DISCUSSIONS

Making History HQ Forum>MAKING HISTORY II: The War of the World General Discussion>Trade interdiction
Trade interdiction
  • << previous
  • 1
  • next >>
said on Aug 29, 2010 at 02:36 PM

As Argentina, I had a trade agreement to sell Tuva 50 Food each turn. I noticed on one turn that there was a battle "explosion" icon at sea, next to Brazil. When I zoomed in to see what that was about, the tooltip indicated that 1 Food going from Argentina to Tuva had been interdicted.

As it happened, neither Argentina nor Tuva were at war with anyone at that time. So,

1) who is doing the interdicting? Shouldn't the tooltip show that as well?

2) And when an interdiction occurs, obviously the recipient won't be getting his full shipment, but does that also mean that the sender will not be paid for the amount that was interdicted?

3) And lastly, if a third party essentially destroys somebody else's property, wouldn't that constitute an Act of War?

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Aug 29, 2010 at 02:40 PM

Oooooooh the German U-boats like this if they could stop the US from aiding GB. Sounds strange though, I'll give you that.

_________________
Africa is a shitstorm. Complete cluster fuck, rebellions everywhere. -SANAND
said on Aug 29, 2010 at 07:07 PM

I'm not sure about any of these questions, but perhaps it was a submarine and therefore you cannot tell who committed this heinous act.

_________________
In order to know how to use free will, we must first know how to fight for it.
  • beast566
  • MHII
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: May 29, 2010
  • posts: 600
said on Aug 29, 2010 at 09:16 PM

I also saw this in a game. There were no ships apparent at the interdiction (which was not in a fog area). I put a naval unit in the sea quadrant where it occurred and it stopped and my naval unit was never attacked.

said on Aug 30, 2010 at 02:29 AM

Maybe it's just one of those hidden variables.. Since only 1 was interdicted, maybe it just got lost to clumsiness, spoilage, disease, pests, etc.. Just a thought, as I have no clue how trade interdiction is programmed.

_________________
"War is not a life; it is a situation. One which may neither be ignored nor accepted.”
-T.S. Elliot

"Sex is the most fun you can have without laughing."
-Woody Allen
said on Aug 30, 2010 at 05:07 AM

Same thing happened when playing as Japan. Trade was interdicted twice enroute to Japan, but Japan was not at war with anyone at the time.

said on Aug 30, 2010 at 05:25 AM

PIRATES!!! ( maybe with patches ) :-)

_________________
Nobody in this world is any more important than a grain of sand on a million mile beach, and if you have got an ego problem that's because your grain of sand is covered in seagull crap.
said on Aug 30, 2010 at 07:13 AM

It will be very interesting to use U-Boats to attack enemy convoys without being found from surface naval units...

  • rommel2ITA
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 27, 2010
  • posts: 24
said on Aug 30, 2010 at 09:08 AM

I had this happen to me in a game. France embargoed me but was not at war with me. They had an aircraft carrier in a sea region and its was interdicting trade. I put a large fleet in the same region but every turn it still happened. There was nothing I could do to stop it.

  • cmoney5
  • MHII
  • location: United States
  • joined: Jun 20, 2010
  • posts: 27
said on Aug 30, 2010 at 05:01 PM

I think this needs to be copied from the Total war series. If you have a fleet on the supply line, the supply is totally stopped and you are able to steal some or all of it.

_________________
We have spilt an ocean of blood for brotherhood and unity of our peoples and we shall not allow anyone to touch or destroy it from within.
  • Zoki
  • MHII, MH GOLD
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: Jul 12, 2010
  • posts: 55
said on Aug 30, 2010 at 05:42 PM

that's not what happens in real life and it is bothersome in a game where you're not even at war. embargoing ships that are interdicting trade shoud give you the right to declair war. as well, they shouldn't be interdicting trade, only refusing to deal with you.

  • warman45
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 22, 2009
  • posts: 288
said on Aug 31, 2010 at 04:44 PM

warman45 said

that's not what happens in real life and it is bothersome in a game where you're not even at war. embargoing ships that are interdicting trade shoud give you the right to declair war. as well, they shouldn't be interdicting trade, only refusing to deal with you.

Yea I mean't as in Total War you'd only be able to do it on Nations your at war with.

_________________
We have spilt an ocean of blood for brotherhood and unity of our peoples and we shall not allow anyone to touch or destroy it from within.
  • Zoki
  • MHII, MH GOLD
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: Jul 12, 2010
  • posts: 55
said on Aug 31, 2010 at 04:56 PM

You could try looking it up in the manual, or possibly the in game encyclopia. (and yes, that was sarcasm)

said on Aug 31, 2010 at 05:11 PM

Parra said

You could try looking it up in the manual, or possibly the in game encyclopedia. (and yes, that was sarcasm)

Really? Was that sarcasm? I had no idea! (Boom! Counter-sarcasm)

Interdiction should only occur if Nation A (Controller of interdicting unit) is either embargoing or at war with Nation B (Buyer) or Nation C (Seller). The payment sent to the seller is for the resources that leave that nation, not the cost of the goods that are delivered.

After we get back from PAX, we'll make sure we get out a manual overhaul with an overabundance of information.

_________________
J. Monken - Designer/Developer, Muzzy Lane Software
said on Aug 31, 2010 at 06:26 PM

ZenMonken said

Interdiction should only occur if Nation A (Controller of interdicting unit) is either embargoing or at war with Nation B (Buyer) or Nation C (Seller). The payment sent to the seller is for the resources that leave that nation, not the cost of the goods that are delivered.

Then that is quite counter-intuitive. And embargo is meant "punish" Nation B. But if B ships the commodity and gets paid for it, having it destroyed actually "punishes" Nation C. In effect, Nation A is telling the world, "Do NOT trade with Nation B or else!" Rather belligerent of Nation A. The rest of the world may very well see the embargo -- enforced as it is -- as a casus belli against Nation A. ["League of Nations denounces Nation A! Sanctions to be set in place for Nation A's wanton belligerence!"]

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Dec 31, 2010 at 06:56 PM

Raising the thread

I don't mean to "bump" a dead thread but I felt that this would be easier than making an entirely new post. Even though these posts are from August I'm still having problems with interdicting ships and losing resources to the enemy.

I have a shipment coming from Ireland and going to me. (Germany) I am at war with America and Denmark. I have sent my fleet to the spot that is being attacked yet my shipments are still being lost.

Let me answer the basic questions.

  • I have ships that can detect enemy submarines and there are none.
  • I have left the fleet there for a few turns and I'm still loosing shipments.
  • There was never even an enemy in the spot to begin with.

So why are my shipments still being lost? The only thing I can see is that I'm embargoed by Britain and they have a sub in a region. Is this all it takes? Because in my opinion this is a real bad system that a nation can crash your economy just by embargoing you and putting 1 measly sub in all your sea regions.

Embargoes mean that Nation A doesn't trade with Nation B, it doesn't mean that Nation A prevents Nation B from trading with the ENITIRE WORLD.

_________________
Africa is a shitstorm. Complete cluster fuck, rebellions everywhere. -SANAND
said on Dec 31, 2010 at 07:19 PM

ZenMonken said

Parra said

You could try looking it up in the manual, or possibly the in game encyclopedia. (and yes, that was sarcasm)

Really? Was that sarcasm? I had no idea! (Boom! Counter-sarcasm)

Lol; I love you Zen.

_________________
"War is not a life; it is a situation. One which may neither be ignored nor accepted.”
-T.S. Elliot

"Sex is the most fun you can have without laughing."
-Woody Allen
said on Jan 01, 2011 at 09:43 PM

Gmer_freak said

Embargoes mean that Nation A doesn't trade with Nation B, it doesn't mean that Nation A prevents Nation B from trading with the ENITIRE WORLD.

Cuba, Saddam's Iraq and many others salute you.

I think commerce should be integrated in the MPU/industrial system, my points : Closer trades are safer and faster for both commitants, we'll have no more Switzerland trading with Australia. It's against realism to deliver WHATEVER amount of goods, ANYWHERE, in a week of time. Railways and civil navies should carry the weight (and determine the time) of goods transportation.

It should be relatively easy to introduce that, since we altready have both railways and naval transports, you programmers should assign to every transport a capacity and automatically send the necessary amount of transport ships to carry and deliver the good.

That would allow to introduce blockades (wich interdict the passage of civil navies, but don't destroy them), creating a difference between an enemy fleet and and embargoing one.

It would be even nice to introduce a difference between free market (where the delivery of the good is responsability of the buyer) and trade agreements, where the seller has to bring the good to the buyer. It is (more or less) historically accurate, if we look back at the lend/lease act.

In this way naval warfare becomes crucial (as it was), since if you send out your civil navy to trade and the enemy intercepts it, you loose both your shipment and your ship and if you want to trade again you'll have to build a new ship.

_________________
Per aspera ad astra
  • FriZ
  • MHII
  • location: Italy
  • joined: Jan 04, 2010
  • posts: 58
said on Jan 02, 2011 at 12:13 AM

Gmer_freak said

So why are my shipments still being lost? The only thing I can see is that I'm embargoed by Britain and they have a sub in a region. Is this all it takes? Because in my opinion this is a real bad system that a nation can crash your economy just by embargoing you and putting 1 measly sub in all your sea regions.

I get the impression that Great Britain doesn't even have to position a unit on the supply line. I think that the Embargo mechanism theoretically okays its military to militarily interdict some nation's supply lines. Thereafter, a theoretical unit is prowling that supply line. Each turn a "die is rolled" to see if the theoretical unit intercepts a supply vessel (also a theoretical unit) on the supply line. If the result is "Yes", then the die is rolled again to see if the interdiction was successful. So what you have is a theoretical interdicting unit -- which effectively invisible -- attacking a theoretical supply vessel -- which is also invisible. Since both units are theoretical AND invisible, actual units can't interact with them.

At least that seems to me to be the way the system works.

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
Making History HQ Forum>MAKING HISTORY II: The War of the World General Discussion>Trade interdiction
  • << previous
  • 1
  • next >>