Conquer Club

Trading Countries.

I was wondering if we could somehow implement the ability to trade territories with opponents.


I know this has been rejected for the team game, for good reason, but I've often had one random country in a place where I really don't care, and it's going to be wiped out anyway. It would be nice to be able to turn that into something profitable, rather than just watching those armies die.

I think the armies on the territory would have to go with the territory, so that would have to be considered, but since both individuals are trying to win, it would tend to be fairly equal.

There would have to be restrictions, such as a limit, maybe one per person per round, and only 1 for 1, and maybe a cap on the number of trades between individuals to prevent abuse. It would have to be for tactical reasons, rather than as a way to acquire bonuses.

Under the right circumstances, it could add an interesting level to the game play.

Importance . . . Not very, maybe a 2.

i think that is a pretty good idea

Hm, it is an interesting idea, as I know sometimes I'm stuck with countries in such places. Sometimes they can be helpful, sometimes not.

But I'm not quite sold on the idea, but I'll give it some thought.


--Andy

you deff should dude

It would make strategy you could make deals like if you break *'s continent I'll give you ...

true it would shurly bring diplomacy onto the table

i like it but surely it could bring about some dodgy trades rite?

This would certainly give rise to some abuse by multis and/or give rise to more multi accusations in the cheaters forum...

Yes! Plus, you can already trade territories... Just use the armies to attack, and let it with 1 army, so your opponent can take it easily, and do the same for you.

MR. Nate wrote:Trading Countries.

I was wondering if we could somehow implement the ability to trade territories with opponents.


I know this has been rejected for the team game, for good reason, but I've often had one random country in a place where I really don't care, and it's going to be wiped out anyway. It would be nice to be able to turn that into something profitable, rather than just watching those armies die.

I think the armies on the territory would have to go with the territory, so that would have to be considered, but since both individuals are trying to win, it would tend to be fairly equal.

There would have to be restrictions, such as a limit, maybe one per person per round, and only 1 for 1, and maybe a cap on the number of trades between individuals to prevent abuse. It would have to be for tactical reasons, rather than as a way to acquire bonuses.

Under the right circumstances, it could add an interesting level to the game play.

Importance . . . Not very, maybe a 2.

good idea , but when u say u have countries where u dont want them to be u must be not looking well to the board i never once whined about deployments cuz i know every country of mine is important as any other country where u have country that u think u dont need my advise to u fort it up and u will like the outcome of it

Nah - don't like it (feeling too stupid to give a reason)

if think it is rather dumb to end up with a lot of armies that are slaughterd anyway... maybe its just a good idea to not put your armies in such places... and if you get some armies there from begin deployment it are just 3 of them... is that such a big deal?

on the other hand it is pretty hard to organize the whole thing... you should have an offer, then a re-offer, for the offer is not profitable enough... and an acceptance...
furthermore, an allience whould become way to strong this way, for the other players in the game would need some time to respond to the teritory trading stuff. so the suddenly see a lot of armies on their neck... before the y could escape anyway...

I dont think this would be an idea the players the balance their strategy would need...

chessplaya wrote:

MR. Nate wrote:Trading Countries.

I was wondering if we could somehow implement the ability to trade territories with opponents.


I know this has been rejected for the team game, for good reason, but I've often had one random country in a place where I really don't care, and it's going to be wiped out anyway. It would be nice to be able to turn that into something profitable, rather than just watching those armies die.

I think the armies on the territory would have to go with the territory, so that would have to be considered, but since both individuals are trying to win, it would tend to be fairly equal.

There would have to be restrictions, such as a limit, maybe one per person per round, and only 1 for 1, and maybe a cap on the number of trades between individuals to prevent abuse. It would have to be for tactical reasons, rather than as a way to acquire bonuses.

Under the right circumstances, it could add an interesting level to the game play.

Importance . . . Not very, maybe a 2.

good idea , but when u say u have countries where u dont want them to be u must be not looking well to the board i never once whined about deployments cuz i know every country of mine is important as any other country where u have country that u think u dont need my advise to u fort it up and u will like the outcome of it

Hi, my name is chessplaya, and im a noob and need lessons from someone who is good to improve my skills because i suck!

It all evens out in the end anyway - some of your "3s" will get slaughtered, as will some of your opponents.

Trading countries would also allow team-mates to swap a newly-taken territory to their team-mate, allowing rapid follow-on assaults by the whole team.

^Good or bad?

I'm against trading countries between teammates. That makes teams almost too easy. But in singles, everyone is looking out for #1, so the trades will generally be equal. As for the "danger" that it will be easier for multis, or that more accusations will occur, well, you can see what Fitz said.

I think that if you were able to trading countries that you would have to have a minimum of 3 armies on each country and when you do trade with the other person that you both just get only 1 armies on the new countries. This way you do not have as much of a leg up on the other players

I'm sorry I don't like the idea at all. Teams would become super-strong too quickly and as another poster said, for a single player game the offer stage would take to long.
I firmly agree with the post that says if you want to go down this road - merely reduce the fortifications on the territory to make it easier for the other player to capture it.

Why does everyone think I want this in team games? I don't. I'm talking about Standard, Assassin and Terminator games.