I think we should be able to loot peoples bank but have a cap on how much u can steal per rank.

that would be fun, especially when GF Roman comes and squishes you for stealing his hard-Robbed moolah... or Godfather TheDean comes and squishes you for stealing his hard-Robbed moolah... or Don Stubbing...

I rest my case

to make my own case. If you come round robbing copious amounts of cash from my bank. Do i get to shoot you? Or do i sit and take it? What happens? Do we get 'no bank looting' tattoos? Frankly, i'm not a fan.

I like this idea as it could be a tactic in a war steal from gf's so they can't buy more bg's love it :P

Steal from their casino not their pockets. There is no point to this really, if you stole from a GF's or a CL's casino what the hell is stopping them from pulling out a cannon and blasting your legs off? What could you say to them, "It was a game option I thought I could do it..." This has been mentioned before and the same replies have been put here as then, a silly idea in my honest opinion.

Banks sorry lol, slash the first statement and put banks where I said Casino :S!!!

Makavelli yes someone does that but as i put it it could be a great help to cities that are pretty screwed to have one last chance and win a war.

What if they keep it in their pockets though? Whose to say the GFs and CLs keep all their money in the bank? in a time of war?

In order for this to conceivably work, a lot of game changes have to come into play. People bank their money now to keep pickpocketers from dipping into their wallets. If you compromise the safety of the bank, there has to be an incentive to bank, be it interest or what not.

There should be a cap on how much someone can rob from a bank, with that cap increasing for each person involved in the heist (with a total cap being a percentage of how much money is in that particular city's bank at the time of the robbery).

The success or 'falure' of the heist could go in three (or more) ways:
1. The party (parties) involve/d have a successful heist and each get their share of the money. This works out fabulously if they can all keep their mouths shut and not blab that they just got a huge score. People with their money banked in the city get a personal from their accountant stating "The First National Bank of (City Name) was robbed at (Timestamp). We are working very hard to recover the funds from this horrible but you have lost $xxxx.xx."

2. The party (parties) involve/d fail at their heist and the money in the bank remains unharmed. These people are put in prison for an amount of time that lets people know these guys did something extra bad and are left to rot, unless their jailbreaking friends have a little spare time on their hands.

3. The party (parties) involve/d fail at their heist and happen to be intercepted by some not so above board coppers. In exchange for their freedom, half of the money is given to the coppers and the rest is split between the heisters. The affected victims get a personal, as stated in the above scenario #1. However... a new tip feature may identify one of the heist participants.

I like scenario three because it leads to a little interaction within the game. An affected 'victim' of the robbery can exact his own justice by killing the person given to him by the tip... or through 'negotiations' that person can spare himself by giving up his compatriots (either truthfully or by pointing fingers). Justice can then be doled out diplomatically... or through the use of a lead projectile lobotomy.

I mean, we shouldn't dismiss this suggestion completely. It may not have been presented in the best possible way... but it does lead to some interesting possibilities if it ever happens to be implemented.

Squishy why do you have to be so good with ideas? I like your idea alot :P

You would have to include a WB possibility if you were to go down this route Squishy, to take account of security or police shoot-outs. I think you may find that the fear of dying for a few lousy K might be the balance you are looking for when it comes to would it be banned outright.

The only way this would work is if it was used during war. Otherwise too many people would end up dead...

Yeah i agree with you KoNvIcT but sure it would be nice having a feature only reserved for wars?