Unions?

--If there has already been a suggestion like this one, disregard this post.--

I don't know about this, but here's the idea:

If you are defeated/surrender, you can send someone a union request (Takes 1 turn). If accepted, you have the ability to see that person's land and move their troops, but they can break the union at any time to prevent people from screwing their units up (AKA trolls; This would not take any turns, instant). **UNION AT YOUR OWN RISK**

Also, joining in a union with someone could allow you to gain SP as if you were in an alliance. As for winning, however, it would say the person in charge of the union has won, but people unioned to him/her would see the same screen, yet would still get the SP they won (Same goes for surrendering/defeated). Finally, there could be a 3-5 max player per union limit.

TBH I don't know what people may think about this. I personally think it's a pretty good idea, but I know people have their opinions. I hope this is seen as a good idea, and not ignored or be considered bad.

LOOOOL

@Goblin
If you were playing with friends, and you were defeated, you could still play with them. This would let you continue to play instead of being a spectator or just kicked out of the game.

I mean, I play with friends and they all wish they had some sort of thing like unions for when they're defeated. And also, you never know if someone would feel sorry for you and let you union them (this would likely never happen).

Yea but many would screw each other games haha

This doesn't make sense, unless i understood it wrong. So you want your friends who died to be able to control your own units? Just, what?

Please explain if i understood wrong

Napisao MediciMan, 25.05.2014 at 01:20

--If there has already been a suggestion like this one, disregard this post.--

I don't know about this, but here's the idea:

If you are defeated/surrender, you can send someone a union request (Takes 1 turn). If accepted, you have the ability to see that person's land and move their troops, but they can break the union at any time to prevent people from screwing their units up (AKA trolls; This would not take any turns, instant). **UNION AT YOUR OWN RISK**

Also, joining in a union with someone could allow you to gain SP as if you were in an alliance. As for winning, however, it would say the person in charge of the union has won, but people unioned to him/her would see the same screen, yet would still get the SP they won (Same goes for surrendering/defeated). Finally, there could be a 3-5 max player per union limit.

TBH I don't know what people may think about this. I personally think it's a pretty good idea, but I know people have their opinions. I hope this is seen as a good idea, and not ignored or be considered bad.

Why on earth would I want someone who I've killed to be allowed to control my units...? Empathy like what Goblin said? If that's the case I wouldn't have killed him in the first place right?

Aside from that, how would the game mechanic work? Say I move my infantry to take city A but the "defeated union" player moves the same infantry to take city B. How exactly does that work?

That would alter competitive play a lot. I'm afraid once you're dead your dead.Controlling your friends units a is tad bit far fetched too. goodluck!

You wouldn't be totally "controlling your friends" but you would be helping them. Also for the city A and B thing:
You would be able to see where the people you're unioned with are moving troops. And for the empathy thing:
TBH I don't know why you would union someone you killed but there might be people who would do that? I don't know.

Napisao MediciMan, 26.05.2014 at 21:02

You would be able to see where the people you're unioned with are moving troops.

And what if he doesn't agree with your moves? What if he cancels your moves and does something else? You would need to discuss with the people in the union about how and what to play. Also, your union mates would be using reinforcements and spending money, and this may lead to another member not being able to have enough reinforcements or money to complete an attack, so you would waste units. Plus i think it would be hard to implement a way to show 'live' what each player in the union is doing..... This would just cause too many problems.

Napisao Milkyy, 27.05.2014 at 05:07

Napisao MediciMan, 26.05.2014 at 21:02

You would be able to see where the people you're unioned with are moving troops.

And what if he doesn't agree with your moves? What if he cancels your moves and does something else? You would need to discuss with the people in the union about how and what to play. Also, your union mates would be using reinforcements and spending money, and this may lead to another member not being able to have enough reinforcements or money to complete an attack, so you would waste units. Plus i think it would be hard to implement a way to show 'live' what each player in the union is doing..... This would just cause too many problems.

Well you would union at your own risk, usually if you were skyping someone. Like I said before, if they're screwing up your troops, kick them from the union (which would be instant).