Why can't a little guy ever win? :-)
Forums › Suggestions & Feedback › Why can't a little guy ever win? :-)-
Alright. Idea three. Let's lout a range in someone that participates in your mob. How does that really change things from the way they currently are? The player that adds everyone will have more mob in every area and will still win every time
-
Changes to make the game more balanced? The game shouldn't be balanced. A player starting today shouldn't be able to beat a 2 year old vet. That's that. I know of no game where that's possible nor should it be
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
Wrong! Go back and read the discussion again, you keep saying this but you obviously did not read the whole discussion.Let's look at your ideas one by one. You want a player to be able to capture any turf regardless of mob size. That's your first idea. It wouldn't be a fair system because the players that put in the most work would be targeted the most and forced into a reset. Congratulations. You just killed the most loyal customers.
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
Wrong again, I am a DBA, this is incredibly easy to code. The smaller players would not have a greater gap, they would have a smaller gap. Once again, go back and read "all" if the comments.Ok. Idea two. Let's base mon on the individual stats of each player. Not only is that system impossible to code but the smaller players would have even a worse gap. It's the big players that are more reliable for adding mob. They're the more active and the harder working. So the smaller players would be left in the blue still
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
That's a fair point, every idea has bugs, try solving that bug.Alright. Idea three. Let's lout a range in someone that participates in your mob. How does that really change things from the way they currently are? The player that adds everyone will have more mob in every area and will still win every time
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
A two year vet doesn't go around killing level 1s all day either, in most games it gives you no benefit. A two year vet usually fights others of the same level. Though it is possible in most games, you don't play enough of them obviously. Your entire argument is "no balance" because the strong should be strong because they have simply existed longer. While mine is based on balancing out achievement and method vs simple time. If you made a level 20 something in any other game, the set it farming gold automatically, and waited two years, you would run out if bag space a long time ago. If I made it to 60 in three days and smacked you, in any other game you would be dead.Changes to make the game more balanced? The game shouldn't be balanced. A player starting today shouldn't be able to beat a 2 year old vet. That's that. I know of no game where that's possible nor should it be
-
Two years? That's a pointless argument. This is supposed to be like any other game, except rather then characters you level up, the turfs are your characters, and they can die or change sides depending on battles. The game is flawed and unbalanced because real work and turf stats mean nothing because of the mob bots.
-
This isn't a game based Solely on mob. It's also about connections and allies. I could take on dramabot. Not by myself but if I got enough players to help via vendettas I could severely damage him. It's been done before. Look at what happened to havoc before. Of even most the large alliances. What you are saying would make a social part of the game pointless because I could capture any turf I want by myself and drama would be powerless to stop me unless he capped me out first. Then everything would turn into how fast can you cap game instead of a how fast can you mob up game. What a change of system.
-
You too billy, go back and read the entire discussion, now what the twentieth time here. Capture any turf? That isn't said anywhere. Capture your "own" turf back that "you" created or "destroy" it because you failed to capture it. Thus preventing the expansion into your home area and stopping the chain of destruction into your territories. It shouldn't be a domino effect of capture, you should be able to prevent it or slow it down. At the very least make the enemy "build thier own" territories if you want to take the effort to destroy yours. To stop the onslaught.
-
If you don't want "a chain reaction" then don't build your turf so close together. Problem solved. If you were stupid enough to build a turf chain that lead right into a cluster that was making money then the attacker has every right to take advantage over your stupidity and take everything you have. It's a tactic I and many others have used in expansion into new territories. If you can't beat them yourself round up a few friends for a V and stop the chain that way.
-
There's no such thing as mob bits. Those players get banned and reset.
-
Castaway wrote:
How can the enemy build their own territories? Turf max for a maxed level player is 50. Youre forced to capture in this gameYou too billy, go back and read the entire discussion, now what the twentieth time here. Capture any turf? That isn't said anywhere. Capture your "own" turf back that "you" created or "destroy" it because you failed to capture it. Thus preventing the expansion into your home area and stopping the chain of destruction into your territories. It shouldn't be a domino effect of capture, you should be able to prevent it or slow it down. At the very least make the enemy "build thier own" territories if you want to take the effort to destroy yours. To stop the onslaught.
-
Obviously the turf has to get bigger and stronger. Widen out and encompass more area. If five turf are in a circle for a week with full control they should just combine and become one big one releasing the remaining 4 extending expansion. This would also make attacking them more difficult.
-
Castaway wrote:
I think you would like parallel kingdom. The circles you create mesh together to form larger blobs.Obviously the turf has to get bigger and stronger. Widen out and encompass more area. If five turf are in a circle for a week with full control they should just combine and become one big one releasing the remaining 4 extending expansion. This would also make attacking them more difficult.
-
Castaway wrote:
If you know how to play, then why are you saying losing your turf impedes growing your mob? The 2 are unrelated. The game is all about turf. Mob is a tool to attack & defend your turf. Idk what you mean by "create a city that is actually in your turf;" that makes no sense.I clearly "do" know how to play the game...This is not "mob war" it is supposed to be "turf war"...If you log in every day and lose all your cities every day, you will never grow a mob to the level if your enemy. And, you will eventually have nowhere to create a city that is "actually" in your "turf" the real point of the game in the first place. "turf wars"
The game works just fine. It doesn't need re-inventing. If you don't like it, don't play.
Where are you getting your stats for player retention? Nick doesn't release them, so how would you know what the retention level is?
-
Your suggestions are so off the mark, that it's tough to even address them. Players already have to have a turf in range to be able to cap you.
You are trying too hard to impose too much reality. A player shouldn't get to keep the capped turf because it's in a burned out wasteland? Get real. You basically want a game where players can only build there own turf & all other turf gets destroyed. That's not how this game works, nor should it be.
-
@Mystery, what the heck are you talking about at all? Did you read anything at all? And when did anyone say anything about turf and mob being related in growth? You didn't read anything did you? You just skimmed it all.
-
Castaway wrote:
I read every bit of it, despite it being hard to understand. I quoted where you said turf & mob were related in the post where I mentioned it. Who's not reading again?@Mystery, what the heck are you talking about at all? Did you read anything at all? And when did anyone say anything about turf and mob being related in growth? You didn't read anything did you? You just skimmed it all.
-
Castaway wrote:
Here's the quote again. This time I put the part I'm referring to in bold. You didn't explain what you meant by "create a city that is actually in your turf," either.I clearly "do" know how to play the game...The "rules" are not clarified or even existing in this point, it is just the way it is by default. What I am suggesting is exactly as boat anchor has pointed out. Concentrate more on the "turf to turf" aspect of the game and less on the mob to mob aspect. Think logically here, the little guy is "not" going to take over the game this way. It would cost a literal fortune. But this way will allow a way to fight back to an unfair system. If you log in every day and lose all your cities every day, you will never grow a mob to the level if your enemy. And, you will eventually have nowhere to create a city that is "actually" in your "turf" the real point of the game in the first place. "turf wars"
-
Ok, a "turf" at "your" gps coordinates. Which is "your" turf.
-
Well...this thread sure took a dive...
That's too bad too. The original purpose is just to suggest that there should be *some* way for a smaller mob to cause some permanent damage to a bigger mob outside of a V.
Having a 6k be completely impervious to a 4k just seems wrong.
Do you guys truly feel that it should be completely, 100% impossible without a V?
-
Mystery wrote:
AgreePrimo Loco wrote:
That's not true. Tons of large players use V's. They just don't advertise in the V forum. They use their allies & pm people.🔫 wrote:
But sadly Vs are nothin but lazy ppl teaming up just for someone who's 3 mob members higher 😒 I don't even bother with it anymore cuz everytime I go in there I end up sending everyone to the ERYou're actually not the only person who have brought this idea. And you're right, it's merely impossible for a small guy to win a fight against the much more well mobbed players on their own, unless using a loot. But I believe that's why the Vendetta was made for smaller players who wants to team up against a much larger player. And to answer your question, I believe mobbing up would most likely be the best solution.
-
Boat Anchor wrote:
I think the random favor could do with a little expanding. I think a 1k mob should be able to get one win versus a 50k even if it's just a 1 in a billion lottery. I think the chances should be so small things like that rarely happens. But I do think they should happenWell...this thread sure took a dive...
That's too bad too. The original purpose is just to suggest that there should be *some* way for a smaller mob to cause some permanent damage to a bigger mob outside of a V.
Having a 6k be completely impervious to a 4k just seems wrong.
Do you guys truly feel that it should be completely, 100% impossible without a V?
-
And this is after disagreeing with you oh so long ago :)
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
Indeed :-).And this is after disagreeing with you oh so long ago :)
You do make a great point though. The chance should be small, but exist nonetheless. How small is too high/low is sure to be an area or contention.
Simply agreeing on a possible existence of such a chance is a big step, and something the devs can chew on.
I appreciate your feedback (even when we don't agree).
-
My thought is a minuscule chance should exist at any mob level. Slightly growing throughout ending in exactly the same chances at the current levels. Wouldn't change a lot. But youd get your lucky strike.
-
And yes...the further apart the mob numbers, the less chance of winning. Completely agree with that. Certainly 1k vs 50k would be quite the feat, and I'm not advocating that. :-). 4k vs 6k however...
-
DRAMABOT 5000 wrote:
I have a feeling those lucky strikes would be extremely gratifying :-). Certainly worth a handful of espressos trying!My thought is a minuscule chance should exist at any mob level. Slightly growing throughout ending in exactly the same chances at the current levels. Wouldn't change a lot. But youd get your lucky strike.
-
Boat Anchor wrote:
Melee weapons seemed to have gone towards closing that gap. I'd actually be surprised if a 4k couldn't get some wins against a 6k, assuming he's well-armed.And yes...the further apart the mob numbers, the less chance of winning. Completely agree with that. Certainly 1k vs 50k would be quite the feat, and I'm not advocating that. :-). 4k vs 6k however...
-
Mystery wrote:
I think it is possible mystery. But I do think a way more erratic random factor would add more interest into the game. The win chances wouldn't be enough to change balance but they'd give the new players that satisfaction that it can be doneBoat Anchor wrote:
Melee weapons seemed to have gone towards closing that gap. I'd actually be surprised if a 4k couldn't get some wins against a 6k, assuming he's well-armed.And yes...the further apart the mob numbers, the less chance of winning. Completely agree with that. Certainly 1k vs 50k would be quite the feat, and I'm not advocating that. :-). 4k vs 6k however...
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC