Trade, Tradepartners and Traderoutes

[mmk]

Trade is still a feature that causes me to wonder...

I was playing Britain on M/M and by 1746 the situation was as this:
This time I followed the advice of several fellow posters on here and concentrated on the North American continet right from the start. This meant, after destroying the Carribean pirates, I took on the Cherokee nation (destroyed) and the just emerging US (detroyed). 13 colonies were still my protectorate (13 colonies at that point consisting of New England, New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland + Kaintuk Territory and Cherokee Territory (which I gave to them hoping that this would boost their income). The 13Cs had one trading port in New York.
I was owning Lower+ Upper Lousiana, Michigan Territory, Algonquian Territory, Carolinas, Virgina and Florida.
I had Commercial ports in Lower Lousinana and Georgia
In addition I had Bahamas, Jamaica, Windward+Leeward Islands + Trinidad&Tobago withwith commercial ports in the first 4.
In Europe I had England (with commercial ports in Newcastle, Bristol, Liverpool and Greenwich), Scotland (cp in Glasgow) and Ireland also with one commercial port.
I had farms, plantations and trade fleets aplenty + some long time trading partners.

Now the following happened - France declared war on the 13Cs - to "protect my protectorate" I joined in the war. A French fleet was blockading New York port, which resulted in ZERO trade between me (Britain) and the 13Cs - strange thing, since we were sharing at least 8 land borders. So, I came to the conclusion that the game recognises only sea trade as trade if the 13Cs are your trading partner, meaning no matter how many land borders you share in North America, trade between Britain and the 13Cs is only taking place between the 13Cs ports and Britains ports. Well, I thought this a strange thing, since the 13Cs could transfer their goods via land to my ports in North America (which were not blockaded by the French) and from there to Britain. Maybe a bit too complicated I thought.
So as not being in danger of bancruptcy, I requested peace with the French (successfully) - which of course did not stop my protectorate and the French from continuing their war. (sighs at the fact that you cannot have any influence on the policies of your protactorate).
Since I didn´t want to lose more money, I cancelled my trade agreement with the 13Cs (New York was still blockaded by the French and I wasn´t making any money from trading anyways).
Next turn I still needed money, but could not finde a trade partner to replace the 13Cs. So I declared war on the French, trying to get rid of their fleet that was blockading NewYork.
No something really ridiculous happened: I French fleet was blockading Bristol - and BINGO I was bancrupt - as having Bristol blockaded ALL my trade was cut of - meaning ZERO income from trade.
Meaning all my other commercial ports had zero value, all my trade cut of just because one port being blockaded????????????????????????????
I checked, double checked and triple checked - NO other sea trade routes were raided, none of my trading partners ports were raided or blocked.
I think it is a bit strong if ONE of your ports being blocked results in bancruptcy.
Whats the use in having more then one port then if - following the games (il)logic - all your trade is going via one port anyways.

[Fisherking]

Trade is still a feature that causes me to wonder...

I was playing Britain on M/M and by 1746 the situation was as this:
This time I followed the advice of several fellow posters on here and concentrated on the North American continet right from the start. This meant, after destroying the Carribean pirates, I took on the Cherokee nation (destroyed) and the just emerging US (detroyed). 13 colonies were still my protectorate (13 colonies at that point consisting of New England, New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland + Kaintuk Territory and Cherokee Territory (which I gave to them hoping that this would boost their income). The 13Cs had one trading port in New York.
I was owning Lower+ Upper Lousiana, Michigan Territory, Algonquian Territory, Carolinas, Virgina and Florida.
I had Commercial ports in Lower Lousinana and Georgia
In addition I had Bahamas, Jamaica, Windward+Leeward Islands + Trinidad&Tobago withwith commercial ports in the first 4.
In Europe I had England (with commercial ports in Newcastle, Bristol, Liverpool and Greenwich), Scotland (cp in Glasgow) and Ireland also with one commercial port.
I had farms, plantations and trade fleets aplenty + some long time trading partners.

Now the following happened - France declared war on the 13Cs - to "protect my protectorate" I joined in the war. A French fleet was blockading New York port, which resulted in ZERO trade between me (Britain) and the 13Cs - strange thing, since we were sharing at least 8 land borders. So, I came to the conclusion that the game recognises only sea trade as trade if the 13Cs are your trading partner, meaning no matter how many land borders you share in North America, trade between Britain and the 13Cs is only taking place between the 13Cs ports and Britains ports. Well, I thought this a strange thing, since the 13Cs could transfer their goods via land to my ports in North America (which were not blockaded by the French) and from there to Britain. Maybe a bit too complicated I thought.
So as not being in danger of bancruptcy, I requested peace with the French (successfully) - which of course did not stop my protectorate and the French from continuing their war. (sighs at the fact that you cannot have any influence on the policies of your protactorate).
Since I didn´t want to lose more money, I cancelled my trade agreement with the 13Cs (New York was still blockaded by the French and I wasn´t making any money from trading anyways).
Next turn I still needed money, but could not finde a trade partner to replace the 13Cs. So I declared war on the French, trying to get rid of their fleet that was blockading NewYork.
No something really ridiculous happened: I French fleet was blockading Bristol - and BINGO I was bancrupt - as having Bristol blockaded ALL my trade was cut of - meaning ZERO income from trade.
Meaning all my other commercial ports had zero value, all my trade cut of just because one port being blockaded????????????????????????????
I checked, double checked and triple checked - NO other sea trade routes were raided, none of my trading partners ports were raided or blocked.
I think it is a bit strong if ONE of your ports being blocked results in bancruptcy.
Whats the use in having more then one port then if - following the games (il)logic - all your trade is going via one port anyways.

I also have a big heartburn with the way trade works.

No matter how many ports a home region has, having one blockaded cuts all trade.

There are some other oddities with the system, like the Danes blocking all American trade via Iceland without putting fleet on the route.

Even a simpleton can see that there are other ways into a country than the one port.

Trade will not reroute to a different port however.

The fact that any Power has loads of ports and trade partners should get goods with out them being transshipped.

It is made to fail and made to keep you broke. Every change makes trade more of a problem.

I often find it tedious and frustrating. At other times infuriating. Some say they find it merely a challenge.

The trouble is that most factions can’t do without it. One turn bankrupt and the next turn all your troops are cut in half. I have no idea if that goes on until you have no units or not…

I do know that there seem to be triggers in the game to challenge any gains with some sort of counter measure.

Sorry that is not much help! I don’t find it fun. Fighting an enemy is fun but being beaten up when you are broke is not. I feel for you.

[mmk]

Thank you for the kind words! ;-)

Would it be a step too far - given the before mentioned "trade" difficulties - to say that the game is seriously lacking logic?

[knoddy]

my guess is the reason u lost ur trade with 13 colonies is because all your trade from americas has to go back to your home theatre first. any produce that comes from america is shipped back to england the shipped out to your trade partners. so by blocking their port they stop u from trading.

as for losing all your trade when 1 port was blocked... this shouldnt happen, my understanding was, say your port has 2 trade route capacity. your first 2 trading partners are at that port. the next one goes to a diff port and so on and so forth. so if they blocked that 1 port u should only lose trade with the people that were trading with that port. which makes sense. Ports have limits, which is why the have capacity. only so many ships could said in dock and load and offload cargo. my guess is 1 of 2, either this is a bug OR your port in bristol is so upgraded that its handling most of your international trade routes.

do u not have a fleet in europe to save your trade routes? i find this essential in my game, i had to send my fleet down to the mediterranian in order to kill some barbaries raiding my trade routes. Having a fleet nearbye to protect your assests is a must. even if your concentrating in a diff theatre

Cheers Knoddy

[mmk]

my guess is the reason u lost ur trade with 13 colonies is because all your trade from americas has to go back to your home theatre first. any produce that comes from america is shipped back to england the shipped out to your trade partners. so by blocking their port they stop u from trading.

as for losing all your trade when 1 port was blocked... this shouldnt happen, my understanding was, say your port has 2 trade route capacity. your first 2 trading partners are at that port. the next one goes to a diff port and so on and so forth. so if they blocked that 1 port u should only lose trade with the people that were trading with that port. which makes sense. Ports have limits, which is why the have capacity. only so many ships could said in dock and load and offload cargo. my guess is 1 of 2, either this is a bug OR your port in bristol is so upgraded that its handling most of your international trade routes.

do u not have a fleet in europe to save your trade routes? i find this essential in my game, i had to send my fleet down to the mediterranian in order to kill some barbaries raiding my trade routes. Having a fleet nearbye to protect your assests is a must. even if your concentrating in a diff theatre

Cheers Knoddy

Hi, port in bristol is a commercial port, like all the other ports are commercial ports. So in my understanding, they all should have the same trading values (as they are the same types of ports). At least that is my understanding.

And yes, I do have a fleet there, but still the fact that if just one port is blockaded all trade is blocked is a bit odd, is it?

[mmk]

my guess is the reason u lost ur trade with 13 colonies is because all your trade from americas has to go back to your home theatre first. any produce that comes from america is shipped back to england the shipped out to your trade partners. so by blocking their port they stop u from trading.

So it seems.
Although the thing that I do share land borders with the 13Cs and I have commercial ports in NAmerica, too should help here. Well, at least that is what I thought.

Thanks for your input!

[knoddy]

So it seems.
Although the thing that I do share land borders with the 13Cs and I have commercial ports in NAmerica, too should help here. Well, at least that is what I thought.

Thanks for your input!

yea but wot im saying is there is no land trade in america or india for that matter (unless its your home theatre)

the way i understand the extra theatres is that any goods are exported back to your home theatre and then exported out to your trade partners. so even tho you have borders with them the goods still go back to europe then are exported by sea back to them. since their trade port is obviously blocked, you cannot export the goods back to them. Hope that makes sense.

as for the single port stopping all trade, its either a bug or, how many trade agreements do u have? i believe the limit of a commercial basin is 4, although i could be wrong. so if u only have 4 trade agreements via sea, then its quite possible all 4 are going through this 1 port so since its blocked u get no trade, perhaps they should implement something where if u have free trade slots on other ports they should redirect the trade route to them, or, its a bug lol. let me know how many trade agreements u have.

Cheers Knoddy

[Babblearossa]

as for the single port stopping all trade, its either a bug or, how many trade agreements do u have? i believe the limit of a commercial basin is 4, although i could be wrong. so if u only have 4 trade agreements via sea, then its quite possible all 4 are going through this 1 port so since its blocked u get no trade, perhaps they should implement something where if u have free trade slots on other ports they should redirect the trade route to them, or, its a bug lol. let me know how many trade agreements u have.

Wonder if he cancelled his trade agreements, then made new ones next turn if it would re-route through the unblocked ports? Course nme might block them then.. I think it's buggy that it doesn't reroute through your available other slots.

Plus as sweden I had trade coming to me from Mediterranean and france was blocking englands port ( both trade partners ) and my trade from med. dropped off, line before england was 16,000 after england 10,000 ... argh.

[Fisherking]

@ mmk

I don’t think it lacks logic, I think it is made to frustrate.

If you check your ports in GB you will find that all ports are not equal. Some are more important than others. Bristol and Greenwich are worth more than the others. There is always a port in a region worth more than the others.


There are ways around the blockades if you have more than one per region but it is drastic.

Destroy the port. (don’t do this with Greenwich, it is a higher level port that you don’t have the tech for at start.) Then the trade will switch to another. But you sure need a navy to keep that from happening.

In regions with only one port the trade will switch to a another region’s port. I would say it needs fixed but the ugly part is I think it was just made that way.

[aimlesswanderer]

I agree, it is all a bit strange, and I find the fact that none of your provinces have any trade when they share land borders to be very odd. That seems regressive, from memory STW and MTW were like that - if you killed of your trade partners you had to rely on taxes, since your people were incapable of trading internally.

[mmk]

A few additional observations and remarks:

I had 2 trade partners left, Portugal and the Ottoman empire.
Trade with them was handled via Bristol in addition I had some of my own goods shipped to Bristol, too.
Also trade income via Newcastle - also my own goods (those from my North American possessions I suppose).

So the French blockade of Bristol resulted in a loss of trade with the trade partners and my own trade goods(from the Carribean + Coast of Brazil sugar trade, I suppose). As knoddy and Fisherking stated. But and now comes the big BUT: On the campaign map Newcastle port still had the green lines - indicating that trade goods were still being handled there. Putting the cursor over the green line showed a trade value of 1080 - which should have left me with at least 1080 income from trade - BUT the trade card in the Government screen showed a ZERO trade income. All trade being blocked, absolutely no income from trade.
Now I think, that is really a bug there! Even if we assume that the game is not meant to re-direct trade to other ports of the same region it should at least take notice of still incoming trade via other ports.
If there is still trade coming in via one port (Newcastle), at least this trade value should be added to your income, no matter if another port (Bristol), handling part of your trade income is being blockaded.

[mmk]

@ mmk

If you check your ports in GB you will find that all ports are not equal. Some are more important than others. Bristol and Greenwich are worth more than the others. There is always a port in a region worth more than the others.

Hi Fisherking thanks for the advice.
Is there another way to check a ports value apart from the building card (port type and possible trade routes) and the mouse over the green lines (indicating the value and the trade partners handled via that port)?

[Hosakawa Tito]

I find it odd that when one has an unobstructed land border, no enemy countries in position to block it, one cannot trade. I don't understand if it's just not working right or a feature. As Great Britain I hold Florida, Georgia, Kentucky and am on very friendly terms with the Iroquois, but can't trade with them. The 13 Colonies are still my protectorate till I take Quebec from the French. I can establish overseas trade with other nations, but not my neighbor.

Does a land-based trade route still have to go through a port?

[mmk]

Something more about trade.

I just started a new Britain Campaign, same settings as above.

It is turn 2.

My trade partners are Sweden, Portugal, UP, 13Cs, France, Maratha Confed., Ottomans and Savoy.

The trade card in the main menue tells me that trade from

Sw, Port, UP, 13Cs, France

is taking place via sea routes while trade from

Maratha Confed, Ottomans and Savoy

is taking place via land routes!!!

Now how does this fit in the picture? I do not share any land borders with the three above mentioned empires.

Closer observation of the three trade ports that seem to be involved in trading shows:
Trade seems to be taking place via
Glasgow port (the box says Trade route GB = 1291)
Bristol port (GB = 738, Portugal = 1167, Maratha Confed = 788, Ottoman = 578, Savoy = 312)
Greenwich port ( GB = 1678, UP = 1049, 13Cs = 957, France = 864, Sweden = 654)

So Maratha, Ottoman and Savoy trade on the campaign map is incoming via ports, obviously - sth the trade card doesn´t seem to realize.

Now My overall trade income is given with 3317 per turn.
How does this correspond with the above given figures of trade value that is handled via my three ports???? If I add the 3 figures for GB, the result is 3707, not 3317.

And any idea why the Irish trade port (which is closer to the Americas) does not have any trade value?
All this remains a mystery to me.

[Fridgebadger]

I think the concept that trade has to come through your home capital is a reasonable one. There's nothing to say there's no trade going on over your land borders, just not trade that your government can properly tax - unless it all comes through their capital's warehouses. (I think in this period some of London's warehouses were the largest man-made buildings in the world?)

Iirc (and I probably don't), wasn't the ol'Boston tea party due to the fact that London was slapping huge tarrifs on tea, which came from India via London?

As to whether the trade ports are bugged, that's another matter entirely ;)

PS. I don't think the Irish trade port gets trade income for GB because it's not connected to London via a land route, unlike the Scottish ports. However, I don't know how this applies to say, a pan-European Prussian empire, where nearly all their ports would be connected via land... maybe it has to be in a province directly adjacent to your home province as well?

[anweRU]

PS. I don't think the Irish trade port gets trade income for GB because it's not connected to London via a land route, unlike the Scottish ports. However, I don't know how this applies to say, a pan-European Prussian empire, where nearly all their ports would be connected via land... maybe it has to be in a province directly adjacent to your home province as well?

The Irish trade ports most definitely do. If you start up the game (post-patch 1.2), you can make a total of 9 trade agreements as GB on turn 1. If the Irish trade port was not functional, it would be only 7. I know you can't see the trade route on the screen, as I've never seen a trade route appear from there pre- or post- patch, despite maxing out the trade agreements.

As long as your ports are connected (via a direct land link or "bridge"), they will be functional. However, the strategic-map displays may not always show them properly.

There is another issue that caught my attention. Fisherking is correct (in several posts in several threads) in that the game conspires to nerf trade. I am currently in 1725, and the prices for spices - and more importantly ivory have been steadily declining - despite the fact that not a single trade ship has been added to any trade spot for at least 30 turns!

Demand should be going up as the population increases, and prices go up as the supply remains constant!!!

[Fisherking]

I find it odd that when one has an unobstructed land border, no enemy countries in position to block it, one cannot trade. I don't understand if it's just not working right or a feature. As Great Britain I hold Florida, Georgia, Kentucky and am on very friendly terms with the Iroquois, but can't trade with them. The 13 Colonies are still my protectorate till I take Quebec from the French. I can establish overseas trade with other nations, but not my neighbor.

Does a land-based trade route still have to go through a port?

I believe land routes run from city to city and from port to capital.

The only tribe I have ever seen trade is the Cherokee. I don’t thing the others can…but why I don’t know.


_____________________________________________________

Also, can anyone verify that they actually get money for pirating a trade route?

I have not been able to see any result. I could be looking wrong or something but I still don’t know.

It may cut the enemy but blockades are more effective than that. It was said that you get a portion of that trade, but it was also said that the AI would know when to use retreat…

So it could be another undocumented change.

[anweRU]

@ Hosakawa Tito: GB can't trade with the NA tribes, as they do not have ports. All trade has to go back to your capital region. So you cannot trade with the NA tribes, even if you have neighboring territories. Same goes for Mysore in India.

Concerning NA trading: I have seen both the Cherokee and the Iriquios trade with each other & (before the patch) with the 13 Colonies. Post-patch, you can still trade with them as the USA in RTI Chapter 4. I don't think the others trade, as they are usually hostile to/ at war with their neighbors.

@ Fisherking: Pirating an enemy trade lane definitely brings in the moolah. I am bringing in ~ 1600 gp raiding Swedish & Prussian trade lanes with a 9-ship stack outside of London. The income shows up under "Other".

[Darth Venom]

Also, can anyone verify that they actually get money for pirating a trade route?

I have not been able to see any result. I could be looking wrong or something but I still don’t know.

Just check your "other income" figure when you pirate. Everything above 3000 is pirated income. Close/reopen the screen to update the numbers when you move your ships around.

[Fisherking]

Just check your "other income" figure when you pirate. Everything above 3000 is pirated income. Close/reopen the screen to update the numbers when you move your ships around.

Is there a particular amount you usually receive pre ship like trade or is it more random?

[mmk]

Just check your "other income" figure when you pirate. Everything above 3000 is pirated income. Close/reopen the screen to update the numbers when you move your ships around.

Hi there.

I regularly have "other income" above 3000 without pirating but when I am protector. I thought the above 3000 is the income from protectorates?

[Darth Venom]

Hi there.

I regularly have "other income" above 3000 without pirating but when I am protector. I thought the above 3000 is the income from protectorates?

I guess it's both then

Is there a particular amount you usually receive pre ship like trade or is it more random?

From my observations it seems to be a percentage of the trade amount per ship.

[knoddy]

@ Hosakawa Tito - as others have stated I BELIEVE that the way NON HOME THEATRE trade works, is that any goods produced are shipped back to your home theatre and then exported out to your trade partners, therefore the only way you could trade with the Native American tribes would be if they had naval ports.

@mmk - its a known bug that some trade routes show up as the wrong thing, in my poland campaign i had all my trade routes coming up in my menu as land despite the fact that i had like +15k via my sea routes.

as for why your trade is less than what your lane says i have no idea, possibly a bug, possibly corruption or something.

@ the others - protectorate income also shows up in other i guess as well as pirating income.

im pretty sure the irish trade port is active in my GB camp ill have a look next time i load it up.

Cheers Knoddy

[Hosakawa Tito]

Thanks for in the insight! Another trade oddity in North America as GB:

The 13 Colonies are still my protectorate as I still need to conquer Quebec. I'm currently consolidating my recent conquest and destruction of the Cherokee. I hold Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas. I have a trade port in Georgia and some trade goods *cotton* from Carolina are being exported through the Georgia port, but none seem to be from my coffee plantation in Florida. There are wagons going from the Carolina capitol to the Georgia capitol & port, but none coming from the Florida capitol. Money is tight and I would have held off upgrading the Florida coffee plantation if I had known that I couldn't trade coffee till Florida developed its own port.

The Florida capitol shows that coffee is being exported, but no coffee is being traded to my trade partners. It's all rather confusing and difficult to make intelligent & timely economic decisions without more info on this.

[anweRU]

@ Hosakawa: Post-patch, the basic trade port can export only 30 bales worth of goods. So your port in Georgia is already occupied with its own export and the Carolina goods. You will need to upgrade the port to get more goods.

[Fisherking]

If the problems discussed so far are not enough for most of you to think this is a bit much then here is another thing for you to mull over.

As you know one port blocked at home cuts off trade. Well, one port in a theater cuts all good from that theater. So if Jamaica is blocked you stop getting furs from Rupert’s Land. Or if Cuba is blocked you loose the goods from all of the rest. India is the same.

It is much too easy to loose trade, especially when ship upkeep is too high to afford the ships you need to police anything. Once that happens you are toast anyway.

[Monsieur Alphonse]

Trade is still bugged.

1. Block one port and you blockade all trade from that theater.
2. Trade lanes that transport trade of an amount like 10,XXX, will not show the first 10 but a lower number. For example: instead of 10850 it will show 850 or 0850.
3. Some trade is traded over land even when it is impossible to have an uninterrupted connection that way. For example Ottoman Empire with Spain while there are hostile states between them and they share no common border.
4. In my Spanish campaign I was earning 49K from trade with Maratha. I could follow that trade from India to the sea lane in front of the coast of Portugal where is disappeared. Instead of landing in the port of Porto, it rematerialized in northern France, went over land to Marseilles and from there by sea to my port in southern Spain and then to Madrid .

[knoddy]

Trade is still bugged.

1. Block one port and you blockade all trade from that theater.
2. Trade lanes that transport trade of an amount like 10,XXX, will not show the first 10 but a lower number. For example: instead of 10850 it will show 850 or 0850.
3. Some trade is traded over land even when it is impossible to have an uninterrupted connection that way. For example Ottoman Empire with Spain while there are hostile states between them and they share no common border.
4. In my Spanish campaign I was earning 49K from trade with Maratha. I could follow that trade from India to the sea lane in front of the coast of Portugal where is disappeared. Instead of landing in the port of Porto, it rematerialized in northern France, went over land to Marseilles and from there by sea to my port in southern Spain and then to Madrid .

1. this sounds like a bug or a sneak thing to make it harder
2. ive never had this, in my maratha camp i had my main trade lane with like 40k on it?
3. even if your trade screen says its via land its still via sea, its only a glich in the trade screen it doesnt effect gameplay at all
4. seems completely random and never experienced anything like this O.o

[Hosakawa Tito]

I know that in my GB campaign I am not taking on Spain for Gibraltar till last because of their huge navy. I'll never be able to afford the naval police force to cover every port in North America, India, and the Channel too. Blockading a trade port should only affect the goods handled by that port, whereas raiding a major trade route should affect all the goods from that theater. I hope they decide to fix this in a future patch.

[mmk]

If the problems discussed so far are not enough for most of you to think this is a bit much then here is another thing for you to mull over.

As you know one port blocked at home cuts off trade. Well, one port in a theater cuts all good from that theater. So if Jamaica is blocked you stop getting furs from Rupert’s Land. Or if Cuba is blocked you loose the goods from all of the rest. India is the same.

It is much too easy to loose trade, especially when ship upkeep is too high to afford the ships you need to police anything. Once that happens you are toast anyway.

I fully agree.