AwakenedLands Forums

Here's how I see the new system working.

In gang pages you have 2 options.

Declare War Go ahead, declare war. You know you want to.
Declare State of War This time they will know it's war.

State of war is the PvP combat re-introduced again, this time in a much weaker version, but still serious.

If you want to pillowfight, then you can pillowfight all you want. Pillowfight the wrong gang and they might declare a state of war on you. And then you might start to lose respect. State of war lasts until a hideout is destroyed, and any pvp fights inbetween will be over respect points as previously described.

Without any serious consequences there will not be serious politics. You don't need any other gains then nr 1 spot on respect rank in Pantheon of Infamy. Cause that's the ultimate sign that you are on top of the game.

And there could be a conversion between Respect and Gang war points

4 gang war points for 1 respect

1 respect for 3 gang war points.

different conversion rates to put in a minor penalty to hinder people converting points freely.

I believe that people will eventually grow bored with the gang war system as it is now.

But when it is given consequences the scheming will begin and people will have endless fun mailing Zenith about unfair it is that they get attacked, and or post on forum that they feel they have been treated unfairly. And you have the replies with "it's just a game" and the whole thread explodes! BANG!

The most fun you can have is getting a nemesis and spend your time getting ahead of him to get your revenge.

what if ur slots r filled up whos going does a member get kicked?

In theory a weaker gang still looks to have a chance with the ideas presented, but in reality they will not have that chance. They wont be able to attack the stronger gangs hideout from the hospital. and if anyone thinks that they will be able to get out, move, and get a few sneak shots in there and win you are sorely mistaken and were not around to see how efficient players were at killing you when you got out of the hospital in the old code.

Should higher levels and statted players have an advantage? yes they should

should the gang size matter in a war? most definately

what that advantage should be I am not sure. I dont want to unbalance the game with any shoot from the hip ideas so i will think on this and post again with ideas later.

Couple of things from the old system that need to be addressed

Surrender. We once all but destroyed the jail busters in their previous guise as their pres refused to send a surrender and demanded their gang points back ( I know) A gang that declares must have the option and ability to end it on their own terms. Our only option was to keep going. Defeating the hideout as it is now seems the best way of calling a halt on your own terms.

Activity. Often gangs would declare when everyone was offline. You would wake up to a 50-60 point defecit, surrender. wait till they were offline and do it back. This wasnt war it was gang respect mugging. Anwer to this has to be gangs can only be declared upon if they have a percentage no of members online.

Slot deletion requires clarification. If a gang surrenders they keep their spot, however if they reach 0 respect they lose a spot. I am personally all for slot deletion as long as there is an option to use gang points to buy spots. More number of spots/higher no of points. This is along side buying spots traditionally. Alternatively, you can regain a gang spot once you reach 100 respect again. Achieved by fighting other gangs or converting gang points.

I like druchiis plan of running the two side by side. Gives an option to gain gang points only while more aggressive gangs could retaliate. Introduces a punishment factor and also a greater risk of failure.

An old tactic was to hospitalise the strongest opposing player to protect the weaker members, for me hospitalisations should give 0 respect. It should be a tactic and not be rewarded. Straight fights regardless of health should be rewarded. Stronger players give 5 points, Similar players 3 and weaker 0

Gangs should have at least 50% respect before they are declarable upon. They can declare but cant be attacked. Gives them chance to regain respect but not be eliminated. Similar to the Hideout HP rule as it stands.

Larger gangs benefit because their gang crimes payout larger amounts and more points. They also would benefit because there would be a need for more of them to be online before they become declarable. This protects their more expensive gang slots and doesnt see a gang lose a couple of million in a matter of hours.

Tied in with the hideout HP this gives a weaker gang a get out clause, a chance to run and end the war on their terms other than surrender.

This system would see a reintroduction of tactics and teamwork and its been long overdue.

i honestly believe there needs to be something done about the amount of gangs we have. the more people that play and donate, the more money that floats around, and then more insignificant gangs pop up. 5 level 6 players trying to make ends meet on crimes! join us!! i mean come on.. i see nothing wrong with gangs of this nature, but having 50 of them? there will be 500 gangs by summer. absolutely silly

theres got to be something to amend this

Well, Poptart. I woke up with a thought this morning. I was like..'I feel like helping small gangs out, if I ever happen to leave Dissidence.'

Go to a level 5.3 average gang and help them with wars for about a week or 2, then move onto the next one, help them, move to the next one.

That should build sufficient gangs, eh? XD How's about you start in my quest, oh dearest Limequat?

my point is not that these gangs are useless, but there are too many of them, making them useless. there are now about 10% gangs as there are active players, which is pretty silly. i dont understand the need for everyone to have their own little gang. how would i be able to help them? free handouts? a few hits for protection?

the point of gangs is for people to be able to help each other out and compete, but there is no competition right now, therefore there is no reason to join a better one. i believe that the option of increasing slots should be cheaper to begin with to promote larger, more competitive gangs. there should also be a cap (not a soft cap) on gang size, but a rather large one, that way extreme donators wouldnt be able to dominate gang size, fights, wars,etc. but there would still be extreme competition

what about 10 gangs with 40 people just pit in a huge warring FFA? that would stir some competition, no? and that would decrease the need for every 3 people to make their own worthless gang

What about allowing merging of gangs?

Take 2 gangs with 4 members in each.Allow a merging option and make the new gang a 6 member gang.Divide the gang war points that each gang has earned and reinstall all those points to be dispensed by the new gang prez.

No gang can have more than 30 members. :wink:

biffbaffboff Wrote:What about allowing merging of gangs?

Take 2 gangs with 4 members in each.Allow a merging option and make the new gang a 6 member gang.Divide the gang war points that each gang has earned and reinstall all those points to be dispensed by the new gang prez.

No gang can have more than 30 members. :wink:

Except for the member limit part, I agree with that idea.

biffbaffboff Wrote:What about allowing merging of gangs?

Take 2 gangs with 4 members in each.Allow a merging option and make the new gang a 6 member gang.Divide the gang war points that each gang has earned and reinstall all those points to be dispensed by the new gang prez.

No gang can have more than 30 members. :wink:

That's a good idea. An option to convert money spent on gang slots so merging of gangs is monetarily fair.

As far as the gang slot deletion, looks like the issue is moot. Looks like moving to a straight gang point system where you gain them by wars or in personal fights is where the discussion is headed. Losers in battles also lose gang perks for some time, and declaring can't be done non-stop.