Get Timers Now!
X
 
Mar 28 - 13:41:49
-1
Page: [ <<< - < ] 1 2 3 4 [ > - >>> ]
Wars not war anymore Started by: Vincent-Valentine on Mar 01, '19 21:48

How quickly we all forget that not even a year ago this whole thing came to a head and most everyone died in a three day war.

Report Post Tip

Yea but the wars were done in take down cycles, the last real war I can remember was probably DeadlySin and Phil_Steak vs Odin and Pratster

Now that was a damn war

Also how can you forget the Roman Prem wars and even trying to take down Stamina, or how about Sho.

This is MR History, things old players never forget...yet...now days every "war" is forgettable beyond it shaping power which is forgotten pretty quickly when the new power does the same things the last did.

Report Post Tips: 1 / Total: $20,000 Tip
Roman was an amazing leader and strategist! But yeah honestly none of these powers that take over now even have a real identity beyond the last one. The just play the old purge cycle games that the last regime played over and over again
Report Post Tips: 1 / Total: $20,000 Tip

For the first time ever, I feel justified in saying that your best solution is to rank up and change it.

Because here's the thing. Everyone at the top runs this world how they see fit. And most of them run the world for longevity. If you want to see wars that last for days, Find a way to make it possible. Because right now, The godfathers (and I include myself in this assessment), run our wars to protect our people to best effect.

Report Post Tips: 1 / Total: $20,000 Tip

Ralph, you can't "find" a way to make wars last, what are you going to do? Tell people they can only build up to 500 to implement BG shooting? Lol come on we all know you aren't going to ever be able to limit the players which is why he brought in a suggestion thread to see what Squishy would be willing to consider to make a better system where people can build and actually get a chance to fight and not get wiped randomly as they are sleeping.

Report Post Tip
^ Yeah... honestly “Ranking up and changing things” doesn’t work when I make a thread trying to pull ideas from the community to collectively try to find a system of mechanics that works better for wars. Because the system we have no is too easy to just take another family out, and trust me if I were in your shoes which I have been many times over I’d do the same thing you’re doing. Takedowns are just the more logical way to fight, it preserves your people and keeps you from having your guys killed.
Report Post Tip

Then perhaps you're considering this backwards. Why are wars the feature? shouldn't war be the last resort? What about...oh, i don't know, diplomacy?

Report Post Tip
No disrespect intended but politics aren’t something I see very often anymore, it’s literally just a GF or two takes control then they put puppets up all over the nation, then slowly kill them off until the rest of them finally decide to kill the GF. It’s the only way this game is played anymore, very seldomly do we get any creditable leaders that know how to actually formulate a sustainable plan to build themselves they doesn’t just involve purging anyone who isn’t them and installing puppets in their previous place, with the intentions to kill them later.
Report Post Tips: 1 / Total: $30,000 Tip

I don't disagree, and I take no offense. But consider something. A decent run of diplomacy does not need to start at the godfathers. In fact, I would respectfully suggest that you don't even need to rank up to do something about it. 

Speak to someone from another city, Make a contact.  Don't think to big, start small, perhaps some mutual work with drugs or OCs. Leave guns out of it, and build a working relationship based on mutual profit. 

go from there.

Report Post Tips: 1 / Total: $100,000 Tip
Oh I understand that but this doesn’t affect anything large scale, as wel doesn’t help the topic at hand that war isn’t war. I know plenty of other mafiosos around the nation doesn’t mean when it comes time for My city to be taken doewn that anything will be any different that all fall roughly the same way
Report Post Tip

Diplomacy is fine and all but simple fact is war is still a feature and while we aren't saying it needs to be the prime feature but when some people who can't dedicate all their time to this game take say 5-6 months to build a cap gun the feature needs to be fun and give them a chance not get swept randomly without any chance of defending themselves.

That is basically what we want to try to change.

Report Post Tip
Exactly I just want people to have a chance when war comes, give the attackers a good fight and make them feel the weight of a war when they choose to take that kind of action. No war is fought without loss and I feel that we have forgotten just how much is at stake when you attack someone
Report Post Tip

For the first time ever, I feel justified in saying that your best solution is to rank up and change it. - ralph_lombino

 

No war is fought without loss and I feel that we have forgotten just how much is at stake when you attack someone - Vincent-Valentine

I'd like to quote Vincent as a reason why what Ralph suggested is not the solution. If you want wars that drag out, requiring endurance and tactics to create a thriling and demanding experience full of intrigue... the best thing is to strike first, while you are far from confident things will turn out in your favour.

It's best to build killer guns and motivation, but strike before those who are further than you recognise you as a potential risk.
Instead, if you consider them a potential risk, shoot them. In the meantime accept the risk that their remaining loyal soldiers might fight you to the death. The good thing about being an attacking underdog is that your sizeable opponent most likely grew fat and lazy, expecting people to be placed in front of their crosshairs. The size of their operation would still form a challenge, but chaos will often fill their ranks, allowing for a war that can actually be considered as a battle.

Report Post Tip

There is no such thing as wars these days. I've read everyone's with the exception of a novel on page one. 

 

Want a real war? You know how we can't pick pocket a player because they are not online? Apply this code to the paranoid who insist on wipeouts.

Report Post Tips: 2 / Total: $150,000 Tip

Now that's an interesting idea AntiSocialism.  I haven't fully thought about this idea but at first glance that sounds like quite the interesting idea at first glance!  You can't pickpocket someone without them being around, you can't shoot them without them being around...  Now how would you deal with IAs at that point though?  Would HQ wacks be exempt?  That would be something to think about honestly and main downside I would think of right off.

Report Post Tip
I think HQ Waco’s or maybe IA for more than 7 days
Report Post Tip

Now we got a decent dialogue going. (Although my last idea was praised and not implemented) Thanks Katherine_Pryde for your time, input and questions. HQ attacks would definitely be exempted. That there makes it more interesting and costly. As for IA"S I ask why waste a bullet in times of war?

Report Post Tip

Well no, you wouldn't shoot the ias in time of war...  But if you make a widespread rule that you can't shoot anyone who is offline then that would apply to IAs.  But if HQ wacks were exempt then that would make for an interesting idea indeed!  But I have no more than that to add.  <3

Report Post Tip

What if the wackback death(WBD) rate was increased for attacking higher ranks when the lower ranks were still alive.

If a CL has 1 consigliere, 2 boss, 4 capo and 6 made men under them, then the  WBD % on hitting the CL first can be something like :

(1*a) + (2*b) + (4*c)+ (6*d)

a,b,c and d are weighted numbers with higher ranks like consig having more weight and made men having the least weight.

Similarly a consigliere can be protected by WBD % based on the capos,bosses and made men still alive under them and so on. 

This will ensure that the first hit wont be on a godfather or a CL. They might survive the first wave and fire back at the attackers. This added risk might prevent unnecessary wars/takedowns. At least that's what I think. 

Report Post Tips: 2 / Total: $220,000 Tip

^I really like the suggested idea by Strider. It would be nice to see because if a city did decide to take that risk and attack the GF in the city then they could lose one of their top hitters in the attack.

Report Post Tip

This Forum Is For Non RP Talk About The Game (AKA OOC)
Replying to: Wars not war anymore
Compose Body:

@Mention Notifications: On More info
How much do you want to tip for this post?

Minimum $20,000

(NaN)
G2
G1
L
H
D
C
Private Conversations
0 PLAYERS IN CHANNEL