Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Starting Merchants 1419

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
unmerged(6159)

unmerged(6159)

Field Marshal
Oct 23, 2001
9.458
1
Visit site
I think that the starting merchants need to be looked at. Right now most COTs start basically empty. I think having a slightly more historically based distribution would make the game work a little better, and would certainly be les artificial. I've posted some of this on the Italian thread, but wanted to expand it to Europe (and the whole world if anyone has ideas)

My proposal follows. I'm mostly working on guesswork, but my goal is to try to give out merchants on a rational basis. The idea is that those states that had significant trading interests should have a presence in appropriate COTs. I've chosen to use the nearest state to represent Hansa interests. This is somewhat bogus when I give merchants to Cologne for that cities role in the Hansa, or to Bavaria for Augsburg. Naples is included simply because it seems alittle weak to me. My assumptions are that
-Mediterranean trade is dominated by Italians. They also play a role in trade routes north to Germany and the low countries.
-Flemish merchants are dominant in North West Europe. The Duke of Burgundy is Count of Flanders, so BUR gets the merchants, along with some Brabanters for Antwerp. Not consistent I know.
-The Baltic trade is dominated by the Hansa. I've included everyone that seems sensible. Poland and Lithuania have some interests (sensible?). Novgorod is dominant in the Eastern Baltic.

Here are the starting merchants in Europe in the EEP and in the GC:

  • Flanders: BUR
    2 BUR no others

    Lyonnais: FRA
    2 FRA no others

    Tago: POR
    4 POR no others

    Genoa: GEN
    5 GEN no others

    Veneto: VEN
    5 VEN

    Mecklenburg: MEC
    3 MEC

    Danzig: TO
    1 MEC, 1 SHL

    Novgorod: NOV
    4 NOV 2 LIT 1 MEC

    Alexandria: MAM
    3 VEN, 2 GEN

I propose the following (by country)

  • Genoa, 2 Tago, 1 Lyonnais, 2 Flanders (+ 5 Genoa, 2 Alexandria)
    Venice,1 Tago, 1 Lyonnais, 1 Danzig, 2 Flanders (+ 5 Venice, 3 Alexandria)
    Milan, 1 Venice, 1 Genoa, 2 Flanders, 1 Mecklenberg, 1 Lyonnais
    Florence, 2 Genoa, 2 Venive, 2 Flanders, 1 Alexandria, 2 Lyonnais, 1 Tago
    Naples 1 Venice, 1 Genoa
    Mecklenburg 2 Flanders (3 Mecklenburg, 1 Danzig, 1 Novgorod)
    Holstien 1 Mecklenburg (1 Danzig)
    Poland 1 Danzig
    Pommerania 1 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig
    Cologne 1 Flanders
    Hanover 1 Mecklenburg
    Bavaria 1 Venice 1 Mecklenburg
    Brabant 2 Flanders 1 Mecklenburg
    Burgundy 1 Tago 2 Lyonnais 2 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig 1 Flanders (+ 2 Flanders)
    Novgorod 1 Danzig (4 Novgorod)
    Lithuania 2 Novgorod
    Aragon 1 Tago, 1 Genoa

Or by COT

  • Flanders: BUR
    2 GEN, 2 VEN, 2 MLO, 2 TOS, 2 MEC, 1 KOL, 2 HAU, 3 BUR

    Mecklenburg: MEC
    1 MLO, 1 TOS, 3 MEC, 1 SHL, 1 POM, 1 HAN, 1 BAY, 1 HAU, 2 BUR

    Veneto: VEN
    5 VEN, 1 MLO, 2 TOS, 1 NAP, 1 BAY

    Liguria: GEN
    5 GEN, 1 MLO, 2 TOS, 1 NAP, 1 ARG

    Lyonnais: FRA
    1 GEN, 1 VEN, 1 MLO, 1 TOS, 2 BUR, 2 FRA

    Tago: POR
    1 GEN, 1 VEN, 1 BUR, 4 POR, 1 ARG

    Danzig: TO
    1 VEN, 1 MEC, 1 SHL, 1 POL, 1 POM, 1 BUR, 1 NOV

    Novgorod: NOV
    1 MEC, 4 NOV, 2 LIT

    Alexandria: MAM
    3 VEN, 2 GEN

I think this is better than right now, although I'll be the first to admit that it isn't perfect! Thoughts?
 
Burgundy has to many, to much trade tax incomes from the beginn compared to italian COT or lyonaisse.

Mecleburg shoud not have italian mercants.

Veneto should not have toscana mercants and should have more southern german.

Genoa should have none from naple and 1 more from milano, noone from bayern and one from suisse.

Lyonaiss, 2 from BUR seems to me to much compared to italian number.

Burgundian in Tago?

Danzig... no italian mercants, no novgorod, no burgundian, there should be only hansa mercants.

Novgorod, more hansa mercants and less novgorod or lituanian.

Alexandria should be like 4 VEN, 3 GEN, 3 MAM.

This are my suggestions
 
I would suggest adding an English merchant to Flanders, as it was the destination of English wool & textiles (which were capturing a larger market share in the 15th century), & English merchants had been at Antwerp since at least 1296.
 
Version 2

Version 2: Incorporating some of the input (the part that I couldn't disagree with) :)

Genoa, 1 Tago, 1 Lyonnais, 1 Flanders 5 Genoa, 3 Alexandria
Venice,1 Tago, 1 Lyonnais, 1 Flanders 5 Venice, 4 Alexandria
Milan, 2 Venice, 2 Genoa, 2 Flanders, 2 Lyonnais
Florence, 2 Genoa, 2 Flanders, 1 Alexandria, 2 Lyonnais, 1 Tago
Naples 2 Venice
Mecklenburg 2 Flanders 3 Mecklenburg, 1 Danzig, 2 Novgorod
Holstien 1 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig 1 Novgorod
Poland 1 Danzig
Pommerania 1 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig 1 Novgorod
Cologne 1 Flanders 1 Danzig
Hanover 1 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig 1 Novgorod
Bavaria 2 Venice 1 Mecklenburg 1 Danzig
Brabant 1 Flanders 1 Mecklenburg
Burgundy 2 Lyonnais 1 Mecklenburg 3 Flanders
Novgorod 3 Novgorod
Lithuania 1 Novgorod
Aragon 1 Tago, 2 Genoa
England 1 Flanders


OR

Flanders: BUR
1 GEN, 1 VEN, 2 MLO, 2 TOS, 2 MEC, 1 KOL, 1 HAU, 3 BUR, 1 ENG

Mecklenburg: MEC
3 MEC, 1 SHL, 1 POM, 1 HAN, 1 BAY, 1 HAU, 1 BUR

Veneto: VEN
5 VEN, 2 MLO, 2 NAP, 2 BAY

Liguria: GEN
5 GEN, 2 MLO, 2 TOS, 2 ARG

Lyonnais: FRA
1 GEN, 1 VEN, 2 MLO, 2 TOS, 2 BUR, 2 FRA

Tago: POR
1 GEN, 1 VEN, 1 TOS, 4 POR, 1 ARG

Danzig: TO
1 MEC, 1 SHL, 1 POL, 1 POM, 1 KOL, 1 HAN, 1 BAY

Novgorod: NOV
2 MEC, 1 SHL, 1 POM, 3 NOV, 1 LIT

Alexandria: MAM
4 VEN, 3 GEN, 1 TOS

Barbalele, I've incorporated most of your comments. I don't think Flanders Having more merchants than Venice is a big deal - both COTs will fill up very quickly.
 
While in principle your idea is excellent, I find that within 50 years, you cannot send any merchants, because you have reached level 5 everywhere, and you lack trade level 3. Therefore, adding to merchant numbers will only increase the speed of this process
 
Originally posted by Jacob Oppenheim
Therefore, adding to merchant numbers will only increase the speed of this process
Click to expand...

Depends on who you're playing. For many countries you'll have no starting merchants, and more opposign merchants to compete out.

Most Latins should be able to make trade tech 3 in 50 years if they so desire.

My intent was to strengthen (a little) some of the small states that seem a bit underpowered right now, and to have a set up that looks a little more like the real world in 1419. Do you think we'd be better off if there were no starting merchants anywhere?

Outside Europe should be added. I haven't put any thought into it yet.
 
I am wondering why there are no Scandinavian countries in the new setup. I know Denmark (and as such the Kalmar union) was not exactly on good terms with Hansa (Mecklenburg in this game I guess), but all three nations were known to travel and trade.

Obviously the Danes tried at least as much to control the trade of others as they did to trade themselves. Also I know for a fact that Denmark in that period exported grain, meat, and leather (probably from cows and such), and that they imported cloth and spices (among other things of course).

So honestly SOME trade must have been done by the Scandinavians ...
 
How much was carried by Danish ships and merchants?

Look I really have no idea. My set up is simply based on the concept that the Hanseatic League controlled the Baltic trade in 1419. I'd like suggestions for how to improve it from anyone who has a general idea of who was carrying what trade at this point.
 
Originally posted by Isaac Brock

My intent was to strengthen (a little) some of the small states that seem a bit underpowered right now, and to have a set up that looks a little more like the real world in 1419. Do you think we'd be better off if there were no starting merchants anywhere?
Click to expand...
I think this is excellent, even if you might end up with too many merchants if you play a rich state.

Originally posted by Sikker
I am wondering why there are no Scandinavian countries in the new setup. I know Denmark (and as such the Kalmar union) was not exactly on good terms with Hansa (Mecklenburg in this game I guess), but all three nations were known to travel and trade.
Click to expand...
In 1419 Sweden had no significant trade, most merchants were from the Hansa and I assume this is true to a lesser extent for Denmark and Norway as well. At least there were no Danish merchants living in Kalmar or Stockholm at the time, but many Germans. Of course there were *some* but perhaps to few to be represented? Or should Denmark have a merchant in Mecklenburg?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back