[Punisher]

True, but if you can be hit in crit or serious....there is no way for the weaker players to stim to a safety point and hit for the gang war portion

[Guest]

yeh thats a great point Pun, that would make it a lot worse off for the lower lvl players :/
If we keep it at fair they'll at least have a better chace

[Guest]

I worry most about getting attacked while our whole gang is offline and losing most if not all our respect. In my opinion, at least one gang member should be online to declare a battle.

Also, lets say a gang ends a battle by beating down the opponents hideout. What would stop the gang from simply declaring a battle again? Perhaps your hideout needs to be at 50% to declare a battle.

Those are my only concerns. I approve of this change and look forward to trying it out. Maybe we could have a trial period where respect is only gained, not lost, just to see how it works.

[TommiTheTaco]

Hmm..That is actually sounding better. XD I'll probably like it.

[zenith]

gtoofs Wrote:True, but if you can be hit in crit or serious....there is no way for the weaker players to stim to a safety point and hit

Well stims do regain 50% of health. There could be more types of stims that heal everything so this is countered. But a lower level stimming out without a plan to regain health and then hit is a sitting duck anyway. Why even stim out.

I do see an issue with the "haha I am declaring a battle again" all day long until you are just sick of it. Perhaps make declaring battles cost gang points.

[TommiTheTaco]

what do you get if you win a war..?

[NiteSlayer]

I may be barking up the wrong tree but is there any chance we can see something to replace schools before you work on gang wars? That is also becoming a bigger issue now that more people are finishing school.

[Guest]

I think that if you declare a battle, your hideout should become declarable even if it is below 50%. I could see some gangs declaring battles when their hideout is destroyed, just so that the defender doesn't have the option to declare war and get out of the battle.

[Conrad1103]

im going to have to read through this again so i can digest it better. but, right away, i dont like losing gang slots. to me, its enough to lose all your respect, etc. some of us put up a lot of money to get those slots.

the scenerio (if i understand it correctly), of declaring war, so the "War" will end the "battle", doesnt hold water. if your opponent doesnt want to attack your hideout, or if your whole gang is in the hospitol, the "battle" beatdown will continue.

also, if there is a chance of you losing a gang slot, i believe a gang like the SVs can destroy everyone, if they wanted. there is no way, that any two (maybe 3) gangs on here could take the SVs alone in almost ANY situation, if the SVs chose to hosp everyone. thats all fine and dandy, but not if there is a risk of losing slots.

i like the idea as a whole and welcome this needed change. i thought the hideout/war thing was kinda silly sometimes. just needs this continued dialogue and tweeking.

i posed this last time... i think it is only fair if your opponent has a certain amount of players online, in order to be able to declare a war on them. i think i saw you had a situation where this has to be true.

i'll read through this more, just wanted to get these thoughts out there.

[Guest]

I personally don't like the idea of the possibility of losing a gang slot, despite their cost (if they are reduced or whatever). And as an SV (this has been mentioned a few times), I would like to say for the record that I have no desire to take anyone else's gang slot away either. Some of the new ideas sound good, and it could be more fun again, but gang slot deletion seems over the top to me.