Solving the 1 influence problem,,,

Forums › Suggestions & Feedback › Solving the 1 influence problem,,,

ChainsawCharlie Mar 29, 2010

The smaller a turf, the smaller it's build radius.

The smaller a turf is, the harder it is to capture.

So what if a new minimum tolerance was set?

You could, for example, take the numbers from a 10 influence turf and make that the minimum standard.

So anything from 1 to 10 would have the same build radius. The same influence radius. The same capture radius.

And it doesn't have to be 10. It could be 18. It could be 5. It could be whatever is determined to work best.

This will go along away in reducing the invincibility factor, and it would benefit new players as well. Helping them to expand a little earlier in their game life and catching up to what may seem like insurmountable odds.
~Matt~ Mar 29, 2010

There would need to be a change in the initial build distance tolerance. Right now I'm thinking that the game doesn't let you build close enough to a small influence turf.
~Matt~ Mar 29, 2010

What if you eliminated the ability to sell turf influence upgrades? Turf tear down only...

Once a turf has been upgraded, it stays at that influence level unless damaged in an attack, in which case will heal back to it's upgraded level in time as it currenlty does.

This would in theory solve:
1. Big players reducing down their turfs to get at smaller players.
2. Players targeted in a vendetta from reducing all the threatened turfs to 1 to avoid any casualties.
3. Every day players from reducing their turfs to 1 when a competitor comes in for a possible capture.
ChainsawCharlie Mar 29, 2010

I feel we need to keep the downgrade as a defense
option. But we need to find a way to keep it fair.

Or make it so that turfs have to be closer in influence. Maybe any turf can cap any other turf but they have tone within 25% of each others influence.

I suggested in another thread that downgrading, you get no money for the upgrades you sell. Payoff only comes with a complete tear down.
ChainsawCharlie Mar 29, 2010

I like the idea of locking a turfs influence in vendetta, but vendetta still needs work. Vendetta should be used toexact revenge. Ad it is now, any player can target any other player. To me, that's not right.
p s i Mar 30, 2010

I still think that there shouldn't be a way to completely eliminate somebody who has spent a small fortune and countless hours playing the game all at once. If we change the riles regarding 1 inf turfs that's exactly what might end up happening. I think there needs to be some kind of finicial penalty but it should still be impossible to capture a 1 inf turf.
Add MoMo Mar 30, 2010

Hv any body capture a turf with 5 influence???
originalbones Mar 30, 2010

Maybe a 10% ( or whatever %) rule, where only that amount can drop to 1 inf to fight another day. I like the payoff when teardown idea too
State's Witness Mar 30, 2010

No one gets eliminated. WTF?just build more turfs. It ain't that hard to do. You don't really lose anything. I had to fight my way out of 3 million dollar negative hole at one point.
Missy Jane Mar 31, 2010

What about a time limit on how long a turf can be inf1.. Like a week or 10 days before it can be destroyed. This also stops other annoying behaviour like using turfs to block other people or using 2nd accounts to reserve spots for later capture by the main account.
TheFilling Mar 31, 2010

With a vendetta, a turf should be able to be cap'd or destroyed regardless of inf, as long as the rest of the requirements are met.
🐑Turf💔Warrior🐑 Mar 31, 2010

I stand by my take on this. Once a turf reaches 84 influence it can be capped no matter what influence it is dropped down to