I like this idea. You shouldn't be able to enjoy blanket protection while walking the streets openly and assisting your family in a war (moving around and setting up your next shot). I always thought the idea of waltzing around with a magical cloak of protection was a bit weird. If you are going to step out and try to kill someone there should be some risk involved. It should be who gets the jump...and is quicker on the trigger. Families can then lay traps and strategize together.

Even if it slows wars down a bit I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily. It would add another level of strategy and realism. Your enemy knows you are holed up in a specific district and you have to move eventually. You can make a run for it or come out guns blazing.

I should add that I am perfectly in agreement with most things breaking pros. I just don't really see there being much point in spending time/effort on this as the only real benefit we will see in this is when hunting down rogues at present.

A few concerns I'd have.

1. If you are shot at by an opponent and missed but because you were not expecting the shot, you petty immediately after (perhaps you're on your phone and don't see the personal). Suddenly you've voided your protection unknowingly and unintentionally, where presently they would retain that protection.

2. Would refreshing on a target void protection? Because much of the "sitting and waiting" is composed of hitters refreshing on proed targets until they shoot. But if each time they refresh they're voiding their own protection, this would drastically lengthen wars. But at the same time, how can you not consider "attempting to shoot someone" as leaving the building they're in?

3. Why not phase out pro wacking entirely? It's not intuitive (just ask anyone who's had to explain it to a new player), there exists in the RP no explanation for why members of a Mafia family are shooting at their LEADERS, and it can often decide who lives and dies in wars outside the hands of the players (RNG). I mean, the basis for this suggestion is that protection is awkward, but seems to ignore that the most prolific use of the feature is even more awkward.

We have BGs. We have crews. We have forts. We have the loyalty feature. Could it be simpler to make a more intuitive system for defense with what we have rather than trying to justify the awkwardness of the existing system by adding more conditions and things to remember during wars?

ohrip;

1. Somewhere I think somebody mentioned a bit about a pop-up before going through with any action that would void your Pro indicating that what you're about to do will negate said Pro.

2. Good fucking point. I don't really think anyone is too fussed about lengthening wars, in fact I think the majority would welcome the return of them. I'm not sure about this one, interested to see what others think. Not being able to refresh would change many strategies during wars - which isn't necessarily a bad thing imo.

3. I think phasing out pro wacking entirely would be...too much of a change, but I guess on the flip side of that, like you said...Adding in a list of additional things to remember is a potential downside for some.

I must say I'm loving that lots of folks are getting involved in this Suggestion.

Here is a thought:

Drop the pro time to 1 hour. 

Each pro you receive drops your defense by 10% for 12/24 hours. 

You don't have to change what breaks the pro and, the more you try to use the pro feature during a war, the more people that can hurt you until such a time that your own pro-er might kill you. 

A significant reduction of Pro time along with some of the previously discussed options (for adding in things that break the Pro) seems like a damn good compromise.

So Squishy, people will get their pro shots,  and  then simply wait and do nothing.  How does that speeds us the war?

Who will sacrifice their pro time for jailbreaking, or some profit from drug dealing?

(There's also always the potential option of shortening the Pro time)

Well I am the only one who suggest the exact opposite, so right  now I am the guy  who listens  to the radio of his car about that crazy  guy  who drives on the wrong side of the road,  and says "Man, this ain't just one guy, they are hundreds" 

So, one more time I try to explain, what I think is more fair. What is good for the game is to have people active right?

How does that penalty on every one of their activities will help the game? Fair for me is to give bonus to the players for being active during the war. So, you can increase their pro time, when people are giving a good speech in the streets, or when they work  with  their Corrupted Agents, or when they bribe  the cops, or when they pay credits to fill the jails... But  you can't add bonus pro time on their 4 hour of pro time that is  now, so I suggest you lower that, to 30 minutes for example , and add time from the bonus, from the people's activities. 

I'm all for basic things breaking pro. Like Disorder stated, anything that brings you out of hiding should be a pro breaker. Period.

Lowered defense in jail? No. Because you aren't actually *in* jail, you cannot perform actions in jail, cannot be killed in jail, and once broken, aren't in jail anymore.  Now, code in a way to rank in jail, then code in the ability to build a shank, then killing in jail works.

The big guns are going to scorch earth regardless of this change, imo. Once they first wave all the hitters, they aren't worried about pro anymore, no one left will be able to hit them. Nor are they much worried about their under Mades dying in the blow back, as the +1 is more important to most of these people.

So I'm sitting in the "hospital" or "safe house" and some fucker comes and picks my pocket. They came to me, I haven't gone anywhere. I mug them right then and there. Will my pro be voided if I mug them?

This is just my personal opinion, but I wish there was a way to completely abolish the pro shot. It just feels so out of place and unrealistic as a mechanic to me. There's no way the mob would be taking shots at their own leadership as a protective action.

After reading the thread, I am starting to agree, more and more, with the idea of pro shots being taken out completely due to the huge unrealistic factor of shooting your leadership to protect them.

Amara, that's a good point. I think in that scenario, the pro shouldn't be voided, as the mechanics kind of allow the PPer to come in and invade your hidden activity. Or, have someone pro your pockets as well.

The pro shot is a necessity...want to cry about realism, cry about why it takes ~75 wack to kill a bg, but it doesn't take 7500 wack to shoot through 100 bgs. The pro shot is a bullet proof vest, or your BG's actually doing something. Take away the pro shot, and all you have left is hitters playing the game. Want to run around shooting shit and dying without strategy, go play CoD.

There are ways to replace it. You could have defensive options, for example. A crew leader in a city with members of his crew could get a defensive bonus, for example. I'm all for having strategy, I'm a strategy gamer. But I don't think the pro is the way to do it.

7. Anything that uses the PickPocket or Attack timer voids your Pro.

I agree that Mugging shouldn't void a Pro, which is why I stated specifically only things that use your PickPocket or Attack timer as opposed to listing Mugging :)

To the bits about removing Pro's entirely - We all know it's unrealistic. It's one of the aspects that make this place unique, and it definitely adds a lot of strategy. Removing Pro'ing would also eliminate a decent portion of the usefulness that lower-end members can provide in a 'real' war scenario. (IE; half a day or back and forth, not a 2 wave take-down type deal).

The big guns are going to scorch earth regardless of this change, imo. Once they first wave all the hitters, they aren't worried about pro anymore, no one left will be able to hit them. Nor are they much worried about their under Mades dying in the blow back, as the +1 is more important to most of these people.

See this is my problem with this suggestion. What is it actually going to change? After wave 1 the dominating side would be up anyway. They dont need pro shots at that point. They will fly and crime at will. But if by some off chance there is a surviving member from the attacked side, given a WB or something. They literally are frozen in place. They cant move about, they cant crime for money. They won't even be able to collect locals, to mount a counter. 

Ill take this one level further. In certain cases before wars are fought the attacking side will sometimes setup CL's/HQ's. Usually they take pros before setting up so they dont get shot right after they setup. In this case, it would almost require them to take two pro's. Or hope that they dont get shot b/w transitioning from no suit to bold suit. Take that another step further, we dont see this now very much, but we did before. Every now and then you see a GF rise in a war. Its because of the lack of GF's/firepower, when someone takes GF status during war. This movement of sorts, will stop this from happening. And in short, take away the ability of the attacked side to mount a counter. 

As it is the attacker is always fighting from the point of advantage. With this addition, I feel as though the attacked side would be even more painted into a corner than normal. Their ability to counter would be almost negligible. Now you can say that would end the war quick….but whats the point in that? If anything this would make it easier for the attackers to clean up faster. Usually dragging out pro times leads to failed pros, its a part of the drag out strategy. This change would take that away out right.  

If we are going to move forward with this change, the ability to refresh, has to be a pro breaker. Otherwise the attacked side has no chance, even with potential WB's and all. Im a proponent for making the game balanced, not lopped one sided. Give the little guy a chance is all I'm saying. 

I think with everything breaking pro that there will be a point to where the uppers will have to make a decision to keep the war going, risking the lives of many of their underlings in order to scorch earth every man woman and child who shares the target city, or, to cease fire and move on.

Izzy, I dont think this would become a point of discussion. After the first wave, its usually down to cleanup the rogue or the leftover. In rare cases are there any proper hitmen left after a wave. And as long as the top leadership is outside the range of the leftover/rogue. I doubt they would care very much about who he shoots next, as long as he gets shot on his next trigger pull…or any other manuever, if we implement this system.  

OK follow me here. When the winning game side has taken out the upper structure and threats from the other side, currently the norm is to just keep shooting until its scorched earth.

I think with everything breaking pro that there will be a point to where the uppers will have to make a decision to keep the war going, risking the lives of many of their underlings in order to scorch earth every man woman and child who shares the target city, or, to cease fire and move on.

By the time it gets to this point, (generally) there are no guns large enough to do any damage to the upper structures, so they wouldn't be required to take pros anymore.

As for the possibility of the remaining victims shooting the lower-ranks of the attacking side, well.. They could do that even now and these people don't tend to take pros - only the big guns/uppers.

Scorched earth would still happen if they wanted it to. They'll just keep shooting while cleaning up and (usually) no one that's being cleaned up has a gun big enough to do anything about it, whether their enemies are prod or not.