Ok to cap inactives?
Forums › General Discussion › Ok to cap inactives?-
I gave a guy two warnings about capping inactives. Wouldn't listen so I capped him out. Then he cry's to a 55k. Who caps me. Lol I explained it to the 55k and was told he's my friend. So I guess it's ok to cap inactives? Don't think so.
-
Sorry bro. Shut like this happens. If you have to, just tear down and move out. Don't start trouble with big players, I learned that early on. Best of luck!
⚔♛ᏦįℵᏳᎯℜϮℌųℜ♛⚔
-
It's better to charge inactives rent than to cap them. Make more money to build more turfs.
-
I don't see a problem with it as long as a bigger person isn't collecting from it and there's enough turf in the area so the income isn't affected.
-
boogz wrote:
Problem is then you have loot out for the takingIt's better to charge inactives rent than to cap them. Make more money to build more turfs.
-
Ƭⅈʛℰℜ wrote:
Most inactives quit before they even unlock the upgrades to get 86 inf.boogz wrote:
Problem is then you have loot out for the takingIt's better to charge inactives rent than to cap them. Make more money to build more turfs.
-
Times.... They are a changing.
-
Ƭⅈʛℰℜ wrote:
Loot turfs are always fair gameboogz wrote:
Problem is then you have loot out for the takingIt's better to charge inactives rent than to cap them. Make more money to build more turfs.
-
I say yes
-
I say NO. without inactives to tax the smart new players won't be able to set up on away from everybody else turfs and safely put loot on it.
-
Play the game the way you want.
-
I have capped inactives, but only in deserted areas where I'm the only one taxing them.
-
☣ 🎸ӈɪƖƖßıƖƖγ🎸☣ wrote:
👆I don't see a problem with it as long as a bigger person isn't collecting from it and there's enough turf in the area so the income isn't affected.
-
Is there a hard and fast rule? I assumed the advice I got when I started was right, but I've not seen it posted anywhere else:
1. Loot turf are always fair game;
2. Capos held by inactives *should* be fair game, but may be protected locally;
3. Never destroy inactive turf if you cap it;
4. Isolated rural inactives don't affect the economy if you just replace them with yourself;
5. Cap actives in urban or built up areas at your peril;
6. Taking your own previously capped turf back from an inactive is okay;
7. Never ever cap an inactive with less than 86 inf. Just tax them.
8. Always ask if a suspected inactive is active first, just to be sure.
9. If you cap someone for capping inactives DON'T destroy the turf, or you're as bad as the person you capped.
I spent my first few months not even knowing how to tell inactives from actives!
-
Meta Baron wrote:
Nice List!Is there a hard and fast rule? I assumed the advice I got when I started was right, but I've not seen it posted anywhere else:
1. Loot turf are always fair game;
2. Capos held by inactives *should* be fair game, but may be protected locally;
3. Never destroy inactive turf if you cap it;
4. Isolated rural inactives don't affect the economy if you just replace them with yourself;
5. Cap actives in urban or built up areas at your peril;
6. Taking your own previously capped turf back from an inactive is okay;
7. Never ever cap an inactive with less than 86 inf. Just tax them.
8. Always ask if a suspected inactive is active first, just to be sure.
9. If you cap someone for capping inactives DON'T destroy the turf, or you're as bad as the person you capped.
I spent my first few months not even knowing how to tell inactives from actives!
-
Mystery will doubtless appear and correct it!
-
WEEDFARMER wrote:
I gave a guy two warnings about capping inactives. Wouldn't listen so I capped him out. Then he cry's to a 55k. Who caps me. Lol I explained it to the 55k and was told he's my friend. So I guess it's ok to cap inactives? Don't think so.
its ok to do whatever u want, if you wanna try to police the game, u will learn there are bigger players out there who will police you
-
Do what you want.
There's no rules, only etiquette.
You do whatever suits your game style. -
If an inactive has one single turf at 86 in the middle of nowhere, I'm capping it. It's not effecting anyone in doing so.
-
❇乃عทزy❇ wrote:
Do what you want.
There's no rules, only etiquette.
You do whatever suits your game style.Fair play. At the end of the day it's about giving people an excuse. Capping inactives is a reason for capping an active. I guess some people need to justify what they do and others don't give a fig.
-
One thing I don't understand with people like Viper is that they have so much turf yet they can nearly build more
-
༎།SཛཀᎢཇΧ།༎ wrote:
But why would you want it? The income from that one would be shit. It would be better to plant your own elsewhere, personallyIf an inactive has one single turf at 86 in the middle of nowhere, I'm capping it. It's not effecting anyone in doing so.
-
Play the game however you want. Just remember your actions have consequences and you'll need to be prepared to attract unwanted attention.
-
☣ 🎸ӈɪƖƖßıƖƖγ🎸☣ wrote:
Exactly.I don't see a problem with it as long as a bigger person isn't collecting from it and there's enough turf in the area so the income isn't affected.
And if people don't like it they will tell you, if you're big enough you can then tell them to get fucked. If you're not then I would suggest not to tell them to get fucked. Play how you like, just be prepared to back it up either way.
-
✭J⌖и Λl͟l͟e͞и✭ wrote:
Not if your turf-limit is less than adequate.༎།SཛཀᎢཇΧ།༎ wrote:
But why would you want it? The income from that one would be shit. It would be better to plant your own elsewhere, personallyIf an inactive has one single turf at 86 in the middle of nowhere, I'm capping it. It's not effecting anyone in doing so.
-
☣ 🎸ӈɪƖƖßıƖƖγ🎸☣ wrote:
I should have added don't cap inactives being taxed, but... is there any etiquette about capping active turfs that are being taxed?I don't see a problem with it as long as a bigger person isn't collecting from it and there's enough turf in the area so the income isn't affected.
On the one hand it might be doing someone a favour, on the other it might make the taxer pissed....
-
You will definately piss off the taxer !
-
Meta Baron wrote:
Holy cow! I've never seen such complicated rules about inactives. The way I play is don't cap an inactive unless it's for loot, a capo, or to get into the center of a clump of their turf to tax because there's no room to build.1. Loot turf are always fair game;
2. Capos held by inactives *should* be fair game, but may be protected locally;
3. Never destroy inactive turf
4. Isolated rural inactives don't affect the economy if you just replace them with yourself;
5. Cap actives in urban or built up areas at your peril;
6. Taking your own turf back is okay;
7. Never ever cap an inactive with less than 86 inf.
8. Always ask if a suspected inactive is active first
9. If you cap someone for capping inactives DON'T destroy the turf
Everyone has their own thoughts on inactives though.
-
༎།SཛཀᎢཇΧ།༎ wrote:
That's a lame cop-out, if your income is that bad you need to re-evaluate the turf your holding✭J⌖и Λl͟l͟e͞и✭ wrote:
Not if your turf-limit is less than adequate.༎།SཛཀᎢཇΧ།༎ wrote:
But why would you want it? The income from that one would be shit. It would be better to plant your own elsewhere, personallyIf an inactive has one single turf at 86 in the middle of nowhere, I'm capping it. It's not effecting anyone in doing so.
-
If capping an inactive dosent hurt the local pay out, then i say by all means, go right ahead. But if its u and an inactive in a town, then capping him will lower the money u make per turf, so its up to you, in remote arias where there are few ppl i would say dont do it, but in large cities like chicago, and la, go right ahead, it wont lower the turf base income any and will boos urs. Thats my thought on it all.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC