What kind of trading system would you prefer?

[Strager]

There are several different models Paradox has used to represent trade in their games:

CK2 Style: Pretty bear-bones system. Has some interesting ideas with republics.

EU4 Style: Abstract but functional. Trade routes are a good addition.

HoI4 Style: Simple compared to Victoria but more in depth than EUs. Allows for a more dynamic diplomacy game than EU.

Vicky 2 Style: Victoria also uses pops to its easy to make analogies. Trade system was a bit cumbersome but very functional.

--------------

What I think they should do is use a simplified version of Victoria's system. Have dynamically created trade-goods. Different species start with different available goods and those goods can be exported to other worlds. Occasionally new goods are discovered on colonies. The more supply on the open market the less something is worth.

What do you guys think? How would you like to see trade depicted?

 

[ISitOnGnomes]

I like the Aurora 4x system. When a planet is first colonized it produces a enough of several trade goods to support its own demand, with one or two goods producing a surplus. Once the planet reaches an appropriate population it begins to produce a surplus in another couple trade goods.

Each planet will therefore end up "specialized" in producing a few goods, while driving up demand for those goods it doesnt produce. The better you are able to fill this demand, the better your pops on that planet would do their jobs.

The game built its own civilian trade c
ompanies that would run this trade in the background, but relying on the private sector to build this trade on its own is slow. Therefore, the player is encouraged to subsidize the private sector to help it along, until the size of your empire is large enough it can sustain itself.

 

[Radically Right Wing]

I agree, a simplified version of Victoria's system would be best in my view also.

 

[alphamikefox]

Anything other than CK2 style will need to introduce something worth trading. At this point nothing further than that can be implemented without also discussing what types of trade goods you think should be added to the game to be bought and sold around the galaxy

Personally though I'd like EU4 trade. I'm sure I'd like Vicy2 if I knew how it works, but implementing that in Stellaris is borderline impractical IMO. EU4 style is more doable I think, creating a system of adding trade routes based on FTL distances that can be reached from planet to planet. You can incorporate the energy, mineral, eventually food, and even migration/refugees flow into this system. Trade nodes exist between every system that you build a trade hub station that you can build in your space, in neutral space, or in another empire that has open borders with you, but can only be built in FTL range of another system with a trade hub in it (or your home system). If one of your trade hubs is built in a system with another empire's trade hub (that you have open borders with), then you automatically connect to their trade routes and every trade route they are connected to with other empires (you could work in a little change to how communication spreads this way too)

Strategic resources can become trade goods instead (adding in some more) and be traded along these routes, and the bonuses you get from them can be granted to the empire that has market control of the good. This is determined by a trade power system that be modified by buildings on planets, modules on spaceports, trade hub stations, and possibly trade ships on automated trade missions similar to how science ships auto-survey, but I'm not sold on that. There is a lot of flexibility in where to put +/- trade power modifiers, but it'd require balancing for sure

Economic policy can be set by empires in the policy menu that determine how many trade routes you can place in your empire, if any. Some examples for consideration (DISCLAIMER: I am only making suggestions for gameplay reasons based loosely, but close enough IMO, in how realistic they are to the real world) Free Market: trade hubs get automatically built for free over time in every one of your systems which cost no maintenance, but your overall trade power is reduced. State control: you can build a certain maximum number of trade hubs that scales with technology, and maybe other things. Feudalism: You can't build any trade hubs, but other empires can build trade hubs in your space if you allow open borders with them, and you can still take advantage of trade routes that pass into or through your empire (this would need to be balanced, I'm not sure what the upside could be from it, but I liked the idea of it from Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga and the Barrayarans)

Just some ideas

 

[Nirmara]

An HoI system seem's like the best choice for Stellaris so that empires will have to protect their trade route from raid. Raiding could also be a thing with stealth ships acting like sub do in HoI.

Internal trade routes should also be a thing between sectors and the core so that an empire can the resources from sector are not magically transported to the core stockpile.

An aspect we have to consider about trade route is how the different FTL will play out. An Eu4 system would not work well with worm hole for example. Hyperlane and Wrap should act as a regular supply lane like in HoI. Hyperlane should also require less trade ships since this FTL is supposed to be faster (and for gameplay purposes, would be very easy to raid). Wormhole should rely on a special worm hole station acting as a trade depot.

 

[Derp]

I don't really want any of the ones listed tbh.
All of them are set up in such a way that they are really designed around the setting; trade, production and consumption in V2 was intimately linked to the era of industrialization and social upheaval, trade in EU4 was designed to imitate the importance of that era's naval trading routes, and trade in HOI was specifically oriented towards a world at war. Stellaris is something different entirely and a trade system should reflect that, if one is to be implemented at all - and I've yet to see a real compelling pitch for it.

 

[AmpsterMan]

I think an Aurora approach makes sense with broad enough categories. Have each civilization have corporations that produce different product classes that populations consume. Corporations take in Minerals and output products of different classes. Those products are then traded within planets, between planets, and between systems. The more trade, the more energy your government makes.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

It would have to be something new, though I would like something mixed between Vicky 2 and EU4. Mainly, aliens don't need or demand the same resources like a single species does. The galaxy is also, realistically, not lacking in necessary resources, and it will almost exclusively be food and luxury resources that are traded. The game needs to be able to represent state-sponsored trade (the bare-bones opening of the diplo window and asking for minerals in exchange for energy), as well as civilian trade (the trade that the state has little control over due to it being a free-market capitalist society).

The ability for planets to trade with each other on their own initiative, based solely on existing diplomatic ties, could encourage both imperial and cooperative play. Free Market societies want to be around friendly alien planets with loads of new stuff to trade with, boosting happiness and food. Empires just take what they want. The more aliens, the more fragile the relationship, but the higher quality the goods.

 

[calen]

I think an Aurora approach makes sense with broad enough categories. Have each civilization have corporations that produce different product classes that populations consume. Corporations take in Minerals and output products of different classes. Those products are then traded within planets, between planets, and between systems. The more trade, the more energy your government makes.

Lets not turn Stellaris in the a spreadsheet manager like Aurora.

 

[Me_]

I don't want a complex trade system. I want the game to focus on exploration and sci-fi, not be bogged down by the mundane workings of prices increasing and decreasing. If I want a spreadsheet simulator I'll play Victoria. EU4's system is the maximum complexity I'd like to see, but I'd like for it to actually be completely different.

 

[Alblaka]

I've written up a pretty detailed concept a week back or so (in the suggestion forum *HINTHINT*) named Trade - Life blood of all empires.
Basically, have every planet contribute trade to an empire-wide pool, then send that trade to all known empires based upon a system of regulations and attractiveness (nearby/allies/tradestrong empires get more), with the trade benefiting both the sender and receiver. The revenue of trade in the concept is 'trade goods' a new abstracted currency which can be converted in any other ressource at dynamic rates.

Though I'm reasonably sure that Stellaris' next Expansion (or maybe a patch in between) WILL include some sort of trading or economy mechanic. It's easily the most desired feature right now.

 

[Ezumiyr]

Actually, trade in CK2 and EU4 are also represented by specific kinds of governement, in both cases they are called merchant republics.
That's what I'd like to see in Stellaris : space corporations. They would emerge a bit like factions when you associate sectors to them (they would use the population to exploit mines or other kinds of ressources), then they could expand in other empires. Empires would be able to set policies concerning corporations, and the empire that "owns" a corporation head office could benefit from taxations and a special ressource, or various other bonus (for example, a corporation specialized in weaponry would provide a specific weapon or a damage bonus), while the other empires would benefit from slighter bonus depending on their policies.

I don't think we need to represent trade as a continual flow in Stellaris. In space operas, trade federation are generally entities on their own that can put pressure on governments. They want to exploit (in the case of mining companies)/protect (in the case of independant archaeological or life protection organizations) planets and will sometimes try to oppose other empires. Trade as a perpetual flow between planets, depending on their attractivity or whatever, would be rather boring and unnecessary. That's kinda what the mod that adds trade currently does. It doesn't really add anything.

 

[Crissa]

I don't care what the goods are, I want to trade them.

And I don't care how many re being traded - just make it very few clicks to trade an efficient amount.

The way trade is clearly beneficial to one side or another flatly (and that it takes a hundred clicks to get there and then you have to do it all over again in 10-30 year sucks rocks.)

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Something that has tangible trade routes (both internal and external) for sure.

 

[Ixal]

I would differenciate between internal and external trade. Internally ressources should not automatically come frome mining outposts to the ressource pool but have to be transported to the nearest planet. And energy has to be delivered from planets to the mining and research stations. And when they make global food this too has to be transported.
Trivial when the next planet is in the same system, but it takes a while when you need to pass 2 empty systems.
To reduce traffic and to increase the gain from riding transports should not be monthly but 1-2 times a year.

Trade with other empires would use a different system, not sure if EU4, HoI or Vic would be best.

 

[monsterfurby]

I would start by asking which aspect of trade is usually the most relevant in science fiction and extrapolate from there.

Three possible elements would be:

1. Political power - Trade-focused empires tend to be somewhat safe from military aggression as long as they do not become aggressors themselves. They also tend to be able to muster a surprisingly large and powerful force if pushed. Other races don't like to go to war with those they have a large amount of trade with.

2. Trade routes - Supply routes play a large role as targets of raiders (space piracy!) and are sometimes the spark that begins an interstellar war.

3. Strategic resources, pilgrims, refugees - This is already in the game in part. Sometimes trade routes become major plot elements when either travellers with a purpose are threatened or an empire's supply of a strategic resource depends on them.

In general, it appears that in SciFi, trade is generally considered pretty abstract, but logistics are quite tangible. Unless some major strategic resource is involved, it matters little *what* is traded and more *where* it is traded. I'd suggest a focus more on trade routes and logistics than on individual resources. Consequently, I see the system bearing greater resemblance to EU4 than to Victoria 2, though neither system really has a "space opera" flavor to it and major adjustments are needed.

 

[redomer]

This game was shipped without any sort of goods and very only two actual resources. I think the trading to be mostly automated to not get a lot of hate from players who just want to conquer and explore.

I however do want a production, trading and cooperations/ industrialists in the game. I even made a threat for it a while ago. My general idea is that most of the work should be delegateble(?). No one can rule the whole universe alone.

 

[grandad1982]

EU4 system would suck big time. It can't have dynamic routes or you could create infinite loops (bad) which is fine in a preset world map that is meant to reflect European Imperialism by having trade flow in one direction (towards Europe). For a game like Stellaris you would need the trade to be much more organically based on how the map develops over time.

I do like the idea of trade but I have no idea how you would best implement it. Maybe expand on the strategic resources already in the game somehow?

 

[Ikael]

Good debate here. Some pondering:

- Some system of visible trade routes would be greatly benefitial for the game, for it would mean less doomstacks (tm) and more strategic positions / chokepoints
- Integrating trade routes with other game systems such as refugees, factions and global food seems like a good, logical step
- I don't think that an in-depth system of multiple consumer goods would be benefitial for the game, considering that 1) We already have a consumer good system in place that acts like a good balancer of production and tall / wide empires and 2) most of us wouldn't like to see the game devolve into a spreadsheet simulator either. A fine balance between depth and abstraction / playability would be the optimal choice, me thinks
- Considering that the game is already quite procedural by itself, to add another layer of procedural-ness might end up being counter productive, as there are lots of possible exploits and loops, considering how "galactic geography" works

With all of that taken into consideration, I think that this could be a good trade system for Stellaris:

- Every empire will be able to attract corporations. They operate in the same vein of political factions. They will demand certain actions for the player to meet (ej: Colonize 3 additional systems, secure a Zro supply, reach X popullation, research X technology, etc). Also, note how favouring one corporation will disminish the strenght of their competitors, and vice versa.

- Once a corporation gains enough strenght level, it will grant a trade route to your empire. State-controlled economies will allow you to pick and choose the trade route's destination, while free market economies will present significantly stronger trade routes, at the expense of their control. Trade routes will be visible on the map to every empire that has charted at least one of the systems where it has been stablished

- The more time a trade route is operating with no piracy, warfare nor interruptions, the more it will grow in size and thus, the more bonuses will provide for both your empire and your trading partners, and its corporate owner will grow stronger as a result, too

- The more trade routes a system has, the more powerful said trade routes will become, and more corporations will want to stablish trade routes with said system. So yes, strategic trade hubs will be a thing.

- There will be a maximum cap of trade routes that a system can sustain depending on its popullation. So trade routes will help "tall" empires, so to speak

- Note how the benefits of these trade routes will vary from one corporation to another, hence why the player will need to ponder which corporation should support. Every trade route will provide extra credits and inmigration to their empires, but certain corporations will provide additional happiness, military ships, science, unity, planetary bonuses, and so on. Ej: "Tyrell corporation: +5% to synthethic pop yields at both sides of the trade route per level" VS "Weiland Yutani: +10% to inmigration towards both sides of the trade route, 5% chances of obtaining xenomorph troops per level"

- Once they reach a certain strenght level, corporations will act as lobbies too, strenghtening or weakening certain empire factions. The more their trade routes grow, the more powerful their political clout will be and the more expensive will be to interfere with their internal affairs (ej: telling a corporation to stop trading with one of your rivals or to support one faction over another will cost you more influence if said corporation is extremely strong and well stablished).

- Some really powerful corporations (and their trade routes) could survive external conquest, even if war will of course weak them out. Conquering empires will decide then whetever to mantain their old foe's corporations or to disband them so they don't become subversive trojan horses

- Certain goverments can strenghten, weaken and manipulate corporations in order to do their bidding, either by giving them subsidies (paying a certain amount of credits per month), giving them political support (paying a certain amount of influence per month), by nationalizing them (gain direct control at the expense of heavily weakening them) or by adopting certain decrees or policies (giving rights to AIs will weaken Tyrell Corporation's strenght, while scientific grants will help them out)

So in short, a "commerce overview" screen would be something like this:

Tyrell corporation
Motto: "More human than human"
Strenght level: 7
Bonus: +5% synth output per trade route level level
Lobbying: Agains the Synthethic rights movement (-20% against their influence), in favour of the New World's Pioneers (+15% to their influence)
Active trade routes:
Earth - Alpha centauri: LV4 trade route. +5 credits, +20% to the synth output of Earth and Alpha Centauri
Earth - Cadia (controlled by the Tau empire): LV 8 trade route. +15 credits . +40% to the synth output of Earth and Cadia
Active policies affecting Tyrell Corporation:
Recieving moderate state subsidies: -15 credits per turn, -10% happiness in your empire, +2 corporate strenght levels, +1 Trade route levels

 

[Drakonn]

I'm still a fan of GalCiv way of building trade ships at a planet (though not being able to reset their home planet was annoying) and sending them to planets you wished to trade with. With many buildings/Starbases to improve your trade (builds relations if your trade a long time too). Had to monitor the routes during war to make sure they didn't get plundered as trade routes could be very lucrative

Main thing is it needs to be interactive. Don't really want something that's set it and forget it or just looking at a screen of numbers ( *cough* Consumer Goods).

Curious about HOI style from what I've heard. CK2 from what I remember was just set up and mess with numbers on a screen. (Though gaining majority was interesting in a region). Need to see if HOI or Vicky has a demo I can try later.