new game mechanic idea

[swen]

"custom house" or something related to the original civ caravan trade paradigm; increases trickle income according to the reserves you have in certain categories; this might actually be a better use for merchants

would only be "local" to your own nation before navigation;
setting up intraciv trade routes becomes possible after navigation;
setting up interciv trade routes becomes possible after railroad or flight;
enhanced bonus after flight;


the general idea would be using your excess production or food or cash to trade for a profit and balancing the future against blowing it all for immediate gain in a battle for example

[ShuShu62]

...the general idea would be using your excess production or food or cash to trade for a profit ...

I understand the motivation to incorporate something from the original game, but a lot of us already use our excess production or food or cash to trade for a profit.

Of course the pharse: excess hammers is an oxymoron.

[swen]

yep, I knew this and I knew that you would likely be against it, though I am not sure if you actually are or not. Part of the point would be to make the profiteering from idle assets automatic, rather than something you have to babysit quite so much. More sleep makes shushu happier, no?

Another part of the equation is to make guys like you think about whether it would be best to go all in or hedge your bets for the future. Don't think I am trying to make an anti-shushu proposal. Isn't "luxuries" (to use another old game term) just what merchants trade in? Unless you are an arms dealer, I would say the answer is yes. If you aren't spending it on military, it goes to make luxuries.

lol, maybe there should be a baby boom effect for winning a war. War production (or a bonus on hammers not used for a war) converted into homes and appliances for returning GIs...

[ShuShu62]

I perceived nothing negative in either the proposal or your response.


I believe the liquid market is the best thing about this game so I disagree with trying to accomodate 'surplusses' In an efficient market, there are no surplusses just disagreements about how much is needed.


The increased trickle tied to tech and interciv alliances sounds like it has potential to enhance the social component of the game, but you would need to find a mechanism that made it risky, because you don't want everyone just to enter the relationships because they are win/win propositions.

[Kalistes]

It might make sense to allow for "auto-trades" based on limits you could set once the "Corporation" technology was unlocked (market and limit orders). This would have the general effect of a "world economy" developing using more modern economic principles. Prior to that technology level, trades would likely have to be done the "old fashioned way".

[Moonlghtknt]

I dunno, I think it could be done before corporation. Hell the game give us markets right out of the gate.

If they wanted to limit it to a tech, I'd say start it at Currency. This might make civs go after Currency earlier than waiting until Industry is the next era win. ( I see this scenario all the time in games I'm in. People don't realize you will eventually need Banking to get Industry.)

[churd]

This sounds like one of those suggestions that stems from earlier Civ games. Trade routes would be awesome, in the same way that luxury items affecting happiness would be awesome, in the same way that playing Civ5 for free on facebook would be awesome. Which is to say that it would be very difficult to implement. It would be better for you to just purchase the game you want this game to be.

I don't mean this to be negative. I legitimately mean that if you want games that are complex in a specific way, and those games already exists, you should just play those games. It will make you happier in the long run than pining for CivWorld game updates.

[Ironsmack]

Down with Pining!

[The Lulu]

What's wrong with pines? They are lovely trees...

[Moonlghtknt]

This sounds like one of those suggestions that stems from earlier Civ games. Trade routes would be awesome, in the same way that luxury items affecting happiness would be awesome, in the same way that playing Civ5 for free on facebook would be awesome. Which is to say that it would be very difficult to implement. It would be better for you to just purchase the game you want this game to be.

I don't mean this to be negative. I legitimately mean that if you want games that are complex in a specific way, and those games already exists, you should just play those games. It will make you happier in the long run than pining for CivWorld game updates.

Well, look at it this way:

They could give it too us as another building to build, making 99% Perspiration slightly easier to get.

It would automate buying and selling on the market, making Economic wins something to be more aware of (in the games I've played, people usually forget these after 200 or 300k).

It could be a "bonus" upgrade for merchants, maybe making them more useful, since they are mostly pointless now. (Yes, this would be the only building that stacks with another, but considering what it's boosting, would that be so bad?)

Custom Houses could be a very useful, if they created it properly.

[churd]

It would automate buying and selling on the market, making Economic wins something to be more aware of (in the games I've played, people usually forget these after 200 or 300k)....

Custom Houses could be a very useful, if they created it properly.

And how exactly would you do that? Specifically, how would you balance automated profiteering against itself? A thing that happens automatically, whatever it is, needs some system of priority in order to function. When a system of priority is tied to a limit quantity, there necessarily have to be winners and losers.

In a situation where multiple people had a "Custom House" and there was a market imbalance, how would you resolve it? Someone would go first, sell the item, cause the price to decrease, and reap the reward. Someone else would go second, see the decreased price caused by the first person, and miss out on any potential profit. How can you possibly make that fair?

I'm all for new game mechanics being debated and proposed, but people really need to think about the competitive game experience rather than a single player's experience. I feel like I'm always the one that brings it up. Every feature of the game is accessible to everyone. Otherwise it's not a feature, it's a priviledge.