategy to the game.

So basically they should either go "all out" on implementing a fantastic trade system or none at all, because lets face it... without an intelligent choice-based system trading is soooo booooring.

Reply #21 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting MiamiBigAL, reply 21
I wouldn't implement a trade system unless it called for a lot of strategy to employ correctly.  Otherwise it just becomes another worthless micromanagement time wasting issue if it does not add strategy to the game.

So basically they should either go "all out" on implementing a fantastic trade system or none at all, because lets face it... without an intelligent choice-based system trading is soooo booooring.
End of MiamiBigAL's quote

 

This sums it up well, so it's worth repeating.  If the system is slick and needs a good strategy, then I'd be all for it.

Reply #22 from Elemental Forums Top

Well I might be a little bias but I think my system is a pretty good one.  :grin:

It rewards players for diplomacy, and exploration, and allows you to specialize cities and interact more with other players. It also doesn't require spam as players will only be building caravans to other cities that specialize in trade and only building trade cities if their are nearby Goods resources or perhaps a large trade city nearby. It encourage raiding and border patrolling. Simple but deep.

I think it would be even better then the nearest comparison which is the Luxury system in Civ, but again I might be bias.

Reply #23 from Elemental Forums Top

*grin*  Good that you can see your bias.  Your plan shows promise for more interesting strategic play, but can the AI even hope to effectively match it, or is it putting something else into the game that gives humans more advantage over the already struggling AI?  So many plans look good on paper and then are horrible when implemented--life sucks like that.  I won't blame the devs if they adopt a "can't go there" mentality; they have to pick the battles they think they can win, or we get another E:WoM.

Reply #24 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Gorde, reply 24
*grin*  Good that you can see your bias.  Your plan shows promise for more interesting strategic play, but can the AI even hope to effectively match it, or is it putting something else into the game that gives humans more advantage over the already struggling AI?  So many plans look good on paper and then are horrible when implemented--life sucks like that.  I won't blame the devs if they adopt a "can't go there" mentality; they have to pick the battles they think they can win, or we get another E:WoM.
End of Gorde's quote

Well said, even if they implement trade and its wonderful, your still dam right on the other stuffs :)
If they need help with the AI (like finding good logical solutions to how it should react differently in combat, or use trade differently), I hope they ask us though, since I think that helps an AI programmer lots to have more than one opinion on what the AI is doing wrong ;)

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Reply #25 from Elemental Forums Top

Yeah, any enhancements to the trading system would certainly have to keep the AI in mind so it can use the system intelligently as well.