*starts game*
*sees Lubeck node at a value of 26 in 1444*
*rages*
I preferred the previous trade system.
*sees Lubeck node at a value of 26 in 1444*
*rages*
I preferred the previous trade system.
Do My Eyes Deceive Me? Is the WETN Truly Gone?
- Thread starter Olaf the Unsure
- Start date
-
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.
Indeed. Right now Western powers have no incentive to play the colonial game, they're already filthy rich thanks to FISH and GRAIN.
I like the new trade connections between the New World and Europe though : every country has to be smart about where to settle, or the trade value is wasted.
Western powers have no incentive to play the colonial game because colonial forcelimits got shafted and because trade propagation lets them get all the trade from the new world without even being there. Not because they're 'rich thanks to fish and grain.'
It is so damn hard to keep trade from leaking out of Ragusa... incredibly aggravating.
"Merchants steering toward inland" is such a HUGE issue for me. I stated it back when it was first introduced with WoN I believe.
Now I'm not a history expert, but didn't the Hansa get most of their trade and extend their dominance throughout the Baltic region?
But the way the trade in-game is modeled you would think they did most of their trade with the Mediterranean and southeastern European countries.
Actually now WETN is gone, I realize I'm missing it, why ?
Because now even if you manage to colonize the WHOLE carribean trade node, 80% of it will still be sucked away to Europe and nodes you don't want to due to " trade power downstream " by France, England, Spain and Portugal.
GG trade system, time to rework it please.
Because now even if you manage to colonize the WHOLE carribean trade node, 80% of it will still be sucked away to Europe and nodes you don't want to due to " trade power downstream " by France, England, Spain and Portugal.
GG trade system, time to rework it please.
Who are you playing as? Norway? Or another coloniser?
I think trade simply needs to directly reward players who have power in the upstream nodes, as well as those who have power in the middle. There are two things that offend me... 1) the way that a country which exerts no influence outside it's home ports in Europe can have more power and money than a nation with strong trade ports and fleets in every corner of the world 2) the way that people get around it by monopolising a small node, such as the Cape, and collecting all the goods from India and China there in a node that represents no import potential whatsoever.
EU4 trade is a great idea but the implementation is falling behind the other mechanics of the game that have had great improvements. It's a more than salvageable system if the right changes are made.
Yes, and that's because the game fails to represent trade properly.
Also, a big problem with the current set up is that a lot of Mediterranean trade gets steered north inland at Ragusa to Wien, and from there it eventually ends up in North Europe. Kinda ridiculous.
A huge improvement is how the new Ivory Coast node is structured. With provinces only on the coast rather than inland.
I also like the English Channel node encompassing both England and Netherlands. In previous versions Netherlands had to steer from London, it was insane.
I also like the English Channel node encompassing both England and Netherlands. In previous versions Netherlands had to steer from London, it was insane.
1) I agree, the propagation is out of hand. Specifically, having light ships propagate is silly, as it rewards the fleet for staying close to home when it should be rewarded for actually going out and plying the world's trade routes. Without propagation, the controller of the fleets would be forced to compromise between the trading robustness of spread-out fleets versus the military robustness of keeping the armada intact in case a fight breaks out, making for a more interesting game, especially concerning naval warfare. I'm OK with province propagation, though - it's right that control of key ports exerts a far-reaching influence, and it makes inland trade work a lot better.
2) Collecting everything at the Cape shouldn't be a dominant strategy unless it's your main trade hub, because the halved collection power and the low potential for provincial trade power makes it very vulnerable to pirates and other forms of poaching. The game theory of trade in EU4 is actually quite complex if you assume a competent opponent. The problem is that the AI is too predictable and inflexible in its trade strategies.
That's due to inland steering though. Not necessarily at fault with the current setup, unless you're implying Ragusa should only flow into Venice... which is something I'd probably allow if we got rid of Venice being an end node, so that trade can still actually flow to Germany from the Mediterranean.
The idea of end nodes is stupid anyways and only exist to prevent infinite trade loops.
The current Ragusa node doesn't make a lot of sense, because it's a weird hybrid of a maritime trade route around Greece and the southern Adriatic, and an inland trade route along the lower Danube. Instead of Ragusa, I would create a new inland 'Danube' node that receives from Constantinople and Crimea and flows into Wien and Krakow, and have another node (Ionian Sea?) covering the southernmost part of Italy, Albania and western Greece, receiving from Constantinople, Tunis and Alexandria and sending to Genoa and Venice (with no direct connection from Genoa to Alexandria).
That wouldn't really help with a poor Venice and Mediterranean trade ending up in Lübeck though. Instead of Ragusa getting sucked dry by Wien it just changes to Constantinople getting sucked dry by Danube. Merchants steering to inland probably need some kind of soft-cap to avoid this while still giving inland traders a chance against their naval competitors.
This is quite easy to mod, hopefully. Embargo bugs and vassal income computations (as well as various income displays) cannot be modded.
For me trade will never be fixed until they change the whole system where wealth flows in one direction no matter what is happening in the world.
Just imagine how glorious it would be if Chinese merchants could get rich by trading with India or Indian nations getting rich by trading with the Middle East. Now the closer to Europe you can collect the richer you are that is kinda sad.
Just imagine how glorious it would be if Chinese merchants could get rich by trading with India or Indian nations getting rich by trading with the Middle East. Now the closer to Europe you can collect the richer you are that is kinda sad.
I wanted to slowclap but I decided against it
what really gets me is that paradox doesn't seem to understand how supply and demand works
Cold weather decreasing the supply of wine?
Prices go down
Yeah I've also found it weird. I try to explain it by saying that cold weather ruined grapes harvest and so wine that year was of bad quality.
In other cases they do, though. European Beaver is going extinct? Fur prices rise!
The lack of consistency is silly though, I agree.
What if the Danube node fed from Ragusa? Sure, Ragusa would still leak inland, but shouldn't the effect be basically cut in half, due to the fact that the various minors would have to divide up their focus between the two nodes?