Since trading troops were taken out right when I got into COW. So it'll be cool to have that back. I know the reasons why it was taken out though, "multis". So to probably prevent that and do better, only coalition members could trade. Then Coalition could make it feel more important and strategical. Since people would just multis again, coalition trading should be able to prevent just a person with so many. AND only allow so little with a 7 day wait. I hope this idea wasn't thought of already so it might be a new idea =) Please consider allowing trading troops
6 Replies
1 Jun 2020, 01:23
Cr4Zytiggs wrote:
Since trading troops were taken out right when I got into COW. So it'll be cool to have that back. I know the reasons why it was taken out though, "multis". So to probably prevent that and do better, only coalition members could trade. Then Coalition could make it feel more important and strategical. Since people would just multis again, coalition trading should be able to prevent just a person with so many. AND only allow so little with a 7 day wait. I hope this idea wasn't thought of already so it might be a new idea =) Please consider allowing trading troops
When i first joined cow trading troops were still part of the game at the time. I do like your idea imo it's clever. I think that'll get other players to be in coalitions for teamwork or at the very least work with allies to win as a group or not to attack each other. Maybe they'll bring it back who knows.
1 Jun 2020, 02:16
Cr4Zytiggs wrote:
Since trading troops were taken out right when I got into COW. So it'll be cool to have that back.
In the umpteen games that I've played, I only recall trading troops with an ally that had Manchuria in the 39 historical map and was short of manpower. I had Brazil, had a bit of excess manpower and production capability, but was always short of cash. After he started chewing up the Soviet Union's Siberia, he started getting lots of cash which he used to buy a unit every day or two from me. The trade worked out well for us. Wonder if other people had similar experiences ...
1 Jun 2020, 03:40
we need trading troops back
it was good
3 Jun 2020, 16:55
Maybe you could just keep the units when they arrived in the capital, for example, or maybe to give units the strength of the receiving army has to be less than the strength of the donor army. That would make it more fair and more realistic, because normaly in real life a country with less army strenght don't give soldiers to a bigger army, and sometimes the troops go first to the capital, for a evaluation or a "nationalization".
4 Jun 2020, 07:25
Yes, the loan of troops would be nice, but with some conditions, in order not to have abuse;
1. it will be only a sending, a loan, the soldiers should not change the flag, but will be commanded by the other nation. (like the Italians in Russia, they had the Italian flag, but the Germans decided what to do) So if someone helps an enemy I know that it is not only therefore also who gives him the troops must declare war on me.
2. Maintenance will be consumed by the receiving nation.
3. The owner can regain command whenever he wants, even without authorization from the person in command.
