✋Airport strikes✋
Forums › Suggestions & Feedback › ✋Airport strikes✋-
How about airports are closed randomly due to strikes or union issues? Few weeks, months, permantly, whatever. I think it'll add a little extra to the game and put some of the risk back in.
No advance warning, just a red banner up or a post in GD saying which one is closed.Come on nick, you know you want to, and can do, so do, do! ✊
-
Me gusta
-
I think on those same days henchmen strike as well.
-
💀nobody💀 wrote:
That would suck for havocI think on those same days henchmen strike as well.
-
I like this idea maybe a 24-48 hour strike......
-
The"Accountant" wrote:
I'd prefer a 5 year strike...😜I like this idea maybe a 24-48 hour strike......
-
Get✯SomeⒼ₡❸ wrote:
Me gusta
-
Nah...I don't like this idea...sry
-
I think this could make an interesting turn. Or maybe if you are capped out of an airport (say 150 miles from it), you can't fly to it for a month and still have the weakness when you get back
-
I think all these would have been fine if they were implemented when airports first came. Not now when most, if not all, airports are being controlled by high mob players.
These changes will primarily only affect the new/low mob players since most of the big players are already pretty vastly expanded. A strike on the airport won't affect them as much as it would a low level player
-
"The Man" wrote:
You really don't like airports, don't you?How about airports are closed randomly due to strikes or union issues? Few weeks, months, permantly, whatever. I think it'll add a little extra to the game and put some of the risk back in.
No advance warning, just a red banner up or a post in GD saying which one is closed.Come on nick, you know you want to, and can do, so do, do! ✊
-
Sgt Mayday wrote:
Yep. He hates them."The Man" wrote:
You really don't like airports, don't you?How about airports are closed randomly due to strikes or union issues? Few weeks, months, permantly, whatever. I think it'll add a little extra to the game and put some of the risk back in.
No advance warning, just a red banner up or a post in GD saying which one is closed.Come on nick, you know you want to, and can do, so do, do! ✊
-
dagamer01 wrote:
I think all these would have been fine if they were implemented when airports first came. Not now when most, if not all, airports are being controlled by high mob players.
These changes will primarily only affect the new/low mob players since most of the big players are already pretty vastly expanded. A strike on the airport won't affect them as much as it would a low level player
Quite the opposite, larger players have wars at airports all the time. This change would affect them far more than smaller mobbed players. I've lost turf at airports myself and I'm a well known neutral fighter, but in war you can't take any chance.
So randomizing closures (which happen in real life) would add another level of play and bring a little bit of the risk back into the game. ✊
-
I approve of this suggestion 👍
-
"The Man" wrote:
I think more players use airports to travel/expand than to war there. Generally airports wars are among the same handful of large players. There are many more small players that use airports for travel/expansion that large players.Quite the opposite, larger players have wars at airports all the time. This change would affect them far more than smaller mobbed players. I've lost turf at airports myself and I'm a well known neutral fighter, but in war you can't take any chance.
"The Man"wrote:
I don't think airports close all that often in real life. I think closing airports will take away from the warring aspect that you say players have at airports. If people can't travel/expand, there I'd less war.So randomizing closures (which happen in real life) would add another level of play and bring a little bit of the risk back into the game. ✊
-
Someone should organize a global shut down. Mass turf every airport. "The Man", they will need a leader hahaha
-
@dagamer, I can't believe you just argued that. You are always arguing about how airports are overcrowded & players can't fly in, especially little players.
Now you are saying more small players use them for travel then large players. Since large players use them quite a bit, then tons of small players must use them.
So which is it? Small players use airports frequently or small players don't use them frequently because of overcrowding/large players controlling them?
-
@Mystery:
The ratio of small players to large is much larger. With that said, theoretically small player should/would use airports more than large players. I guess I wasn't clear or was misleading in my argument. What I mean was that airport strikes will affect smaller players more simply by looking at the number of small players vs the number of large players.
I was just countering The Man's arguement that airport strikes would affect larger players more because they use it as a battle ground. Primary use of the airports is travel, and if there are strikes, no1 can travel. Since there are more small players than large players, it affects small players more.
battles can still happen among the large players quite effectively since by now most of the larger players are pretty well expanded and dispersed in the areas they normally battle.
-
On a side note:
Say this idea does get implemented, I think that all turfs at the airports should go down to generating 0 income. I mean if a place is on strike, no income could be made there right? It would make no sense to have a place of work shutdown and then still be able to reap the income.
I am also think of a possibility of reducing the strengths of the airport turfs during this so called strikes/shutdowns. But I sure all the vets will not like this since it will ruin their holds on the airports.
-
What is it with u and airports
-
@ dagamer
You kinda piss me off. Stop talking like you know better than any of the vets. The Man says they have wars at airports, ten they have wars at airports. -
TheNewfieBullet wrote:
Dude chill. I never disagreed with him about that. I am merely was pointing out that there are more smaller players thus a airport strike would affect the small players more than it would the larger players.@ dagamer
You kinda piss me off. Stop talking like you know better than any of the vets. The Man says they have wars at airports, ten they have wars at airports.Regardless, if he says there are wars at the airport and this being a war game, having strikes at airport reduces waring. That's counter productive to the games concept.
-
dagamer01 wrote:
Not neccesarily. I'd explain, but you've about sucked the life out of me.TheNewfieBullet wrote:
Dude chill. I never disagreed with him about that. I am merely was pointing out that there are more smaller players thus a airport strike would affect the small players more than it would the larger players.@ dagamer
You kinda piss me off. Stop talking like you know better than any of the vets. The Man says they have wars at airports, ten they have wars at airports.Regardless, if he says there are wars at the airport and this being a war game, having strikes at airport reduces waring. That's counter productive to the games concept.
-
Mystery wrote: Not neccesarily. I'd explain, but you've about sucked the life out of me.
Sorry you feel that way. But I am not gonna change my mind simply because of what you just said. What you have just said is your opinion and I respect that but it does nothing more than that. I'll graciously hear you out if you would give some detail or fact to support your opinion. -
dagamer, it's great that you're so passionate about what you perceive as a valid viewpoint, and I'm not trying to belittle that in any way. But the fact remains you lack the experience played to be making most of your assumptions in this thread, and a few others.
I know a little bit about wars in this game, not nearly as much as most of the other large players, but enough to understand that this change would in fact make the game more interesting and fun for a lot of folks.
What experiences and in game knowledge are you basing your arguments on?
-
@The Man: Just what I have seen, read and experienced myself as well as logical thinking. You are right, I don't have the vast hands on experience in wars like vets but I read and do research on any game I play so I know what it entails. But than again we are all just making assumptions here. No one truly knows how things will turn out for sure with this change.
And thank you for being respectful of my opinions. I really appreciate it. Many of the Vets I've dealt with have been pretty rude and condescending.
-
dagamer01 wrote:
@The Man: Just what I have seen, read and experienced myself as well as logical thinking. You are right, I don't have the vast hands on experience in wars like vets but I read and do research on any game I play so I know what it entails. But than again we are all just making assumptions here. No one truly knows how things will turn out for sure with this change.
And thank you for being respectful of my opinions. I really appreciate it. Many of the Vets I've dealt with have been pretty rude and condescending.
Welcome, but think it over before you post. You really do need more in game experience related to the matters at hand before offering opinions on why they wouldn't work. ✊
-
@The Man: You knw I've been playing since the first week of August 2010. I admit I have only been extremely active for the last 7-8 months. I used to play passively (never really commenting on things). I don't really knw how much more experience is required for me to actually comment.
It's true I don't have the extensive experience in airport wars as most of the vets do, but you have to admit thats not the only thing to do at the airport. My opinions on the matter have been formulated based on multiple factors. Sometimes experience doesnt mean much; especially when your experience could be drastically different than others (ie. My experience in airport wars would most probably be much worse than yours based on our mob sizes.) Such difference experiences would lead to very different opinions in our case. I true feel that opinions in such situations cannot solely be based on experience.
-
To clarify the above, I am not saying that we should lewve experience out completely. I am saying that logic and reasoning, game mechanics, etc are equally important, if not more, to formulate an opinion. Especially in this matter.
Difference in experience due to difference in mob size will lead to different, and probably bias, opinions.
-
dagamer, as you know first hand it's easy for another player (or group of players) to remove someone from an airport. Two weeks later, they are back. You really trying to tell me if there was a chance that airport could be shut down, even on a temporary basis, that would not make the game more fun? For any level man, risk is inherent to this game, my suggestion would put some of that risk back in.
-
Take my road trip from Texas to California, I increased my turf limit months in advance to be sure I had plenty of safety turfs along the way. I PM'd the larger players and alliances in advance to let them know I was coming. I did all this because if I got capped out, I was gone. For good.
The game, at least around airports, has lost that thrill. Level, mob, time played, none of that changes the fact airports need a little something to spice them up. ✊
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC