Danik wrote:Not always... the third port may be closer to the second port than the first one is... but thats being pedantic : this idea fails in many ways : you cant trade between ports with the same goods no matter how close relatively. Profit lies in the buy/sell difference between ports not in their proximity. Why set up a trade route then switch it off and hope a random order will be better? Just do it right once and job done, surely?
The same goods issue only fails because the game fills the cargo at the current port and then continues to the nearest port on the trade route. The inherent problem with that is that if the port the fleet is in isn't part of the trade route, it shouldn't be buying anything from that port in the first place.
A trade route has a very specific set of instructions. At Port A do this, travel to port B do this, etc. If I'm at Port X that isn't part of those instructions, I shouldn't be doing anything at that port other then unloading and leaving.
Now I understand that a fleet could change routes and have cargo already in its holds. There are some basic options to alleviate that. Sell to the market at it's current port, and if it can't, then it takes that cargo to the closest port. In the long run, that won't matter as CJ has already stipulated that eventually every port will be able to produce each resource once all resource production is moved to player production. So the issue with the same resource will go away.
One of the main reasons for this suggestion is warehouse transfers, particularly for party card routes. Although this feature could be used for other purposes including new features down the road.
An example of the issue and why the suggestion is beneficial:
If I have 2 fleets at Port A.
I create 2 routes where one goes to Port B then to Port C, and othergoes to Port C then to Port B.
In the current setup, I would need to send the fleets to the opposite ports first then activate their Trade Routes, otherwise both fleets will goto the same port first.