In EU2, every trade agreement lowered your trade efficiency by 3%. I think it is the same in EU3. Never really understood why it did that. IMO made trade agreements useless.
Trading: Useless?
- Thread starter Black_Shade
- 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.
As, Portugal I was able to rack up a large trading income. The secret is to send your explorer to the far east and discover the rich COTs there. Also pick the trade National ideas and change your government to the Merchant one. Finally, colonize the rich sugar producing provinces in Brazil to increase the value of Portugal's COT in Lisban.
It ought to be interesting to try this "Merchant Empire" strategy in the full game.
George
It ought to be interesting to try this "Merchant Empire" strategy in the full game.
George
I think part of the problem with trade in the game is that most everybody is equal in trading ability, at least for the first 150-200 years of the game. So you place a merchant, and he gets almost instantaneously competed out because there are 30 other countries trying for the same spot that are just as good as you. After a while, gaps start to form in trading research and national ideas and advisors, so you're able to maintain a steady population of merchants.
JaguarUSF said:
Actually in my Portugal game, with the appropriate National ideas, my traders had good staying power. I was able to maintain 5 traders in at least 4 COTs plus lessor amounts in others. However when I went for a monopoly, my traders were competed out quickly.
George
Prestige and reputation also have an effect on your merchants' ability to compete. If you're being a bad boy or your prestige is low, your merchants will get competed out of business in no time (which makes sense...your country is a social pariah after all so no one really wants to go business with you).
aglozier said:
I've had exactly the same experience with Portugal, although it took me a while to get 5 merchants over six or seven COTs. Part of that is because I was concentrating on colonizing more so than trade.
Lord Ederon said:
Sorry but I do not agree with what you say. Unfortunately a merchant in a COT makes money on the money originating in the COT and its profit is based on trade efficiency (tech) and inversely with distance (the farther you are the more expensive it is to place your merchant).
Who said value of CoT represents money in that CoT? I'd rather understand it as value of goods traded in that CoT. So rich CoT isn't place with high capital itself, but place where you can get rich by trading there. That is, you buy there and sell wherever you can make profit on it.berhaven said:
The fact it takes your merchant more time to get to a far away CoT is ok and again corretlates with your view of trading. The time till he "arrives" can be understood as time when he tries to establish trade routes from that CoT (not only to your homeland, but anywhere he is allowed to and where he can make profit). If he succeeds, these routes make profit based on price of goods from that CoT on world market. When he's outcompeted, it can mean another merchant convinced your merchant's supplier to sell him instead of to your merchant, ditto with ship captains who provided transport, etc..
As I said before, I think trade system in EU2/3 is well tought out and it takes all you mention into account. Anyway, I'd like to know your proposals how to change it.
Lord Ederon said:
That's the point: the value of a COT is based on the value of goods traded in that COT. As the game works now, the goods traded in a COT are the goods produced in the provinces belonging to that COT, while it would be more realistic that the gods traded in a COT are the good imported in that COT by its merchants
In the demo got I a good center of trade in the middle of the Aztec empire(after I annexed it). I only had to compete against indians who wheren't as active or good in trade as europeans.
I believe it is more appropriate the way it is - model where CoT is source (where destination is not dealt with in detail and is greatly abstracted). Model where CoT would represent destination would be little wierd, it could only work if you had both source and destination (CoT-> CoT). That would substantially overwhelm the trading system. Rembember, this is not trading game, it is grand strategy scale game.berhaven said:
Of course the best way for trading would be trade routes, dynamic trade routes that chance based on supply and demand. It shouldn't be all to hard to make I think, even if it require some work Paradox obviously didn't want to spend.
In any case I have not been able to make profit form trading in EUIII (demo). In EUII you send two merchants to a CoT, mostly one succeeded, and stayed there for some months usually. In EUIII you send 5 merchants, is lucky if even one succeeds, (not to talk about two, then you're a real lucky fellow) and before the end of the month you have none again. Don't tell me this makes profit.
In any case I have not been able to make profit form trading in EUIII (demo). In EUII you send two merchants to a CoT, mostly one succeeded, and stayed there for some months usually. In EUIII you send 5 merchants, is lucky if even one succeeds, (not to talk about two, then you're a real lucky fellow) and before the end of the month you have none again. Don't tell me this makes profit.
I made a lot of money when trading as the Timurids. The eastern CoT in India (can't remember the province name, something with "b" (no, not Bengal actually)) are at 1200. Fars, Kutch and Malacca around 600, and I think the CoT in China is up to 1200. Also, there's less competition.
Trading as Portugal was very profitable in the demo. By 1520 I had 5 merchants in 5 or 6 COTs and majority of my income was from trade. I think the key is keeping your reputation good (no wars without Casus Belli and annexinations) and selecting national ideas that promote trade, like the one which gives you +10% to compete chance.
I think a system like that would take long time to design and balance, not to mention would eat up more processing power.
I think the CoT system is a brilliant abstraction. Do note that the CoTs influence can be seen as its market.
cheers
I think the CoT system is a brilliant abstraction. Do note that the CoTs influence can be seen as its market.
cheers