| Oct 10 - 18:49:55 |
|
| Post Reply | Post new topic | Page: 1 |
| Pro Shots | Started by: Flippy on May 24, '26 05:31 |
|
I think it would be better business to rid of pro shots. I think a good replacement would be to make available pricey safe houses. So if you own safe houses you're going to have to pay a high price to hide. If you don't own a safe house you're going to have to pay a high price to hide. That should be very easy to change. |
|
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I like this one. |
|
| Reply by: Bebe at May 24, '26 05:38 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| Anyone who prefers a challenge would endorse this. Thank you Bebe. | |
| Reply by: Flippy at May 24, '26 05:41 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Money is pretty much irrelevant, so tying anything to it is unlikely to achieve much. If you remove pros, you essentially eradicate rogues. As they will be 1/2 shots and dead virtually all of the time. That then would restrict all conflict to wars, which seldom occur. Perhaps looking at reducing the length of a pro to speed things up and increase the volume required to protect someone (and therefore the 1% risk) would be a better way of looking at it. |
|
| Reply by: DetroitSimon at May 24, '26 07:48 | |
| Report Post | Tips: 1 / Total: $20,000 Tip |
|
Rogues are invited to the set. I was just in the main lounge addressing another how they closed their eyes not once but twice and let their City be wiped out. Yes rogues came about but can we really call them rouges? To me it was their kin seeking vengeance. I'm rightfully so nobody can argue with that. I have to disagree with you that money is irrelevant. Safe houses are extremely pricey. Pair this with my other suggestion and now we have a challenge. |
|
| Reply by: Flippy at May 24, '26 08:02 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
A challenge to what? The person who most needs a pro is the one who has the greater volume of guns trained on them at any one time. If there are none, then your single individual who just bought a HQ who is not aligned to the established crews (or a rogue in common parlance), is going to die because they can take one or two shots and then the established crews all point their guns at them. Money is irrelevant, and the vast majority of it at any one time is with the established crews. So this suggestion would effectively make the established crews stronger. Is that what you're advocating for? |
|
| Reply by: DetroitSimon at May 24, '26 08:09 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
That is not what I'm saying. The established Crews as you put it, can and have pounced on crews that are not so established. My idea can help any crew. Established or not. All I'm saying is when a man who is made is spotted in the obits let's add a little role play to it. Sirens police are crawling all over the place instead of having 30 people killed in 6 minutes. |
|
| Reply by: Flippy at May 24, '26 08:17 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
The people who would benefit most from pros being removed are those who have control because there are more of them. There are implications to this beyond causing a war rather a takedown. Because of how the game has to be played, crew vs crew conflicts are less frequent than rogues and I think this would make them even more infrequent. |
|
| Reply by: DetroitSimon at May 24, '26 08:28 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
do we not already have safe houses available as properties? |
|
| Reply by: TheTripleDeuce at May 26, '26 01:32 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| Yes and those safe houses give you a wee bit of a chance of being effective. Look I guess I'm just longing for what my kin came upon years ago. Maybe I'm delusional to think it'll happen again. | |
| Reply by: Flippy at May 26, '26 02:08 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Pricey safehouses? BGs are already pricey. I am not a fan of removing pro shots for this idea. |
|
| Reply by: Zephyra at Jul 06, '26 01:36 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| Post Reply | View All Threads | Page: 1 |
Minimum $20,000
