There is a difference between would and should Should + the base form (eat, buy, walk, etc) is a modal verb that is used to express recommendations or advice for the present or future. It 1. I should exercise more. 2. You should buy water 3. They should go home. It can also be used to talk about advice for actions in the past by using should + have + past participle 1. I should have exercised more. 2. You should have bought water. 3. They should have gone home. Would is most commonly used with the second and third conditional 2nd Conditional- Things that are not probable If + past simple, would + base form 1.If I had a million computers, I would teach a million students. 2. If she talked to me, I would be happy. 3rd Conditional (When you talk about two actions in the past being different) If +subject + had +past participle, subject +would+ have + past participle 1. If I had studied, I would have received a good grade. 2. If she had bought food, she wouldn't have driven home. Lastly, you can use the second half of the second conditional to make sentences expressing future possibility/things that aren't probable. Would + base form I would love to travel. She would try to that. I would like to go there. Hope that helps.

There is a difference between would and should, so it's not really a preference issue. It depends on what you are trying to express in your sentence. example: We would help you if we were able to, but we do no have the ability to do so. We should have helped you since we have the ability to do so, but we would not help you because we do not like you.

so it is not a mistake to say we would, if we want to describe our conditional possibility to do something, isn't it?

thanks all for help

we would help you , but we have no time. i know we should help you, but we have no time. we are sorry.