Trade Routes

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Trade Routes

      I believe they should add trade routes factors into the maps. This would give nations that control high travel routes, such as the Panama Canal, Suez Canal, the Strait of Gibraltar, the Silk Road and other trading hubs, an economic boost in their resources, due to their control of trade in the area. This would also include major trade cities, such as Singapore and New York. Although maybe will believe this could give an unfair advantage to certain countries, this would overall improve the realism of the game, and would make patrols of sea trade routes much more crucial to maintaining a nations economic power
    • I like the idea, maybe pre-established trade routes could be on the Blitzkrieg map, but on other ones you could make your own.
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • Good idea.


      "I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.


      "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
    • Kehsct wrote:

      I like the idea
      Thanks dude.

      Kehsct wrote:

      maybe pre-established trade routes could be on the Blitzkrieg map, but on other ones you could make your own.
      That's a good idea, but maybe you should have to choose from multiple preexisting trade routes for your nation, which you can edit at anytime, but the changes will take time to be implemented.
      This would also ass Import and Export tax into the game as well, which is a major thing in the real world, and was a factor in why the US fought the War of 1812.
    • Maybe it could also be based on your current economy? The better it is, the more trade routes you can have and the further they can go. Ex: Level 3 infrastructure across much of the nation could allow a lot of land trade routes, but the infrastructure of other nations that the route passes through could also affect how far they can go in addition to your own. Same idea for naval trade routes.
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • Exactly. You could also need to protect trade routes, maybe assign units to travel along the trade routes and protect your trade.
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • I don't like it. Just because it is more realistic, doesn't mean it is better. I mean, can you imaging playing a tank simulator game and then your tank breaks down, leaving you immobile and unable to play? That would suck.

      Then, with this, you would generally have to be plundering a helluva lot of the stuff coming through the ports to make a significant difference to your economy, so that would be unrealistic.
      Forum Gang Commissar



      I changed it for you Dia <3
    • I don't like the idea. This looks like the feature from EU4. What it did was to make some nations stronger and some weaker than before based only on geographic position. Unlike EU4, this is not historical game, but a game based on balanced countries and equal possibilities.

      Making some some regions importan for trade, traditional trade centers, historical great ports, preexisting trade routes and similar thing will greatly unbalance the game. They are also too complex to implement if you compare their benefit with the downsides. Also, this is not a grand strategy games like Paradox's games when you control all aspects of nations but a multiplayer war game when economy is not a priority.
    • Paramunac wrote:

      Making some some regions importan for trade, traditional trade centers, historical great ports, preexisting trade routes and similar thing will greatly unbalance the game.
      That could be for maps like Blitzkrieg. On the balanced maps, you would have to make your own. It's up to the devs for impact on a nations economy if they go ahead with it.
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • I say we already suggested this some time ago, but it was about morale and not economically, I believe it's about communications if my memory is correct (God I sound so old)

      Anyway it makes the game more realistic, in WW2 EVERY country rely on trade to keep the war effort going, well except the Axis powers since they try to be self sufficient, without trade Britain would fall without US aid, and the pacific campaign would be a standstill, countries that stay neutral provided the materials for the participating nations, where at home we make bombs while somewhere else they make food and we bought them.


      Game-wise it make the game realistic but it will be difficult to manage, remember non-core provide only 25% and we can't dedicate destroyers protecting them from subs all the time, consumption will outpace production if we allocate resource to defending the routes. Especially if said routes span half the map.

      And don't get me started on the world map.

      The only plus is the economic boost, but compare it to just focusing on defeating your enemy, we would spend half on attacking and winning and the other half on defending just to keep going.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day