Introduce an ‘Organized Hit’ option.

Basic: The Idea for this is that you get maybe 5-10 hitters together, take their guns and combine them in some way for one single hit.

Roleplay/Reality: In real life, you don’t try to go attack a Godfather with ~250 bodyguards all by your onsies.. you bring your friends. I know everyone can say ‘well you can have people shoot bodyguards’ But in reality you wouldn’t have your hitters going to shoot 1 or 2 bodyguards at a time. You’d take 7 of your friends and blaze straight for the target.

Math: Of course it would be a bit crazy to just add everyone’s guns together for the hit, So I suggest maybe cutting all the stats by 25-50%, then combining them.

EG: 5 players with 300 kill guns get together, they can now shoot the same as one person with a 750 kill gun. (150*5=750)

Pros: It adds an extra level of coordination that reaps valuable benefits. It makes things more realistic. It gets rid of ‘invincibility’. People Will no longer have a reason to whine about bodyguards.

Cons: Big players can die more easily (sorry guys)

Impact: With a more complicated wack system like this takedowns and even defenses will be easier, Instead of the fate of the entire game weighing on 1%’s from PWers, Number of Bodyguards, And sizes of bank accounts. It will be based upon coordination and manpower/alliances.

Some people may cry ‘This defeats the purpose of BGs because it makes them invalid if any group of people can just get together and hit someone at the cap.

My answer to that? ‘Good’

If 5+ dons/consigs/Bosses with guns above 3-400 kills wants a man dead, then god damnit they should have the ability to come together and hit someone… This is a valid compromise to ‘Nerf the shooting ability’ or ‘Nerf the BGs’ or the more asinine ‘cap the bank accounts’ arguments… This would make it so you don’t have to do any of those things. People can still grow their guns (although there will be less need if you have the capacity to build relationships in game) AND people can still have their ridiculous amount of bodyguards to protect them with a clickmonkey with an axe to grind. 

Comments, Questions, Ideas?

I believe I jokingly brought up this suggestion several years back as a way to demonstrate how the ability to move money around and 'stack up' multiple people's defense bonuses onto one super-defender made defense stronger than offense in the long term.



Rethinking it, I'm not so sure that this is a bad idea provided that some serious safeguards such as maximum number of people in a single "group attack" and the likes were also added. I'm not sure what the appropriate safeguards would be though. Here are some quick thoughts: Gun bonuses from ranks and positions and the likes would have to be culled out of the equation because otherwise you could get "free skill" by having pro wackers join the attempt -- I would think the starting point for adding things together would have to be something simple like "trained gun skill" (the excess above when they were able to hit the rifle range last) for each person.

I assume with the system you're envisioning, everyone involved in such an attempt would all lose any protection against being wacked afterward, and that they would have to re-organize and re-attempt as a group between attempts? Or would they have a "leader refresh" sort of thing, where one person could hammer the button until all are able to shoot together?

Lots of details about the mechanics of this to be hammered out here before I even consider it a complete suggestion, to be brutally honest. But the idea seems worth thinking through to the conclusion before it gets dismissed. Would love to hear other people's thoughts on how the mechanics might be worked out to balance something like this -- or their opinions about whether it can be balanced.


Parting thought: this seems like this could well end up with everyone always taking pro shots in wars, which might lead to even more of an "everyone dies to 1% and the winner is a dice roll" problem. How do we deal with that?

Gun Bonuses: I'm not currently aware what the gun bonuses are for rank other than the substansial 'Godfather Bonus' I've heard a bit about... But yes I think that a proper formula should be worked out for that sort of thing. I was thinking as i said, You take the after max gun stats, maybe cut them in half for each member.

when you say "free skill having pro wackers join the attempt" I dont necessarily follow you there to be honest.

Trained gun skill would be exactly what i would base the numbers off of. 

Now, the thoughts of a leader refresh sort of thing I hadn't thought about. But I would advocate for that. Where one person hammers the button and is the 'mastermind' Sortof like with OC's

Now for the number of people allowed in the wack attempt, I would say a cap of 5-10 would suffice (Possibly the mastermind's rank could effect this??)

I honestly believe anything above 10 would be unbalanced. 

On to protection and such: I would call this a wack attempt from all five people. I would say that every single member loses their Pro, and Uses their shot. To balance out the risk/reward it's only fair.

I think there are two major problems with the bodyguard system in place:

1. People feel there can be no change and that 'rank up and do something about it' is no longer valid. With proper politics and coordination a group hit silences those complaints

(eg: Godfather with 250 Bodyguards, He's a wanker. Loads of enemies. He certainly wont let anyone get to godfather because... he's a wanker. So, what are people to do? 'Rank up and do something'. Okay, instead lets get 7 people ranked to capo/boss and accumulate 400 kills each, (7*200=1400) So that's a 1400 kill shot now. Should be enough to take out the big man depending on some other variables of course.)

2. One person with a bank balance longer than their birth date can technically 'live forever' Leaving a rogue out there for an intense amount of time. It's bad enough that Pro wackers prolong these wars for what seems to be indefinitely at times, It's really troubling to see someone can just basically laugh in the faces of the game's biggest guns, no matter how outnumbered or outgunned just because they can keep replacing bodyguards, This silences that complaint as well, because with a nice group of hitters, you can hit almost anything.

(eg Someone clickmonkey that hates everyone goes rogue and just decides 'meh imma random wack everyone' No one can hit him because he plays 25 hours a day and has a bank account longer than his social security number plus about 100 credits he bought yesterday. Now, he can go around killing everyone in sight until the country gets enough people together to kill his bodyguards (even though he can buy more), Kill his proers, and wait until he guns down another person. Instead of this frustration, you get together a team from every crew, (same numbers from above) and you just refresh on him, maybe have some of the young guns PW hunt.)

I see people defending the bodyguard cap at it's current high amount, with the fact that people can BG wack. But that does not answer the problem of a person that's stacked say 500million dollars or what have you. He can just buy new bodyguards. and if you think 500mil is a ludacris number, I'll tell you to look at the stats page, and mention that about 1billion dollars of effective currency was lost in this previous war. Methinks it had quite a bit to do with purchasing bodyguards. Plus I'll point to the credit market where prices have largely deflated, Seems to me some folks found it necessary to SELL massive amounts of credits, even though the smart thing to do is stock up on them incase of death. Only reason to sell all your credits during wars is for?... buying of bodyguards 'funds for the war effort'

So i do believe this is a bit of a middleground without destroying the BG system, without destroying the Gun skill system, and stopping quite a lot of complaining about both the bodyguard and gun system. Plus it lets people smile and say 'rank up and do something about it' and i like that phrase a lot...

Some interesting thoughts brought up here, but I would like you all to give it some thought from the other side.

A number of thing were brought into play to counter excessive BG stacking, multiple BG shots from professional wackers, BG level caps just to name two of them.

One thing concerns me more than anything is people want to make it easier to kill people who put in a hell of a lot of work, that should never be the case by any stretch of the imagination.

I truthfully dont like the idea of making people easier to kill... But I do think something needs to change about the way bodyguards sortof make ~70% of the site irrelevant in combat. 

At times it just seems as if there are a multitude of casualties in these wars, and very few shooters. It sortof takes the fun away from a lot of people. (Especially newbies like myself)

For instance, my bloodline has died twice from wars, which is fine - it happens. But the thing is both times I didn't really even get to play a part. Why? I didn't have a gun over 500 kills. To be frank, I didn't have a gun over 200 kills... But the thing is, If this were implimented, I could've been 'used' in one of these group hits. I think it gets some of the less intense more 'casual' Gamers involved, along with silencing all the complaints about bodyguards, which are many. 

Most people know I've always been a philly man, And always will be. So I can say objectively that I'm not here to try and stick it to the acting IWP players or my Godfather, And i'm certainly not here out of spite or revenge. But I can say that I think this would not just make things more realistic and fair, but it would certainly make some of use young ones a bit more enthusiastic. 

Also, on the subject of fairness, This could be a strategic advantage OR disadvantage, You dont know. If the wack fails, you've just wasted the shots of 5-10 medium-heavy hitters AND pro'd your target (who will now be angry and aware that they are an important target)

Also, many other measures for fairness could be implimented. Like a possibility for wackback of MULTIPLE members of the wack team. 

Last bit responding to you Nino on the idea of fairness. It's not really fair for one player that has a slight advantage financially to the others, to take out a multitude of them. I mean the way the game stands currently, Technically an extra 50 million bucks could decide the fate of many many people

(eg One man has 101 bodyguards, a 505 shot gun, and 50 million dollars. He's up against 5 people of the same rank and gun power, They have just 100 bodyguards each, Now, let's say the first man's bodyguards cost 5mil a pop. 4 of the men take out 2 bodyguards each. Moments before the fifth man tries to take the shot the first man buys ten bodyguards and shoots the first man, maybe he's got one proer and gets a pro. Now, there's a great chance that this one man with what we could call a very slight advantage could take out 5 people that put in just as much work for their kills, bodyguards, ranks. But they're all gone, just because of a slight discrepency in funding.)

Now with the group wack, coordination of these 5 people, this man is dead. As he should be - because in my opinion the combined effort, coordination and abilities of five people should definitely trump that of one person. 

I hate to bring this up as well, But it's a definite concern of mine. 

That 50million dollars can be bought with real life money through selling credits. Now personally I dont find it fair that a war could possibly be decided from our credit cards. 

Now I've gone on a bit of a rant, but i've included a valid hypothetical in my opinion. Hope I have stayed on track or at least close to it. Thank you guys so much for taking a look into the idea, I'm glad we're getting a dialogue going about possible alternatives.

One problem I can see with this is what happens to the kill - whos gun is it added to? If it goes to all that could open up a way for groups of hitters to train their guns without competing for ria's - e.g theres a kill coming up so you invite 5 other family members to the group so you can all gain a kill each off of 1 ria.

Also you dont want to make it so any group of people can take down anybody in the game. Maybe you could lower the amount of people you can invite to the group so that this wont happen... or perhaps you could have a descending scale depending one how many people are in the group in terms of how much % of their gun goes towards the total skill e.g  2 people in the group means 40% each or something (just a random number) compared to say 20% each or something if you have 5 people in the group.

It would be interesting though in terms of underground groups ganging up on targets to take them out in one hit.

Also perhaps some other kind of penalty should be applied to the hitters in the group, maybe a 2 hour attack cooldown timer or something, you cant be attempting every hour or something. Youd also have to work out how wackbacks and whatnot are done too, otherwise if no wackbacks can happen in a group youll just see people doing hits in groups just for the sake of no risk of dying to a gun malfunction.

Thats all i can think of for now, good suggestion. Note that i dont know too much about the whole wack system on the game but these are just some thoughts i got while reading this suggestion.

I like it, and I don't like it. It'd be nice for players to be more involved in a war. A guy who has 200 kills has still worked hard and trained hard and SHOULD feel like he can do something but with the way it is at the moment where people have 1000 kills a guy with 200 is nothing on his own. A lot of the site likes watching the war but most people can't actually take part.

There would have to be a downside to it though. The most obvious one is sort of how it works with training where you then can't shoot again for 6 hours (is it 6? I am a noob so), so if you join in for a Group Hit your wack timer is then set to 6 hours so if you miss you are then useless for the next 6 hours of war.

I like it, but 6 hour cooldown are a bit outrages I think. 2-3 hours should prevent any kind of abuse,besides its risk vs reward. And I dont think any of the group will get the +1 if they succeed, should be the only one who organized it

Ok I have read through all the points and I am still undecided on this suggestion. 

You could make it so max of 4 people can participate, each person gets .25 like you get from a BG hit. Could make it so you need to be say a CL in it and you need auth from your GodFather. It would need a lot of issues resolved before something like this would be even remotely viable.

On the other side of the coin it seems like a really bad idea that could hurt the game. At the minute you need a monster of a gun to shoot someone through 200+ BG's so a lot of people get involved with war by shooting at bg's to make people get down to a number more of the big guns can refresh on. 

If this idea where to come into play you could just stick the biggest guns  togethor to do this and boom war is won before its even started city A starts war on city B by using this feature and killing ciy B's Godfather, the guy with the most bg's and the biggest gun. 

What about rogue underground groups? Right now they can not do that much damage which imho is a good thing, depending on how this potential feature is worked out it could make rogues more powerful.

Last bit responding to you Nino on the idea of fairness. It's not really fair for one player that has a slight advantage financially to the others, to take out a multitude of them. I mean the way the game stands currently, Technically an extra 50 million bucks could decide the fate of many many people

Interesting idea however fundementally flawed.

You can not alone drop a ton of credits onto an account and go out and buy bodyguards.

You have to convert credits to game cash first and foremost and to do that there has to be a market for it. If you want to counter that then you tell your people to pull their cash off the marketplace.


Also you have failed to take into account that what of a godfather who is sat with over $50 mill in his bank, or his city are kicking money up to him to keep him alive, or the chap with $80 mill in his casino?

Should all these be punished because one person has a big ass credit card and can clear it with his wages assuming a market remains for the credits in war time?


To the people complaining that a 200 kill gun can't contribute. If you are being told this then they really shouldn't be running your war. A 200 kill gun has a decent chance of killing off BGs two at a time.

Finally, with how our world is obtaining a gun is currently the easiest it has ever been, in the time it takes to get godfather with MIAs and durden spawns you can quite easily have a 300, 350 kill gun. Do you know how hard it is to minimum time godfather?

You want to make godfathers easy to kill, yet these people will have undoubtedly have put a lot of hard work into an account that is simple suddenly simple to kill. There has to be a give and take for the idea not to dramatically alter the landscape we work from.

Finally, with how our world is obtaining a gun is currently the easiest it has ever been, in the time it takes to get godfather with MIAs and durden spawns you can quite easily have a 300, 350 kill gun. Do you know how hard it is to minimum time godfather?

 

So, Basically What my idea would bring is that 5+ people that are old and experienced enough to be godfathers, would be able to take out another godfather... I mentioned that you would need about 5+ people with 500+ kill guns to pull it off. That's an awful Lot. 

You want to make godfathers easy to kill, yet these people will have undoubtedly have put a lot of hard work into an account that is simple suddenly simple to kill.

 

I dont think the coordination of 5+ people with quite large guns is considered 'simple'. Just more realistic and less time consuming. Currently you cant even hit someone through a capped BG amount... So it changes that thought. 

Should all these be punished because one person has a big ass credit card and can clear it with his wages assuming a market remains for the credits in war time?

 

I haven't been in a lot of wars, but the wars I've been in, there was still a market for credits.. In fact, the first war I was in people bought credits at 600k each.

You have to convert credits to game cash first and foremost and to do that there has to be a market for it. If you want to counter that then you tell your people to pull their cash off the marketplace.

 

There are a number of things wrong with that idea. First of all. You may not have the foresight to do that, There are normally over 100million dollars worth of cash offers for credits. It's not hard to buy them before the opposing leader can get all his members to take the offers down. Also, he could stack the cash beforehand. Also, Not everyone will be online when the leader calls for the cash offers to come down. Also, Not everyone will be against the man looking to buy the cash ('neutral' cities, friends of the buyer) 

I'm not trying to make godfathers easy to kill at all. Your statement that someone who is minimum timing godfather and putting in a lot of work could easily get 300-350 kill gun is exactly my point. They put all of this work in for 90 days, but 1 single godfather has a bit more cash (real or in game) and they can simply never have to worry about these other Godfathers... Especially if they're not Capped. 

What we have currently is the ability to buy your defense. I know you say these godfathers put in a lot of work, I dont deny that one bit. All I'm saying is that it's a bit unbalanced to have the ability to be 'invincible' (more or less) from one day of BG buying. But Someone who has worked for 100 days straight cant do one dent to you but maybe take out two bodyguards and get shot. Currently work and rank has nothing to do with defense, the only thing that matters are bodyguards. 

To the people complaining that a 200 kill gun can't contribute. If you are being told this then they really shouldn't be running your war. A 200 kill gun has a decent chance of killing off BGs two at a time.

Those people are all dead. Why? They didn't have enough bodyguards. Right now you can pick someone off with a decent gun, Lots of time spent, lots of work. Why? they hadn't amassed a large enough amount of wealth. Currently, All you need for 200 Bodyguards is a few hundred bucks in your bank account... (500 credits is all you really need) Now, I dont really see a fairness in that. I've blown five hundred bucks on stupider things...

The point I'm trying to make mostly is, The only people that have ANY defense are the ones that can afford bodyguards. I know there is a proing ability, But other than that people anything less than IWP are helpless

I remember when i died the first time i started talking 'Man, I'm gonna buy myself like... 10-15 bodyguards, Then i'll be safe!' My friend and longtime player of MR replied 'lol anything less than IWP is a waste of time' 

And they're right.

I dont think the coordination of 5+ people with quite large guns is considered 'simple'. Just more realistic and less time consuming. Currently you cant even hit someone through a capped BG amount... So it changes that thought.

Why is that a bad thing? I don't think it *should* be easy to remove someone with that many bodyguards. There should have to be more co-ordination between bodyguard hitters and the person taking the shot. The idea that 5 people could put in a less than top effort to remove me (someone who quite frankly spends most of their time awake playing, training, working hard) is quite sickening, and one I would never like to see introduced.


One more thing...

All I'm saying is that it's a bit unbalanced to have the ability to be 'invincible' (more or less) from one day of BG buying. But Someone who has worked for 100 days straight cant do one dent to you but maybe take out two bodyguards and get shot.

When I set up as a crewleader, I had one bodyguard to my name. My crew/city worked damn hard to earn the money to get me protected with full price bodyguards. Just because *some* people can insta-buy defence, does not mean everyone does.

I will end this by quoting a response in a similar suggestion a while back:

I don't know if I like this idea.

I've died a fair amount in my 2+ years here. I've always appreciated the fact that (outside of the 1%) a single, actual player needed to put in the hard work to kill me. As opposed to three somewhat lazy mofos working together.

Perhaps not my most elegantly stated counterargument, but you get the idea.

Reply by: Kates at Dec 28, '09 23:45

Another thing to think about - the Bodyguard Cap is always kept higher than the biggest gun in the game can hit. What does that say to you? To me, it says they don't want the top accounts to be one-shottable, which is exactly what you are trying to put forward with this suggestion.

The first thing I would say is that nobody is invincible. I believe that had the LV/LA leaders in the recent war got their tactics right, then they would probably have come out victorious. With the right tactics and an appropriate level of firepower, anyone is removable and there are plenty of ways to get that job done. Just because they didn't achieve this with their chosen strategy, doesn't automatically mean that people are invincible.

The BG cap is continually adjusted and already it is much lower than it was a year ago. This continues to be adjusted as required. I believe it is too high and I'm sure that should those people at the cap be killed, then this will be scaled down further and further until it gets to a point where the effort/risk balance is correct. People will then be prepared to go for glory as they aren't too put off by the work involved in doing so, but equally aren't prepared to throw their account away time after time making the work meaningless. When we reach that point, we'll be in the right sort of range.

A common misconception appears to be that it was ever easy to kill Godfathers/Crewleaders and that has never been the case. On original Mafia.org CLs traded shots on each other with over 300 kills (when they were more difficult to accumulate) without succeeding, back in a time of 10 BGs.

On to this suggestion, I personally don't like the idea of guys teaming up and chaining their abilities to overwhelm any individual. The principle of this suggestion is spot on, bring more people into a war, but I don't think this is the right extension of that principle.

The original purpose of BG wacking was to take wars out of the hands of the 10-15 big hitters in a crew and to bring in more little guys. I'm not sure we've achieved that but I disagree that a 200 kill gun is irrelevant. Sure, you aren't going to be able to 'oneshot' a Godfather, but you can damn sure make yourself a nuisance.

I've always said that I believe the goalposts have been moved too far and I stand by that. I would like to see 200-300 kills being a huge, huge weapon rather than a mid level threat. However, with the rate kills can be accumulated, this would see turnover occur probably a little too regularly, even for my taste.

So, a good suggestion, but I'm not sure I can get on board with communal wacking. 7 Capos with 200 kills could absolutely hammer a Godfather's BGs if they had enough pro wackers and I think that is probably right.

Okay, this is my last post because i'm running out of fresh thoughts and ideas.

First, I just want to say that most of the things I'm saying aren't of my personal opinion. I'm simply conveying the opinions of the multitudes of people That I've seen complaining both in IRC and in every thread that even uses the word 'bodyguard cap'... 

I also want to point out that this isn't a thread I made to complain or personally attack the people that are IWP, That's not the case at all. 

In fact, I'm happy that bodyguards help protect my leaders. I'm glad my leaders cant be easily taken out, if I were to make suggestions based upon possible personal gain I'd say let's raise the bodyguard cap by a couple hundred and get rid of durden spawns...

On the other hand though, I dont think my suggestion is outrageous, or making it 'easy' to kill anyone. 5+ players with 500 shot guns all using their shots at the same time, is a pretty impressive thing in my opinion. 

Another note about this suggestion: You can tailor it so it's not overpowered. A few suggestions for that could be:

Require CL/Godfather authorization

Higher Wackback Odds (risk vs reward)

Lower success rates

Maybe the hit could cost money to put together (to 'buy guns' or 'pay cops to stay away')

The last thought I have is... What about if instead of being able to 'one-shot' the target, You take out a large group of bodyguards?

Maybe a group of 5 'professional wackers' Could take out 20-30 bodyguards with this? Maybe you take out 1 bodyguard for every 100 kills between the people in the group. So 5 people with 500 kill guns take out 25 bodyguards. 

There are a lot of different ways to work it. The central idea is a 'new' kind of wack. One that includes multiple people, where not all of them need huge cannons. The point is more to balance this daunting bodyguard 'situation' that I see all these complaints about, not make 'godfathers easy to kill'

That's all I've got for now, Thank you everyone for your input :)

I'm not even going to read all of the other posts in this <.< There are far too many for me. However, I will say straight off that this is a bad idea. The idea suggested in the last post, by Whitey of taking down BGs using the method seems rather solid, however. There are a few reasons I am against a "gangwack" of sorts. 1. There is another game that uses the Jaundies network that has a feature like this, I don't like it on that game either. 2. It's extremely unrealistic. The cops would surely notice this if it were to occur. 3. The final reason is a simple one. If a group of five people that had 500-1000 kills each decided to use this "gangwack" feature, they could easily eliminate anyone in the game with ease.