I want to transfer my troops to another person in a FFA, its possible?

If there's gift cards you can give a territory to someone and they could gift it back after transferring the units elsewhere.

Other then that I don't think there's any way to do that.

Don't play FFA games if you want alliances...

lol +1 nerko

Don't play FFA games if you *DON'T* want alliances

fixed it for you.

Okay, I realize I'm throwing gasoline on a fire here but I simply don't understand not utilizing some form of diplomacy in ffas. Expecting a player not to work out border truces, NAPs and/or share information and just blindly attack everyone like an idiot seems silly to me.

I understand that a rich machiavaellian tapestry is not for everyone but that's no reason to look down on people just because they don't play the game your way.

The main difference between people who don't like diplomacy and people who accept it is that when you beat me I don't bitch and moan that you beat me 'the wrong way'

Oh and if you go to advanced options when you bring up your attack it will give you an option to transfer troops.

this function to transfer only doesnt work that way emgzapper if u read the wiki and test its in a FFA or other team u would discover that its only for your self or your teammates the way wiki explain

ps:sorry for my bad english

ah I see, my bad. Never actually tried it.

+1 emgzapper

EMG... the transfer only is designed to let you move smaller armies into territories under threat of attack and not risk wasting them on an attack.

Before anyone asks, adding an option to transfer troops to an enemy (or a temporary ally, depending on the way you look at it) is far from trivial. Not so much because it's difficult to code, but because it's difficult to define in the user interface.

Maybe an example will make things a little more clear. Let's say we have a FFA with four players: A, B, C and D. Player A controls territory X and player B controls territory Y (X and Y are connected).
Now, A wants to transfer some troops to B (see last paragraph for possible reasons). He could give a "transfer troops to enemy" order. But what happens if player B loses controls of his territory Y before that transfer takes place? Maybe player C conquers it before the order happens. As far as the game cares, both B and C are enemies and the same rules apply to both of them; suddenly C gets a bunch of extra armies!
Maybe I'm in a fierce fight with player C and I don't really care whether B or D opens a new front (with armies they got from me), as long as someone does. So then I'd have to be able to specify "transfer to B or D, attack C". We're getting very close to changing the interface from:

Attack or transfer
Attack only
Transfer only
Treat teammates as enemies

to:

If player A controls the territory:
Attack
Transfer
Cancel
If player B controls the territory:
Attack
Transfer
Cancel
...
If player X controls the territory:
Attack
Transfer
Cancel

The only option which doesn't make sense is "Attack" for "I control the territory". All other options could at some point be useful. Can we agree this would get "slightly unwieldy" in a FFA 24 game?

Okay, so why would you donate armies to an enemy? Because the enemy of my enemy is my ally (or, at least, the enemy of my biggest enemy is not my first priority to fight). If one player is getting very strong, it might be in your own best interest to keep other players alive a little longer. Remember, each player has a base income of 5; if you defeat them (which takes armies and time, even if they would cooperate) and take over all their bonuses, the total number of reinforcements your "big enemy" has to deal with still decreases by five. Giving a weak enemy a little boost, so he can help you keep the stronger enemy busy might actually make sense.

hmmm...after thinking, maybe its not a good idea because player would enter in a FFA with fake accounts to help them