I was speaking to my leader about this, and he suggested that I bring it up here.

I think it would be great if changes were able to be made to the sponsors' associates rosters. Suppose if Sponsor A has 6 associates under him, and Sponsor B only has 1. Now, the underboss (or whoever the sponsors report to) wants a couple of associates to move from A to B. From what I see, no one in the upper structure or the sponsors is able to do that.

From a roleplay standpoint, if the boss has her or his HQ set up with a proper structure, it would tie in better if the associates under the sponsors reflect that of the structure. And since sponsors already have their own logos/badges, this could work really well.

How it stands now, it seems like the sponsor is simply whoever invited you to be a member of the family, which in my view doesn't really seem like much. Even though in real life the person who sponsors you is in charge of you, it may be too limiting to only give those with certain positions the power to invite when we are on the same platform playing in different time zones and having different times of availability online. 

Firstly I don't think you can actually have 6 associates but that's not important. Why would an underboss even want the associates to move from one sponsor to the other? I don't see a reason that would happen. If the 1-associate man wants more associates then he should recruit, if there is enough space in the crew.

Firstly I don't think you can actually have 6 associates but that's not important.

It was just an example...but thanks for getting technical on me. Suppose if Sponsor B is on during a time of day where there are not a lot of potential recruits, and Sponsor A is? That doesn't mean Sponsor B is less worthy of training new members, just that they don't get a lot of opportunity to recruit for them.  If you read what I said about the different time zones and time availability, you would see what I mean easily.

Why would an UB want to fix a crew structure? If a sponsor went on a trip for a couple of weeks, and had taken on a few new people, surely they would need someone to show them the ropes?  If that's the case, why would they be under the person who invited them to be a member if someone else is actually doing the work? That's misrepresentation.

Next...suppose if a newly recruited member doesn't respond well to the sponsor that invited them, but does to someone else? Should they just stay with the sponsor that stayed with them and potentially cause a lot of issues, or should they be transferred to someone who can handle the unique situation better?

There are a lot of scenarios where restructuring would come in handy, just like in any other business.

You don't need to be someone's sponsor to teach them and show you the ropes. But if someone recruited an associate, it should be their choice to give them up or keep them.

Okay it's clear you don't get what I am saying Nello. I guess I'll wait to see if anyone else cares enough to say anything.

I see what you are saying Blaise, but I also see what Nello is saying.

To use the Role play analogy, Sponsor A has 4 associates, sponsor B has none. These Associates that work for Sponsor A are punks he uses on the streets. They aren't in the mafia, they are everyday gang members, street hustlers, house breakers etc. The Underboss would have zero interest in them other than the money they are kicking up for being allowed to work on our patch. If they come into contact with another made man in the family, they are to be introduced as 'A friend of mine'. As time passes, and they become more important to their sponsor, they increase in rank. Until, finally a day comes where with some gentle persuasion from the sponsor, the Don/GF/Family head decides to open the books and make them into the family. From that day on they are introduced to other made men as 'A friend of ours'.

Just going from the Sopranos, there would be grave consequences and repercussions if an underboss reassigned the associate of Sponsor A to Sponsor B. 

I also don't see what you mean about people not being on at the right times to recruit. I'm from the UK, in my short time here I've met people throughout Europe, the Middle east, the Far East, Austrailia and north America. So there are always people playing from accross the world, meaning there are always people playing in every time zone, with regions over lapping. If you genuinely can only play for a short period of time each day, limiting your recruitment ability, then you aren't really the kind of person needed to be a sponsor. If you play 2 hours a day, and your associate plays 6 hours a day, then that's 4 hours a day he's getting help elsewhere anyway. Also, so what if there is friction between the sponsor and the associate, that's life. You don't always work for someone you like. Your decision, is what path to take. Suck it up, and prove your sponsor wrong, do nothing and just coast along, plot your sponsor's downfall, what ever else.

My topic is about having the ability and flexibility to make changes to the sponsor/associate list..not whether an Underboss should be able to change the structure without notice to anyone else. That would be hard to implement, being that there is no slot currently for an UB in the game, and would require a lot of unnecessary coding for that to happen, especially because that wasn't what I was asking for. 

It seems like you guys are fixated on what I said in my initial example of an underboss wanting to make changes, running with that and then negating my whole idea, which I don't really understand at all.

I think I have made it clear as to why having flexibility with the sponsors' structure would come in handy. Are you honestly saying that there has never been changes made to a mafia structure before in mafiareturns? That everyone stays put, no matter what happens?

In the past, I have seen leaders in MR (and and other games to boot) make changes to the caporegime crews within a family structure. I only used the UB for my example because in the game, it was with the help of their undebosses that changes were able to be made. No one got pissed off or got in trouble or got killed. If a member/associate had to be moved for whatever reason it was to the agreement and betterment of the Caporegime and his or her crew, which was better for the family as a whole. Sure, a family can use their own structure and just disregard the sponsor/associate list, but since it's already set up nicely,I just thought it would be nice to go one more step.

The Right Hand & Left Hand positions are readily changed at will  in mafiareturns (meaning it's not locked to the one person until that person dies), and people do utilize that ability. But as we know you can't do that in RL without repercussions.  So the logic saying that

Just going from the Sopranos, there would be grave consequences and repercussions if an underboss reassigned the associate of Sponsor A to Sponsor B.

doesn't really apply here.

All I am saying is, why not have it for the sponsors, too?
 

I also don't see what you mean about people not being on at the right times to recruit.

To clarify what I had said before:

Even though in real life the person who sponsors you is in charge of you, it may be too limiting to only give those with certain positions the power to invite when we are on the same platform playing in different time zones and having different times of availability online.  

and

Suppose if Sponsor B is on during a time of day where there are not a lot of potential recruits, and Sponsor A is? That doesn't mean Sponsor B is less worthy of training new members, just that they don't get a lot of opportunity to recruit for them.

The qualities for a recruiter/sponsor is not necessarily the same as a person who will help a new person be what the family needs them to be.  

If someone has went through the trouble of recruiting an associate, that associate "belongs" to them and it's unfair to give them to someone else. Associates earn good money and if I brought someone to the family, I want that money for myself, not someone else.

And you are entitled to feel that way, Nello.

But just like anything else, ultimately it's up to the crewleader to determine what works best for his or her family in MR. I believe this feature can help - any issues you would have with that would depend on an individual basis within the structure of said family.

What I still fail to understand is why someone would actually feel the need to move an associate from one sponsor to another.

Nello to quote you, "that associate "belongs" to them." 

Wouldn't that mean the sponsor has every right to pass an associate onto someone else if they felt like it? There can be a million reasons why you'd switch. You don't get along? Pass them along. Different time zones? Pass them to a different zone. 

I don't see why this shouldn't be allowed, and can't really fault Blaise for wanted this to be an option. Personally I'd rather see new associates under someone they like and can get along with then someone they refuse to speak with. 

I can't see how anyone would have a problem with this considering it's completely optional. I think it's a great idea personally.