Hi there, I've always wondered, but never bothered to ask: what are the effects of these 'trade fleets' ? Are they the same with 'increase tradeable goods' ?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Hi there, I've always wondered, but never bothered to ask: what are the effects of these 'trade fleets' ? Are they the same with 'increase tradeable goods' ?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Last edited by tudor93; June 12, 2012 at 05:41 AM.
Înfrânt nu eşti atunci când sângeri,
nici ochii când în lacrimi ţi-s.
Adevăratele înfrângeri,
sunt renunţările la vis.
dude?it is sea export...
Last edited by napoleonic; June 12, 2012 at 06:02 AM.
yeah dude I know
what's the effect, more income ? or what
Înfrânt nu eşti atunci când sângeri,
nici ochii când în lacrimi ţi-s.
Adevăratele înfrângeri,
sunt renunţările la vis.
I believe they are those little green lines starting from you port and going to different directions.It means more trade thus more income.
Dudes. Very interesting question. Here's what I think: Once you have a port - and as long as it is not blockaded - you can trade by sea with other settlements that also have a port. However, you will not sea-trade with provinces adjacent to you, as these can land-trade with you. You will only sea-trade with settlements that have at least one different resource from your province. The more different resources qualify for export/import to/from a given province, the more lucrative sea trade with that province will be.
Now I have seen the following: Your port can sea-trade with several other ports, even if you do not have a single building which grants a trade fleet. What does this mean? My theory is it means that these other ports have trade fleets available (or maybe each port has one "standard fleet" and trade fleets come on top) which choose to sea-trade with your province because it is their most lucrative choice. If eg your port becomes blockaded, all these other ports will "switch" to different ports. Now if you build a building which grants a trade fleet, your port also has a fleet which can "choose" another port for sea trade. Look up the trade detail screen of your settlement - you will notice that there is one sea trade route which brings mighty money. That must be your trade fleet! I have also noticed that there are different buildings granting you "trade fleets available: 1". However, these do not add up. So if you have two different buildings of that sort, your total number of trade fleets is still (only) 1. Only upgrading one of those buildings will bring you a second trade fleet. The maximum number of trade fleets for a settlement - I think - is 3.
Correct me if I am wrong. Interesting topic.
Oh, and to answer the question from post #3: Yes, the trade fleet means more income.
Last edited by Strengelicher; June 12, 2012 at 06:36 AM.
Yes dude, you are right, the more trade fleets available the more differant ports (settlements) you can trade. In other words the number of the green lines connecting ports represent number of trade fleets. So if you have just one trade fleet, you can trade with one other region through port. But it does not mean more rough income like "trade base income bonus". It varies a lot.
You have it mostly correct- Port comes with 1 trade fleet and only the Wharehouse line adds more trade fleets. 1 trade fleet allows 1 export connection to another port which is chosen based on the goods available for trade, the value of the goods, and the population of the two cities as population increases the value. So for example if the trade value of the good for export is relatively high then the export and import trade of that good combined with population of both cities creates a high income. Sea trade only trades goods that the cities don't have in common while land trade will trade the same good if both regions produce it. The value created is also multiplied by the market buildings of each province and that is calculated ontop of the base value. So Constantinople might derive a large value from exporting to Thessaloniki but if Thessaloniki has undeveloped markets and roads the value of its exports to Constantinople benefit from the large pop size of the export market but remain comparatively smaller due to its own undeveloped trade infrastructure.
Exports make much more than imports by a calculation based as factor of population sizes of the cities doing the trade, the level of the trade infrastructure and the value of the good. Imports make about 10-30% (I haven't tried to figure it more exactly than that though you should be able to figure it nearly exactly observing enough cities trade summaries and setting the resources values to factors of 10) of the export factor based on the combination of the population of the importing and exporting cities with the added value of the trade infrastructure multipliers added to that base value.
So for example Constantinople has 1 trade fleet only with a shipwright that chooses the largest city to trade with as that brings the most revenue. That city is usually Caffa/Cheronesos or Thessaloniki but sometimes another. It is usually not Nicaea because they both have Silk resource. If Constantinople builds a Wharehouse that 2nd fleet seeks the next best location, probably Smyrna or Chersonesos/Caffa but maybe Corinth or Tarnovo etc.
Since Constantinople has the largest population in its broader area most often many other cities select it as the target market since it brings a higher income due to the population size. So Constantinople could have export value of 1,000 and 4 cities target it for their own exports then the sea trade could be 1,300 total as those cities usually have smaller population and the exporting cities pop size weights the heaviest on the income created for that city doing the exporting. However the export income those cities that targeted Constantinople might still gain less than Constantinople even though Constantinople has a 20% or so lower income as its imports for them but Constantinople has larger population by far and more developed trade infrastructure so total income gain could actually be higher for Constantinople until those cities develop more trade infrastructure and come nearer in pop size.
Land trade is based on the same things but level of the roads in each region is a factor along with distance instead of number of fleets. Usually land trade brings in more income due to more connections since its not limited by number of fleets but some isolated regions make very little as they might only border 2 regions and if 1 of those regions shares the same resource there is still trade but I think it halves the value of the trade due to shared resource.
What I am not sure of is if roads benefit sea trade as well as land trade or if the wharehouse line benefits land trade as well as sea trade. I believe it is simply a trade multiplier that gives a bonus to all trade which is why income rises so high as campaign progresses. Populations increase as well as developing trade infrastructure which if it all stacks eventually gives around 300% trade bonus stacked on the original base of 100% so total 400% income to the population size. So 500 trade income at turn 1 for a city of 5,000 could grow to 2,000 base as the population increases to 20,000 and then the trade multipliers increase that base to 6,000 so the total is 8,000(base plus multipliers). So by late campaign you see cities situated at a crossroads of many regions(lots of land trade connections) with max trade infrastructure(so 3 fleets exporting to cities even beyond the land trade connections) reaching 10-12,000 income as the total income of 8,000 from all trade is added to the tax base. With a governor with +tax or trade traits or ancillaries(whose bonus is only to the trade base of 2,000) income might increase another 1,000 to 13,000 but few cities will reach much beyond that even with all trade infrastructure built in the current SS.
For SSMAP due to lack of land trade connections for some very rich cities and other issues I introduced Tolls as a resource that can have mines built so that regions on the map edge that traditionally had alot of trade like Urgench, Novgorod, Marrakesh, Rostov, Harat, etc could still have high income. Also trading routes along rivers and through mountain passes often were a very rich source of Tolls that nearby factions fought over while religious pilgrim routes were similarly fought over between Crusaders(Kerak was a fortress built primarily to tax Hajj routes) and Damascus/Aleppo. Also Rome, Santiago, Jerusalem, Mecca, had large incomes from the Tolls of pilgrims and the hospitality industry feeding, clothing, guiding, and sheltering the pilgrims.
Trade resource values also matter for the income and can be raised or lowered if you want higher or lower income from trade between cities not to mention merchants on the resources as well. Keep in mind that most of this should be related to the EDU recruitment and upkeep costs or there is either crazy stack spam everywhere more often the poor regions of the map are completely crushed by richer regions who can afford massive armies. For SSMAP I tried to balance the resources much better as well as Tolls are more spread out so areas of the map like Rus that were relatively poor for land area before now have some Tolls to represent the very rich river trade that brought silver coins of the middle east into massive hordes on Visby and in other areas of Scandinavia the trade routes were that long.
Personally I think trade income stacks way too much over a full campaign due to all the trade multiplier on buildings. I would cut trade multiplier by at least half and perhaps reduce the number of buildings they occur with. Corruption, law, public order also play a role in total income produced and in combination with lowering trade multiplier raising those would be a good thing. I'm not as big a fan of distance to Capitol being raised more as ERE and Cumans for example are unfairly penalized with that despite having good control over even distant regions. It should play a role but the current values are about right.
The problem with trade multipliers is that EDU costs remain the same over time... so when cities income is 8x the starting amount then nearly 8x as many armies can be created leading to longer turn times as AI has to calculate the moves and fight the battles of all those extra armies while also making from some boring gameplay as to advance 2 regions players might have to fight through 16 armies instead of 4. I think the solution is raising the costs of professional armies alot while lowering trade multipliers so then ERE as the richest faction can still afford alot of armies at start but with professionals costing alot more and income lowered its more difficult to sustain massive stack spam except of low quality armies. Over time the other factions which are poorer than ERE will develop professional armies on their roster and not have a huge advantage. Mostly this would mean some other rich areas like Italy, Moors, Egypt, and England could have a bit more early professionals in their rosters at start as well to balance costs. England actually has the best case for this as despite being a feudal society it had a much higher proportion of its army being tied directly to the King's household as the core troops with vassals being more often auxillaries to that at least for the first century after the Norman takeover.
Last edited by Ichon; June 12, 2012 at 02:01 PM.
STAINLESS STEEL Historical Improvement Project (SSHIP) - v0.8.2 Beta released!
Recent AARs/Guides
Norway 180 turn SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...71#post8479471
Lithuania SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369607
1390 SS submod WIP
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=479539
Ok, thank you very much for the information, Strengelicher and erkanus dudes !
Last edited by tudor93; June 12, 2012 at 12:57 PM.
Înfrânt nu eşti atunci când sângeri,
nici ochii când în lacrimi ţi-s.
Adevăratele înfrângeri,
sunt renunţările la vis.
Dudes... If you have a sea dude, your going to be able to pull in more sweet dude!
That will allow you to recruit more and more dudes in which to fight those evil dudes from across the sea who are always duding with you.
Just dude it!!!
Edit your post, Tudor dude.
What do you think of several EDUs with higher and higher recruitment and upkeep costs that players can swap in every hundred years?
It seems simpler to change settlement mechanics so that doesn't need to happen for a balanced game.
The EDU formula I'm designing would also help as units with more armor and more often early and late pro the costs rise but on its own still not enough. That combined with some settlement mechanic changes would be enough I think- the only real reason to swap EDU that I can see is for general's bodyguards but even then I've seen mods that solved that with armor upgrades.
STAINLESS STEEL Historical Improvement Project (SSHIP) - v0.8.2 Beta released!
Recent AARs/Guides
Norway 180 turn SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...71#post8479471
Lithuania SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369607
1390 SS submod WIP
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=479539
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
*referring to the huge post
if i had time Strengelicher i'd help you with this one too, and would have read that huge post of Ichon...
as a response for Tudor: yes, for all cities with at least 1 resource (the more the best), this building (which if adds 1 more trade fleet per level) and next levels are the most important and most profitable ones. 2nd after these are paved roads, depending on how many regions are around for land trade...
in some mods level 1 of that building doesn't give 1 more trade fleets, so just the minor trade bonus, but level 2 can bring a worthwhile profit. in this case i ignore it at cities unless i don't have anything else to build, and when it reaches large city i build the 2 levels in a row.
Ichon's post was like the teacher entering the classroom while the class was fooling around during break time (or, in this case, "duding" around). Notice how everyone fell silent for a while after his looong post? I loved that...
![]()
i read his whole post and it says a lot to me, mere player
but i still could not find an answer to my question in SS forums.
QUESTION: If i have 1 port/shipwright that gives me 1 trade fleet, and i will build Merchants Wharf, which gives me another one, i will have 2 fleets to export?
if yes: early campaign as Venice and Byzantine - it does not work. it looks like my number of trading fleet is strictly same as the HIGHEST number on any of my building in the town. (so port + wharf != 2 but 1)
if no: why is it so? why i cannot have more than 3 trade fleets (and only with HUGE city)? whats the point of explorers guild then? it gives me +2 trade fleets on GM, 1 on regular/master, but isnt it pointless? i dont need 1 trading fleet that i already have from a port when they do not stack.
i really would like to find an answer to this "problem" of mine. i looked into settlement details, and unless i get building with 2 or 3 trade fleets, i will still have only 1 trade fleet. explorers guild + port/shipwright + merchants wharf = 1 (tested personally). it quite pisses me off, cos i converted everything down from Bosphor and Dardanely (dunno how it spells in english) to cities, only castle on the coast is Corinth, and i still cant get more trade fleets with extra buildings. also, i am not quite satisfied with answer "towns around you do not match the condition ichon said, so they do not export" - they have a whole truckload of destinations they can choose, from italy through egypt to asia minor.
in old rome and maybe even first M2, Iraklion and Rhodes were source of great income, altogether with greece, as they could connect to many cities and had many trade fleets. now, they just suck. Nicosia same. looks like every island should be just castle.
Couldn't you get around that by doing something like this:
trade_fleet 1 requires {factions}
trade_fleet 2 requires {factions} and building_present_min_level sea_trade merchants_wharf
And then of course increase it for higher level merchants wharf and do the opposite for the merchants wharf buildings and any other buildings that increase naval trade.
Last edited by PapaRosario; June 25, 2012 at 01:28 PM.
yes thank you for fast replies ppl!
actually, i was just right thinking about same thing as you, edition of building stats - there are few buildings that gives tade fleets, so merchant wharf would not be 1 fleet but 2, and etc everything +1 (beside port, +1 is for ports). for explorers guild, i was thinking about giving it +4 regular/master and +6 headmaster.
but that would require changing conditions to large city for basic/master explorers guild and huge city to headmasters.
so i would preffer you way, cos i "just" have to count every possibility and count merchant fleets... if that will work actually. ill test it later, cos i do not need additional money now. ill let you know if it works.
fine, i couldnt wait to try it out ^_^
modified city ports (not castle, cos they dont have explorers guild nor wharfs):
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
sea trade modified here (i didnt implement drydocks and didnt make combinations of drydocks + explorer only and others... no time now):
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
replace with this your original entries in export_descr_buildings.txt and you can have up to 6 trade fleets at once with shipwright + docklands + HQ explorers!also, if anybody have time, maybe complete it with implementing drydock to sea trade? (BTW thanks to this mass of requires, building info WILL look pretty bad
right now it is good)