In this suggestion I put forward to make gc and charity investment towards specific port attributes rather than general population growth, the diverse attributes will give advantages to the ‘owner’ of the attribute.
These attributes I call ‘buildings’ and may overlap with functions already in play. However, these buildings will not replace those functions but only provide advantages. I propose that 25 different kinds of buildings (and advantages) are designed but that each port will be randomly assigned 5 buildings when this gets implemented. Thus each port gets a different flavor and value.

Buildings I can think of are: shipwright (building a ship cost 1 turn less); captains academy (% discount on captains), admiralty (%discount on admirals, federal bank, trade school (temporary adds 1 attribute to all ships because of trained crew), pressgang (% discount on crew hiring), prison (free crews), tax office, prospector (treasure hunt related) etc etc.

In this suggestion the port build up is changed into specific building build up. Also when a player needs a crew, he has to pay up to the pressgang or to the prison (same costs) and no longer to the port directly.
Influence owned by players when this gets implemented will be equally distributed over the 5 buildings of the port.

Who owns the buildings?
Whenever a player invests in a building he can check whether the investment aids his nation or his guild.
The nation of guild with the most influence owns the building AND all the influence carried by that building. (Just like the USA voting system were the winner takes all)

Since guilds cannot own ports they will have to vote to which country they give their buildings influence. The advantages will stay with the guild if they hold a building.
So, buildings are owned by a nation and all her citizens join in the advantage of the building or by a guild whose members reap the benefit.

The nation that has most buildings in a port owns the port. However other nations may own buildings in that port as well. When 2 nations own an equal amount of buildings the total amount of influence will decide who owns the port.

I hope to create more activity with this proposal. Since owning a port building brings a desired advantage, guilds may decide to invest in certain buildings and even compete for domination. The same goes for nations. A building is an asset regardless of the port it is in. small nations can start owning a building as a stepping stone to port control. Guilds can become deal makers by putting their buildings influence for hire.
Owning the same building in multiple ports increases the advantage.

I realize that this suggestion needs a lot of work. The main idea is to offer several benefits to the ports which are lined to influence. Creating strive between guilds and nations for those benefits will give a new dynamic to port control.

+1 i know there are a few suggestions out there and this will probably be changed a few things i dont like too much but i dont know how to change then that wouldn't affect something else

I love the concept of adding additional reasons to owning ports or in this case buildings as well.

Something like this would not only create a larger desire and more competition but also yield a larger pool of options to invest in allowing more players the ability to "hold" something of value.

For those reasons +1 on the concept and direction.

This would add so much diversity , +1

Edward Hawke wrote:I love the concept of adding additional reasons to owning ports or in this case buildings as well.

Something like this would not only create a larger desire and more competition but also yield a larger pool of options to invest in allowing more players the ability to "hold" something of value.

For those reasons +1 on the concept and direction.

one of the reasons i came up with this is to create more desirable items that are 'scarce'.
also i think that guilds being able to influence which nation holds a port is a fun addition.
but i added guilds as receivers of the benefits because it could bring more animosity between guilds

I would have thought the controlling guilds name would be displayed under or by which building they held

Edward Hawke wrote:I would have thought the controlling guilds name would be displayed under or by which building they held

yes, who has the building should be known.

I think that something more in the ports is a good idea. Buildings with bonuses might be such a feature (I think the advantages has to be slightly greater than indicated here, but that's a detail).

Giving guilds, rather than nations, control over something, is also an interesting idea. Not sure if this is better than sticking to national control, but the idea is definitely worth discussing.

I like the concept. There are other things I like more, though, and I'm not sure they will be possible to combine...

bump

Some interesting idea in here for Port Buildings