trade system unreal and totally broken

[NUTCRACKER]

May be stone and bronx were important like gold in ancient times.
however, usually, with gold you can have all ressources. so this is enough.
additional strategic ressources or a connection to,was made fine in older historic titles...before troy.
adding food is ok, as gold you can not eat. and food can be waste during import.


however, this is not a trading simulation ---but if it would be, it would be a verybad one. If you know the patrician3 for example? or many other games like this.

here in pharao dyn I sit on my screen and can arrange every turn trades in a relation like a global bank. this works fine starting if you have 1/4 or more of all factions to trade with.
the stuff works instantly without any losses - globally. looooooool

I am the global world trade organ.
I take stuff and give it back to the same faction
I give stuff and take it back from the same faction
partially this works in the same turn!

also trading with factions which dont like me ( this was not possible in attila/rome2for example)

I play an horde on veteran with little food income from outposts. nothing more.

now I have positive income of
70k food 15k stone 5k wood 15k bronx 5k gold per round.... for nothing to do for, except clicking around
in stock
500k food 80k stone 40k wood 150k bronx 110k gold....

I mean , this is for having no single production place.

there appear invaders, like hordes, sea people, (rebels have less stuff). and you can give them the stuff they need and take what they have a lot for a strange relation.

usually the pillaging sea people have so much gold and bronx, they dont need it, but stone and wood.

the southern egypt factions have stone and gold, but need the other stuff.

some have no bronx and trade in really good relation, being happy to have some.

****

sure, this is how trade works. but here it feels like global stock trading.

what I mean,
I need no trade fleet or any... I do not need to travel around, no risk,,,, only click a little.

the last good ressource trading was in Britannia. but there was the income broken starting in mid game.
real good: attila

[[-TWR-]tajl]

That is why I use forbid trading rule.

Trade system is just beyond ridiculous and makes game trivial.

[Kendji]

If you think that is op, wait til you try Hatsheput...
Trade gets harder towards late game, though not impossible.
Have you looked at this? https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3298135277&searchtext=AI+Overhaul

[i-dot]

Originally posted by -TWR-tajl:

That is why I use forbid trading rule.

Trade system is just beyond ridiculous and makes game trivial.

how do U survive without trade?
the Administrative Burden makes feeding army so difficult that without trade it is impossible to have three armies (two for conquest and one for defence)

[[-TWR-]tajl]

Originally posted by Kendji:

If you think that is op, wait til you try Hatsheput...
Trade gets harder towards late game, though not impossible.
Have you looked at this? https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3298135277&searchtext=AI+Overhaul

Actually you can earn even more with normal trade than with Hatsheput, but of course I wouldn't use Hatseput either. I think there should be limit how much your caravan can carry, but last time I checked there wasn't and I think it is a bug.

[[-TWR-]tajl]

Originally posted by i-dot:

Originally posted by -TWR-tajl:

That is why I use forbid trading rule.

Trade system is just beyond ridiculous and makes game trivial.

how do U survive without trade?
the Administrative Burden makes feeding army so difficult that without trade it is impossible to have three armies (two for conquest and one for defence)

It is harder but far from impossible. Main problem is food, but you get lots of food when you win battles.

In my Meshwesh campaign I think I trained my third army around turn 60-70, but I used Aten religion combining Horus and El so religion gave my armies lot of speed so that they could cover lot of ground and catch enemy armies.

First 20 turn were hard because no barter limits diplomacy too, as you cant easily buy non aggression pacts, but then it become easier.

[Defmonkey]

I dont think trade is "real" in any Total War. Its rubbish in all of the Total War games. I like the additional resources and what the bartering system brings from Troy and Pharaoh though.

The things i would like to see:

- Trade Routes you can see visually on the Map on both sea and land. Much like Napoleon. These should be raid-able. I'm thinking trade routes between faction capitals and the trade nodes for off map resources, e.g. Amber and Tin trade that were historical.

- Unique resources for trade. Always good to have more things to fight for. Mentioned Amber and Tin above. But this can be expanded to other things, Hetshetsut legacy introduces some of this. would be good that these were more widely trade-able and regions producing their own complex goods, these goods providing small bonuses for trading / consuming.

-

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

also trading with factions which don't like me ( this was not possible in attila/rome2for example)

I disagree. You should not be able trade with them if at war, you should be able to trade with them if they don't like you with an increased penalty to make the deal and worse exchange rate, this already happens in the game.



~~~~

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

I play an horde on veteran with little food income from outposts. nothing more.

now I have positive income of
70k food 15k stone 5k wood 15k bronx 5k gold per round.... for nothing to do for, except clicking around
in stock
500k food 80k stone 40k wood 150k bronx 110k gold....

Like ive said in another post to you before. You are playing a faction thats easy, Id suggest trying a more difficult one.

Regardless of whatever faction you play you will get to a point that you can overcome the admin burden and snowball.

Id suggest trying Bay on legendary and see how you do. Im sure others will have suggestions on a more difficult campaign if they are willing to post it here.

[NUTCRACKER]

@Defmonkey

It must not be"real"...it must feel ok and fine for a strategy game. not more not less.

here I can jump over totally ressources building....trade only,,, thats great...on veteran.

the additional ressources are and were not needed in all 2010s TW historic titles.
Gold and Food.... and some strategic ones... fine.

The trade since troy is more a trade from a merchant simulation. but solved badly.

you not agree? ...wow... but here are the facts:

Sure, I can make instant single trades with enemies.

and the penalty for all the others is a joke. tell me if it is a penalty if I can make such profit like noted above with all the factions which hate me???
and you know, playiong Iolaos , they hate me all, except the Sea people.
the penalty is there, yes, but not really a penalty.

Yes, I will check out other factions.
first try Iolaos was looking fine, playing a pillaging horde.

but tell me, what should this change about my noted problems with the trade?

the only difference is, I have to protect my settlements better.

[NUTCRACKER]

here some screens, playing on veteran, but the Iolaos horde.

there is no need at present to make a change, I mean to take settlements to build stuff.

at this point I have 6 full stack armies and 4 half suppports (archers and chariots)

it should be less than the half (85 left) of the factions already met by me

https://ibb.co/0BtybMB

and trade volumes

https://ibb.co/nrd8hZH

this is from 2 days ago

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

@Defmonkey

It must not be"real"...it must feel ok and fine for a strategy game. not more not less.

here I can jump over totally ressources building....trade only,,, thats great...on veteran.

the additional ressources are and were not needed in all 2010s TW historic titles.
Gold and Food.... and some strategic ones... fine.

The trade since troy is more a trade from a merchant simulation. but solved badly.

you not agree? ...wow... but here are the facts:

Sure, I can make instant single trades with enemies.

and the penalty for all the others is a joke. tell me if it is a penalty if I can make such profit like noted above with all the factions which hate me???
and you know, playiong Iolaos , they hate me all, except the Sea people.
the penalty is there, yes, but not really a penalty.

Yes, I will check out other factions.
first try Iolaos was looking fine, playing a pillaging horde.

but tell me, what should this change about my noted problems with the trade?

the only difference is, I have to protect my settlements better.

I'm pretty sure i said "i don't agree" to not being able to trade because the faction doesn't like you. You should still be able to trade in my opinion. I don't think you should be able to trade if at war. I'm referring to trade deals, for clarity.

Now, yes you can do a one time barter with those at war in this game. Not sure how i feel about this. I'm currently at war with 4 factions in my current campaign and looked at trade offers with all the resources and what the AI wants and all cases in my instance the deals are very bad. i'm not trading 5000 gold for 9400 food etc, etc.

This isn't to say that i cant get good trade deals, it just means in my current instance i'm not getting these offers with ones i'm currently at war with.

That said i'm sure the system can be worked into your favour if your relations improve significantly, i do think deals can be shifted around far too quickly for instant results. Though i will say i don't spend turns carrying out 150 trade deals, i usually set up trade deal and reevaluate it when it expires so i havent gone down the rabbit hole on how much i can cheese it.

How would i resolve this yet keep the bartering? i'm just spit-balling here and not given it deep thought, but think some possibilities could be:

- Cooldowns or having time frames for the deals to go into effect or take time to ramp up to full effect.... e.g. perhaps distance of trading partner from your territory / capital. Closer the trade partner the quicker the trade is carried out.

- Maybe limitations on number of trade deals per a port or market / trade hub or something. Could be a turn based thing or an absolute thing.

- Bigger penalties for trading with factions that are not liked. If trade is accepted by a faction. Penalties for trading for both trade partners go up to make further trade more difficult with disapproving factions.

[NUTCRACKER]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I

Id suggest trying Bay on legendary and see how you do. Im sure others will have suggestions on a more difficult campaign if they are willing to post it here.

just started. veteran, bay
Alyattas is defeated...so no big problem until sea people will arrive?

sure, it is harder...but only in the begin.
also the horde gameplay is more easy I think.
so Alyattes is shown as hard campaign. I will try too.

[NUTCRACKER]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I'm pretty sure i said "i don't agree" to not being able to trade because the faction doesn't like you. You should still be able to trade in my opinion. I don't think you should be able to trade if at war. I'm referring to trade deals, for clarity.

not sure if your "disagree" was meant for it does not work real in gameplay or it should not work as a game feature. so misunderstanding, yes?

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I

Id suggest trying Bay on legendary and see how you do. Im sure others will have suggestions on a more difficult campaign if they are willing to post it here.

just started. veteran, bay
Alyattas is defeated...so no big problem until sea people will arrive?

sure, it is harder...but only in the begin.
also the horde gameplay is more easy I think.
so Alyattes is shown as hard campaign. I will try too.

Yes horde gameplay is much easier, especially for Iolaos.

Alyattas? Im assuming that is Alishiya, depending on language conversion... But yes, i think they would be harder to play.

On Dynasties release, Ithica and thrace were noted to be quite hard.... but this was down to AI kicking the crap out of the player, especially if player switched on "remove fog" on campaign map. In latest patch they toned the AI aggression down.

Anyways, if you are finding the game easy, why are you playing veteran? Why not play legendary? if i recall, you get further handicaps against the AI.

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I'm pretty sure i said "i don't agree" to not being able to trade because the faction doesn't like you. You should still be able to trade in my opinion. I don't think you should be able to trade if at war. I'm referring to trade deals, for clarity.

not sure if your "disagree" was meant for it does not work real in gameplay or it should not work as a game feature. so misunderstanding, yes?

Yes, i think just a misunderstanding. Thats OK. No harm done :)

[NUTCRACKER]

I dont like legendary as I can do mistakes in the game what would be not real in the "ingame world"... as, they (virtual people which make the decisions ingame) have much more time to think about (days) - and me seconds. here, one click, decision made...without knowing the conseqences. I dont mean such things like, what the virtual people ingame/ or historic people could not know. I mean mistakes only a player can do.

if you know the game, it it another thing and you are on a higher level to play legendary.

however in older TW games was a cheat console. lucky me, I could play other titles like attila or britannia on legendary too - and there was no cheat possible. but hey, I would say Rome was the hardest thing... campaign also battles. I have seen it in remastered again.


if I want to play games without saving and perma death, I play Heads Will Roll Reforged, legionarys life...or may be Mount & Blade.
but somewhere I have seen an explanation (was it you?) playing legendary also medium.... and losing 6/9 campaigns. this would be a nice experience to try. as I can not remember having lost any campaign. ah ok, stopped to play, may be 1/10.

[Kelly Too Sweet]

Originally posted by Defmonkey:

I dont think trade is "real" in any Total War. Its rubbish in all of the Total War games. I like the additional resources and what the bartering system brings from Troy and Pharaoh though.

The things i would like to see:

- Trade Routes you can see visually on the Map on both sea and land. Much like Napoleon. These should be raid-able. I'm thinking trade routes between faction capitals and the trade nodes for off map resources, e.g. Amber and Tin trade that were historical.

- Unique resources for trade. Always good to have more things to fight for. Mentioned Amber and Tin above. But this can be expanded to other things, Hetshetsut legacy introduces some of this. would be good that these were more widely trade-able and regions producing their own complex goods, these goods providing small bonuses for trading / consuming.

-

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

also trading with factions which don't like me ( this was not possible in attila/rome2for example)

I disagree. You should not be able trade with them if at war, you should be able to trade with them if they don't like you with an increased penalty to make the deal and worse exchange rate, this already happens in the game.



~~~~

Originally posted by NUTCRACKER:

I play an horde on veteran with little food income from outposts. nothing more.

now I have positive income of
70k food 15k stone 5k wood 15k bronx 5k gold per round.... for nothing to do for, except clicking around
in stock
500k food 80k stone 40k wood 150k bronx 110k gold....

Like ive said in another post to you before. You are playing a faction thats easy, Id suggest trying a more difficult one.

Regardless of whatever faction you play you will get to a point that you can overcome the admin burden and snowball.

Id suggest trying Bay on legendary and see how you do. Im sure others will have suggestions on a more difficult campaign if they are willing to post it here.

Many people expect too much from developers but for a Bronze Age game, an expansive dynamic trade mechanic should have been a no-brainer. It’s the defining characteristic of the period. The overly-simplistic, immediate transaction trading with only the most basic of resources is one of the biggest missteps in Pharaoh.