Giving Away Factories/IC

[77Hawk77]

It was like that in HoI III with lend lease, but the devs were unhappy with that. Rather than that (unrealistic and unbalanced) approach they decided to let you send real equipment with lend lease which can potentially intercepted by the enemy, so it isnt a 100% safe way to support other nations. I highly disagree that basicly giving away factories should be possible, since that would make lend-lease rather pointless and would make convoy raiding very easiely avoidable.

What if you could send IC at a reduced effeciency, and also it had to be shipped if possible.

We understand it, we just think it's a bad gameplay element.
Lend lease in HOI3 worked like that, and I feel like it wasn't good for the game at all.

I don't think it was great either, but i'd still like a real currency that could be exchanged, and they said civi factories are basically that currency now, though political power like someone suggested would be a really good thing too.

 

[potski]

i'd still like a real currency that could be exchanged, and they said civi factories are basically that currency now, though political power like someone suggested would be a really good thing too.

PP is an internal "currency", how much ability you have to implement changes to your laws, ministers, NFs, fabricate claims etc. It is based on democracies persuading public opinion or autocracies persuading the ruling elite, plus then implementing the changes through the bureaucrats in government, military circles etc. Even Stalin couldn't just change the trade laws and conscription overnight. He might sign a decree one day, but his bureaucrats can't set up the processes to get all of the extra men from their homes into barracks to start training the next day.

It has no international side to it, and cannot possibly be exchanged.

 

[77Hawk77]

.

PP is an internal "currency", how much ability you have to implement changes to your laws, ministers, NFs, fabricate claims etc. It is based on democracies persuading public opinion or autocracies persuading the ruling elite, plus then implementing the changes through the bureaucrats in government, military circles etc. Even Stalin couldn't just change the trade laws and conscription overnight. He might sign a decree one day, but his bureaucrats can't set up the processes to get all of the extra men from their homes into barracks to start training the next day.

It has no international side to it, and cannot possibly be exchanged.

Probably, I am just concerned that service trade won't be a thing at all, which it has been in every other paradox game.

 

[potski]

You already get the big benefit of recieving experience if your sent equipment is used in battle, which is a massive bonus especially if you are currently at peace. It will be essentially as if you were actively fighting with that equipment yourself.

We've seen volunteer Divs fighting in someone else's war, but not someone fighting with equipment that has been lend leased. Or, more importantly, we have not seen the effect on the sender of the equipment.

Your suggestion would be odd, if correct. If US provides some Shermans to UK, they shouldn't get the same Army Experience as UK. It should be more like the difference between carrying out training exercises and live combat.