Why it's bad to be Thuglife...
Forums › General Discussion › Why it's bad to be Thuglife...-
Unmaker wrote:
So? Maybe it makes him laugh?
Unmaker...I don't doubt that he's laughing about the whole situation. However, I'm fairly certain that Nick didn't make this game to make Thuglife laugh...I'm betting he made the game to be as reasonably fair as possible to most players, regardless of level or mob size.
If you're going to come up with an argument to my comments, at least make them reasonable. Otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time.
-
Backspace wrote: Um, it's called turfwarfs and simulates a gangster game. Think your after the care bear gps game called ' clouds are cool too'.
Backspace...I think we all realize that this is a gangster game...thank you captain obvious. However, you show me a gangster gang in real life that completely takes out every other gang in the surrounding areas. There are already aspects of the game that allow players to dominate other players...including Capo and paying protection money.I have not once argued that players should not capture other players turfs to retain control or dominance...but most everyone understands that there should be a limit (especially when not in a war with those players).
-
If thug wants to take out every small player that's his thing. I would not go that route, but whatever. What bothers me is that while Nick made the vendetta so big mobsters would suffer repercussions for picking on players, there is a gigantic loophole and he is exploiting it. This has to be fixed and I'm sure Nick will get it fixed sometime. I just hope this is a priority to him
-
Turf Warrior wrote:
Agreed...however, I think the problem is two-fold. One problem is the loophole you mention about 1-influence turfs being "unbeatable"...and the other is about high-mob players like Thug and yourself being able to capture from lower-mob players. It seems obvious to me that Nick tried to incorporate a control for the latter with the 10% influence rule...but that it's still failing. However, if the 1-influence turf problem is fixed, that should definitely take care of this particular Thug problem.If thug wants to take out every small player that's his thing. I would not go that route, but whatever. What bothers me is that while Nick made the vendetta so big mobsters would suffer repercussions for picking on players, there is a gigantic loophole and he is exploiting it. This has to be fixed and I'm sure Nick will get it fixed sometime. I just hope this is a priority to him
-
Am i really the only one who realized this was posted in the rong forums?
-
Backspace wrote:
Night wrote:
Um, it's called turfwarfs and simulates a gangster game. Think your after the care bear gps game called ' clouds are cool too'.That is incorrect. To expand, you only need to take one turf...and then take another turf that's at the boundary of the turf you justplayer...regardless if they are a 100 mob player or a 2800 mob player.
they are they are!! But in all seriousness, did thug lower his inf to capture turf from the little guys or to avoid having his turf taken by the big? (I know his action has had both effects, I'm asking about his intent). As I understood it, his intention was to avoid having his turf taken (b4 all these vendetas against him I think his turfs were at the usual 84 level, am I mistaken about this??)
-
DarthPenatrator wrote:
There are plenty of other threads in the Suggestions and Feedback area for ideas on how to fix the problem. This is a thread to "Generally Discuss" the issue at hand...so I believe it's posted in the correct place.Am i really the only one who realized this was posted in the rong forums?
-
Night wrote:
definetly not. This belongs in the suggestions forum because you are suggesting ways to stop the thuglife mayhem.DarthPenatrator wrote:
There are plenty of other threads in the Suggestions and Feedback area for ideas on how to fix the problem. This is a thread to "Generally Discuss" the issue at hand...so I believe it's posted in the correct place.Am i really the only one who realized this was posted in the rong forums?
-
p s i wrote:
Actually, I'm not 100% certain (since I'm not him)...but I think his intentions were both. There are times when his influence was much higher that he had to lower his turf influences enough to capture player's turfs who had less than 300 total influence...it's pretty obvious to me that that was his goal at those particular instances.they are they are!! But in all seriousness, did thug lower his inf to capture turf from the little guys or to avoid having his turf taken by the big? (I know his action has had both effects, I'm asking about his intent). As I understood it, his intention was to avoid having his turf taken (b4 all these vendetas against him I think his turfs were at the usual 84 level, am I mistaken about this??)
-
DarthPenatrator wrote: definetly not. This belongs in the suggestions forum because you are suggesting ways to stop the thuglife mayhem.
Just because there are suggestions in the mass of the threads does not mean the threads original intent was to provide suggestions. If you read the first few posts I made, nowhere in there do I make suggestions on how to change the game. And since I started this thread, I'm pretty sure I know what my intent was...but thank you for attempting to read my mind. -
Night wrote:
I personally believe that if working properly vendettas will be enough to solve the problem. Giving smaller players more protection will be a mistakeAgreed...however, I think the problem is two-fold. One problem is the loophole you mention about 1-influence turfs being "unbeatable"...and the other is about high-mob players like Thug and yourself being able to capture from lower-mob players. It seems obvious to me that Nick tried to incorporate a control for the latter with the 10% influence rule...but that it's still failing. However, if the 1-influence turf problem is fixed, that should definitely take care of this particular Thug problem.
-
DarthPenatrator wrote:
Night wrote:
definetly not. This belongs in the suggestions forum because you are suggesting ways to stop the thuglife mayhem.DarthPenatrator wrote:
There are plenty of other threads in the Suggestions and Feedback area for ideas on how to fix the problem. This is a thread to "Generally Discuss" the issue at hand...so I believe it's posted in the correct place.Am i really the only one who realized this was posted in the rong forums?
my god man stfu. You are everywhere. Get the stick out of u'r ass. It's close enough so deal with it.
-
Belial wrote: I personally believe that if working properly vendettas will be enough to solve the problem. Giving smaller players more protection will be a mistake
Perhaps...and that would definitely be a good start. Maybe if Nick actually gets around to fixing the 1-inf capture/destroy issue like he hinted at, then it will put a "control" on larger players like this...and then we can actually see. If the problem persists, I guess we can try and deal with it at that time. -
This is basic game design 101. Nick is 100% repsonsible for these imbalanced game issues and should of thought though a bit deeper to minimize bullying and unfairness. It's seems obvious to me creating a pvp game play where a 100% player can trounce a 10% player is a big hole. No game will last with that feature. TW ghost town is imminent unless this changes.
Nick, if you want some assistance please msg. I am a product manager by trade.
-
Belial wrote:
I completely agree with this.Night wrote:
I personally believe that if working properly vendettas will be enough to solve the problem. Giving smaller players more protection will be a mistakeAgreed...however, I think the problem is two-fold. One problem is the loophole you mention about 1-influence turfs being "unbeatable"...and the other is about high-mob players like Thug and yourself being able to capture from lower-mob players. It seems obvious to me that Nick tried to incorporate a control for the latter with the 10% influence rule...but that it's still failing. However, if the 1-influence turf problem is fixed, that should definitely take care of this particular Thug problem.
-
Jenjer wrote:
it's worked pretty well so far. The problem is that this is a location based game and to give lower level players too much protection would give them a sizeable advantage when it comes to controlling key areas on the map. Us higher level players need the abillity to expand and regulate our areas and sometimes that means caping from people way weaker than us but it has to be doneThis is basic game design 101. Nick is 100% repsonsible for these imbalanced game issues and should of thought though a bit deeper to minimize bullying and unfairness. It's seems obvious to me creating a pvp game play where a 100% player can trounce a 10% player is a big hole. No game will last with that feature. TW ghost town is imminent unless this changes.
Nick, if you want some assistance please msg. I am a product manager by trade.
-
p s i wrote:
unlike you, i prefer to not have long, hard objects up my anus.DarthPenatrator wrote:
Night wrote:
definetly not. This belongs in the suggestions forum because you are suggesting ways to stop the thuglife mayhem.DarthPenatrator wrote:
There are plenty of other threads in the Suggestions and Feedback area for ideas on how to fix the problem. This is a thread to "Generally Discuss" the issue at hand...so I believe it's posted in the correct place.Am i really the only one who realized this was posted in the rong forums?
my god man stfu. You are everywhere. Get the stick out of u'r ass. It's close enough so deal with it.
-
davey boy wrote:
He hasn't wiped out most players in Brooklyn. BK is nearly 100 square miles, that'd be close to impossible.Right on night! I couldn't say this better myself. Anyone who looks at NY (namely Brooklyn area) he has wiped out almost all of the players there. And I'm not talking about worthy players. Some with under 100 mob. There's no reason someone with 3000 mob should be able or should take turf from someone that small. I understand that Nick dosent want a "end game". But by letting thug exploit the game means more players will continue to quit.
-
Night wrote:
Unmaker wrote:
So? Maybe it makes him laugh?
Unmaker...I don't doubt that he's laughing about the whole situation. However, I'm fairly certain that Nick didn't make this game to make Thuglife laugh...I'm betting he made the game to be as reasonably fair as possible to most players, regardless of level or mob size.
If you're going to come up with an argument to my comments, at least make them reasonable. Otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time.
Oh I'll delight in wasting your time.
I just think that unless people stop buying packs that the customers, us, will simply have to be content with things as they are. Updates will come some day, but it's not worth Nick's comapny's time to have any sort of a dialog with us.
This game is on the verge of being awesome or turning to complete shit. Sadly it's looking more like the latter
-
Belial wrote: it's worked pretty well so far. The problem is that this is a location based game and to give lower level players too much protection would give them a sizeable advantage when it comes to controlling key areas on the map. Us higher level players need the abillity to expand and regulate our areas and sometimes that means caping from people way weaker than us but it has to be done
I think the problem is we're finally seeing the situation where it doesn't work. I'm all for the "dominant" player being able to regulate his underlings...however, I don't see the need for someone who has 4-500 turfs to be able to regulate on someone with only 4-5 turfs (yes, that actually occurred). I just think there should be some limit in there. -
It almost seems to me that if you're trying to mimic real-life gangsta activity...that the top mobs wouldn't even deal with the bottom of the barrel gangs. Hypothetically, if you truly had control of your areas, and if there was a low-level player causing trouble, that you would send a mid-level player in your area to take care of him (since you wouldn't be able to based on the game restrictions). I have used this exact scenario before in the game with allies I've made.
-
Unmaker wrote:
It saddens me that you think that you have no voice in a community like this.I just think that unless people stop buying packs that the customers, us, will simply have to be content with things as they are. Updates will come some day, but it's not worth Nick's comapny's time to have any sort of a dialog with us.
This game is on the verge of being awesome or turning to complete shit. Sadly it's looking more like the latter
I'm not expecting any dialog from Nick (given his track record). However, I'm fairly certain he reads a lot of these threads...and if so, then hopefully it generates some feedback with him on how to deal with the issue, if he indeed sees it as the problem that most of us do.
-
Well said Night. however I feel the vendettas can solve the problem you are talking about. I'm saying this as a victim of thuglife even. He just wiped out all of my bases in Brooklyn. (80% of my turf) Im not complaining about it, but had I been in a vendetta I would have been safe as long as i was in a vendetta against him
-
Finraz wrote:
Unfortunately, a Vendetta does not make you safe from capture in your instance. All it takes is for the attacking player to knock the other two players into the ER...and then he has free reign of your turfs, as if you weren't in the Vendetta.Well said Night. however I feel the vendettas can solve the problem you are talking about. I'm saying this as a victim of thuglife even. He just wiped out all of my bases in Brooklyn. (80% of my turf) Im not complaining about it, but had I been in a vendetta I would have been safe as long as i was in a vendetta against him
-
It saddens me that you think that you have no voice in a community like this.
I'm not expecting any dialog from Nick (given his track record). However, I'm fairly certain he reads a lot of these threads...and if so, then hopefully it generates some feedback with him on how to deal with the issue, if he indeed sees it as the problem that most of us do.
Alright, I think you got my point. But I do want a dialog. Nick may read these posts, but without some sort of dialog we have no idea if playing this game will continue to be worth our time an money. When will new balancing be implemented? 2 months? 4 months? We need assurances if he still wants our cash
Thuglife seems a symptom that the game needs better balance. Bitterly attacking anything that moves has become more enjoyable than building up turfs. That's a problem
-
Yes...I do see your point...and agree. I wish we had more dialog from the developers of games like these. Unfortunately, it is my observation from the several apps that I've played similar to this, that the developers typically don't have the time (or feel that the time is well spent) to provide the dialog that most player desires. As avid players...we can only choose to do as much as we deem necessary to attempt to get the developers attention.
-
Another problem with trying to limit the strength of those you can attack in a location based game is what happens if everyone in your attack range is too small? Are you supposed to just sit and rot?
-
Dude, it's called strategy
-
How much strategy is involved taking down someone 12% of your size?
If everyone in the are was to tear down or reduce all their turfs to 1 inf, this would essentially strand him. He would have to upgrade if he wanted to move anywhere.
-
ChainsawCharlie wrote:
someone read my postHow much strategy is involved taking down someone 12% of your size?
If everyone in the are was to tear down or reduce all their turfs to 1 inf, this would essentially strand him. He would have to upgrade if he wanted to move anywhere.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC