I would have to agree with that, it's a nice well thought out suggestion :P and possibly depending on your rank,cash and maybe how many times you get in jail it's possible when it gets to 100% they just look the other way as they may give you a warning. Although the coders could do it so as a warning you lose 25-50% percent of your money.

Actually Makavelli what you are suggesting is pretty much getting rid of all violence as far as wack and shit goes. Which above all else is the most NECESSARY feature on this game to prevent stagnancy.

Before the last 4 big wars especially the one where Godfather Deimne died. There was horrid stagnancy. I was RHM to a crew with 34 IA members. So wacking is key to this games survival as a user base.

Once every 100 kills the percentage go up by 5% that is not a buzz kill for wackers. It is a risk, it would define who are the big hitters in the game and who are the average who just a few kills here and there.

And what you are saying is there were no big guns before the four wars? There were still massive guns, did that stop stagnacy? No it didn't...

Wait so by making those that kill more run the risk of dying faster that is fair?

And I really have no clue where you got the "no big guns before the four wars". The point I was getting at is if people can't build massive guns i.e. they'd be dying more often from wackbacks and such then it would cause more stagnancy.

Sorry thought I was clear enough already.

I was just thinking and this will not help any one except other cities as they would more easily find who the hitters are and then wars would be even shorter :( and with this what happens if you HQ someone as that's wacking but you haven't talked about that.

Most people have an idea of who is hitting for what city. Let's not be stupid when 300 w/s's go out it's hard to not know.

I know that, But I was meaning they would then know who posers a bigger threat as not every one sends ws's in and seeing one guy constantly jailed (for wacking (successfully)) and one guy wacking once or twice a week, who would you take out first?

McDermott you have actually gone completely off subject can I remind you what we are debating on?

[Idea ooc.
every WS collected by the warden will count towards an evidence meter (maybe1-2%), when the meter gets to 100% you get caught in a raid.
3 things can happen:
prison for a period of time (1-12 hours)
loss of all your money from your federal bank account.
death. (you get one day to appeal.)
you can tip the warden to remove 1 WS worth of evidence (at a cost of $25,000)
If you get caught and sentenced to death, your family has one day to come up with an absurd amount of money (2-3mil) to save you.]

Wackback was never apart of this. She was saying the Warden will decipher the witness statements and keep a record, and once the Warden gets enough WS about a certain someone, the cops will come down on him.

Death atm is the lowest percentage, I suggested all percentages be raised by 5% every time the Warden gets 100 WS or whatever the target number is. How does this stop hitter's? There was also a suggestion for families to decide whether to save them or not from death? 15 million would make it a life or death decision. Now continue debating about stagnancy now you know what you are debating...

Aye but if the % increases then the cops would come down on said mobster more and more and more. Thus giving a better chance of dying. 1% obviously is already enough but adding in 1% then adding more and more overtime is even worse.

Mind you I do know what we're debating but I'm going at all angles. It's a good idea but it'd be horrid to keep raising the risks.