Why the Trade Bonuses need changing

[Tomas]

The current trade bonuses are calculated using the formula displayed in the graph below

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

As you can see, it is only after around 70% distance travelled that the increase in trade bonus stops increasing by a significant amount and begins to tail off. 

70% distance travelled = approx 100km which means you have to travel this far in order to get somewhere near the optimum price for your goods.  For the purposes of this topic i am estimating that the increased trade bonuses after 70% are countered by the extra travel time, which would therefore make 70% (100km) the optimum distance to travel.  This probably isn't the case though and the optimum travel distance is probably above 70%, but that's not needed for consideration in my argument.

SO, back to my point.  The following Villages do not have ANYWHERE that is 100km or more away and are therefore at a massive disadvantage to the rest of the fiefs on the map. 

Ayyike
Ulurban
Tebandra
Tadsamesh
Tosdhar
Emere
Tshibtin
Yalibe
Ushkuru
Rduna
Ehlerdah

Whilst there can never be a distance bonus system that makes all villages equal (except on a spherical map with evenly distributed villages), a system that completely excludes 10% of the villages on the map from getting an optimum goods price is seriously flawed. 

ALL villages on the map need to have a reasonable number of target fiefs to sell in for the optimum price.  Having just 1 or 2 target fiefs is not enough as they could easily all have low goods prices.  Personally I'd say village needs at least 10 potential selling fiefs at or above the optimum distance.  This means that the optimum selling distance should only be at around 50km

[Keshian]

I would like to see it go up faster at the beginning and taper off sooner and more.  Right now carebear alliances get massive trade benefits of gold for not having anyone that can attack their caravans as most of of EU 1 boring alliance.  This change would favor maybe having your immediate neighbor as ally but no more than that needed as your ideal trade is 1/4 of the way across the map.  This would alsoa lleviate some of the boredom of startegus where people take 10-14 days of slowly moving to run a caravan round trip and thats all they do on strategus for 10-14 days (incredibly boring like watching grass grow).

[Konrax]

I traveled across the entire map after the village I was in was taken over by some jerk clan and made the visiting fee 100g / hr.

I was nearly attacked several times along the road, and the only thing that really saved me was the horses I had bought right as the village and surrounding area were taken.

Took me maybe 4 or 5 days to get across the map, made 25,000g and was a hell of a lot more entertaining then watching paint dry =)

[Keshian]

I traveled across the entire map after the village I was in was taken over by some jerk clan and made the visiting fee 100g / hr.

I was nearly attacked several times along the road, and the only thing that really saved me was the horses I had bought right as the village and surrounding area were taken.

Took me maybe 4 or 5 days to get across the map, made 25,000g and was a hell of a lot more entertaining then watching paint dry =)

So you are one of the rare few who could affordmorehorses than troops??  or did you just have 1-2 troops so only needed 1-2 troops??  because most large caravans move much much  much slower than that.

[Braeden]

A few things:

The bonus is currently slightly bugged.  The maximum distance was improperly entered and should be fixed when the next round of strategus modifications comes in.  But you are correct in that 100km is approximately what it should be for 70%.  When the system is fixed, you should see a slight increase in trade bonus across the board, though the difference will be most significant in the second half of the chart.
 
The goal of the system was to make a differentiation between fiefs.  Some fiefs are more valuable for selling goods than others, you are correct, and that is entirely intended.  Those fiefs aren't as good.  They aren't as valuable.  The people who own them are disadvantaged, at least in the realm of trade.  This disadvantage is perhaps countered by their central position and ability to control trade routes, and perhaps not.  However, if they are truly disadvantaged, good.  Let the owners of those fiefs fight for a more favorable position.

As to the affording of horses, the next strategus patch is also intended to feature an overhaul and general price decrease for the crafting system, which will result in the ability to produce horses much cheaper.  Currently, though, someone with a 40% price discount on Rounceys would be able to produce 100 for 21624, a sum which is easily obtainable after a single caravan journey of 100 troops.  (50 crates times 6 goods per crate times 80 goods price = 24,000 gold, and that isn't even a maximum efficiency trip).

As to the problem Keshian brings up about large alliances, that is a wider problem than trade bonuses and will hopefully be dealt with shortly.  However I do not believe the trade system should be modified accordingly.  The system is designed to give rewards to those who take greater risks, and I would much rather fix it by increasing risk for everyone than decreasing it for everyone.

But for the TLDR crowd, I guess what I am trying to say is: Tomas, what you bring up isn't a flaw but a feature.

[Bjarky]

the OP should do some more calc, cus 100 km is a good piece below the 70% 

[Tomas]

The goal of the system was to make a differentiation between fiefs.  Some fiefs are more valuable for selling goods than others, you are correct, and that is entirely intended.  Those fiefs aren't as good.  They aren't as valuable.  The people who own them are disadvantaged, at least in the realm of trade.  This disadvantage is perhaps countered by their central position and ability to control trade routes, and perhaps not.  However, if they are truly disadvantaged, good.  Let the owners of those fiefs fight for a more favorable position.

2 things

1)  Middle fiefs are already disadvantaged from being surrounded by potential enemies whilst the edges of the map have safe borders.  Why disadvantage them further.  If anything the central villages should be the best for making money as they are the hardest to hold tactically.

2)  Massive alliances that border the edge of the map and then expand into the centre will not be effected or care that these are lower quality villages, as they already have their crafting set up elsewhere.  Given the current inability of Strat to nerf these carebear alliances, why pander (or panda even ;) ) to them with the trade system?

[Tomas]

the OP should do some more calc, cus 100 km is a good piece below the 70% 

But you are correct in that 100km is approximately what it should be for 70%. 

[Bjarky]

it is not, do a run, and calc the km with the bonus and you'll notice a even worse surprise, at least if chadz's curve pic is correct.
with same fief product prices ofc.

[Tomas]

it is not, do a run, and calc the km with the bonus and you'll notice a even worse surprise, at least if chadz's curve pic is correct.
with same fief product prices ofc.

Only true because the max distance in entered wrongly if you read Braedens post.  My argument is still valid as it is based on what the bonuses should be (and what they will be once fixed)

[CrazyCracka420]

2 things

1)  Middle fiefs are already disadvantaged from being surrounded by potential enemies whilst the edges of the map have safe borders.  Why disadvantage them further.  If anything the central villages should be the best for making money as they are the hardest to hold tactically.

2)  Massive alliances that border the edge of the map and then expand into the centre will not be effected or care that these are lower quality villages, as they already have their crafting set up elsewhere.  Given the current inability of Strat to nerf these carebear alliances, why pander (or panda even ;) ) to them with the trade system?

I totally agree with the 1st point.  Just like in single player M&B, the central villages and towns are the most profitable because of all the trading that comes through there.  These are also going to naturally going to be attacked more often than villages on the edge of the map.  Trading FROM these villages could and probably should stay the same as it's setup.  I'm not sure how villages make money, but if people sell goods in their village it should become more prosperous and make money for whoever owns it.  If this isn't the case, it should be.  I'm assuming that is the case, and these central villages would still be profitable, but that would result from people trading there, not from the goods produced there.

[Bjarky]

Only true because the max distance in entered wrongly if you read Braedens post.  My argument is still valid as it is based on what the bonuses should be (and what they will be once fixed)

and you expect this to be fixed quickly?
i did a run and calc'ed it through, 100% distance bonus comes at 41,08 km and is located at ~23% of the max distance according to chadz's graph as of now, the rest is easy to find out from there.
if they fix the max distance etc., fine, i would welcome it.

[Tomas]

and you expect this to be fixed quickly?
i did a run and calc'ed it through, 100% distance bonus comes at 41,08 km and is located at ~23% of the max distance according to chadz's graph as of now, the rest is easy to find out from there.
if they fix the max distance etc., fine, i would welcome it.

100% distance bonus at 23% distance covered is pretty close to the graph.  But I think you have the wrong end of the stick.  You can get approx 420% distance bonus by travelling across 70% of the map (100km ish).  It is all slightly out due to the wrong max distance but the shape of the graph is still correct.

[Bjarky]

if the graph is correct u just calc the 23% (41,08km) up to max km (i get it to ~179km, if that was done right) and find the 70% km from there, wich would end in a good chunk over 100km.
u can check it out by walking between two villages who have the same product price and are in the ~41km range from eachother to see the bonus ~100% for yourself.