I am curious if I am mistaken in looking at the changes and seeing that it favours leaders set up, but if people want to change the regime, it seems almost like its more impossible once these changes take effect. Am I wrong in thinking so?

While the changes sound good, I am just trying to see where the ability to remove leadership that people may not want in power for 1+ years is. Seems like we are carefully removing that ability. Which could be problematic for some that enjoy the rogue aspect, or being able to play without being killed at set time periods.

Sorry just trying to look at it from both sides of the fence. Perhaps I am mistaken, this is just general impression reading the multiple changes.

This exploitation has been being used for over a year and was used in many different ways like taking control of the game, removing people who are dangerous to you, and I am sure at some point it was also used for wars. It seems like the urgency to fix this was not something of high priority and now all this time later it has become normalized as part of the gameplay whether it is technically a loophole or not so I am not sure why that is highlighted so much when everybody uses it.

Moving on from that I understand you want to fix this and no longer allow it but by doing so you are giving complete control to whoever is in power whether it be current or future and no matter who that power is its too much. If you do not want this to be able to be used anymore then I get it but it needs a balance to come with it, if everything is going to be distance based from drug units to gun then the same needs to apply for BGs/Defense, much like your gun would lack due to lacking knowledge of surrounding areas so would BG effectiveness and your own defense/perception to be able to defend yourself.

I think the best suggestion I could give to balance all of this out is to apply the same reduction to BG effectiveness and overall defense that is being applied to the gun loss due to distance. This would balance things out and while yes I understand the argument of "then nobody will leave their home city or their own coast" and that is probably true but if we want realism how many mobsters were leaving their home city to begin with?

I am curious if I am mistaken in looking at the changes and seeing that it favours leaders set up, but if people want to change the regime, it seems almost like its more impossible once these changes take effect. Am I wrong in thinking so?

You're not wrong in thinking that. While this change does affect existing CLs too, it still favors them as they can just send their hitters into another HQ to bypass distance. Rogues don't have the same privilege without sacrificing a ton of proers.

-1 too easy to remain on top.

You're not wrong in thinking that. While this change does affect existing CLs too, it still favors them as they can just send their hitters into another HQ to bypass distance. Rogues don't have the same privilege without sacrificing a ton of proers.

 

-1 too easy to remain on top.

I take it you didnt take the time to read the other announcement about that specific change then?  

I take it you didnt take the time to read the other announcement about that specific change then?

No, my mistake, but good! If everything’s patched then there’s no issues with this one.

+1 new distance as a whole could make cities more independent

Upon further review seems I came off a bit rude, id like to change up what a said slightly. "The change itself is just a joke". What I should have said was the change just seems unnecessary with the current state of things. 

I do not agree with this change at all. It's bad enough too much is against the majority of the user base as it stands. 

Also there is nothing stopping a gun from crew hopping to take their shot. We have seen that millions of times. I personally took out a crew hopper who killed a GF who became GF that hour. But the chances of that happening now because of the constant purging is nill.