10% rule.
Forums › General Discussion › 10% rule.-
@ iamcanadian. Draw me a picture I'd u think u understand better...thug probably didn't even fight back.
Whining? Why would I need to whine when I got a higher fight count than u? U nonce. Hush ur gums while the adults speak child.
-
iamcanadian 🔨🔥💀 wrote:
Vendettas don't help if the V member who has range on a target does not meet the 10% inf rule. How is that a problem? If you're in a V and the target drops inf, then (the V member within range) needs to drop to match. It's a pain in the ass, but its a very real tactical option (not flaw) in TW, and should not be removed. So thuglife didn't drop inf when you V'ed him? why not? (just asking because I don't know)VADAN wrote:
You use vendettas like I did to deal with thuglife. Now STFU@ iamcanadian, u right I wouldn't have had to drop cos he wouldn't be in my mob cap range. U still haven't explained how u would deal with a 2pm mob player with 1500 turf and 1500 influene. Please, enlighten me oh great tw strategist... Or, shut up. My reason don't need to be justified, I'm not saying it's the right option, at the moment it's the only option.
-
🚶ickle mobster🚶 says:
Ain't payback a bitch. That's the problem with going low inf and being a cocky little shit, you run out of money then have to face reality, fuck you loser👊👊👊👊👊5 days ago
nuff said!!!
-
iamcanadian 🔨🔥💀 wrote:
What does that prove? Absolutely nothing against the "so called" point u made. Lol. U sound desperate to win a losing justification. Stop making a fool of yaself son.🚶ickle mobster🚶 says:
Ain't payback a bitch. That's the problem with going low inf and being a cocky little shit, you run out of money then have to face reality, fuck you loser👊👊👊👊👊5 days ago
nuff said!!!
-
VADAN wrote:
LOL By reading your comments we can see who is the real fool here... Now counter another of your points you are trying to put across in here... Idiot!!iamcanadian 🔨🔥💀 wrote:
What does that prove? Absolutely nothing against the "so called" point u made. Lol. U sound desperate to win a losing justification. Stop making a fool of yaself son.🚶ickle mobster🚶 says:
Ain't payback a bitch. That's the problem with going low inf and being a cocky little shit, you run out of money then have to face reality, fuck you loser👊👊👊👊👊5 days ago
nuff said!!!
-
YOU wrote:
Oh and I wasn't talking about ickle, altho I did clear quite a few while I was under. I have no problem with revenge being taken. U need to understand the game not me lol. 10k noob.iamcanadian 🔨🔥💀 wrote:
What does that prove? Absolutely nothing against the "so called" point u made. Lol. U sound desperate to win a losing justification. Stop making a fool of yaself son.🚶ickle mobster🚶 says:
Ain't payback a bitch. That's the problem with going low inf and being a cocky little shit, you run out of money then have to face reality, fuck you loser👊👊👊👊👊5 days ago
nuff said!!!
-
VADAN wrote:
LOL you are a child...YOU wrote:
Oh and I wasn't talking about ickle, altho I did clear quite a few while I was under. I have no problem with revenge being taken. U need to understand the game not me lol. 10k noob.iamcanadian 🔨🔥💀 wrote:
What does that prove? Absolutely nothing against the "so called" point u made. Lol. U sound desperate to win a losing justification. Stop making a fool of yaself son.🚶ickle mobster🚶 says:
Ain't payback a bitch. That's the problem with going low inf and being a cocky little shit, you run out of money then have to face reality, fuck you loser👊👊👊👊👊5 days ago
nuff said!!!
-
Wow. This went down hill
-
🔥GOD of WAR🔥 wrote:
Sorry lol I hate when people try make a point with no valid arguement b. Atleast u put up decent counters, unlike others, who think they know it all.Wow. This went down hill
-
VADAN wrote:
You entertain me... jusk like a klown!!!🔥GOD of WAR🔥 wrote:
Sorry lol I hate when people try make a point with no valid arguement b. Atleast u put up decent counters, unlike others, who think they know it all.Wow. This went down hill
-
Viper ☠ wrote:
👍 similar to what Shaggly said. E.g. A 14-15k mob fully armed with no upkeep weapons who can, will continue to still cap 5k mob with fully armed lapua & armor). That does not make sense in this respect where 5k mobs are decent sized to have a fun gameplay.Sorry B, you and I couldn't disagree more. If it stays I say it needs to expire at a certain level. I've had to crater my inf more than once to have a go at certain opponents. If someone reaches level 40-50 & haven't learned how to play the game yet then their fate is their own and the rest of us shouldn't have to be punished when we want to self-police a Godfather level player that bottoms out so he can rip some noobs apart. The rookies aren't helped by eternal protection, they are actually hurt by it. They have the Don's help until 25, after that it will be up to the players skill and the relationships and rep they have built by then.
-
Another thing to consider would be a "training wheels" server and a server for the higher end server. At some set level, mob size or turf count the player chooses where to continue their career, either the rule set that currently stands or a no holds barred server where the combat is less restrictive. We clearly have at least two camps in the game and if Nick would consider maybe creating a second server for the players that favor a less restrictive game style. As for your idea of taking a week off B keep in mind there is something in place that accounts for that, daily cap limits. B, as far as turf you and I are roughly the same size, for you to lose everything in a week you would have to have 4-5 players go to cap limit on you every day for a solid week and the chances of those same players would need to all be within range of every one of your turf or be able to get in range in that week.
-
The odds of that happening are pretty slim at best but if they find a way to do that then why should they be discouraged? There should be a way to lose it all, empires crumble it's simply a fact in the real world. If you could lose everything would it not change the way you deal with some situations?
-
randombloke wrote:
The Rhino wrote:
Yes. Let's do this. That way bas can stay malarial and Shaggly and brit will be forced to go full influence. Very good idea.How about this. Make the rule only for those with less than 1 bill to your name. That should make it harder for big mobs to exploit. Just a thought, can't see anything wrong with this one
There are members if Twfc that could also exploit this. It's not perfect, no solution is, and I know you wont belive me when I say that this is not intended to aid our side of the war. However, this Makes it ALOT harder to exploit. The downfall if malaria is that it destroys income, having money under 1 bill it is hard to place alot of turfs, or have any good weaponry. On the flip side it makes it hard to destroy a players game completely, and allows the small players to benefit as this rule was intended.
-
I liked the 10% rule, I used it myself most memorably to re-establish my presence while I mobbed back up, but I never intended to use it for a long time, it was a temp fix and meant I've had to work hard to build my cash back up. But I now think the rule is being OVERLY exploited by pretty much everyone. It's becoming the only strategy used now and it's pretty yawnworthy
-
🔥GOD of WAR🔥 wrote:
Or turf hop away from them. Nate did that once in the GC3 War. Just kept turf hopping every day.Turf🐑Warrior👊🔨💀 wrote:
So instead they should be just capped to oblivion? That's not brave that's just silly.I have no issues with larger players having this advantages that they have. But they shouldn't be able to pussy their way out of vendettas by hiding behind the ten percent rule by dropping influence down to 800 with 800 turfs. If those people can get a vendetta against that person and be able to beat them and that large player can't find any help to defend him or her self, they should be able to to just drop influence and hide. As I said, it's the pussy thing to do
-
🔥GOD of WAR🔥 wrote:
THat is a good point. Then make it to where once you upgrade to 86, you can't downgradeTurf🐑Warrior👊🔨💀 wrote:
Mob wouldn't work. Me and night amd a few others wouldmt have anyone to cap.God✯Father wrote:
Agreed. I still think there are two ways this could be fixed.🔥GOD of WAR🔥 wrote:
No it needs to work both ways! Low inf = bitch game!Everyone thinks this should or will change. I have to disagree. The 10% rule is necessary for the survival of both smaller and bigger players. I hate it as much as anyone but it's necessary amd there are no acceptable alternatives.
Keep the ten percent rule but add one influence to every member of your mob OR make it to where once you upgrade a turf to 86, it cannot be downgraded unless torn down
-
Viper ☠ wrote:
Agreed. F U ViperThe odds of that happening are pretty slim at best but if they find a way to do that then why should they be discouraged? There should be a way to lose it all, empires crumble it's simply a fact in the real world. If you could lose everything would it not change the way you deal with some situations?
-
There should always be a way to come back from the brink. Nick would lose customers if this was not possible.
@Random would ait lower figure suit? 500m or ever 100m?
-
Ait= a dunno where that came from
-
The Rhino wrote:
I liked the 10% rule ...it was a temp fix ... But I now think the rule is being OVERLY exploited by pretty much everyone. It's becoming the only strategy used now and it's pretty yawnworthy
-
I personally think that if you are "artifically" below your natural 10% influence (based on turf count not turf limit) then you should not benefit from the protection of the 10% rule. I haven't thought this through fully but I think it would be enough to protect the smaller players.
If an example is needed, someone with a turf count of 100 should have 8,600 influence or thereabouts. If their influence falls below 860 due to them lowering all their turfs influence to 1 they should not benefit from the protection of the 10% rule. Another way, 1000 turf count at below 8,600 influence should not benefit in the same way. However, someone who is "naturally" below someones 10%, regardless of mob size, level etc etc should benefit from the protection of the 10% rule. So in this example the same player with 50 turfs at 86 influence would still benefit.
-
VADAN wrote:
Best post in this entire threadThis game has become nothing more than a mob size competition. And the simple fact is not everyone can put in as much time and effort as we have. We bang on saying "mob up" that's bs, it makes no difference, code acceptance rates are dropping fast, noobs join, they see huge players n get put off. That's no way to progress. We'll keep fundig towards this game with our own wars, which if I'm honest is getting boring now, the new generation of players don't wanna read that the only way for them to enjoy is by punching 1000s of codes or spending real money. Yes, we do and will spend, but this shouldn't be the games dependancy. A point will come when the vets call it a day financially which will drastically change this game.
-
randombloke wrote:
Hmm. Interesting. I like. It still allows you TI lower to cap someone so free players aren't hurt. But at the same time it limits protection. I can't think of a downside.I personally think that if you are "artifically" below your natural 10% influence (based on turf count not turf limit) then you should not benefit from the protection of the 10% rule. I haven't thought this through fully but I think it would be enough to protect the smaller players.
-
Noghri_ViR wrote:
The thing is having a big mob has nothing to do with game enjoymentVADAN wrote:
Best post in this entire threadThis game has become nothing more than a mob size competition. And the simple fact is not everyone can put in as much time and effort as we have. We bang on saying "mob up" that's bs, it makes no difference, code acceptance rates are dropping fast, noobs join, they see huge players n get put off. That's no way to progress. We'll keep fundig towards this game with our own wars, which if I'm honest is getting boring now, the new generation of players don't wanna read that the only way for them to enjoy is by punching 1000s of codes or spending real money. Yes, we do and will spend, but this shouldn't be the games dependancy. A point will come when the vets call it a day financially which will drastically change this game.
-
Better yet, don't base it on inf at all make it dependent on turf count. Bigger players have the most to lose but everyone has the same percent of risk on the line. If one can lose all but 10% of their top turf limit at least that makes life a bit more interesting. People who have not bought turf limit increases don't have as much on the line as players like myself, Belial and \V/ who have added to our possible limit. On top of it all, it adds a bit of mystery to it.... "what is that guys limit and where will I hit limit?", will you hit limit when you are mid-war, leaving yourself vulnerable to some nasty counter attacks, is he already close to the 10% and your attacks tip your hand to your aggressive plans? We don't know what each others limit is, and you have to admit something like this would benefit Nick as well. Who wouldn't buy a little more TL? For every 10 you buy essentially one is bulletproof.
-
And add a little more challenge to the game, tie portions of our banks to the turfs themselves. RL mobsters have their income reinvested, if someone caps a turf there should be a fair portion of that turfs value in cash transferred to the new owner as well. Our banks are ridiculous, put some risk on them as well. And yes B, this means us big guys would take the big hit but we have it to lose. I come back to the no holds barred server idea, let us get down and dirty once in a while.
-
Viper ☠ wrote:
👍👍👍And add a little more challenge to the game, tie portions of our banks to the turfs themselves. RL mobsters have their income reinvested, if someone caps a turf there should be a fair portion of that turfs value in cash transferred to the new owner as well. Our banks are ridiculous, put some risk on them as well. And yes B, this means us big guys would take the big hit but we have it to lose. I come back to the no holds barred server idea, let us get down and dirty once in a while.
-
Viper ☠ wrote:
Not strictly true. Every 1/10 of your opponents TL is bulletproof. 👍... Who wouldn't buy a little more TL? For every 10 you buy essentially one is bulletproof.
-
randombloke wrote:
Yes, but if you add to YOUR limit as well you are buying 1 out of 10 as well. if you have 10 turf as a limit 1 cannot be capped, if you buy 90 more for a total of 100 then 10 cannot be capped. You just don't get to pick which are impervious, or even add a twist and let us pick which 10% ARE bulletproof. Make it a turf upgrade that is non-removable and you are given 1 per each 10 turf you either buy or are rewarded for leveling. That would add strategy, how do you distribute your "fortresses"Viper ☠ wrote:
Not strictly true. Every 1/10 of your opponents TL is bulletproof. 👍... Who wouldn't buy a little more TL? For every 10 you buy essentially one is bulletproof.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC