Limit the gang size

[Stinky]

For the gamer winning is the end goal. Clearly there is no winner in this game (we're all just Murray in Groundhog Day) so the goal must be to have players hopeful that they can win a few fights from time to time.

For those that run the server I would think what they would want is for things to perpetuate.

As I see it players who consistently find themselves running around in spawn clothing trying to simply afford a Rook are not going to stay around very long.

I would suggest limiting gang sizes so that it would be very difficult for any one gang to rule the server this giving player a chance to grow a reasonable account and buy a home, store equipment...

I think that if players eventually give in and join a big gang to meet that need that you would only be left with a few stragglers who would eventually quit or join the gang too. Who wants to play this game if you have no one left too fight? That's an extreme case but it would mean lower numbers for the servers and probably no new donators even if it didn't come full tilt.

On the other hand, if you limited gang sizes as I am suggesting, the power balance would not be so tilted and therefore new players would have a much more optimistic feeing.

Hopeful people tend to stick around longer (and maybe donate too)

Keeping the power struggle "dynamic" is a win-win for everyone.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Stinky

[Boris]

This topic will likely recieve some very hostile responses.

That said, how would you limit gang size effectively? Organisation is done on a gang owned teamspeak, people can change names, and people can join groups. (Group size is already capped!)

If you tell a group of friends to simply not play with each other, what do you think will happen? They'll simply stop?

[goyney]

13 minutes ago, Boris said:

This topic will likely recieve some very hostile responses.

17 minutes ago, Stinky said:

On the other hand, if you limited gang sizes as I am suggesting, the power balance would not be so tilted and therefore new players would have a much more optimistic feeing.

I really have no words.

Probably been here 5 mins and suggesting that gang sizes are limited. Is it not enough that we have a group cap, and an online gang group cap, being 12?

It is not necessarily the amount of gang members that are in each gang. Have you considered individual player skill and experience?

Please stop.

 

Edited February 22, 2017 by Goyneyyy

[simon-pc]

I AGREE !!!!

[HotWings]

Cap gangs and you get Gangname-1, Gangname-2, Gangname-3.  You would be making no difference whatsoever tbh

[Stinky]

@ Boris

I am not really concerned about hostile responses, only the responses that have good input are what I am concerned with.

That being said...

Will people stop playing if they can't have a gang of 20, 50, 100 members?

I think they'll stay and, I'd argue that eventually you would have only those people and probably a few stragglers.

If you want new blood, and consistent donations, you have to give them a reason to stay.

I am only trying to think of ways to bring more people on and, to keep them around.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Boris said:

how would you limit gang size effectively?

Gang size taxes. Gangs pay on an exponentially increasing scale above (x) members for each additional member every restart that a member of that gang does a thing, regardless of whether those additional people are online and fighting, or just sitting on the roster.

If the gangbank has insufficient funds when this happens, the gang is disbanded and the ganghouse is sold to cover the cost.

27 minutes ago, HotWings said:

Cap gangs and you get Gangname-1, Gangname-2, Gangname-3.  You would be making no difference whatsoever tbh

I can think of a few mechanics that would make that very inconvenient.

[Stinky]

@Hot wings

What you are saying would be fine because now the turfs could not be held by X1, X2 or X3 collectively.

This would create a new dynamic to the game since what they would really have are alliances and, as we all know, alliances do not last.

Sounds exciting to me!

[Silver-Spy]

Well if the gang leader cannot handle many members they can either kick them or disband the gang.There is no need for a gang limit size as the more the gang members the more fun you have fighting against strong gangs.

[Stinky]

Gnashes has put out another great idea.

Nice input!

[bunni]

Another gang / rebel nerf! Just what we need!

[Guest]

Just now, Stinky said:

Gnashes has put out another great idea.

Nice input!

Not really a new idea. It's something that was considered around the time that the group cap went in, it was just deemed mostly unnecessary since people don't like to fight without hexes.

[Stinky]

To add to Gnashes idea, maybe the  Police could have a higher alert status the larger the gang is. Maybe an application for bounty hunters as well.

[HotWings]

Just now, Gnashes said:

I can think of a few mechanics that would make that very inconvenient.

You are pretty ingenious with things like that. 

 

2 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

Gang size taxes. Gangs pay on an exponentially increasing scale above (x) members for each additional member every restart that a member of that gang does a thing, regardless of whether those additional people are online and fighting, or just sitting on the roster.

This has been a thing forever but never implemented correct?

 

Just now, Stinky said:

@Hot wings

What you are saying would be fine because now the turfs could not be held by X1, X2 or X3 collectively.

This would create a new dynamic to the game since what they would really have are alliances and, as we all know, alliances do not last.

Sounds exciting to me!

Potentially yes, there is a slight chance it would help, but I personally think it would just further fracture the gang life.  Gangs already complain constantly about group cap, limiting the amount of people they can have will just create more negativity.

[Guest]

Just now, HotWings said:

This has been a thing forever but never implemented correct?

Gang and Property Taxes exist on paper, but haven't ever been added.

[Stinky]

@ Hotwings

It's the struggle that keeps one coming back.

It's when people become complacent that they start to look elsewhere.

And back to my point, when gangs have overwhelming control why would I want to stick around when all I can do is wreck diving and apple picking?

Hey, maybe I am wrong... I am just trying to find new ways to keep interest up.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Stinky

[Squirtle]

2 hours ago, Stinky said:

For the gamer winning is the end goal. Clearly there is no winner in this game (we're all just Murray in Groundhog Day) so the goal must be to have players hopeful that they can win a few fights from time to time.

For those that run the server I would think what they would want is for things to perpetuate.

As I see it players who consistently find themselves running around in spawn clothing trying to simply afford a Rook are not going to stay around very long.

I would suggest limiting gang sizes so that it would be very difficult for any one gang to rule the server this giving player a chance to grow a reasonable account and buy a home, store equipment...

I think that if players eventually give in and join a big gang to meet that need that you would only be left with a few stragglers who would eventually quit or join the gang too. Who wants to play this game if you have no one left too fight? That's an extreme case but it would mean lower numbers for the servers and probably no new donators even if it didn't come full tilt.

On the other hand, if you limited gang sizes as I am suggesting, the power balance would not be so tilted and therefore new players would have a much more optimistic feeing.

Hopeful people tend to stick around longer (and maybe donate too)

Keeping the power struggle "dynamic" is a win-win for everyone.

who are u? and how long have you been playing on asylum?

 

there is plenty of low-tier gangs out there that dont fight, they jus make money.

 

here's a few

Fireflies 2.0 

/ Core

/ Newera- cant find there new page

Pistolbangers2.0

 

you may fit in with them.

 

Edited February 22, 2017 by Squirtle

[HotWings]

2 minutes ago, Stinky said:

 

And back to my point, when gangs have overwhelming control why would I want to stick around when all I can do is wreck diving and apple picking?

Gangs typically fight gangs at cartels and stick to themselves.  I play with 3,4 friends and we are the ones robbing people.

[Stinky]

@ Squirtle

I think you are making my point. I do want to be able to fight but when you lose every battle to some huge gang since they send an army after you for just playing the game the way it is supposed to be played, what am I left with, join them or quit right?

if I join I become complacent and stop playing (for most of us that is) or I quit because I don't want to be in the apple picking gang.

 

[Squirtle]

Just now, Stinky said:

@ Squirtle

I think you are making my point. I do want to be able to fight but when you lose every battle to some huge gang since they send an army after you for just playing the game the way it is supposed to be played, what am I left with, join them or quit right?

if I join I become complacent and stop playing (for most of us that is) or I quit because I don't want to be in the apple picking gang.

 

you hide till they log off and go ghost-cap there cartels like most of the low-tier gangs do.

either way the server is still going to move on with or without you.

[Stinky]

@hotwings

I know the gang type you are speaking of. These are the ones who rob people for $100 and get a $1,500 bounty in return.

You guys are the ones running around in their underwear with rooks. That doesn't sound appealing to anyone other than a 10 YO.

You're not going to convince anyone that you guys aren't struggling to keep substantial funds in your bank account (although I am sure you are going to respond saying otherwise)

[Yung Kali-G]

Just now, Stinky said:

 

Nobody gives a fuck about your problems.

[Stinky]

@Squirtle

it will carry on, for now..

The End Days server just shut down and I suspect it is because they weren't being proactive enough.

Playing catch up is a losing game; you must stay ahead.

[HotWings]

1 hour ago, Stinky said:

@hotwings

I know the gang type you are speaking of. These are the ones who rob people for $100 and get a $1,500 bounty in return.

You guys are the ones running around in their underwear with rooks. That doesn't sound appealing to anyone other than a 10 YO.

You're not going to convince anyone that you guys aren't struggling to keep substantial funds in your bank account (although I am sure you are going to respond saying otherwise)

If by underware you mean, CSATS, illegal rifles, carriers, helicopters, and lock picks sure.  FYI robbery is a 5k bounty.

 

Big gangs that your complaining about literally never fuck with people like you unless you never shut up in side and annoy them. They are busying fighting cartels and probably running meth in their spare time to fight more cartels.  

Small groups of friends like myself and the 3 or 4 guys I roll with when I play civ are the people who are robbing/killing normal civs. We are all in different gang or not in gangs at all.  Its literally just a group of friends.  So go ahead and cap gangs, the "problem" you're describing will not be solved by doing so.  In reality its working as intended.  There is a pecking order, if you dont arm yourself appropriately you're more than likely going to get robbed/killed and your stuff stolen.

 

btw i have 2.2 mil and before 6.0 had 25 mil.  I spent a year in a large gang, but made most of my money running meth with 3/4 friends at a time. We hardly ever did community meth runs.

Edited February 22, 2017 by HotWings

[Stinky]

Thanks for the inspiration Yung-kali G!

Look at Yung's input here input, just pure idiotic trolling. Yung doesn't care how difficult you make it for him, he's going to stick around since he is a simple minded person.
But Yung offers nothing dynamic to the game. It's not him that your concerned about it's the ones who want a more compelling game because they make it interesting for everyone. This is what keeps people coming back and, I promise you, they'll bring in new people.

[BaDaBiNg_10-8]

Capping gang size will do nothing to balance power. If you put a gang/group of let's say, five experienced rebels together they will wipe the floor of a gang/group twice that size. 

[Yung Kali-G]

8 minutes ago, Stinky said:

Thanks for the inspiration Yung-kali G!

Look at Yung's input here input, just pure idiotic trolling. Yung doesn't care how difficult you make it for him, he's going to stick around since he is a simple minded person.
But Yung offers nothing dynamic to the game. It's not him that your concerned about it's the ones who want a more compelling game because they make it interesting for everyone. This is what keeps people coming back and, I promise you, they'll bring in new people.

The game isn't difficult at all, I've played here since the server started around 3 years ago. Your suggestion isn't going to help anybody, if anything alot of people want the size increased by around 2-3 players. Like Axe said, the big gangs you are complaining about dont target morons like yourself.

[KIIAK]

Yesterday I saw 2 with rooks kill 8 people with spar 16s  so stfu

[Bandit]

28 minutes ago, KIiak said:

Yesterday I saw 2 with rooks kill 8 people with spar 16s  so stfu

Yeah, it's super skillful to walk up behind a few people and open fire without saying anything

Edited February 22, 2017 by Bandit
grammar

[goyney]

1 hour ago, BaDaBiNg_10-8 said:

Capping gang size will do nothing to balance power. If you put a gang/group of let's say, five experienced rebels together they will wipe the floor of a gang/group twice that size. 

Exactly.

[goyney]

1 hour ago, KIiak said:

Yesterday I saw 2 with rooks kill 8 people with spar 16s  so stfu

Irrelevant.

[Quenton]

2 hours ago, Stinky said:

@ Boris

I am not really concerned about hostile responses, only the responses that have good input are what I am concerned with.

That being said...

Will people stop playing if they can't have a gang of 20, 50, 100 members?

I think they'll stay and, I'd argue that eventually you would have only those people and probably a few stragglers.

If you want new blood, and consistent donations, you have to give them a reason to stay.

I am only trying to think of ways to bring more people on and, to keep them around.

 

Easy. Get good and people will stop denying you from their gangs. Then you can stop making stupid posts

[Mike Stmria]

You can limit the gang size to 2 members and if those 2 are experienced enough they will make a witch hunt on you if you want, good not even 2 maybe could be 1 person gang and he will still make you struggle. So this is not the solution.

 

[Quenton]

5 minutes ago, Jaeger said:

You can limit the gang size to 2 members and if those 2 are experienced enough they will make a witch hunt on you if you want, good not even 2 maybe could be 1 person gang and he will still make you struggle. So this is not the solution.

 

????

[HotWings]

7 minutes ago, Jaeger said:

You can limit the gang size to 2 members and if those 2 are experienced enough they will make a witch hunt on you if you want, good not even 2 maybe could be 1 person gang and he will still make you struggle. So this is not the solution.

 

 

1 minute ago, Quenton said:

????

A gang of Bikstok and Rodriogo is still better than the average gang of 10, limiting slots doesnt change skill.

[they took the name eazy]

5 hours ago, Stinky said:

For the gamer winning is the end goal. Clearly there is no winner in this game (we're all just Murray in Groundhog Day) so the goal must be to have players hopeful that they can win a few fights from time to time.

For those that run the server I would think what they would want is for things to perpetuate.

As I see it players who consistently find themselves running around in spawn clothing trying to simply afford a Rook are not going to stay around very long.

I would suggest limiting gang sizes so that it would be very difficult for any one gang to rule the server this giving player a chance to grow a reasonable account and buy a home, store equipment...

I think that if players eventually give in and join a big gang to meet that need that you would only be left with a few stragglers who would eventually quit or join the gang too. Who wants to play this game if you have no one left too fight? That's an extreme case but it would mean lower numbers for the servers and probably no new donators even if it didn't come full tilt.

On the other hand, if you limited gang sizes as I am suggesting, the power balance would not be so tilted and therefore new players would have a much more optimistic feeing.

Hopeful people tend to stick around longer (and maybe donate too)

Keeping the power struggle "dynamic" is a win-win for everyone.

I'm 90% sure this is probably a post aimed at the huge Tanoa gangs because you got killed when doing a coke run.

[Mike Stmria]

Just now, HotWings said:

 

A gang of Bikstok and Rodriogo is still better than the average gang of 10, limiting slots doesnt change skill.

Thanks for explaining my bad english xD 

[Midamaru]

3 hours ago, Gnashes said:

Gang and Property Taxes exist on paper, but haven't ever been added.

Oh haven't you seen that usefull talent yet?! 5% less gang upkeep costs!

[HotWings]

Just now, Jaeger said:

Thanks for explaining my bad english xD 

<3

[Henry1]

4 hours ago, Bandit said:

Yeah, it's super skillful to walk up behind a few people and open fire without saying anything

Cringe