Hello, I think I understand disloyalty, however as I understand it, well it dosn't make much sense. So I just wanted to clear things up.

The way I see it is that crew leaders who control many aspects of the smaller player have all this power over their members. They control rank hence units, they control if the user has a gun (quite annoyingly in my oppinion), how much is tributed (at a crew level), and if that player lives or not.

Because of this high level of power, the gods made dishonesty. Which means (from what I gather) unhappy members sit and check their dishonesty dropdown, and well nothing happens. Eventually there is a war, and their CL is easier to kill. So for the unhapyness they felt their crew leader dies. But that doesn't help much because you are in the war too, so you probably die too. Your crew leader probably is also completely ignorant to the fact he/she was disliked this much that this is why they are here.

It feels like if you are that unhappy, you might as well suicide and start again.

The upcoming Graduated Tribute update will probably be an additional way for you to show your crewleader you are unhappy. 

I'm not totally sure what this post is about, is it about the lack of features available to show your CL you are unhappy? Or are you simply trying to point out that the disloyal dropdown is useless?

If it's the latter then my only response is that this being a non-linear type Role-playing game - there's no harm in having the feature. It's there - it is used for a certain perpose, and it is somewhat effective in it's accomplishment of that purpose (which is to not offer, or hinder, the stats of your crewleader)

Personally, I tend to agree with you. If you dislike your CL that much - go someplace else. But just because I'll never use that feature doesn't mean that it isn't or won't ever be used...

The post is generally a query to see if I am missing something about the feature, because as I pointed out it seems the way I have described it rather pointless (other than perhaps you are holding a slot that a loyal player would be holding).
It seems a long drawn out suicide. It feels it is intended to help the crew member defend against crew leaders they are not happy with, however doesn't really seem to help...

I do agree there is a lack of defence to players regarding their crew leader but if the Graduated Tribute feature comes through will be an excellent counter balance.

However the query, was regarding if I understood the feature correctly. Which it seems I do.

Yeah, I think you've hit most or all of the major points (that I've heard) from coders and other players.

The only other thing that I would point out is that often times players truly aren't loyal but must stay in their place momentarily (or do not want to lose the work they put in to their character)

Many times (the majority) of a Leader's crew is left alone after a takedown or other similar situation.

I don't like to name names but one very public instance that comes to mind, that I believe you are probably familiar with, was when Timothy_Petrov was removed by the late Godfather Squidmaster of Chicago. I don't know all the details - but what I do know is that if there were members of his crew set to 'disloyal' for whatever reason - it would have made him easier to remove. This is just one example of where 'disloyal' members helped (if that's the right term) their situation. 

It has also been stated numerous times on IRC that the statistical role the disloyal/loyal feature plays is pretty substantial. How substantial? I don't know, I'm not sure anybody but 'the gods' know. But, it could mean the difference between a long dragged out war with many deaths - and a simple 'change of the guard' done in one quick swoop.

It may seem useless - but when used under the right circumstances I'm sure it could be more than useful...

Hmm, I guess I do not understand so much the wacking and war things work, but I guess the feature makes sense regarding inter-city wars.

Thanks.

One could also say it's useful strategically to take down an extremely powerful foe. With planning, one could insert members into the families of the intended victim. These members would play normally, not arousing suspicion, but click Disloyal on their account. Do this with enough people, and you can effectively weight the odds in your favor. This may also work by paying off existing members with promises of their own families, or money.

It's a strategic advantage, and one that I fully believe in.

As I understand how loyal/disloyal works, a member deciding on disloyal does not actually hurt a CL's chances to defend an attack, so I'm not sure where Anubis' strategy comes from.  I was under the assumption that this feature really only has an effect on offensive capabilities, or lack thereof.

I haven't been around long though, so my assumptions may be full of hot air.

Without going into the details of your assumptions OutkastReturns, I'm in no position to either confirm or deny them, I'm not sure why you assumed Anubis was speaking only of defensive strength (I personally didn't take that from what he said) or how you think hurting a foes offensive capabilities would not give a strategic advantage (weighing the odds in your favour, which were the words used) in a war?

His statement regarding infiltrating members into one's family to mark disloyal as a preemptive action to an attack, is where I got defensive strength from.

But, I suppose I was thinking from a defensive standpoint, as my bloodline has never been in a war where we were the aggressors.  It would indeed give an advantage offensively, but I ponder how much an advantage, given my assumption that the feature only affects one particular segment of the family.

As I type this, I wonder if this isn't a discussion better left for the alleyways, as I find myself changing my wording often as to not 'divulge' information I may or may not have correct.

In the end, I believe this feature works as it is intended.