We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I think it is, but perhaps not serious enough to do anything about. As it is you can have 300 years of trade agreement without renegotiation, really strange. Later on in MP the players tend to have TA with all remaining nations this boosts your economy tremendously. Since it's so easy to have TA with all embargoes against AI nations are few and that is perhaps a bit unbalanced. Limiting in number or duration? Nah, that would mean cancel one to get a new one eventually, gives a stab hit and that's too much IMO. I think we have to live with it, at least in large 1492-1819 campaigns.
The problem is that merchantilism represents nations state run trading companies, so as free trade should suffer from trade embargoes Merhantilism should suffer for trade agreements as the concept was to block foriegn merchants from domestic markets not encourage them through agreement.
Originally posted by Smirfy The problem is that merchantilism represents nations state run trading companies, so as free trade should suffer from trade embargoes Merhantilism should suffer for trade agreements as the concept was to block foriegn merchants from domestic markets not encourage them through agreement.
I think that was what Metroncho meant. I'm not sure if that was what nelly was suggesting or not, his post was a bit ambiguous
I would be happy enough if they were just cleared every time you went to war with a nation. I would like to see them limited in some way, I'm not that picky which