Old players / Prison time???
Forums › Suggestions & Feedback › Old players / Prison time???-
Hiya coming as a new player in the last few months there seems to be a helluva lot of inactive players hanging round occupying turf - and ally of energy by new players trying to get capo points from those who aren’t even playing. Is there anything that can be done about phasing out inactive players??? I’m not one to pose a problem without a solution so my suggestion is that a feature called “prison time” is instituted. Much like real mobsters such as lucky Luciano, a players influence diminishes the amount of time they are inactive from the game, until after, say 12 months they are bought down to 1 influence. In gameplay terms I th No this is realistic as new active players would realistically take over idle capos no?
-
PS I’d like 500 free henchmen if this idea was taken up lol 😝
-
No disrespect but you need to understand the game a bit more to see why that idea does not make any sense.
Inactive players provide to the economy and are great taxing opportunities.
This has been suggested many times by new guys who do not appreciate how the games fully works.
Look back over other similar threads to see best explanations. -
No I definitely understand what you are saying and I’ve seen it mentioned before. And these great “taxing” opportunities may benefit yourself and other players who have been here a long time but actually hinder new players growth - and yes I am advocating for new players. I imagine it was a lot easier to gain control of areas and have battles when a lot of the established players first started as most people were starting too. Mob sizes were no where near as big and territories everywhere not completely claimed when you first started. As a new player starting in a regional area I was fainted by the inactive capo having 500 mob, let alone if I started in major cities with not just capos but regular players having over 5000 or more mob. I understand what you are saying but this policy only benefits the built up players by way of, as you stated, taxing. It actually overwhelms new players and drives them away. New players don’t care that players like yourselves with 80000 mob and 1500 turfs get taxes
-
Sorry had to do it in a different post.
Anyways like I said this benefits established players not new ones. If you want to maintain a monopoly of established players then fine. If you actually want a challenging game again then change it. Let me ask you this —- of those players who get hundreds of thousands of dollars protection money from inactive players had to pay for their mob with just active players taxing, how would they go? It was not designed to be this way, it was designed to be the way these players started with. Even if we say newbies can build their mob up over time, they’re still only entering and gaining the same mob codes as those with 100000 anyways so not making up ground. How many of those mob members do the top guys have are not even playing anymore? This needs to be looked at!
-
I dont fully understand what you are saying but mob size doesnt count when it comes to taxing an inactive player.
As soon as you reach the level you can equip loot you can tax said inactive. -
Now as for putting loot out and risking an active player capping it? Well thats a different scenario- one we all risk as there is always the chance of a larger player capping it.
However you only speak of inactives so im not sure of what you mean. -
To the contrary Beer Baron, it's actually the older, more established players who don't care so much about taxing opportunities. If someone has 1500 turf (per your example above) they're probably not hurting for money. But a new player who only has 15 turf could really benefit from taxing other players. Who better to tax than an inactive. They won't cap you, they won't complain, and they won't tear down the turf you're taxing.
-
It also sounds like you're advocating for reducing inactive influence for the purpose of new players getting capos. You indicated that not being able to get these capos hinders your growth as a new player.
However, having capo of an area does nothing to help you grow, so your growth will not be hindered by not having it.👉😵 -
Thanks for all the responses it’s hrear to see that people are interested. What I am saying is, how powerful would the “powerful” if the inactive players were wiped out? As you say mick attack or defence stats don’t mean anything, your mob is your power. How are new players ever going to get to that level even if they punch codes all day they still will not be able to reach you or others levels as you have people in your mob that are inactive and hence will not accept the invites?? I don’t see how this makes a level playing field for new players. I am in no way diminishing the effort you guys have put in in terms of mobbing up but it is statistically impossible for any new players to reach the same level —- they can invite every new player, as will you, but they can’t invite those who are inactive so there will always be a permanent gap yeah?
As far as TODs comments go there is a definite advantage when starting out if you can gain capo —- you are able to generate at least 25% more income due to no cops
-
As a historical point again, how much do mobsters’ influence decrease when they are inactive in real life? Yes there are plenty of examples of bosses who rule from jail but even Capone and Luciano lost their influence after enough time in prison and “inactive”
-
This is my fourth attempt to write a reply as something happens half way through so I’ll keep brief. If anyone can answer this question:——
How do new players reach the same level of mob as established players if established players’ mobs contain players who are inactive and no longer respond to invites? How does this NOT create a two tier system??
If anyone can explain how this creates a level playing field I would be grateful to hear it... otherwise this is why I believe a change needs to happen if the game is to continue to grow....
-
Ok so i think you have moved away from the influence/ tax/ capo question first asked and now ask, if i read you right, “should players mobs be reduced by those number of inactive players in their mob count to allow newer players some chance of reaching them in mob number terms?”.
-
This is a double edged sword for newbies, because say myself for example, im not a profilic puncher, but if u removed the inactives from my mob i may only be left with 7 or 8k. Or less, i dont really know.
But either way, as u punch and grow your mob too will also decline as your mob will have a certain percentage of inactives thus resulting in stagnation.No matter how you weigh it up it doesnt make any sense.
-
You currently have 466 mob count. Chances are most active players have not punched your code with the exception of daily punchers nor have you punched their codes.
At 466 mob you can still be a trillionaire if u wish, as that i feel answers your first query.
And no, new guys or myself for that matter, will ever catch up to the likes of Dunn in mob count.
But the game has a place for everyone regardless of stats including mob & influence.Keep on playing and adding to your profile and you will find a happy playing field.
-
I would only chime in as a "newer" player, not as any voice of authority.
Beer Baron, I was in your position just about 6 months ago. Many of these "powerful" players also were at one time where you and I are at. The difference is that they've put in the time, energy, and in some cases money as well to be what they are today.
I personally don't feel Ruth at any player regardless of their mob size should be "penalized" by losing Mob for what other players do. By that I mean why should anyone lose mob because a player becomes inactive?
Another point I would suggest and make to you as a newer player is punch codes and get familiar with Mob.Codes as that site is FREE and posts what is called TEMP CODES daily as well as hosts most of the Turf War codes as a database for us to punch and mob up.
I hope this was deemed helpful and as constructive and not disrespectful as that is not the intention whatsoever.
There many great active players that are more than happy to help newer players out. 💔Maddux💔
-
Reducing turfs influence over inactive time would only show how quiet this games got.. punch temps like crazy and get to 1-5k mob .. use all your dp on turf limit and every 2 weeks land somwhere new and spread out.. game will open up for you a bit then
-
At 7k mob you can invite any big player in the game to a vendetta, and destroy any turf, mob size can become annoying sometimes as players are able to capture you and you can't touch them due to capture range, yes you can't beat Dunn for example in a 1v1 fight, but get a few 30k mobs in a vendetta and you can capture anyone. This game is about punching to the necessary size and then making bigger friends to help you capture even bigger players. On a small scale, a solo 1.5k mob would be no match against you and a few friends. Basically, you don't need to catch people up in mob size to be able to beat them pretty easily
-
as ive proposed before, there should be a negative effect on inactive players. for the small, uncappables - increasing their capture radius, decreasing the influence requirements, and removing don protection. for others - decreasing defense.
if a new player wants to cap players who have been inactive for years, why should the game stop them? this gives new players some ability to actually play the game and encouraging players to stay active.
-
as for the whole mob thing, it heavily favored the older players from the start. sure now days small players can use vendettas to take out a few big players, but there is literally no hope for a new player to get anywhere close to a decent sized mob before they give up on the game. ive debated whether auto-accepting invites or auto-accepting invite codes generated for “henchmen” would work. sure it screws over existing players that put the time and effort into punching player codes, but at this point the game needs to encourage new player growth instead of alienating them with the almost impossible task of ever being relevant in this game. maybe some kind of amount or time limit for the auto-accepting feature for new players or maybe nick says fuck it and just makes it available to all players with no limitations, allowing the most determined to eventually rise above the rest.
-
Add a negative modifier to inactive player defense based on mob size, new players can get turfs easier without too much difficulty and active players will not be affected
-
Im a returning player with loads of cash I'll never run out of but I'm still way smaller than most inactive players mobs around me. It gives me less reason to really stick around.
-
yomama1064 wrote:
Yepas for the whole mob thing, it heavily favored the older players from the start. sure now days small players can use vendettas to take out a few big players, but there is literally no hope for a new player to get anywhere close to a decent sized mob before they give up on the game. ive debated whether auto-accepting invites or auto-accepting invite codes generated for “henchmen” would work. sure it screws over existing players that put the time and effort into punching player codes, but at this point the game needs to encourage new player growth instead of alienating them with the almost impossible task of ever being relevant in this game. maybe some kind of amount or time limit for the auto-accepting feature for new players or maybe nick says fuck it and just makes it available to all players with no limitations, allowing the most determined to eventually rise above the rest.
-
If they are inactive. Sounds like tax time.
-
I feel like the problem with inactive players’ turfs isn’t a real problem as long as some of those turfs get capped by active player’s daily. However, I do agree that the map is being crowded with turfs and not giving room to new players so they can establish themselves in places like NYC and other population centers.
-
Tinny Tim wrote:
I feel like the problem with inactive players’ turfs isn’t a real problem as long as some of those turfs get capped by active player’s daily. However, I do agree that the map is being crowded with turfs and not giving room to new players so they can establish themselves in places like NYC and other population centers.
Only real way to fix that problem would be to make a new game but at this point that would be a slap in the face of those that have been here for years. -
Preoximerias wrote:
Unfortunately, you are right so the only way is to capture hundreds of turfs and tear them all downTinny Tim wrote:
I feel like the problem with inactive players’ turfs isn’t a real problem as long as some of those turfs get capped by active player’s daily. However, I do agree that the map is being crowded with turfs and not giving room to new players so they can establish themselves in places like NYC and other population centers.
Only real way to fix that problem would be to make a new game but at this point that would be a slap in the face of those that have been here for years.
-
Tinny Tim wrote:
Preoximerias wrote:
Unfortunately, you are right so the only way is to capture hundreds of turfs and tear them all downTinny Tim wrote:
I feel like the problem with inactive players’ turfs isn’t a real problem as long as some of those turfs get capped by active player’s daily. However, I do agree that the map is being crowded with turfs and not giving room to new players so they can establish themselves in places like NYC and other population centers.
Only real way to fix that problem would be to make a new game but at this point that would be a slap in the face of those that have been here for years.
But that would also wipe out the economy in an area.
-
Howdy.
FACTORS to consider {perhaps as game players
seek to suggest evolution to game designer's universe} 💡...hopefully not noob naive...re: inactive players and EFFECTS in game.
[rename or classifying ::
Levels of inactive status
-timeframe dependant and resultant effects per status
--any (jr or sr) player's attempt to raise mob
--turf of an IA (inactive mobster) is not vacant when
IAM (IA's Mob) consists of active mobsters
---but where IAM consists of MIA ...influence should be lower OR stats related to/built while playing would, fairly, suffer/diminish until gone or. until IM logs on...returns from vacay...released from prison...worded to fit universe of course.
These aspects in story and reflecting effects of absence from one's hood or homies...wrong genre..i know.{renaming
inactive player...vague
-criteria tbd-
mia = MobsterInActive
OR
mud=MobbingUnDetectedother end of scale,
mop=Mobster OPerating
as in an active playerSMRTASS
BBADDABB -
Crap...was building thoughts
Didn't intend ro post
Was brainstorm ing. -
tartwater wuss wrote:
Just delete your post if you don’t want it there.Crap...was building thoughts
Didn't intend ro post
Was brainstorm ing.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC