BGForums

GIJoe597 wrote:I am unclear how this would be different from the existing mechanic of trading ships?

Is not the underlying issue that the ai does not understand when to get rid of designs? It has the means already.

Nerei wrote:Typically what those countries are doing is placing orders at factories in the manufacturing countries.
Take Uganda buying Russian T-90S MBT's. I highly doubt Uganda can build such vehicles themselves and setting up the production locally is in most cases way, way too expensive to be feasible. We are likely talking billions setting up supporting industry. I remember there where claims restarting the F-22 production line would cost nearly $10B and while we can argue if that might be accurate for the US it really would be in a country without any significant aerospace industry.
On top of that the cost of each unit will likely be significantly higher. Japanese military aircraft manufacture is a good example of this.


In most cases if there are any "local" production it tends to be Ikea style knock-down kits that the recipient country then builds a "factory" to assemble. It cost a fraction of an actual production line and politicians can look good having generated workplaces and "industry". Such facilities can later be used for servicing vehicles (with imported parts).
Such factories can be ignored beyond what the game already have with traded units suffering casualties you then have to repair (and are provided the resources to do so).

I honestly do not think having a tech requirement to buying designs is a bad thing. If you already got them then we can assume you have the infrastructure in place to build the designs and if not we can assume the cost is going to into establishing the supporting industry the production of advanced military hardware requires.

Having a diplomatic option to buy factory production slots with a friendly country would go a long way to covering arms trade. The remaining part would indeed be selling finished armament.


The real restriction though is what other countries will sell you.
Ugandas T-90S order was placed before the Armata was revealed from what I remember but let us pretend it was not. Would Russia have been willing to sell their fancy new MBT with a lot of new innovations build into it to a 3rd party country like that? Probably not. You can also consider that in the past when Russia was selling M variants of the T-72 they where selling downgraded tanks.

Balthagor wrote:Or borrow, maybe for "a year".

@SGTScuba, if you find an old thread, please quote Nerei's post into it.

Balthagor wrote: ↑May 06 2020 Thanks, I've reviewed the ticket. It's still on our wishlist so the idea has not been rejected. I've added a comment about potential SR Next Gen work.

SGTscuba wrote: ↑May 06 2020

Balthagor wrote: ↑May 06 2020 Thanks, I've reviewed the ticket. It's still on our wishlist so the idea has not been rejected. I've added a comment about potential SR Next Gen work.

Nice!

Rosalis wrote: ↑May 16 2020 Its good idea until western powers buy up all the eastern equipment, because they dont have the designs, but got the money to do so. Then its very bad and defeat the purpose of having unique unit designs.

This system as proposed by the rest is too generic. Netherlands doesnt buy cw units from eastern europe, they buy very advanced AA units from USA, tanks from Germany, planes from USA, etc. etc. etc. From their allies not random nations that keep building old units.

That would be step 1, AI stop building useless 70 year old units and step 2 scrapping them. Else the number of deployed units will increase, but its basicly just lagging the game. No point in overflooding the airfields with stuff that get 1 shot.

Nations should only export their excess units. Right now not only with units but also with resources nations export old cw units to Netherlands for example and then build even worse units. Its a loss loss at that point.