Home | News | Forums | Turf Map | Screenshots | Play Turf Wars Now!

Cap an inactive?

• 〓Տɧɑƌøա₭ɪɲɠ〓 May 30, 2012

  ☈☣♭☢┲ 🐔℃Ⓗ↕☪κΞ☊™ wrote:

  If its on the map that's all u need to cap. Someone else don't like it cap them too.
  

  I can agree with you if the person capping is able to defend himself against those he would piss off by capping said inactive. However, with his mob size, the people around him would try to completely cap him out.
• YoungP May 30, 2012

  So one thing that doesn't make much sense to me, if you cap an inactive and grow the turf aren't you helping the economy?
• 〓 Ⓑ Ⓛ 〓 May 30, 2012

  No, weather the Turf is 1inf or 100inf don't make a difference its who it belongs to.
• 〓 Ⓑ Ⓛ 〓 May 30, 2012

  YoungP wrote:

  So one thing that doesn't make much sense to me, if you cap an inactive and grow the turf aren't you helping the economy?
  

  Read my post in page 1.
• YoungP May 30, 2012

  ad_BL6 wrote:

  YoungP wrote:

  So one thing that doesn't make much sense to me, if you cap an inactive and grow the turf aren't you helping the economy?
  

  Read my post in page 1.

  I did, what I got out of it is that it only hurts the economy if the inactive, yourself and one other are the only people in the area. You cap the inactive out leaving two players in an area hurting just yourself and the other. And what is this said area? A town or a radius around the turf?
• HeroicBeast May 31, 2012

  👿Belial wrote:

  Hmm. I never bought into the protect inactives craze. Do what you want but he aware some won't like it and consequences can follow
  

  👆 this.

  I find the income argument for capping inactives completely bs. I have yet to find a area (other than those where you cannot fly to or easily hop to) where capping a few inactives would hurt the area. A very large majority of areas have q crap load of players there. I personally like taxing and only get mad when someone caps who I am taxing and males it a 86 inf or higher turf. I can care less if anyone caps an inactive whose turf is already at 86 or higher.
• Mystery May 31, 2012

  dagamer01 wrote:

  👿Belial wrote:

  Hmm. I never bought into the protect inactives craze. Do what you want but he aware some won't like it and consequences can follow
  

  👆 this.

  I find the income argument for capping inactives completely bs. I have yet to find a area (other than those where you cannot fly to or easily hop to) where capping a few inactives would hurt the area. A very large majority of areas have q crap load of players there. I personally like taxing and only get mad when someone caps who I am taxing and males it a 86 inf or higher turf. I can care less if anyone caps an inactive whose turf is already at 86 or higher.
  

  Apparently dagamer is saying feel free to tax his turfs. He'll happily cap inactives, so if you can't find any to tax, you can use him as a substitute instead.
• nidkid May 31, 2012

  Well im from Edinburgh and theres loads of players (im not going to im just saying) and if i was to cap the inactive it would still leave loads of players. I get it now that you need a few players around you for you to make £53k per turf but honestly in my situation capping this guy wouldnt change a thing apart from big players that tax the turf, but theve took turf from me anyway, hes really the only person i can cap for miles around, and it would take me ages to reach the strenght the other players are at
• 👿Belial May 31, 2012

  The truth is capping inactives in most areas won't change income in the slightest. Besides no one seemed to care when I went inactive and lost 1000 turf. Course I didn't and don't either :)
• HeroicBeast May 31, 2012

  Mystery wrote: Apparently dagamer is saying feel free to tax his turfs. He'll happily cap inactives, so if you can't find any to tax, you can use him as a substitute instead.

  way to twist my words mystery. That not what I said at all (although a good portion of my turfs are already being taxed). What I was saying was I prefer to tax inactives. Unlike you all, I don't go around policing people capping inactives unless I find that they have capped an inactive I was taxing. I don't care if the cap inactives that aren't under my own turfs. If I am not taxing an inactive and that inactive gets capped, I don't care. I have seen many people cap inactives I am not taxing and, guess what, my turfs did not take a hit on income at all. A majority of areas have way more than 10 people in the area.
• Primo Loco May 31, 2012

  nidkid wrote:

  Ok thanks for the advice but my area is full of players im sure if i took a couple it would be ok no?

  A couple sure just not too many
• Hyena May 31, 2012

  I have seen players cut swathes through suburbs destroying 6 inactives in an area. THAT does affect incomes.
• HeroicBeast May 31, 2012

  Hyena wrote:

  I have seen players cut swathes through suburbs destroying 6 inactives in an area. THAT does affect incomes.
  

  I have seen way more inactives in areas get destroyed, yet the income stayed the same. Some people lost added income they were getting from taxing but their base income was still $53k.

  It really depends on the area I guess. But the selft-proclaimed "inactive police" don't bother to look at that.
• Hyena May 31, 2012

  dagamer01 wrote:

  Hyena wrote:

  I have seen players cut swathes through suburbs destroying 6 inactives in an area. THAT does affect incomes.
  

  I have seen way more inactives in areas get destroyed, yet the income stayed the same. Some people lost added income they were getting from taxing but their base income was still $53k.

  It really depends on the area I guess. But the selft-proclaimed "inactive police" don't bother to look at that.
  

  I guess the problem is that the majority of players who cap inactives are not sophisticated enough to be able to judge the impact of capping inactives on a community. Therefore it is generally better not to cap in the first place.
• HeroicBeast May 31, 2012

  Hyena wrote: I guess the problem is that the majority of players who cap inactives are not sophisticated enough to be able to judge the impact of capping inactives on a community. Therefore it is generally better not to cap in the first place.

  Maybe hyena, but as it is now, the "inactive police" doesn't look at any factors involved. They just look at the fact that an inactive was capped and that too by a noob.

  Frankly I have seen many high mob players who have also capped inactives. No one says shit to them or dishes out punishment their way. The amount of social double standards are shocking.

Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC