Trading Tip Of The Day

[Asmodeus]

This maybe obvious to some but I only just noticed it.

My Danish trading fleet stretched from the Baltic to the eastern Med but because the Italians and Scillians are so territorial about their waters I had to maintain large fleets there and being so far from home this cost a lot to support each turn.

A simple way to reduce these costs is to occupy a couple of coastal territories en route. For example, I have occupied Wessex (gives me cheap sailing as far as southern Spain) and I'm now looking for a suitable candidate in the Med, Malta or Sardinia for example. Build ports in these territories and the support costs of your ships will be reduced dramaticly. Better still if the 'pitstop' provinces produce a few trade goods too.

[Cazbol]

Believe it not but I didn't know that. Thanks for the tip. This actually makes a bit of sense.

[RTKCei]

Actually the farther away you are from the provinces you control with ports, the more the costs. Also the more ports you have the cheaper the costs get.

[Xer0]

I got a question about trade. Do you get more money if the one you are trading with have trade merchant and do you still get money if he doesnt has one?

[DojoRat]

You can export to anyone that has a port. I don't know if the value increases if they have a merchant.

[Hermann the Lombard]

Quote[/b] (Xer0 @ Jan. 21 2003,13:43)]I got a question about trade. Do you get more money if the one you are trading with have trade merchant and do you still get money if he doesnt has one?

It doesn't matter to your exports if the other side has a merchant...but if they also have a trade route back to you, your port will earn some florins from the imports. The AI is terrible at setting up trade routes, though. Right click on the port to see if it is generating any money.

[Disco Volante]

Is it just occupying provinces with ports closer to where your ships are, or do you need shipwrights, etc as well in those provinces to reduce cost?

[Basileus]

never thought about it either, i usualy got alot of cash so it didnt bother me..but i´ll do it

[Lord Romulous]

The only thing with conquering provinces to keep ship costs down is that you have to make sure that the cost of defending the provence and keeping the populace happy doesnt outway the reduced shipping cost benefit.

adding up all these costs can be a bit time consuming.

but still it adds yet another aspect to the game which you can analyse to improve your empire and make it more effiecent and hense powerful. the poor ai never stood a chance

[HopAlongBunny]

Quote[/b] (Disco Volante @ Jan. 21 2003,16:39)]Is it just occupying provinces with ports closer to where your ships are, or do you need shipwrights, etc as well in those provinces to reduce cost?

All you need is a port in the province

[Sandy-San]

also on trade, playing as the italians in a GA campaign, I've just passed the 60% minor conquest point, I've got ships in all coastal sea provinces, with unblocked trade routes to all. I'm neutral with most remaining factions, so I should be trading with them, but despite this dominance I don't show as having got the 'dominant trader' GA (get more income from trade than anybody else). is this just a GA bug?

[Asmodeus]

Quote[/b] (Lord Romulous @ Jan. 21 2003,18:56)]The only thing with conquering provinces to keep ship costs down is that you have to make sure that the cost of defending the provence and keeping the populace happy doesnt outway the reduced shipping cost benefit.

adding up all these costs can be a bit time consuming.

but still it adds yet another aspect to the game which you can analyse to improve your empire and make it more effiecent and hense powerful. the poor ai never stood a chance

Romulous this is true, in fact I have to keep a disproportionate number of troops in Wessex to keep the French deterred from invading (the English have been wiped out and France now rules the rest of Britain). But Wessex makes a reasonable amount of money through trade so I dont mind.

I managed to sieze Corsica last night from the infuriated Sicillians, I had blockaded it for ages and finally sunk the ships guarding it and promptly invaded. So I have my pitstop in the Med sorted now. It generates very little income though so the only benefit it gives me is a Citidel, port, shipwright etc right in the middle of the Med (very handy as I am in a huge naval war with Sicilly) and reduced costs for my war fleets. He must have been hopping mad to loose a citadel so easily, especially one so close to his key provinces.

I suffered 2 terrible naval defeats last night though trying to blockade the island of Sicilly. First off i lost a fleet of 5 Caravels then in fury I sent another fleet of 6 Caravells (both have 3+ valour) to attack again and lost the whole lot We are not amused.

[MonkeyMan]

This is of course a good representation of the real value of the med's various islands. Capturing a couple of them to provide home ports near to the trade or to ensure your naval force is supported in war is very useful indeed. As is the strategy of moving forces to within striking distance in one of these islands before launching a naval assault. Strategically the larger powers find these islands very important and well worth fighting over.

[Asmodeus]

Quote[/b] (MonkeyMan @ Jan. 22 2003,05:17)]This is of course a good representation of the real value of the med's various islands. Capturing a couple of them to provide home ports near to the trade or to ensure your naval force is supported in war is very useful indeed. As is the strategy of moving forces to within striking distance in one of these islands before launching a naval assault. Strategically the larger powers find these islands very important and well worth fighting over.

Absolutely, just look at how critical Malta was to the Royal Navy.

[Alrowan]

i love those islands.. but on the other end of the scale, when playing the turks, i had a fleet across the world, yet the furthest east i had was constantinpole... to counter that i set up my two new trading colonies, one in gibralta, and the other in sweeden... a long way from home, but the cash it saves is amazing

[Daveybaby]

The other thing to bear in mind is the fact that the bigger and more expensive a ship is to produce - the LOWER its support costs are. Weird - but true.

So get rid of all of those Barques ASAP. Not only are they useless in a fight, they are more expensive to maintain.

[Asmodeus]

Another thing that I've been wondering about....


If a coastal province with a port has no local tradable goods, is it work building a Trading Post? I havent as yet (didnt seem any point) but if a friendly faction has a trade route there you get a small amount of revenue through imports, would this increase with a Trading Post? If so i'll build em everywhere

[MonkeyMan]

Quote[/b] (Asmodeus @ Jan. 22 2003,14:40)]Another thing that I've been wondering about....


If a coastal province with a port has no local tradable goods, is it work building a Trading Post? I havent as yet (didnt seem any point) but if a friendly faction has a trade route there you get a small amount of revenue through imports, would this increase with a Trading Post? If so i'll build em everywhere

So far as I'm aware the trading post is not avaliable in a province with no tradable goods.

[Asmodeus]

Yeah I checked this last night you are quite right.

I finally crushed the Sicilian Fleet and conquered Sicily last night so now I rule the Med, until the next contender has a go at it...

[BDC]

Can you trade with yourself?

[middy]

hum is it worthwhile to even have a port if there are no goods to trade... apart from the reduced cost

[Naagi]

You do get some inter-province trade, but it is very low income. Having a port with no tradable goods, can eleviate ship building.

Naagi

[Mr Frost]

I wonder if RTW will gives us more realistic overland trade routes ? Edessa historically brought in rather a lot for it,s gems ; Champagne made quite a lot . If a landlocked province has a lot of something tradeable , it should see more for this {than it does in MTW} as goods still travel over land and along rivers and if this trade goes through several provinces then through a port it should generate something in those provinces each step of the way .
I hope they have improved the trade model ; not so much as more income , but more realistic income . I want to tax tradeing caravans of camels bringing bolts of silk from cathay , Indian Spices and Ivory through my lands and see realistic returns on the gems I get from Edessa etc .

[Asmodeus]

Quote[/b] (Mr Frost @ Jan. 24 2003,00:10)]I wonder if RTW will gives us more realistic overland trade routes ? Edessa historically brought in rather a lot for it,s gems ; Champagne made quite a lot . If a landlocked province has a lot of something tradeable , it should see more for this {than it does in MTW} as goods still travel over land and along rivers and if this trade goes through several provinces then through a port it should generate something in those provinces each step of the way .
I hope they have improved the trade model ; not so much as more income , but more realistic income . I want to tax tradeing caravans of camels bringing bolts of silk from cathay , Indian Spices and Ivory through my lands and see realistic returns on the gems I get from Edessa etc .

I quite agree Mr Frost

I would be nice to see a fully fledged trading system much like that in CIV3 (one of that games best features).

Also, if I can trade Timber and Furs and Wheat etc to the far corners of the map, why can I only use my Iron in Sweden? Its so tedious sending troop after troop to retrain in Sweden so they use decent weapons. Shouldn't all my territories have access to this valuable resourse if they are connected to my trade network? (also as in the way CIV3 does it).

[BDC]

I'm playing the Danish, I have only 7 provinces (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, 2 in England, 1 Spanish and Portugal) but have almost 200,000 and am making 6000 profit each turn My fleet stretches from the baltic all the way to Italy. So fun