"Mafia Returns and Mafia.org were NEVER about gun training"

Whilst I have some sympathy with the negative views of the NPC crews, this statement is plain wrong.  It might have not been as widespread but I recall hit squads on the old .org where the average hits per hitter was in excess of 150.

Felicity, I'm not jumping on a band wagon, I just don't really have time to come on and keep up as I once did, Sure, I have a few Ideas I might toss out sooner or later, but I can't be online all the time and post all the time, Else I would have said it sooner.

I'm not really saying yes or no to it, only that I wish it wasn't so weighted much, as Glock has said:

2. newer members will be told who they can and cannot shoot.  This
is logical for family heads because the NPC crew is recognized as a
means for training hitters on highly ranked targets.

This is what worries me... I really don't know how to address this problem really, but It is a problem... Every day it gets harder and harder to cause change because if any one not over a certain age tries and ANY one else older doesn't like it... Boom... Dead... I've seen it a thousand times, people are scared of change and will try hard to keep it from happening or shape it to their benefit if there is no stopping it..

Yes, this is what the mafia is about, but we have the problem with drawing in new players and keeping them right now, people come, rank up, get killed and put so much work into their first account creating a second feels like a waist so they move on, I think this is a great Idea, just not a good one for now.. maybe after a restart, or a major major war. but not now. :|

All I guess I'm saying is this:

We need this, We need the games the intrigue, we need the newer attractions, but we need stuff for Base lvl players as well and this is one more game that most basic players, those who don't quite have what it takes to train a gun. *shrugs* maybe I'm the only one who see that, but it's there to my eyes.

Haven't really got much to say about the NPC crew thing, as I don't particularly have any positive or negative feelings on it at all. Yes, it will impact the game; but conversely because (as with crackdowns) it is something all users can benefit from, it doesn't significantly change the playing field.

However, there's a few things that have been brought up that I'd like to comment on:

Mafia Returns and Mafia.org were NEVER about gun training

Absolutely false. It may not have been blatant but that has always been the driving factor in almost everything that happens on this game. Obviously, this game is about power. The primary goal for the vasty majority is to wield power and enjoy the benefits that come with it. Generally, two types of people are remembered/hailed as game greats. The great hitters, and the great leaders..

- Great hitters are remembered, simply, for their fearsome ability to kill things.
- Great leaders are remembered for leading well. Standing up for one's city. Enacting new policies. Even something as simple as longevity. All of these are achievable because of good guns/hitsquads supporting the leadership.

Yes, diplomacy is a good weapon but ultimately every lasting dynasty ever built on this game and org has been done so thanks to the hitsquad acting as the engine that powered the ship.

When basically half of the active characters in the Mafia game are Bosses, Consigs, Dons, and Godfathers.... How can you say that it is a rarity to have to kill one?

Arguably, yes. The amount of high rankers in the game is obscene and the top heavy structure is removed from reality. Ultimately, this is not down to the admins. The ranking structure has not changed from the days where Dons were few and far between. Rather, the mentality and playing style of users has evolved and as such, more high rankers are to be found.

Could the admins force a change here? Yes, of course. The idea of crew promo points has been thrown out, as well as a few less 'official' discussions which have taken place on irc. As far as I'm concerned though, making a knee jerk reaction and altering something so fundamental as the rank structure can only be a bad move. The way forward is to make a measured and unhurried decision on this and obviously implement it at a time when everyone's on an even keel.

All the benefits of warring another actual "Player" family. None of the Risk of return fire from it.

Bad Idea.


An extremely valid point. If anything, the only thing I'd like to see added here is an increased % of wackback. Ultimately as said previously, it's not as though is that one player is not getting an advantage over another because everyone can benefit/. However, an existing issue is the fact that you can train a gun in this manner knowing that codewise there will be zero chance of repercussion. I'm not sure that's a good thing at all.

Razi - in regards to your faster internet worry. Ajax wack is configured that only X number of wack attempts can be processed in a certain time frame. Essentially, there is now a ceiling on how far your connection will get you. I split my time between a 56k dial up modem and 1mb broadband, and I'm confident of the ability to compete with anyone should I be so inclined.

2. newer members will be told who they can and cannot shoot. This is logical for family heads because the NPC crew is recognized as a means for training hitters on highly ranked targets.

Though it's factor, I think this is something admins would step in on. When MIA's were first implemented, Izzy sent out a mail to all the GF's/City leaders to inform that MIA's would not be spawned in cities where the GF's were planning to tax them. I think, if leaders tried to dictate to users which npcs were allowed to be shot, that Izzy/the admins would again stop this from happening

I'm going to do my best to reply to Felicity, although I do admit that she/he ... whoever "they" are.... should take a much longer time to think through things before replying.  I have found many of your "retorts" to be an attempt to misrepresent my statements.  Regardless, I am making an attempt..

This isn't supposed to be the old Mafia.org. This is the beta testing
grounds for the new game that Crooked Studios have been planning for
years to work out all the kinks and bugs. If you've been here for years
as you say, and have been an avid reader of the forums as I have, you
should know that by now.

While it may be true that "Crooked Studios" is creating a game that is separate, distinct, and mutually exclusive from the old Mafia.org, please do not forget Mario's own comments when he initially brought back the old code that .org once had.  If I remember off the top of my head, he stated on the MR website about 2-3 years ago "They (.org admins) changed it horribly.  But now we have finally done it.  Recoded, the old Mafia game we all loved is back"  Much of this is paraphrased but even Mario and Izzy themselves will remember quite clearly what was once reverberated throughout the old Mafia world when MR first came out.  And yes, I have been around since .org's inception along with a few other loyal and dedicated players.  I have just as much time staked into the fate of this place as anyone.  So please don't patronize me on the premise of devotion.

Really? You feel as if every few weeks a random rogue crew popping
up is going to drive people away from the game in droves, eh? I'm not
an 'older' player, but I've been around. NPC crews have no bearing on
me whatsoever. I don't train my gun, I don't wack. If anything, it just
makes me blink twice at the 60 second list when I see a new bold name
crop up. This doesn't send me flying off the rails and stop me from
completing my RPs, or finishing my mails, though. To suggest that it
does is, again, (word of the day:) ridiculous.

Not to mention the fact that it's not REALISTIC? Right, because in
the REAL Mob, no one EVER tried throwing together a crew and moving in
on someone else's territory or business. No, you're right. It was
always inter-continental wars. No one EVER warred someone within their
city. No one ever tried to overthrow someone else's business. Everyone
sat around and discussed things, such as who was taking what city when
it emptied, and who was in control of what market (drugs, alcohol,
gambling, etc.). If anything, this is the most realistic addition we've
had in awhile... and everyone here is wasting their breath trying to
argue the opposite point. Take a long look at the issue, people. And
tell me, now, is it REALLY so far off 'history'?

Wasn't really sure where to begin to reply here.  Your thoughts seem as scattered as they possibly could be.  You're attacking my statements by completely going off on your own tangent.  For example, "No, you're right. It was
always inter-continental wars. No one EVER warred someone within their
city." .... what the hell are you talking about?You seriously lost me at this point in your dialogue.  I know you were making an attempt at sarcasm, but I have no idea why you would imply that I am stating any of what you accused me of stating.  What I claim to be unrealistic is not what you criticized me for making claim to - so I really can't defend anything here as you aren't attacking my statements!  *Retarded - is my "R" word of the day I guess and it accurately summarizes this gibberish you call an argument*

And you have a great understanding of what it is, and what it's
intended to be? You were right alongside the coders as they brought
this game back to life, huh? And I suppose you sit in on all the
meetings with the owners of the game, taking minutes and getting the
inside scoop? Let's face it- you don't know what this game
was meant to be or understand what it was supposed to be. You don't
know anymore than I do, than the kid down the street does, or the Dons
in Philly or Las Vegas do. No one but the owners and creators know the
true vision of the game, so lets not try and belittle other players for
throwing their two cents in, no matter how worthless you seem to think
it may be.

Well, here again is ignorance at its finest.  I have spoken with Izzy (Scott) and Mario on several occasions throughout the years along with many other players from time to time about where the game is going and how it can be improved.  To a great extent, many of our ideas have been implemented over time and some of them were not a coding issue - but a policy issue among high level leadership in game amongst players.  Izzy claims that he and the other members of the administrative team will listen and hear out any and all ideas from the community regarding several coding issues to be decided upon in the near future.  So to honor that promise, I have done my best to offer serious solutions and alternatives.  I have recieved several mob mails and messages from fellow players who fully support my ideas and have hope that they will be considered enough to be debated by the full community at large.  What have YOU done Felicity, to have any impact other than failed attempts at witty cynicism regarding mine and others ideas?  Surely this cannot be one of the best "minds" that Izzy and Mario mention when they speak about Godfathers and other leaders representing the community properly. 

And yet, again, no one cared to suggest this and get the ball
rolling on this BEFORE it was implemented? It's easy for everyone to
come out here and point out how bad they think it is NOW, now that all
the planning and coding has been done on it. But none of you, seriously
NONE of you had the nuts to think outside the box and suggest something
different when we initially started discussing this feature a few weeks
ago?

It's easy to jump on the 'no' bandwagon, but it takes a different
type of person to stand alone and actually try and make a change
happen- not just once, but continually, repeatedly. As much as I didn't
like this idea,
it is one of the best examples of standing to make a change, and not
abandoning the attempt even after it was shot down several times.

I'm guessing that none of you here, now, really tried to make that
kind of change... which suggests to me you weren't totally, completely
opposed to the idea from the get go.

Bullshit plain and simple.  I had both the balls and the ingenuity to devise my own project and present it to Izzy in a previous thread months ago... to which I have yet to have my chance at a formal debate and conversation.  Many can attest to my various attempts throughout the months and years I have been a part of this thing of ours - to make a real change that we can all be happy with.  I even took into full consideration, the best way to keep the current coding system in place while making a further effort at realistic Mafia leveling/hierarchy structure.  But I bet my whole little structure that was actually quite intricate and well thought out got so much as a "Blip" on your radar Felicity.  Why so?  Probably because your own narrow mindedness was focused on whatever ideas you wanted to see implemented... assuming you had any part in them.  I have at least taken the time to speak with various people about various issues in hope that we may make a change as a community together - in lieu of an administrator coming up with the idea altogether and asking for "some" vocal support. 

Stop complaining. If you want a change, be proactive and stop
bitching like children who got spanked in front of their friends in the
front yard.

Oh, and a PS to Ezio, one last time- making veiled, concealed
disdainful comments about one of the owners of this game- no matter how
sneaky you thought you were being- doesn't gain you any bonus points,
pal.

My final words are this Felicity, whomever you are - Assume nothing from my words.  I have a feeling I know who you are and I can tell you that you are not the target of my choice of words.  However, if you do claim some of the guilt of which I have implied by my statements, I strongly suggest you be mindful of the people who have helped support this game since the beginning other than yourself.  There are many people here with great ideas but your lackluster portrayal of other people's comments only negatively impacts the greater debate.  It seems as if you "jump the gun" on every comment you read and proceed to misconceive that which you don't fully appreciate or understand.  I have no interest in further debating with you as it seems that logic here, falls on deaf ears. 

Instead I will save my thoughts, comments, and suggestions for those who aim to listen and be as constructive as I intend to be.   Again to Izzy and Mario, I am sorry if I may have offended.  You guys should know me by now at least a little and understand that my heart is always in the right place.  Perhaps one day our visions will find a parallel platform of ingenuity. 

Regards,

GoodFella (No veil here)

Dear Goodfella,

I regret that this has become more than a debate about the subject at hand. However, after slogging through your self-praising reply, I decided to take a crack at again, replying.

First point: Patronizing bullshit about Felicity in an attempt to garner sympathy from the readers of this thread.

You want to talk about my twisting words? You're playing with the wrong person here, Fella. If you want your words twisted, then I'll twist the shit out of them.

Second point: Dribble about being an old .orger, twisting Felicity's words to suit my argument.

Me? Patronizing YOUR devotion? This coming from the guy who stated that he and the other old timers should just 'move on' from the game at the comment of another player. (NOTE: Shouldn't you get their opinions on things before you act as their spokesperson? Just a thought.) Were you not patronizing THEIR devotion to the game, by batting their comments away like an annoying fly? Nice one, champ. I wasn't patronizing YOU, I was patronizing your ARGUMENTS. I don't know you. Well, okay, I know OF you, but I'm not going to pretend to know you (like you pretend to know who I am- read on to point six for more information), nor am I going to pretend like I give a crap as to who you are or what you've done.

Third point: Appealing to the masses and trying to convince them that Felicity is an idiot, nay, excuse me, *retard.

Did you forget what you wrote already, bud? Wow, talk about convenient memory selection! YOU were the one who insinuated, by your statement of "If anyone would care to hear a real alternative that does not alienate players of old while also providing a historically accurate Mafia experience..." that the current system of an NPC crew is ONE, driving away 'older' players, and TWO, is not historically accurate. So what is it? Either you are suggesting what I just stated, or you are just trying to pad your own ego as to being the cornerstone of all La Cosa Nostra knowledge, which had no place in the entire debate (go advertise your expertise elsewhere). Pick one. Any one. Take your time, no rush.

Fourth point: Long winded campaign speech about how everyone should vote for GoodFella/Nader in 2012, and how Felicity hasn't done jack shit for the site. Craftily ignores the point about insulting another player's input, and in the process insults another player's integrity.

You suggest things, they get implemented, great. I'm proud of ANYONE who gets input into the game. Have your gold star for the day. This does not, however, mean that you are in the driver's seat and know where the place is headed. I have backed ideas from other players, I have disliked ideas from other players. Everyone deserves the chance to be heard, I agree, Goodfella. This does not make them the majority stockholder in the company, however. If, for whatever reason, I'm wrong and you are like, Owner Version 2.0, then I'll eat my words. Last time I checked, however, you were not.

I also want to point out the fact that in your quest for proving yourself right, you have insulted other people in this thread. Not just me, but other players who wanted to share their input in siding with the idea. I don't give a rat's ass what you think about me, or what you think I have or haven't done for the game. The people that MATTER know what I've done for the game in my time here. I'm not going to go off on a tangent and pet myself while I list my achievements like you so humbly have, but rest assured that changes have been sparked in the game off of discussions I've been involved in and suggestions I have made- IN game and OUT.

So go ahead and try to play the patronizing hero card again, but don't point your finger at others when you don't know exactly who they are or what they've done. Like I stated before, I haven't liked every idea that's been implemented, but I've been supportive of about 90% of them- so again, don't pretend that I'm just here to crap all over everyone's parade. My showing support for an idea that has already been implemented doesn't make me the badguy in this instance. YOU were the one throwing the hissy fit, talking about leaving the site.

Fifth point: Continuing Presidential Campaign, taking care to mention that the opposing party, Felicity, is a no name C and has not put in the same amount of effort as I have.

You stated that you felt I was trying to challenge YOUR devotion to the game? What I just read of your reply was a 1,666 word slant about how *I* am not as devoted, nor will I ever be, as you. Which is, as you stated, "bullshit plain and simple". To suggest that I don't care about this game is about as narrow minded as you can get. I never once challenged your love for this game, nor did I ever challenge the time and effort you have put into this. Not once. I agreed with you on your view of memberwhoring, and I told you I didn't feel you had as much insight as the owners did as to the direction of the game. Oh, and then my parting shot about YOUR parting shot against one of the owners, sorry, that was rather rude of me. Everything else I said was in response to someone else's comment. If they want to respond in kind to me (which some of them have, and now after this I probably won't have any energy left to reply to them), they can. You're not their spokesperson. And yet it was *I* who jumped the gun on my replies. Nice shooting, Tex.

There are other people out there who talk about the game, and ways to improve it, and pitch ideas to the administrators. It's not just you and I out there, pal. I realize this, and I also realize that yes, everyone deserves the chance to be heard. You however, twice now, have not afforded other people the chance to let their opinions be heard without belittling them. And, again, it is *I* who slammed the people, not the ideas. Pew pew.

Sixth point: Another veiled threat, trying to throw their weight and seniority around, all while talking about guilt (guilt? Wtf m8?). Getting in one last promo for GoodFella/Nader '12, and making sure everyone knows that Felicity/Unannounced Vice Presidential candidate is, once again, does not fully appreciate or understand the principles of this game. Lolz.

Again, "lolz". I assumed nothing from your words. It was written in black and white (or... gray and white, in this matter), and very plain to read. You took a shot at one of the owners, and in the process insulted the entire upper tier of this game in one go. If you don't think you did, I'll give to the chance to go re-read it. Maybe, if you wish, you can MM me and I'll further explain it to you. That is, if it doesn't get lost in all the mails of support I am receiving for this debate. (You're not the only one with fan mail.) I'm very mindful of the people who were 'here to support the game from the beginning'. In fact, I'm so mindful I even take into consideration the people who WEREN'T here from the beginning.

Get off your high horse. This community isn't made up of "the old players" and the "new players". It's made up of PLAYERS. Seniority counts for nothing, and until everyone realizes that this game will never truly grow. Everyone is entitled to the same amount of love and devotion for this game. Just because you've loved it longer, doesn't mean you love it more than many of the people here. Maybe if you took the time to actually associate with people you would actually learn that.

And you're right. There are MANY people here with great ideas. It's YOUR lackluster portrayal of other people's status that is, ultimately, going to destroy this place in the very end. Stop with the needless segregation, please. It just makes you look silly, and it'll make you very unpopular among the 'younger' players if you continue in this vein. I don't give a shit if you've been here for eight years, or if you've been here for two weeks. If you have a good idea that I like, I'll support it. If you have an idea I don't like, doesn't mean it's not good. It just means that I don't like it. End of story.

I get that you were aiming to be constructive and helpful. I'm sorry that I misconstrued your attacking an owner, a 'junior' player and now myself as being helpful and constructive. Where I grew up, that stuff is just called 'plain rude'. Easy to confuse the two, I suppose.

Closing with a ballsy 2nd mention of the name that was already previously name dropped in an attempt to gain support from friends.

Didn't quite catch my point there with the whole "veiled" insults thing, did you? It's okay buddy. We all know it's me with the problem.

This has been fun. Lets do it again in a few months. Good times.

xoxoxoxo

PS: I am taking this opportunity to officially announce my candidacy for the next US Presidential campaign. I've got an open VP spot for anyone that wants it. First come, first serve.

Felicity,

Your behavior insults all of our intelligence.  Again and again you have misrepresented my comments, let alone those of others.  I love how in your replies... every one of them as a matter of fact - you managed to re-summarize what someone else states, while also redefining what they meant by it.  I applaud your effort at the deconstruction of a real debate on this issue, but again you have failed to provide anything constructive about our arguments against this idea - which was the original point of the thread.  Why is it that when someone provides negative feedback, stating they completely dislike an idea that has already been tested - they are targeted in a counter-attack propaganda campaign?  Is this an attempt at flattery to the admins, or something far more serious?  It's also ironic that a handful of people (I am wondering if you are one of them) completely discredited my idea months ago without it even having been field tested; a bit cynical at best.  Yet, I watch change happen and give my own feedback and the feedback itself is attacked without any proof why my solution would not be better?  I am one person with one idea, and I wasn't even given the opportunity to present it.  That should tell a lot about what is happening behind closed doors. 

I would also like to note that I do not give more credit to the people who have been here since the beginning.  Everyone here does have an equal say, but it the fact that those who have been here longer, understand where the game has come from in terms of coding changes - well this group of individuals has had a series of shared experiences which creates a unique bond that takes time to formulate.  I may not agree with every one of them, but I do respect the ones who put forth years of effort in trying. 

And again, Felicity I will say this - If you continue to portray me as someone who is "damaging" other people's status, which is essentially a slanderous move, we are going to have some problems.  The only person who I see in this debate who is dis-credible is you.  I'd love to have an IRC chat with you in the future, one on one about what is proper and what isn't.  I'd also like to see you stop hiding behind your own anonymous veil and make your more widely known face - known so I may know who can bring up discussions from the past and attempt to use it against me in the most ridiculous of ways.   

The fact that have not yet, tells me a lot about who I am talking to and what they might have to hide.  Ignorance must really be bliss Felicity.  You're living in a universe full of it 

Ezio, if you look back, I believe you'll find that those 'handful of people' discrediting your idea was, in the majority, me.

It wasn't ironic in the least. You miss a very important fact. Your idea(s) I gave my opposition to as I believed, as I still do strongly, they wouldn't be the least bit beneficial for the game. I have no vested interest in the game, I have no relationship with you that would cause it, I just didn't like them. Nor did a very large majority of the userbase, hence they weren't tested.

When the idea of NPC's/MIA's came up, despite a few very vocal people disagreeing, a large portion of the userbase loved the idea. The idea was discussed and developed into the current system we see before us. None of us are saying it's perfect, but the excitement and fun I've seen it bring to a lot of members in the last 2 days makes it appear to be going down very well for the majority... again, with a few very vocal opponents to it.

This isn't a conspiracy against you. It's just a matter of despite your strong belief in your idea being superb, others disagree. I appreciate everyone who tries to contribute a new idea, it's exactly what the game needs and I personally thank each and every one of them for the ideas over the years (including yours), but that doesn't mean I'll blindly support it if I don't believe it's a good idea.

***************
As an aside, should an irishman be eligible for the role of VP, count me in! I don't have any plans for 2012 just yet.

Dear Goodfella,

I thought you weren't replying anymore? Argument over and done with? I must've struck a nerve somewhere if you came back for round... what round are we on?

My behavior is awesome. End of story. This is the OOC forum and I can act as I wish, just as you can act as you wish.

I'm not attacking you for anything. I think you are entitled to your opinions, even if I don't agree with them. However, the arrogance that is the driving force behind EVERY single one of your posts is just RIDICULOUS (yep, used my 'R' word there again). Did you ever stop to think that maybe, in the grand scheme of things, no one gives a flying fajita?

It's also ironic that a handful of people (I am wondering if you are one of them) completely discredited my idea months ago without it even having been field tested; a bit cynical at best.

That, right there. What idea are you on about? And why would you ASSUME that I was against it? What if I was one of the biggest supporters of your idea? You don't even know who I am! You're so worried about protecting YOUR own investments in the game, and you're so BULLHEADED that you cannot seem to see past your own tunnel vision. YOU'RE right, everyone else is wrong. That is how you have always been, and, unfortunately, maturity does not come with age, it seems.

I am one person with one idea, and I wasn't even given the opportunity to present it. That should tell a lot about what is happening behind closed doors.

What are you suggesting? That I've set up shop in some office somewhere, staking you out and looking for EVERY single thing you do in this game, because I'm out to get you? And you think I am going off on tangents? Friend you're not even making any SENSE here. You seem to think everyone and anyone is out to get you, the little man, the little man who just wants to stand up for the people and make everything grand. Come on, get real here. :/

I would also like to note that I do not give more credit to the people who have been here since the beginning.

Then why constantly refer to them, and yourself, as 'old timers'? Then why constantly reference the fact that you and other said 'old timers' are going to leave the game? Or that only you all truly understand the way the game works? So the people that have been here for five years, four, three, two, one- none of them matter because they weren't here for the BIG code change? We've all experienced enough here at the hands of game changes. No one's input is any less valuable than anyone else's.

The only person who I see in this debate who is dis-credible is you.

Again, you seem to think you're speaking for the majority. I don't want to break your heart here, sweetheart, but the number of Godfathers, Don and other high rankers that have contacted me in regard to my replies here in this thread would devastate you. You don't have the popular vote here, my friend.

And don't try to lecture me on etiquette and decorum here. That's just laughable, and I'm sure many people could tell you for various reasons as to why. I'm not hiding behind my anonymous veil. Like I mentioned posts before, the people who MATTER know who I am. I'm not like you. I don't purposefully try to mix my coffeeshop identities with all of my characters, so that I can attempt to gain notarize of accounts gone by. I make my own path with every account I make. Besides, as someone with an official game account, I was encouraged to make a playing account to make my opinions known. That way the two names would never have to intersect.

I'd also like to see you stop hiding behind your own anonymous veil and make your more widely known face - known so I may know who can bring up discussions from the past and attempt to use it against me in the most ridiculous of ways.

Again, what da hell? Paranoid much? What 'discussions from the past' are you talking about? Everything I have said so far is about the here and now. Everything I have commented on has been said or inferred or drawn from this thread. You've gone of the rails here, and I don't know how to help you. Anything I may say will just further feed your paranoia that someone is out to get you.

If anything, I think you've long ceased to care about the argument at hand. This is about me, isn't it? You've never liked me, and have done your damnedest to try and get rid of me, in game and out, since the day I have met you. This is what we seem to do, isn't it? I do or say something, then you insult me in game or on IRC, and then you leave for awhile and come back later on to attack me again? Yet I'm the one with the problem about attacking other people's opinions. If I were a paranoid person, I'd swear you were simply targeting me for all your abuse the past few years.

But if you're so hell bent on coming to find me, and so ready to travel along this crusade to come and 'set me right', then feel free to come find me. I'm in a little room called #riot!. Come on in, if you're still not banned from the last time you harassed me.

xoxoxoxo

PS: Deimne has filled the Vice Presidential role, despite being a non-American. I feel this will work to our advantage, however, as Irish accents tend to make everyone swoon.

"Deimne has filled the Vice Presidential role, despite being a non-American. I feel this will work to our advantage, however, as Irish accents tend to make everyone swoon."

I 2nd that. I heard his voice last night. Was AWESOME!!!

Aside from whether or not MR was all about gun training or whether or not NPC's are a good thing (i think we may safely bet on NPC's staying with us for some time yet), all I would like to add is that the current crop of NPC's seem to have stayed around quite a bit longer than intended.

I was under the impression that NPC crews were expected to die out in a "couple of hours" or so, this batch has, in my opinion, lasted just a bit too long. In a very basic way they make the place look untidy. Maybe if pro times were set to an hour rather than 4?

Just a thought.

The NPC have been around longer than planned because they're working out bugs and kinks within the system.

Ezio, if you look back, I believe you'll find that those 'handful of people' discrediting your idea was, in the majority, me.


It wasn't ironic in the least. You miss a very important fact. Your
idea(s) I gave my opposition to as I believed, as I still do strongly,
they wouldn't be the least bit beneficial for the game. I have no
vested interest in the game, I have no relationship with you that would
cause it, I just didn't like them. Nor did a very large majority of the
userbase, hence they weren't tested.


When the idea of NPC's/MIA's came up, despite a few very vocal people
disagreeing, a large portion of the userbase loved the idea. The idea
was discussed and developed into the current system we see before us.
None of us are saying it's perfect, but the excitement and fun I've
seen it bring to a lot of members in the last 2 days makes it appear to
be going down very well for the majority... again, with a few very
vocal opponents to it.


This isn't a conspiracy against you. It's just a matter of despite your
strong belief in your idea being superb, others disagree. I appreciate
everyone who tries to contribute a new idea, it's exactly what the game
needs and I personally thank each and every one of them for the ideas
over the years (including yours), but that doesn't mean I'll blindly
support it if I don't believe it's a good idea.

Deimne, I will reply to your comments because they were both well thought out and pertaining to the subject of the thread.  I completely agree with what you said when you stated "This isn't a conspiracy against you."  No, I am not the least bit paranoid that I am the target of concern.  My only problems with the way things have been structured in the past 2 years is that there are a small group of people who are on the "in" of things... and everyone else seems to be on the "out."  I'm not necessarily claiming that there is a favoritism game going on among all the people who know each other in real life and who have had the opportunity to speak with Izzy and Mario personally, but it doesn't exactly hurt your chances.  I have not been the target of anything nor do I believe that I have been.  Perhaps I did not explain myself clearly enough to cover all connotations of my words, but I simply meant that a lot of people have had their voices fall on deaf ears - I do not believe the majority of people like the NPC crew idea, but there is no way to prove that.  And whatever Felicity or Billy (or whatever he/she wants to call themselves), has accused me of... well this is an absurd notion.  This is an online GAME and if anyone was paranoid for the above alleged reasons, they would have to spend a LOT of time playing this game in order to be so.  As you can see, I barely spend 20 minutes worth of time with my current work on any given day and have a lot more invested interest in real life endeavors.  Personally, I would just really like to see MR live up to its authentic potential while also creating a level playing field where diplomacy, politics, and war are difficult struggles - not simply take downs by those who spend all day training their guns on NPC targets where there is no real consequence in doing so (apart from small wack-back percent chance). 

I would also like to respond to this notion of a "majority" agreement.  There is no statistic, data table, or any verifiable proof to back any claim to the above.  While I do understand that we may all individually poll our friends and contacts, and perhaps fellow leadership to get an idea of what and why people believe as they do - this does not mean the majority of people agree.  Also, simply because 5 out of 6, or 4 out of 7 Godfathers decide a certain game changing dynamic should be incorporated - does not mean it actually should.  I do agree with Izzy and Mario that the Godfathers should always be the best of the community; truly dedicated people who bring independent minds and diversity to the table to constantly make the game a unique dynamic and not the static complacency we have currently.  No, this does not mean that war should be a state of normalcy; I do not imply this whatsoever.  "Dynamic" here assumes stimulation (fun gameplay), and a constant state of change.  Unfortunately, I have tried my best to have fun but with recent changes to the IA system, even worse with this NPC crew idea - I just don't have any fun anymore.  Even if I did have more time to play, I have no inclination to, especially when there are people who are constantly ready to put down your ideas long before it is even openly discussed - let alone battlefield tested as this NPC crew idea has been. 

Deimne, I have the utmost respect for your position and where you have come from to get to where you are.  Let's face it though - you are someone who has truly benefited from this IA system.  If you had diplomatic consequences EVERY time you fired your weapon - your odds of survival would have been far worse for your character.  I'm not discrediting you in any way, just trying to get you to take into consideration that you may have acted differently had there been REAL consequences to your IA targeting.  Instead, people are able to target both Inactive and Non-playable characters with this recent addition, almost 100 percent free of consequence.  Yes, I do understand there is always a percent chance of backfire from a weapon that has the potential to be fatal - but its certainly not something that deters anyone from shooting.  I am not saying that the majority agree or disagree with my idea - nor can I state that they will agree or disagree with this NPC crew thing.  I believe the point of the thread was an attempt to get an idea from the people who choose to vocalize their opinions. 

There is also a very fine line where the majority "should rule" versus "protection of the minority."  Suppose for instance that the majority of people enjoy killing NPC targets and could care less about the authenticity of having no consequences for doing so... Giving them the opportunity to target Don's and Bosses without reprimand... what about the minority (whatever percent that may be) of players who want their actions to ALWAYS have severe consequences with other real life players?  Should we just cast them aside completely, taking away their likelihood of being effective in a war where the best guns came from training on these NPC's?  Obviously it is their choice to not participate in this, but where is the line drawn between what is best for the game and what is popular?  Is what is popular at this time, at this place in Mafia Returns... always be considered "best" for the game?  There has to be a balance between retention rates of players and the retention rate of the games core mechanics.  Something so drastically game-changing like the addition of NPC crews may have a lot of undesired consequences, unforeseen until it is already well-established.  For example again, the member whoring nature of family policies is a direct consequence of the desire to kill more and more over the period of a shorter and shorter time.  The mentality is almost obsessive for someone who is trying to stay at the top; "just another kill to get a little ahead of the competition."  Whereas if there were no NPC or IA's to target, they would always have to consider the consequences of member whoring for "just another kill" when each and every member of their family can be a desirable weapon in times of war.  Isn't that something that ALL (not just a simple majority) of players can agree upon?... That with every action there is a real consequence?  Or are we really, truly at a time where what is popular is what is easy?  Seeing a lot of people retire/suicide/quit at high ranks tells me that there are a growing number of people who are as frustrated with this complacency and static gameplay as I am.  I just hope that the people who aren't bored enough to quit, simply see this as a disparity among "old" and "new" players; the assumption of which only leads to further discontent.    

Anyway Deimne, I have stated a lot here in hopes to continue the discussion back on its less-beaten path.  I would like to hear other individuals thoughts on what has been stated here and what they have seen with the current system for gun training - not just constant back and forth arguments between 2 people who will never see eye to eye on anything relating to the measure of quality.  If that means I must reserve myself and my thoughts so that others may be better heard, then this is the small sacrifice we must all make for the betterment of the game.  I would just like to see people put a lot more thought into their opinions on this NPC matter - not just a thumbs up or down. 

My only problems with the way things have been structured in the past 2 years is that there are a small group of people who are on the "in" of things... and everyone else seems to be on the "out."

I personally disagree strongly. If an idea/thought is raised, by anyone, regardless of who they are or who they know, it will be listened to. If the powers that be (the owners and admin's) feel it's something that has potential, they listen to public opinion. If the majority feel it's a beneficial change, it can/will (and has been many times) be implimented. It might at times appear a little skewed, given that most of the ideas will come from the most active players (due to their knowledge of the game and the users they always will have a better idea of what needs tweaking and good ideas on how to tweak it), but that doesn't mean that a brand new player with a superb idea (as long as they learn the basic mechanics well enough to know how to put across the idea in the correct light) won't get the same 'air time'.

Personally, I would just really like to see MR live up to its authentic potential while also creating a level playing field where diplomacy, politics, and war are difficult struggles - not simply take downs by those who spend all day training their guns on NPC targets where there is no real consequence in doing so (apart from small wack-back percent chance).

In theory, this is wonderful. But due to game logistics, there needs to be a way for game time and hard work to be rewarded (in this case in the gaining of strength and power) or people will simply not work. The politics side of it is 100% down to the users. The fact of the matter is that should a 'leader' start acting in a way to alienate themselves from the masses, that user will die. Though it's far more difficult to kill a GF if you can't simply one shot them, it's still very possible. If I currently went on a rampage killing all other gf's/cities for nothing more than shits and giggles, despite having a very strong character, I guarantee I could and would be killed for it. The power of numbers on MR has become even more important in recent times, so the political side of things is more important than ever. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I'm not in the position I'm in due to an army of bodyguards or a large kill list, it's due to the relationships, friendships, diplomacy and hard work which others felt was worth rewarding. Sure, character strength has allowed me to keep the position, but that's how the game does (and how it should) work.

There is no statistic, data table, or any verifiable proof to back any claim to the above.

Given my level of activity, I was there to see the majority of discussions relating to the planning of the NPC crews and all of the testing of them. To date, I've seen/heard about 10 players have serious issues with it... about 20 have a 'not too sure myself' view on them... and the rest (well over 100 active users) show genuine joy/delight/excitement on the implimentation. I'll happily stand over my 'majority' comment, as it's not bases on a small subset but a relatively huge one.

Also, simply because 5 out of 6, or 4 out of 7 Godfathers decide a certain game changing dynamic should be incorporated - does not mean it actually should.

This is a very different matter. Coded changes we view, or should view, totally OOC. Many changes (easier kills, bg health changes, etc etc) hurt 'Deimne', but I'm in support of them as they help the game.

When it comes to internal game dynamics introduced by godfathers, there's no question. They/we have earned the right to shape the game as they see fit. Their ideas might be horrible, but it's their role as a gf to be able to make these changes. If they make bad calls, they'll lose support and pay the price. If they make good calls, they'll earn more support and thrive. The joy of the game is that users can and do shape it, with gf's having the ability to shape it more than any others. Some will change the game for the better, some not at all and some for the worse, but whatever the results, it's their right to do it.

Instead, people are able to target both Inactive and Non-playable characters with this recent addition, almost 100 percent free of consequence.

The fact of the matter is, the game needs a way to reward effort/work/dedication/commitment and give a strength/power/etc reward for what a player puts into it. The current ia/mia/npc system might not be perfect, but it's the best solution/system I've seen/heard to date. The consequence isn't in the form of shoot them and you die, the consequences are in the form of if you don't work as hard as others you fall behind and lose power. This has always been the case and seems just fine to me.

There has to be a balance between retention rates of players and the retention rate of the games core mechanics.

There is. Many ideas, even which have great support, haven't been adopted as they comprimise the game mechanics in a way that the owners/admins don't want/believe is right. The comments on 'majority agreement' don't mean that I justify any change that the masses think is great, it's just pointing out that despite the fact that you don't like a change doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. The admins/owners filter out all ideas they don't want, with the rest coming down to public reaction on if it should be implemented and if so, what tweaks it might need to work well. These filters are in place, however you seem to feel that a change that 'you' (and a small minority of other players) don't agree with is suddenly going to ruin/destroy the game. This isn't the case.

The mentality is almost obsessive for someone who is trying to stay at the top; "just another kill to get a little ahead of the competition."

Again, something I don't agree with. It's something which can/does happen, but not something which should happen, is enevitable or something that actually leads to long term gains. I've never allowed my own families to practice member whoring behaviour. I've gone out of my way to ban -48 kills. Both of which reduces kills, but leads to far more important long term gains. In terms of the game, this is a change needed at the user level, not at the admin/code level. It's one that will happen, and has been worked on by the leaders for quite some time now.

I would just like to see people put a lot more thought into their opinions on this NPC matter - not just a thumbs up or down.

I fully agree. However, there is a difference between "OMG, this is ruining the game. Me and all my 'old timers' are going to quit and you should have used my super idea." and making genuine constructive critism in the hopes of improving the system.

If anyone can suggest an improvement on the current ia/npc system, I'm all ears. But to date, I've heard nothing that is an improvement on it. A change, sure, but a change in the right direction? Not yet.

Felicity, your opening rant was needless and basically tantamount to telling people to quit whining, despite their opinions, improvements or constructive criticisms being asked. After that, you continue to take it off track, make petty comments and the toing and froing with Ezio looks ridiculous.

Regarding the actual topic at hand, Izzy, my only suggestion is that these NPCs shoot back. If you are happy to ignore them, fine, you should be in no danger. However, if you point your gun at them, then fire and miss, then you should be prepared to have them shoot back. I know this would probably take a little more code behind the scenes, but it'd be worth it. People couldn't complain about death by NPC gun, the call to shoot was theirs. As it is, it's a turkey shoot; if this is a move to engage people, how better to do it than attach some risk? The NPCs could, for example, on generation be given a gun that matches the current average for their rank across the site. 

At no time did I think I was on some holy, coherent crusade. I knew how ridiculous and flamboyant I was being in my arguments the other day. But honest to God, how else am I supposed to respond to someone who stated they were going to leave a game simply because a younger player (who no doubt didn't have a lot of experience under their belts) said something they didn't agree with? Perhaps if someone wasn't so ridiculous themselves in that aspect, I wouldn't have had to reply in kind.

Not to mention taking shots at the owners of this game who, as I have mentioned on many an occasion, pay out of their own pockets for us to have a fun and free playing experience well... you can all do the math from there.

My apologies if my defense of a game that we all spend our free (and some of us 'not so free') time at went a little overboard. I suppose I'm just narrow-minded like that.

My argument only is that the NPC crews tend to artificially inflate the number of online users at a given time. I have no problem with the NPC crews in any aspect other than this. Is there any way to leave them but remove them from the online group?

Regarding the actual topic at hand, Izzy, my only suggestion is that these NPCs shoot back. If you are happy to ignore them, fine, you should be in no danger. However, if you point your gun at them, then fire and miss, then you should be prepared to have them shoot back. I know this would probably take a little more code behind the scenes, but it'd be worth it. People couldn't complain about death by NPC gun, the call to shoot was theirs. As it is, it's a turkey shoot; if this is a move to engage people, how better to do it than attach some risk? The NPCs could, for example, on generation be given a gun that matches the current average for their rank across the site.

Solid idea.

Fair enough, Felicity. I don't want to get into a debate here as it'll just take it off track again, but the easy answer would be - I guess - to ignore the initial ridiculousness and let the owners defend themselves and the game if they saw fit. I appreciate that's easier said than done at times. It's just a frustration when threads get rail-roaded and end up well off topic at the expense of ideas getting through to those asking for them.

So, to get back on track.....another advantage to having these NPCs shoot back is that it is a deterrent for - as an example - a Goomba proing a Boss NPC that they had no hope of hitting in the first place. I would imagine that the current attitude is "Heck, it's a free shot, I might 1%, why not?"...when really, I imagine it's just a pain for those with the ability to actually hit. If they really want the shot that much, let them take some of the risk on.

By having them shoot, the pro times will decrease significantly. The family will die much quicker.

Given that it is, in effect, a 'war' on the 'NPC family' I'd have no issue with seeing them being able to return fire. I think it adds a nice additional factor into the choice to shoot or not, as there is in a normal war.

On skill... I believe the previously mentioned 'avg for that rank' would provide a good system. The avg gun at the low ranks would mean a fairly low risk, where the high ranks would have a fairly significant risk given the number of good guns at +made man.

As for chances, given it is the shooters choice whether to shoot or not and they should have a fair idea of their chances to hit prior to pulling the trigger, I wouldn't complain with a 100% return of fire (assuming the target has/had an open shot [obv if they've been shot, returned fire and lost pro, then shot again they wouldn't be able to return fire]). That said, anything less than this would provide the same potential risks with just a less common occurance... so maybe a 50% return rate (heck, even 10% would be a step up on no return of fire) would work just as well.

It certainly has the potential to be an interesting twist on the NPC idea, so nice suggestion.