• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Mr_B0narpte

Field Marshal
12 Badges
Mar 15, 2009
4.715
344
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Cities in Motion
  • Darkest Hour
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
It seems that when doing overseas trade it looks for the most effective trading port, regardless of whether or not it's accessible. This may appear to be good logic, but it's not when Germany has Copenhagen and the Western Allies want to trade with the USSR. The Soviet Union still has Murmansk, Archangel and the port north of Vladivostok so I don't see why the Allies can't trade with Stalin. I know those ports are very hard to supply, but that's an argument for reducing trade effectiveness, not for preventing the usage of those ports.

View attachment 105916

I would've provide an entire screenshot, but that would potentially reveal information to the enemy!
 
Upvote 0
The general problem is known. The concrete problem of soviet union is somewhat solved in 1.09 because chabarovsk is trading port for soviet union there.
 
Ah okay, but does moving the port there significantly affect trade effectiveness?
 
No. Acutally it helps soviet union a lot because only japan would be a problem there. Thus trading with USA and Chile is quite an option.