Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

mofications to goods.csv

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
unmerged(2456)

unmerged(2456)

Pure Evil Genius
Mar 29, 2001
11.211
0
www.hero6.com
Currently we have:
Code: 
Goods;Base Resource Value;Mine;TradePost;NumOfSlaves
CLO;10;0;0;0
COT;7;0;0;1
FISH;10;0;0;0
FURS;10;0;1;0
GOLD;0;1;0;0
GRAI;5;0;0;0
IVOR;7;0;1;0
METAL;15;1;0;0
NAVS;5;0;0;0
MINERAL;15;1;0;0
ORIENT;13;0;1;0
SALT;15;1;0;0
SLAV;8;0;1;0
SPIC;20;0;1;0
SUG;16;0;0;1
TOB;14;0;0;1
WINE;15;0;0;0
WOOL;5;0;0;0
COFFEE;10;0;0;0
TEA;12;0;0;0
NOTHING;0;0;0;0
Every value is equal to or greater than vanilla, however we do not get as many COTs in the later game. This is because i believe we modified enough of the provinces to make them of lesser value.

But also some of these are out-of-wack. FE Orient should be the most expensive item. Often these contain elements of other expensive items like minerals and spices, but also more stuff. This is why it should be the highest.

Second, Naval is extremely low. It is the same as grain, while fish is double grain.

Coffee and ivory could probably also be affected by NumOfSlaves.

Wine seems awfully high at 15. 13 might be okay, but it certainly wasn't as valuable as metal or salt.

Also sugar shouldn't be more expensive than salt either.

Base tiers should be:
Orient, Spice, Salt should be the top tier of products.
Mineral, Metal, Sugar and Tea should be second tier
Ivory, coffee, wine, cloth, tobabco, furs should be third tier
Cotton, slaves should be fourth
Grain and fish because they are easy to come by in most areas should be at the bottom.
 
Coffee and ivory could probably also be affected by NumOfSlaves.
Click to expand...
Ivory was AFAIK not come bu through slave labour so i dont see why slavery should affect it. Same goes for coffe i think but i'm less certain about that one.
 
actually the slave labor for ivory was through slaves taken and used to gather the ivory, but i'm willing to acceed to that one.

Coffee however was in S and C America later as much as sugar, although not nearly so much as Cotton or Tobacco.
 
|AXiN| said:
I'm curious why you have salt in the top tier - was it really that valuable?
Click to expand...
This is the era before people knew you could get salt from almost anywhere and salt was essential. You can live without food longer than you can without salt. Salt was also used as the major preservative and was essential for meats during long voyages. Empires rose and fell just on whether or not they controlled salt.
 
You're not taking into effect the value of goods by the supply/demand adjustments. Also another thing, I'm guessing you're not factoring in is that this value isn't by weight either. Salt may be extremely valuable, but if the idea is that salt provinces weren't producing massive amounts compared to say for example sugar than it shouldn't wind up being worth more.

Besides if I'm not mistaken scripting a commodity to be effected by slaves doesn't work. I remember trying it and it doesn't show up in the commodity description and also I don't remember it having the desired effect either. I hope I'm wrong.

Wine is high but the problem is that due to the high supply it winds up not contributing alot of trade until late game. So lowering it will make it contribute all but nothing to trade for the first half. And once again, you can't compare it to another commodity by weight. If historically the provoinces that made wine made very large amounts if it and it made alot of money for each region than it needs to be high.

Sugar should be more valuable than salt. Did salt make more money over the course of the game than sugar?

Actually IMO the one commodity that is really out of whack nobody here has pointed out. And that commodity is grain. Regions that produced staples weren't anywhere near as low valued historically as they are in the AGCEEP. Also there are many of them and it has so low supply/demand value on top of it. It's the one commodity that is cpompletely out of whack with history in the engine. Granted I don't think it should have a really high value but when a province makes grain and contributes 0 trade IMO this is unrealistic. Perhaps I'll experiment with upping it and post the results of my observations.

Fish could probably be lowered slightly. Hard to believe fish was more valuable than grain.
 
We could give gold a base value to "interest" a colonization AI.

Just for know, could we create one more good with "NOTHING;0;0;0;0" (new values and graphic) ?
 
Captain Frakas said:
We could give gold a base value to "interest" a colonization AI.

Just for know, could we create one more good with "NOTHING;0;0;0;0" (new values and graphic) ?
Click to expand...
That's an intersting idea. If so I would say horses are the most eligible as many arabian and north African provinces had it as their major export.
 
Ivory should not be affected by slaves. the world-wide slave trade has no bearing that I can see on the world ivory trade.

Shouldn't Greenland be Ivory?
 
idontlikeforms said:
That's an intersting idea. If so I would say horses are the most eligible as many arabian and north African provinces had it as their major export.
Click to expand...
I would like to see wax introduced. Wax was the second most important export of East Europe after furs and was traded by the Hansa in large amounts and with very reliable profits - while wax was needed everywhere for lighting, production in West Europe was low and thus merchants could make not outstanding, but quite decent and constant profits of between 10 and 15%. What would mostly justify its inclusion is, besides its importance, that, differently from other more or less important Hanseatic goods like livestock, beer or butter, which can be represented by grain if grain is understood to be all kinds of cheap foodstuff, there isn't really another good to represent it. Horses would not be a bad idea either, though. Too bad that we are so restricted in the goods we can introduce...
 
The probleme is : "Is the "nothing" good value affected by the supply/demand system ?"
 
Captain Frakas said:
We could give gold a base value to "interest" a colonization AI.
Click to expand...

Yep, I play every time with a value for gold (value = 3), but you may have a little problem : it will give a little inflation to each country which have merchants in COT. It's a very little inflation by trade, but for country that produce a great amount of gold and have a lot of merchants in CoT that produce gold, it will increase a lot the inflation (so beware for Spain...). For exemple, in 1600 I have an inflation of about 60% with Spain after conquering Aztec and Inca Empire.
For information, I never see that the value have an impact to colonization AI.

Captain Frakas said:
Just for know, could we create one more good with "NOTHING;0;0;0;0" (new values and graphic) ?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I've made a lot of test to add a new value, but if "NOTHING" can be used to create a new good, you can't add a new graphic or use the same graphic of another good. And the value of the new good won't be affect by any demand/supply adjustement.
 
Captain Frakas said:
Just for know, could we create one more good with "NOTHING;0;0;0;0" (new values and graphic) ?
Click to expand...
I'd also like to point out that Nothing is used as goods in provinces that doesn't produce anything, like rivers, and perhaps also sea provinces and lakes.
And you can add graphics for it (the MES team did).
 
Just look at the grahpics for goods:
resource.bmp

The first "block" is empty, ie Nothing

And a link for the MES 0.3
http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=141898
 
So, should we include a new good, and if yes, what? Horses would allow for better province goods in Arabia, North Africa and Finland - and also in many other parts of the world, especially in America, if we make it a bit more general so it can represent cattle as well -, wax would add more realism to Hanseatic trade and give more accurate goods in Russia, Livonia and Lithuania. A more general livestock good would probably have a lot more provinces than wax while wax would be more valuable.
 
idontlikeforms said:
You're not taking into effect the value of goods by the supply/demand adjustments. Also another thing, I'm guessing you're not factoring in is that this value isn't by weight either. Salt may be extremely valuable, but if the idea is that salt provinces weren't producing massive amounts compared to say for example sugar than it shouldn't wind up being worth more.
Click to expand...

For production income supply and demand are irrelevent. They only matter for trade income.
 
Last edited:
Well 1dt off before editing stuff you have to remember certain objects will affect suplly demand of certain other objects outside the paramets lsited here. These are hardcoded.

So FE the more ports there are, the higher naval becomes (and even higher for shipping yards).

Well the nothing good should probably not be used because it would mess up rivers and sea zones.

Mostly i'm converned about the values of the stuff. They are almost not very good.
idontlikeforms said:
esides if I'm not mistaken scripting a commodity to be effected by slaves doesn't work. I remember trying it and it doesn't show up in the commodity description and also I don't remember it having the desired effect either. I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
You are thinking of stuff from what i mentioned in the previous paragraph.
idontlikeforms said:
Sugar should be more valuable than salt. Did salt make more money over the course of the game than sugar?
Click to expand...
No, but it did before the introduction to the Americas and the beginning of the slave market, but it was only the amount and the cost of producing compared to its selling price that made so much money.
So since it does get increases because of slavery it can start out a bit lower than salt.
 
I've made a thread for the price of goods one year ago. If you speak french, you can read it here : http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51230

To resume : Price = (Demand x (1.99-Supply)) x (Unit Price)

There is some others rules in the thread, but sorry, i can't translate it.
But with this formula, you can calculate the price for each good along the game, and you may adjust basic price with it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back