Encircling a town?
Forums › General Discussion › Encircling a town?-
⌖↻ԋ♺ᖶᖶ⇟☈ᖶσ↯ᵸᶳ⌖ wrote:
This is something I find really interesting, but I almost never hear it talked about. All the politics, the jargon, and all the different tactics players in this game use. I'd love to hear more people's thoughts on all this.I’ve long thought that TW would make an interesting study, even back when I was playing several years ago. Nick made the rules and a rough blueprint of how the game is played. and we decided the rest. TW made its own culture, its own pseudo language (cap, ooc, sending shoes, etc.), and its own rules of war. It’s quite interesting.
-
Funny how things such as no capping of inactives came about - everyone just kind of decided it shouldn’t be done
-
🍄𝔹𝕝𝕒𝕔𝕜👊𝕖𝕪𝕖🍄 wrote:
Who was it that wanted to make a TW book a few months ago? I still think that’s a cool idea.⌖↻ԋ♺ᖶᖶ⇟☈ᖶσ↯ᵸᶳ⌖ wrote:
This is something I find really interesting, but I almost never hear it talked about. All the politics, the jargon, and all the different tactics players in this game use. I'd love to hear more people's thoughts on all this.I’ve long thought that TW would make an interesting study, even back when I was playing several years ago. Nick made the rules and a rough blueprint of how the game is played. and we decided the rest. TW made its own culture, its own pseudo language (cap, ooc, sending shoes, etc.), and its own rules of war. It’s quite interesting.
-
𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖑𝖎𝖓𝖌🏴 wrote:
If you cap inactives the overall income of the area will decrease. Income of a turf is determined by the number of players in an area.Funny how things such as no capping of inactives came about - everyone just kind of decided it shouldn’t be done
-
🇦🇷THOMPSONMOB🇦🇷 wrote:
Mystery decided it shouldn’t be done in like 2010 when there were few players and even though it’s a dumb rule today it’s amazing how many still follow it.𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖑𝖎𝖓𝖌🏴 wrote:
If you cap inactives the overall income of the area will decrease. Income of a turf is determined by the number of players in an area.Funny how things such as no capping of inactives came about - everyone just kind of decided it shouldn’t be done
-
℣į₭ϊ₦Ǥ👹 wrote:
I’m glad I’m not the only one that thinks it’s dumb. Most of your income is going to come from protection money not from the random people in your town who downloaded TW and played it for a weekend in 2013. Go ahead and cap those inactives. Capping dead players on the other hand... that’s a different story.🇦🇷THOMPSONMOB🇦🇷 wrote:
Mystery decided it shouldn’t be done in like 2010 when there were few players and even though it’s a dumb rule today it’s amazing how many still follow it.𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖑𝖎𝖓𝖌🏴 wrote:
If you cap inactives the overall income of the area will decrease. Income of a turf is determined by the number of players in an area.Funny how things such as no capping of inactives came about - everyone just kind of decided it shouldn’t be done
-
℣į₭ϊ₦Ǥ👹 wrote:
That rule now is a way for stronger players or lame alliances with weak ass players to have a reason to cap someone🇦🇷THOMPSONMOB🇦🇷 wrote:
Mystery decided it shouldn’t be done in like 2010 when there were few players and even though it’s a dumb rule today it’s amazing how many still follow it.𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖑𝖎𝖓𝖌🏴 wrote:
If you cap inactives the overall income of the area will decrease. Income of a turf is determined by the number of players in an area.Funny how things such as no capping of inactives came about - everyone just kind of decided it shouldn’t be done
-
bump
-
bump
-
Mr. Blu wrote:
This is an excellent way to lose support and make people work against you.bump
-
I mean, its still a valid point. Making 30k instead of the base 53k does make an impact on where you plant turfs at lower levels. 30k with low protection money gets you roughly the 53k you could have in a populated area. You can take that fifty with protection and make it 80. The more tl you have the less the impact. But it still has merit.
-
🌏2$t€V€N*G€🕊
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC