Oh, so you're like me? You like doing the gamble-gamble every now n' then, or more often? So you're sitting there in X city right, just minding your own p's and q's, hatin' the piss outta the dealer cuz you're down a mill right? And what the fuck happens? The owner of the casino dies. WB, war, retiring, whatever the reason may be, you're out your money, and now have to wait til you can fly to resume yo gamble-gamble. But wait.... There was a war two weeks ago, many of the CL's died...Oh, there's only one or two cities with casinos? DOESN'T THAT SUCK MONKEY DICK!?

My suggestion is a simple one, and one I think many hitters who gamble, and all the gamblers will agree with. Cities that are currently unoccupied (LV/CH atm) should have admin owned casino's in them. Every city used to have one before they became user-owned, and I think that it'd be cool to see them in cities with no CL's.

They would be ran exactly like a user-owned casino, with the max bet being 200k on Blackjack, 35k on roulette and ....whatever the fuck it's at for craps/slots. They can not be bankrupted. They would shut down the minute a crewleader set up in that city.

Pro's: Will give many more places to gamble at, which gamblers like.
Will not restrict people's flight patterns.
Will take money out of the game. (For the majority of the part, there are obviously some of us degenerate gamblers who will come out ahead).

Con's: ...Waiting to hear those!

Damn dude i like that idea!! It would be really great to have casino in empty cities!

Whilst I don't want to encourage your blatant gambling problem, I've got to say this is a good idea.

Personally not a gambling junkie but i definitey like this idea

Lol!  As a gambling addict myself...I must agree.  Maybe a small conference room too for Gamblers Anonymous would be an idea.  

Con:

it woulc create less traffic for any Person that had a casino if there were one in every city, thus creating less income for those CL's. In my oppinion it simply would not be fair for those that have been able to attain a casino. 

How do you figure so? For one, there's not many out there that I know of who fly to a city based on whether or not it has a casino (myself, Striphe...Maybe a couple others if that?) so that theory's albeit gone out the proverbial window...

For two, since when has fairness really been a big concern in the mafia? If there's no Organized Crime in LV at a particular time, you're still damn sure as a nun's a virgin going to find a casino there, eh?

Shrugs. 5-1 so far, I'd love to hear others thoughts! :D

I would like to say that it is a great city ,if it has all, that the cities have to offer.RIA'S,buy and sell drugs for profits,and casino's,,,If this is available to all members .they will be more enthused on flying there and doing their business in that city ,lets make MR - a great game families,ty GrizzlySon.

I do have a few concerns with this one.

1) Wouldn't the administration just be funding the potential for users to make even more money and thus be introducing a new element to further inflate the economy?

2) Wouldn't this reduce the likelihood of people travelling to the cities where users have casinos solely for the purpose of playing them?

3) Given how expensive casinos are, shouldn't those users reap the rewards of having something of a monopoly on the market?

Stick with me on this as I'm not 100% sure on the casino facility as I've never owned one, but I assume from what you're saying that you can only own a casino in a city where your family is based? Would a better solution then not be for the option to own a casino in any city, provided that you only own one at any time?

It could add in the addition of one family bankrolling someone else within their organization to own a casino and the whole host of roleplay potential that comes with it.

1 - Technically, I suppose you could look at it that way, but in all reality there's a house edge on every casino, so really money's going to be flowing out of the game.

2 - Yes it would, however, as previously stated, how many people truly fly to a city solely based on whether it has a casino or not?

3 - I will agree with you there somewhat, though they're already reaping the reward of all us degenerate gamblers going there constantly and them getting our money. (For the most part they get our money, obviously there's going to be a few lucky players who come out ahead...But you know what they say, the house ALWAYS wins in the end.)

I do like the idea of expanding where users can purchase a casino, but really we're not going to see CL A from City B toss up a casino in City D if City D has a CL in it already. It'd be stepping on toes, encroaching territories, however you want to word it. Though if they were allowed with no repercussions to set one up in an empty city, I think it could work.

Obviously I still prefer my idea :p

My main area of concern is that people will gamble their money and in some instances, lose it away in a non-CL owned city, thus preventing them from gambling that money away in a CL-owned Casino.

 

I actually think that would be a positive change Phil, though I do see the point in that its expensive for the CL to purchase theirs and thus they wish to make that money back, and more. I think the option mentioned by that Grinning fella would be preferable, as opposed to Admin Casinos, expand the ability for all users to open a Casino in ANY city.

Though that option does currently appear, I dont know if in error is presented if you try and buy one. In fact, i'll just check that right now by flying to Chicago and buying one for shits and giggles...

You must be in home city to buy a casino.

Well there we go, that answers that question.

I see no problem with the expansion of allowing this.

I think the idea of allowing people to setup casino's in other cities would be a good idea so long as they only own 1 casino.

At least this way empty cities won't be completely devoid of activity. If a city isn't empty you would obviously have to get permission from the person who runs that city.

The only down side I see with this is if a casino is setup within an empty city the leadership may be more reluctant to auth a leader there.

Which is why we are currently considering a suggestion regarding encouraging authorisations in unoccupied cities!

The only down side I see with this is if a casino is setup within an empty city the leadership may be more reluctant to auth a leader there.

On the contrary. I think it encourages the city to be filled.

e.g. PH wipe out Chicago and now own it, but havn't authed anyone; Someone from NY decides to purchase a Casino in Chicago. Now PH aren't making any money off a city they could have authed a leader in, this could encourage them to get someone from their side over in the city to start earning them some money, or at the least possibly front their own Casino in the city to compete.

The cities named above are examples only.