If we're going to have treaties, can we have a right of passage feature that will allow troops from a friendly nation to cross another friendly nation's territory without actually attacking? I like the idea of a treaty, but I don't like the fact that two allied natios can't back one another up by sending troops to help one another out across one of the nation's territory.

Your person could vacate a path.

Yeah I get that, but I was hoping for something that would supercede the Treaty, but still allow passage and missile fly over. I sent issiles last night and even though the guy is my ally, half of them seemed to have been destroyed before they ever hit their target.

Discussing this with my son brought out an interesting point. If I am allowed to cross Johnny, I could make hundreds of troops, move them towards the west to attack "our" enemy, only to break the treaty after I get set up the way I wanted. Yes, there is a 21 day break, but I could be so entrenched that Johnny couldn't possible build a defense in that time.

I know that this isn't necessarily what would happen but...

If a route is laid out for them to traverse, then you can control where the Frenemy can go and defenses can be build as a precaution/deterrence.

As for the Air Force, I was under the impression that one could fly in friendly air unmolested.

that's a really good point, and why i won't be interested to see that aspect added to the game.

Perhaps a Peace Treaty could not be ended while a Right of Passage treaty is still active?

Add to that no cancellation of a right of passage while units are in RoP'ed territory, and no moving over friendly bases of any sort (turrets, navy, etc.), and that should prevent any betrayal gambits (its my name for them from the Civilization games. RoP, get powerful units next to the cities, break RoP and attack.) Lets you section off sections of your country and create a highway of sort for friendly units moving through your territory.

I think part of this would require you to be extremely careful to whom you granted this right. I understand what you're saying, but at some point, judgement has to come into play in the game. trust is a big factor with us in our alliance - all of us trusting one another implicitly, it didn't start out that way, and so that's a treaty that wouldn't be given lightly.

I could always work around that situation, too. For example, I could program it so that if you break a treaty with a country, any units you have on their land would be destroyed when the treaty expires.

The bigger issue is that the current infrastructure couldn't support this. It would have to be a GT 2.0 feature (along with terrain types).