New foreign trade system (user suggestion)

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

It looks nice, but it shouldn't have to be circular, why would it not be possible to ship directly from Africa to Italy for example? Especially considering Roman dependency on Sicilian, African and Egyptian grain.

[HusKatten]

|Sith|Galvanized Iron: This Trade Route is not necessary about factional needs. The Trade Route symbolizes private non-political merchants who travels from port to port in order to sell their luxuries. Grain import/export should be made with a trade agreement between two factions. This is about Foreign Trade - Just like the Trade Nodes in the current games.

I hope i answered you question. If not, do not hesitate to ask again

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

|Sith|Galvanized Iron: This Trade Route is not necessary about factional needs. The Trade Route symbolizes private non-political merchants who travels from port to port in order to sell their luxuries. Grain import/export should be made with a trade agreement between two factions. This is about Foreign Trade - Just like the Trade Nodes in the current games.

I hope i answered you question. If not, do not hesitate to ask again

Well only half, I'm wondering why private merchants would not be interested in sailing from Africa to Italy?

[HusKatten]

Well only half, I'm wondering why private merchants would not be interested in sailing from Africa to Italy?

They are, but they are following the coastal lines for safe farewaters and more opportunities to trade. Direct trade between Italy and Egypt will be set with local trade routes (aka trade agreements). This is a form of bigger independent trade route chain. Not a deal between two factions. Also, I could draw the lines differently on the preview pictures. Like all the routes origins from the Red Sea and spreads to the other Trade Stops - This could definitely be an alternative

if you search for "Silk Road" on google images you'll find that these kind of routes are a little cracky in order to trade with as many as possible. Its this kind of effect i want my pictures to have.

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

They are, but they are following the coastal lines for safe farewaters and more opportunities to trade. Direct trade between Italy and Egypt will be set with local trade routes (aka trade agreements). This is a form of bigger independent trade route chain. Not a deal between two factions. Also, I could draw the lines differently on the preview pictures. Like all the routes origins from the Red Sea and spreads to the other Trade Stops - This could definitely be an alternative

Yes in general you are right, but I think your forget about Sicily one of the reasons Sicily was so valuable was becuase it allowed trade from Carthage to Italy becuase Africa to Sicilty isn't really open waters, but pretty safe to travel. So a Carthage-Sicily trade route should be added I think, probably Sicily should be a trade region of its' own as well.

[HusKatten]

Yes in general you are right, but I think your forget about Sicily one of the reasons Sicily was so valuable was becuase it allowed trade from Carthage to Italy becuase Africa to Sicilty isn't really open waters, but pretty safe to travel. So a Carthage-Sicily trade route should be added I think, probably Sicily should be a trade region of its' own as well.

Historically speaking you are probably right. But the cities that was major trade hubs historically are not necessarily the major trade hubs in-game. It all comes down to how the campaign plays out. And imo it's important to not break down the Trade Route Regions too much, since that will take away all the competition and the Trade Stops rarity - And that's the two main points of keeping the feature interesting and functioning. Sicily could still be important trade-wise, (i.e valuable production, geographical position) but it doesn't have to have its own Trade Stop Region.

[HusKatten]

Double post.

[Timotheus]

Hey kattmannen, what about put a linky to the CA thread in your OP? It may help

Also lended you some firepower now

[AlexCouceiro]

Ichon, have you ever considered writing a WIKI strategy guide for Rome 2 explaining general game´s formulas and mechanics, as some contributors do regarding Paradox games?

I personally understand nothing about coding, but love reading all detailed explanations I can find about how my favorite games work behind the scenes. Your information about how blockading ports work in Shogun 2, for instance, would be most valuable to me in the past, when I still enjoyed playing Shogun 2. What do you think about my suggestion?

[Ichon]

It's early to write any R2 strategy guide and there are already plenty of guides online for most things. I know stuff only from reading guides and modding but I have not modded warscape aside from a tiny bit NTW. I have looked over the toolkit for Shogun2 but I don't have free time to get into it. HoI MTW2 and M&B.

[HusKatten]

Timotheus: Yes, good idea, i'll post it into the OP. Thanks man!

We've got the fire started in the official forums also. Thanks for all the firewood guys

Ichon has answered your questions. Don't hesitate to post more questions

[HusKatten]

What are your views on the ability to pirate/intercept the Dynamic Trade Route? Or the local trade itself?

This is my post i copied from the official R2 forums (Its taken out of context, but it might be a good starter for a discussion regarding the pirating):

"The only problem i have with pirating is that it's often used as a lousy reson for full out war. And during mid and late game the pirating is very frequent and mostly just annoying rather than interesting. Programming the AI to not pirate as often or during peace-time is not fair either. Since then the human player can pirate on a frequent basis, and the AI can't. But sure, everything can be fixed with a polished AI. Placing out nodes on the routes is also an alternative for reducing the annoyance of pirating. At least then you know where your enemy can and cannot pirate, and it'll be more easy to defend. My mind is however not settled wether you should be able to pirate directly on the routes or not. My experience with E:TW says that unlimited interception possibilites along the entire route is not a good solution. Simple port-blockage is good enough - but that lacks depth."

[TsarGrey]

What are your views on the ability to pirate/intercept the Dynamic Trade Route? Or the local trade itself?

This is my post i copied from the official R2 forums (Its taken out of context, but it might be a good starter for a discussion regarding the pirating):

"The only problem i have with pirating is that it's often used as a lousy reson for full out war. And during mid and late game the pirating is very frequent and mostly just annoying rather than interesting. Programming the AI to not pirate as often or during peace-time is not fair either. Since then the human player can pirate on a frequent basis, and the AI can't. But sure, everything can be fixed with a polished AI. Placing out nodes on the routes is also an alternative for reducing the annoyance of pirating. At least then you know where your enemy can and cannot pirate, and it'll be more easy to defend. My mind is however not settled wether you should be able to pirate directly on the routes or not. My experience with E:TW says that unlimited interception possibilites along the entire route is not a good solution. Simple port-blockage is good enough - but that lacks depth."

I might be bit late, but that got my intrest. Piracy was a real problem in ancient Mediterranean, especially when romans destroyed Carthage and Macedon. When their fleets wiped out, no one stopped pirates.
When Rome fought Mihridates in first century BC, he allied with pirates, and they even attacked Ostia, portcity in Tiber delta. Travelling at sea was dangerous, for example Caesar and P. Clodius Pulcher get kidnapped in their young days.. OP's suggestion would bring 'em into gameplay as they deserve..

So go on OP, you got yet one fan!

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

Well I think that maybe it should be possible to fight smaller naval engagements without being at war, it happends in modern times without resulting in war (same with border skirmishes actually), however the faction attacked in this way would of course have the possibility to use it as a reason for war.

[MaceHead]

If you have a trade stop or in anyway benefit or have a connection with a trade stop your are forbidden to pirate/intercept the whole Dynamic Trade Route. Because every powerful faction around the Mediterranean sea has some connection the Dynamic Trade Route pirating will be limited. (Because there is one Dynamic Trade Route, enemies can use the same route but cannot pirate the route) When a faction has no connection with the Dynamic Trade Route, and decided to pirate the route, it should be very lucrative, maybe even a large percentage of the trade coming through, but all the factions AI connected with the trade route should automatic respond and maybe work together to defend the trade route.

[Ichon]

First of all it should be dangerous to leave ships end turn far away from coasts, storms. 2nd if fleets in port and have full move left they should have very large ZoC. Then with strategic control of ports fleets.could remain safe from attack by small enemy fleets but protect large parts of trade routes unless enemy finds open unprotected area or risks sitting far away from land. So places like Aegean, N African coast where there is land but few ports would be more natural places for piracy.

[clwsham]

I had a brainwave: what if you could set some armies/legions/units/fleets to patrol routes? This would have the benefit of reducing piracy/banditry and probably increase trade route eligibility and income from the patrolled route- lets face it, a road with towers and formations marching down the road will be a magnet for the rich!

The downside is that your forces are spread out- they may need a turn or two to consolidate at a point in order to become a fighting force- collecting men, supplies etc. You may also suffer attrition or higher upkeep due to men within units running home as they are far from administrative centers, or may even do a little banditry of their own, leading to a negative trait forming... who knows, may be a little advanced for the masses tho...

[clwsham]

also, how will incense from somalia reach the Med? can there be a land route where the Modern-day Suez Canal is, maybe involving a few cities along the way... cairo, alexandria, acre, sinai, etc.

[Ichon]

also, how will incense from somalia reach the Med? can there be a land route where the Modern-day Suez Canal is, maybe involving a few cities along the way... cairo, alexandria, acre, sinai, etc.

It is off the map used as example but I would think Upper Nile, Arabia, Horn of Africa could have a tradestop of its own for the cities to compete over.

[Argon Viper]

It would be cool for off map nations that historically traded with the Roman world to be represented by trade stops much as they were in Shogun 2.

Another thing that would be quite cool would be some kind of advantage for controlling choke points in trade. Controlling the Hellespont, for example, should allow you to gain a percentage of all trade that goes into and out of the black sea.