Mobster stronghold loot
Forums › Suggestions & Feedback › Mobster stronghold loot-
ЖФMiniФЖ wrote:
Possibly work opposite to the pt defence penalty? Hmmm not sure.Like a defense bonus or automatically changes them to 100 influence. This is for my commet before.
-
It would make it worth it to actually fight for a populated capo. Instead of these capo'd single turf cities. I like the idea. I am going to follow this one closely and comment often to keep it bumped!!
-
I see the problems in my idea but you need to stick with this idea and keep posting the idea to nick😄👍
-
It'd be great if nick gave some insight in to the idea.
-
Yeah come on Nick
-
To many irregularities. This is a pain. It would end up being buggy. Game is buggy enough. Heck, there is a glitch now in building turf.
-
If this upgrade went through and the loot or capo benefit it goes away if it is capped that is super lame. Just means whoever buys the most turf limit gets the benefit.
I say do it. Then, I'll have a new game. It would make a nice addition to the Ozark Banker's game. 😉
-
Mr. Ikslopot wrote:
Yeah that is true but there are always downsides to flooding an area with ur turf. If someone bigger comes for u thats a big hit on income losin those turf. I think it would open up more competition and reason to fight, rather than juat alliance wars.If this upgrade went through and the loot or capo benefit it goes away if it is capped that is super lame. Just means whoever buys the most turf limit gets the benefit.
I say do it. Then, I'll have a new game. It would make a nice addition to the Ozark Banker's game. 😉
-
Any more suggestions on how to improve this? Shame Nick can't be bothered to respond.
-
VADAN wrote:
I imagine nick is busy working on the bugs from the last update.Any more suggestions on how to improve this? Shame Nick can't be bothered to respond.
-
Mystery wrote:
Well it should be on the to do list😄VADAN wrote:
I imagine nick is busy working on the bugs from the last update.Any more suggestions on how to improve this? Shame Nick can't be bothered to respond.
-
Thought I'd bring this back. See if we can get a fresh take on it.
-
So. We keep on with the stronghold as a loot. Can be acquired from missions and attached to 1 of any turf where you have a capo. Max 5 can be active per player but only 1 per capo region. It can not be capped, that turf is protected indefinitely. The only way to cap it would be to take the capo from that player, once he loses capo the stronghold turf can be capped/destroyed. The stronghold itself is attached like any other turf loot. It's has 250 influence and can be attached to a 124 inf turf.
-
This brings the total protection radius to roughly 2 miles. All the turf covered by the radius pay protection.
Some may say is that it? Currently a well placed 124 can bring in 12pm on average that I've seen. Which is around 5-6 turf paying protection. This loot is 3 times the coverage. You could expect 15-20 turd maybe? Possibly 500k+ in protection alone + the basic income of a 374 inf turf which I suspect would max around 200k? Now 1 turf collecting a combined 700k, 16.8m daily don't sound too bad to me.
That's pretty much as simplified as I can get it.
-
Somewhere highly populated you could pick up 30-35m a day from 1 turf. That's enough for others to wanna take capo I'd say.
-
I don't like the idea that a turf could be protected indefinitely (unless it's a day 1 turf).
-
Mystery wrote:
If the capo goes the turf is open to whoever can cap it. It wouldn't be much of a stronghold if it can be capped like normal would it?I don't like the idea that a turf could be protected indefinitely (unless it's a day 1 turf).
-
Darth Vadan™ wrote:
Then it's defense could be higher, but I don't think it should be uncappable.Mystery wrote:
If the capo goes the turf is open to whoever can cap it. It wouldn't be much of a stronghold if it can be capped like normal would it?I don't like the idea that a turf could be protected indefinitely (unless it's a day 1 turf).
-
Mystery wrote:
Debatable I think lol. Maybe I should not have put it as protected indefinitely. It can be capped but requires effort. Encouraging Vs for capos which is a rare sight. I don't really see a negative side or something that can be abused by a player, or strategically advantageous. Would help if you elaborate please mystery.Darth Vadan™ wrote:
Then it's defense could be higher, but I don't think it should be uncappable.Mystery wrote:
If the capo goes the turf is open to whoever can cap it. It wouldn't be much of a stronghold if it can be capped like normal would it?I don't like the idea that a turf could be protected indefinitely (unless it's a day 1 turf).
-
I'll skip over arguing the uncappable (yes, made up word) for a minute. I'm trying to figure out how the V comes into it. Are you saying people would create a V to become capo (because they can't cap the player by themselves) or in order to cap the stronghold turf?
If I was having to pay protection to a turf I couldn't cap, then I'd probably just move my turf.
-
Mystery wrote:
I see the confusion. It's close to 5am now lol. Quickly tho. Basically I meant it would encourage more players to start up Vs to destroy larger players who are capo in their city. If that players loses turf to the V he in turn may lose his capo to the next player in line, that would then make his stronghold inactive so it can be destroyed (x cash value distributed amoungst actives in the v), or someone big enough can cap. The stronghold itself would also be a rare loot.I'll skip over arguing the uncappable (yes, made up word) for a minute. I'm trying to figure out how the V comes into it. Are you saying people would create a V to become capo (because they can't cap the player by themselves) or in order to cap the stronghold turf?
If I was having to pay protection to a turf I couldn't cap, then I'd probably just move my turf.
-
Think about swagger...
1.) It takes a LONG time for some people to go to each of their capos and change something.
2.) This could potentially increase big player's influence by quite a bit.
3.) What happens when you are not capo? do you lose the stronghold? -
__Don_Line__ wrote:
You can't use it. And a player can only have 5 active as I said. That's 1250 inf.Think about swagger...
1.) It takes a LONG time for some people to go to each of their capos and change something.
2.) This could potentially increase big player's influence by quite a bit.
3.) What happens when you are not capo? do you lose the stronghold? -
fum wrote:
Not true. I still think this is one of the top 2 capo ideas. The other being frabas give capo a portion of build cost.Vadan It's been 20 I'd the devs were to implement this they would have addressed this already no sense in bringing it back then
-
fum wrote:
No one knows how many suggestions they read. I would think it would take a while to work out how to do this & then write the code to make it work, if nick liked the idea. From the updates we can see he's been working on a lot of things, so it could take a suggestion a long time to get implemented. Besides, sometimes suggestions seem to be ahead of their time, so to speak. I'm not saying this one is, just that you never know when one might suddenly make sense to use.Kozy wrote:
Dang it sure is taken a long time for the devs to implement this I thought one dev wouldnread every suggestionfum wrote:
Not true. I still think this is one of the top 2 capo ideas.Vadan It's been 20 I'd the devs were to implement this they would have addressed this already no sense in bringing it back then
-
Let's say for a minute that the strongest player is capo in a city. He gets V'ed, has his turf destroyed & loses his capo. The person with the next highest inf gets it. As soon as the V is over, the strongest mobster will likely cap the new capo to regain his capo. It seems that would lead to no one having stronghold loot there (unless they were stockpiling them). It also sounds like in the long run people would lose money, rather than gain it, because of all the fighting.
-
fum wrote:
I figured from your comment in the other post this would come up. You're completely off the mark. This is a new idea, an addition to an existing feature. Easier way to invite mobsters is a completely overhaul of an existing and complex system. They are 2 different things, in no way comparable. There has been far more constructive and potentially workable input in this thread than the other and it's reasonable to say an idea of this sort would be easier to implement than a new mobbing system. So no, not hypocritical, just more constructive.Refer to my "easier way to invite mobsters" and read what vadan said about it? Kinda hypocritical lol
-
Mystery wrote:
You make a valid point. Come to think of it there would be more overall loss than individual gain. Hmmm.Let's say for a minute that the strongest player is capo in a city. He gets V'ed, has his turf destroyed & loses his capo. The person with the next highest inf gets it. As soon as the V is over, the strongest mobster will likely cap the new capo to regain his capo. It seems that would lead to no one having stronghold loot there (unless they were stockpiling them). It also sounds like in the long run people would lose money, rather than gain it, because of all the fighting.
Maybe we look more at defensive benefit like you said. That may be the best solution.
-
fum wrote:
No, it's not.Refer to my "easier way to invite mobsters" and read what vadan said about it? Kinda hypocritical lol
-
fum wrote:
My suggestion in the other thread was that we need not drag up old suggestions that the devs have no interest in implementing. Changing the mob system is complex and I'm doubtful it'll ever change, you're essentially altering a core element of the game.Mystery wrote:
Define hypocritical on my wall and then tell me why not lolfum wrote:
No, it's not.Refer to my "easier way to invite mobsters" and read what vadan said about it? Kinda hypocritical lol
This suggesting does none of those and is in fact very easy to implement in comparison.
There's been more potentially viable suggestions made here and it's an idea that has room to build on. Mobbing thread does not. So nobody is being hypocritical. I'm no going against my beliefs, I'm stating the obvious.
Now can we get back on topic please?
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC