 |
|  |
 |
|
ahenobarb
|
|
I would like them back, though with a few modifications.
I think they should run automatically (like workers on Shift-A - hmm a new metaphor?) since governments (a least non-communist ones) don't decide to make "incense". Your caravans/merchant ships sail around the world conducting buisness (which gies you revenue) and you protect this commerce by defending your sea lanes and trade routes.
A good way to make money would be to find your opponents sea lanes and trade routes and prey on them with "privateers" and "bandits" (or something). Each caravan or merchant ship you get is worth 50 gold.
They should be produced automatically, say 1 every 20 turns for size 1 cities, 1 every 10 turns for towns (size 2 cities), 1 every 5 turns for size 3 cities.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jabroni154
|
|
I like the virtual caravan idea. It would definitely add another dimension to the game to be able to hose over another empire by indirect means (privateers, mercenaries). Plus, it would add quite a bit to sea power I would think.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ahenobarb
|
|
I guess part of the problem is determining what is meant by "Bring back the Caravan", the way they were in Civ 2 was pretty close to useless because they required so much (i.e., too much) management. But having a caravan as a vulnerable unit (like workers) that yeild gold if attacked, would be fun.
Rushing wonder with them never made any logical sense to me, but I did it anyway if I needed to (usually it was just easier to over produce on a useless wonder and switch).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Steve Clark
|
 |
Colorado Springs, CO
Oct 1999 time: 22:18
|
|
This is a good example of what I referred to as an ill-advised suggestion that is detrimental to the context of the game. Now, I don't mean to pick on this one because I like caravans, but it's a new thread that can prove my point.
Okay, let's say Firaxis caves in and brings back caravans in their traditional role (they won't so this is hypothetical). In Civ2 they were primarily used for trading between cities and for wonders building. So what do you to the existing trading system that's in the Diplomatic Screen? Do you eliminate it? Reduce it so you can't trade goods - only techs? Keep it but you have to physically move the good (making the trade moot since it could take centuries to complete a track)? You bring back caravans in their traditional role and you have just messed up one of the fundamental designs of Civ3.
IMO, this is true with other suggestions regarding the tech tree, combat, AI trading and others I can't think of. Many of these suggestions, while fine in itself, do not consider the context of the game and its impact on such. Civ can only work well if every element works together at the same scale (like in Civ2 and SMAC). What I have seen in the new features of Civ3 are things that do not belong because they took a simple, yet deep model and made it needlessly complex where it doesn't work together well (that's our fault, imo, since we demanded those things to be added and wanted Civ3, not Civ2.5; but I digress). And as witnessed in the constant tweaking in the patches and mods, you can further upset the balance by fixing/changing one thing but now causes two new problems. One (including Firaxis) has to look at Civ3 as a single system, not as individual parts. Unfortunately, I see suggestions that are focused at a part and patches that tweak parts.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ahenobarb
|
|
Responding to Steve Clark's questions about how it would affect the current "bargaining table" concept, I think it could work like this (But, like you say, it won't because Firaxis has already scrapped this one):
the bargaining table is for large/politically motivated trade agreements between countries they consist of the strategic and luxury resources.
A second trading tier below that would be a non-player controlled unit (think of it like a business class) that traded the bonus resources (wine, wheat, cattle, bananas, mangos, whatever). They move around by themselves on auto-pilot and bring you gold from their sales (conceptualize it as a tax on their trade).
The advantage would be that you gain more wealth (gold in the game) through this, but also that you can prey on your opponents caravans, or whatever, and get $$.
This would also create a commercial reason for wars and provide a purpose for having a navy (maintaining a trade empire, keeping the sea lanes open) other than "I need to transport tanks across this blue stuff because I want to knock off a neighbor"
I can think of alot of good additions to this idea: you can increase/decrease the amount of taxes on imports/exports, over time you brand of "wine" becomes the quality brand so you are paid more for it (like comparative advantage).
Will they do it, the eight ball says "definitely not". But, I think it's an interesting concept and certainly one that could be done and integrated into the game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
elfstorm
|
|
I wouldn't want to see a return to the Civ2 system, but I do think trade (and diplomacy) are done really badly by Civ3.
It's a great game, but those two areas are appalling. A VAST improvement for next time please Fireaxis.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SpencerH
|
 |
Co-Ruler of my patch of land south of Birmingham Alabama
Feb 2002 time: 23:18
|
|
quote: Responding to Steve Clark's questions about how it would affect the current "bargaining table" concept, I think it could work like this (But, like you say, it won't because Firaxis has already scrapped this one):
the bargaining table is for large/politically motivated trade agreements between countries they consist of the strategic and luxury resources.
A second trading tier below that would be a non-player controlled unit (think of it like a business class) that traded the bonus resources (wine, wheat, cattle, bananas, mangos, whatever). They move around by themselves on auto-pilot and bring you gold from their sales (conceptualize it as a tax on their trade).
The advantage would be that you gain more wealth (gold in the game) through this, but also that you can prey on your opponents caravans, or whatever, and get $$.
This would also create a commercial reason for wars and provide a purpose for having a navy (maintaining a trade empire, keeping the sea lanes open) other than "I need to transport tanks across this blue stuff because I want to knock off a neighbor"
I can think of alot of good additions to this idea: you can increase/decrease the amount of taxes on imports/exports, over time you brand of "wine" becomes the quality brand so you are paid more for it (like comparative advantage).
Will they do it, the eight ball says "definitely not". But, I think it's an interesting concept and certainly one that could be done and integrated into the game. |
Some great ideas.
I'd like to mention a thread I started while wondering whether the minimum hardware limitations essentially eliminate the possibility that the types of additions described above ae even possible.
Hardware requirement
I only got 1 or 2 two cogent replies.
For those that are kind enough to have a look, "Its not about map sizes" 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:18
|
|
Ugh, no to caravans
why?
In civ2 they made it too easy to steal great wonders from the AI at the last moment
Until an AI can be programmed to take advantage of cheap tactics like that, I think they should be left out
also people complain(ed) about tedium in civ3, to me, the caravan system was the ultimate source of tedium in civ2. setting up trade networks one by one. ugh. how boring
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18. Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|