Idea for Merchants

[Majd il-Romani]

I remember that mechants in mods like stainless steel were actually good for more than 1 mnai a turn, so they can be modded to be, well, useful and they shouldn't be thrown away. Also, I have no clue if this can be scripted or what but can you make merchants of one faction more "potent" than another. Like when you train one it has more experience than usual based on faction. In example, Carthage would have the best merchants, period. Following behind would be Casse, Saba, and Ptolemies, because they were very rich kingdoms that conrolled a lot of trade. This would only be starting out. So a Carthaginian merchant would start out with like 5 coins (or whatever they use to represent experience stars) but if he isn't used then he'll just stay the same or even go down. A Roman merchant would start out with 3 or 2 but can work his way up to buy out the Carthaginian one. What do you guys think?

[Foot]

We already have plans for the merchant agents. They won't be merchants though.

Foot

[Majd il-Romani]

We already have plans for the merchant agents. They won't be merchants though.

Foot

Ok, but I won't ask, because I know I'm gonna get something like
"they will be trained and have a cost to train an upkeep, and they will be used in some way"

[General Appo]

Hey, don´t jump to conclusions!

[Space_Ed]

Yay I'm glad the merchants are being taken out because I thought they were rubbish when I played M2TW.

[MDPR]

Just throwing in a related idea, that might work even without merchants being used as such. Its basically to let EBII be a bit inspired by the old game Trade Empire, where for instance, the Silk Road, is involved.

For instance, why not add trade-competitions, thus multiple trade negotiations, where example a faction, having builded a certain trade-upgrade, can negotiate trade-deals, with other factions, asking several factions about what they will pay, in order to get a deal up? - trade-competetion. The merchant could then become some sort of specialized trade-negotiating-diplomat.

After all Total War really means war on all fronts, including the economical front, being a front that EB so far really has ignored in the bigger picture.

Some inspiration could perhaps be the old game, Trade Empires:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Empires

- Start out simple, with one merchant and his donkeys. Gradually build up your merchant empire until you control a vast trading web.

- Manipulate the supply and demand economy to dominate the other merchant families. Corner the market. Undercut their prices.

- Explore and Exploit: Continually discover new markets and products, from silk in the Far East to steel in industrial Europe.

- Adapt your family's trading network to an ever-changing economy or instead face defeat when your competitors purchase advanced technology and deliver superior products.

- Span the centuries and the world, in regions from Ancient Sumeria to 19th century Europe.

- Build vast transportation networks, using anything from dirt trails to railroads.

- Compete against other merchant families who are powered by a clever artificial intelligence that plays by the same rules you do.

- More than 200 structures and 30 units in 15 different episodes.

[bobbin]

It's a nice idea but sadly we cannot mod the game in that way. We are stuck to the basic format of a TW game, we cannot add new features like diplomacy options etc.

[MDPR]

It's a nice idea but sadly we cannot mod the game in that way. We are stuck to the basic format of a TW game, we cannot add new features like diplomacy options etc.

OK. Sad to hear that, thanks for expleaning.

[Megas Methuselah]

... being a front that EB so far really has ignored in the bigger picture.

As bobbin said, there is only so much that can be modded. If the boys had the resources and manpower to create an entirely new game, then it might become a reality. But this is only a mod. Further, it is the best the world can offer. And as you very well must realize by this point, the world is far from a perfect place. We will be forever disappointed in life. You must accept this.

[Olaf The Great]

Merchants are -annoying- in Medieval 2, I'd be okay with them if the money gained was reduced and they couldn't be "stolen" by other merchants, that was a micromanagement game I didn't want to play.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

When ever I had problems with merchants I used experienced assassins to take care of them. I usually kill foreign merchants right after they enter my kingdom. This way I can keep my freshly recruited merchants safe in my kingdom as long as they become more experienced.
But I am glad that merchants are not merchants in EB2.

[Ludens]

Merchants are -annoying- in Medieval 2, I'd be okay with them if the money gained was reduced and they couldn't be "stolen" by other merchants, that was a micromanagement game I didn't want to play.

I agree completely. It was a good idea of CA's to add merchants, but they didn't implement it properly, so now it's just another unbalanced gimmick.

[fightermedic]

Merchants are -annoying- in Medieval 2, I'd be okay with them if the money gained was reduced and they couldn't be "stolen" by other merchants, that was a micromanagement game I didn't want to play.

i couldn't agree more

[Ichon]

They are fun to use if you role play creating a trade empire and not that difficult to use. The money can be significant eventually but it doesn't add much more than maxing your cities growth with high chivalry governors until late in the game.

I would prefer CA hadn't done the artificial castle/town divide. Makes beating AI even easier when you can take down its major troop recruitment centers so easily. One thing I am looking forward to with EB2 is that will be gone for the most part it sounds like.

[B-Wing]

I'm quite curious to know what role merchants could possibly fill if they're not to be used for sitting on resources. That's their only relevant ability, after all.

[Brennus]

We already have plans for the merchant agents. They won't be merchants though.

Foot

Slavers! Used by every society.

You could use your mnai to top up your cities population quickly if you needed to, of course it would be at the expense of public order..... no, wait.... that's what armies are for. Silly Brennus.

[antisocialmunky]

The back parts of my mind imagines using merchants as spawns from different philosophy schools. You would debate them against each other until one of the dropped dead from boredom.

That or some sort of off color reference to the inclusion of a Judean faction but that would be inappropriate.

[Brennus]

Whatever character is intended to replace merchants it must fit certain criteria:
1. It must be of significant importance to require control by the player. Armies are significant as they were not everyday occurences (and still are not) in antiquity. Merchants, by contrast, were everyday features of society like farmers and craftsmen.
2. The character must be under state control. Economies of antiquity were nowhere near as centralised as some modern economies, merchants were private buisnessmen. Likewise philosophers were not state employees. Diplomats and assasins would have been under the control of an elite (government) figure.

If you can think of a character which would have been an employee of the state and of such significance that it would not have been an everyday sight in society then you will probably arrive at an answer as to what is due to replace merchants.

Foot, now its your turn to tell me that all I have just written is nonsense.

[vollorix]

The so called "state" is just a burocratic institution. Most Kings/Mighty Chieftains were the personification of the "state". But almost all of those Kings/Governments had to rely on the aristocrathy, local princes, clan leaders etc., who had their own interests and targets. Theoreticaly, one can use those merchants to portrait ancient societies even more detailed, but the question is: what is their particular role in the game, withing the game engine etc.?

[Brennus]

The so called "state" is just a burocratic institution. Most Kings/Mighty Chieftains were the personification of the "state". But almost all of those Kings/Governments had to rely on the aristocrathy, local princes, clan leaders etc., who had their own interests and targets. Theoreticaly, one can use those merchants to portrait ancient societies even more detailed, but the question is: what is their particular role in the game, withing the game engine etc.?

Well in this context the state should just be taken to mean the elite of society or those who retain power.

[Populus Romanus]

I imagine that they must use merchants ability to destroy on another and to sit on map locations to make money (or something other than money).

[moonburn]

this is just a wild idea but why can´t be merchants ... turned into recruiters something like a merchant in region x (region with horses) would mean cheaper horses , region with strong iron production would mean cheaper iron

or then depending on how many iron mines or horse breeders areas you had it would enable special bonuses on cavalry archery or infantry in stamina cost upkeep defence stats attack stats

or even how much it would cost to upgrade city´s defences if one placed a merchant in quarry´s

a merchant in grain in regions where the army was acting would reduce the upkeep cost of the army and that nasty starving stuff that always screws up lenthy sieges :|

probably it´s impossible but better to share and pass as dumb then to keep wondering if you failed a chance to help right ^^

[antisocialmunky]

I imagine that they must use merchants ability to destroy on another and to sit on map locations to make money (or something other than money).

Prostitutes.

[Brennus]

Prostitutes.

I pity the poor girl who has to work as a Sarmatian prostitute, sitting around for weeks and them BAM a whole tribe of sexually frustrated men on horseback hove in to distance.

[Ludens]

this is just a wild idea but why can´t be merchants ... turned into recruiters something like a merchant in region x (region with horses) would mean cheaper horses , region with strong iron production would mean cheaper iron

It may be possible through the script, but I don't think it's worthwhile. Firstly, is it balanced? The A.I. has not been programmed with this in mind, so it won't be aware of the recruitment bonuses. It would be too easy for the player to exploit this. Secondly, is it realistic? I don't know much about international trade in the Classical world, but I doubt that tribes would let foreigners take over their iron mines unless it was under threat of force or they were paid for it.

[Moros]

µhahaha imagine a Saba player moving all his merchants from saffara to Petra for hours every turn!

[Brennus]

It may be possible through the script, but I don't think it's worthwhile. Firstly, is it balanced? The A.I. has not been programmed with this in mind, so it won't be aware of the recruitment bonuses. It would be too easy for the player to exploit this. Secondly, is it realistic? I don't know much about international trade in the Classical world, but I doubt that tribes would let foreigners take over their iron mines unless it was under threat of force or they were paid for it.

Ludens is right, it would not be realistic. Another thing to consider is how these bonuses would change over time if they could be programmed, for example c.120BC the Gauls and Romans began importing larger horse breeds to improve their cavalry stock. Now to implement this you would somehow have to re-write the script so that only Romans and Gauls get access to larger horse breeds c.120BC also unit stats/skins would have to be redone to reflect this improved equine stock.

[moonburn]

i was just putting it out there an alternative way to work not actually defending it :\

but ludens technically the merchants wouldn´t take over they would just be buying on behalf of their factions cutting the middleman off and getting the better deals

[Ludens]

i was just putting it out there an alternative way to work not actually defending it :\

Understood, but if you didn't want our opinion, why did you put it out? If you publish an idea, you should expect it to be commented upon.

[moonburn]

i do want feedback and gotta admit i delight on seing it analised what i deslike is the criticism of the author that always seems to fallow suit