What is your idea?

In a nutshell just remove bodyguards from a persons profile and make this unknown to the userbase.

Has your idea already been suggested in some form or another before?

I've checked and I can't exactly see this specific thing being mentioned anywhere, sorry if I've missed anything.

What does your idea entail?

The consequence of this is basically so that the userbase can't see it and my premise is basically conjured up because of war times. People can guess that a crewleader or head of a city is going to be well guarded but a newly made man? I don't think so. I think it would make times of war a little more interesting in the fact that people can't easily decide which gun to put on which target.

I do think that you could leave this visible to the rest of the family for instance and other crew leaders in the district/city. That way there is also a chance of treachery on the inside. 

When a person dies does this then show the unemployed BG amount? I don't know if that matters or not. 

What is the positive impact of your idea?

To try and stop this constant first person to shoot wins thing that's going on here. Most people here know how to calculate what they can and cannot shoot, I think a lot of people are starting to get tired of this aspect. So in turn I think this small change could in fact bring about a small element of chance when taking a shot or organising a war effort and that would be a positive.

What is the negative impact of your idea?

The negative is that maybe people like the fact other people can see how well stacked they are with bodyguards and/or maybe people disagree with what I have said thus far and they enjoy the takedown aspect of the game and to remove this feature would take away from the game that they love.

How may your idea affect the rest of the userbase?

I think I've pretty much summed it all up in the previous questions but the userbase would no longer be able to see everyone's bodyguard stats and wars would turn out to be a little different than before (I think). 

Please discuss.

I kind of like it. But Pickpockets would need looking at or it's a simple case of "Dont look in the profile but bg check these 10 people who I think have guns so I can plan a takedown based on results of the PP checks"

Hi James,

That's a good thing isn't it? If I was a crewleader in that situation I would be asking my top guns to keep an eye out for people pickpocketing them and if everyone was getting hit at the same time then I would be on the lookout for anything suspicious.

On the other hand the family who is getting there best pickpocket team together to try and figure out where people stand are putting the work in to find their targets, they should be rewarded for doing their homework.

My personal preference would be to remove both so it is a totally random crapshoot. Maybe remove bgs from PP Defence have pickpocket xp boost something else.

Why is a crapshoot beneficial?

In my experience "WAR" ie both sides actually shooting each other (As in the most recent one or way way back in the day when everyone had to chip in with BG wacks) are the best times on the game. Everyone gets involved. People communicate, even your lower guns matter. Player numbers go up. People rebuild after.

"Take Downs" are to my mind the opposite. Anyone with a Excel sheet can now plan a takedown assuming you are not a moron & have 10+ 'big' guns. It is usually the big guys picking on the smaller guys, to feed their hitters some kills or to 'remain at the top' which imo leads to people rage quitting / not playing until the regime in power eventually leaves. 

Maybe I am just rambling but would be interested to hear others' opinions. I believe 'distance matters' were put in to add a 'random variance' to "Wars" or to make them more risky but that's been in for so long that I think people now have a handle on it. Removing all ways to 'Confirm' a persons level of protection would certainly add a small element of randomness to matters. 

I would be for this, but only if the rebuild changes. Because the impact would be wars will last longer, and we can all see my thoughts on the HQ Attack loop. And no one is going to set up mid-war to combat rebuild. 

I actually like this suggestion. Would move wars to a more realistic vibe - as in a person can shout about ohh look at me in words I'm IWP you can't get me yet maybe they have fuck all. I think this would add more strategy to wars for sure rather then all wake where you need to be done the maths and ready steady shoot. +1 from me

Meant to add I also think it would add an interesting dynamic to the PP options too so again I like it. 

What is the RP logic behind people having 200 bodyguards also?

Can we reduce the numbers but increase the effectiveness?