When warring factions for territory can we get.rid of the bounty options as it's a faction war.not a every man and his dog war.
What a stupid thing. If you have the money you can just bounty the other team and have everybody else do the work.
Get it sort a faction war should be exactly that faction v faction not faction v money and every other player that's just complete boll**ks.
So the suggestion is when a faction war happens disable both factions from being able to bounty each other make the factions fight it out
All's fair in hate and war...
How can a faction war for.territory be far when the faction who is warring isn't being hospitalised by the faction there warring against?
What's the point in a faction war if it's not being fought by the 2 factions involved?
Just a stupid comment so I'm guessing your a stupid person.
Yes, that's why I have almost 2k karma, because I just spout on some nonsense 24/7 (may or may not be accurate now that I think about it).
Realistically, money is also a stat. This is likely something to consider as you also have to realize you're fighting both the bodies and the funds those bodies have. If the faction is full of traders they might be spending ludicrous amounts of funds to win those turf wars. You have a lot of 2.5mil bounties, each costing 5 mil. If that's unfair that they can use their money when they don't have the edge on fighting stats, then I don't know what to tell you...
It's a faction war not a faction buy.
Disable bounties between the 2 factions? Because it is hard to get someone from outside the faction to set the bounties for you? lol
If you're losing a terrotory war due to bounties, chances are you wouldn't have won anyway. They aren't that deadly with the 10 bounties per person limit, although that limit should cut both ways, not just one.
If floyd mayweather paid someone to knock the shit out of Connor McGregor would may weather be the winner? Of course not that would be stupid and pointless.
It's a simple capture the flag game that somebody clearly hasn't understood the rules or the concept.
As for the previous comment a 100 man faction each doing 10 bounties is enough to win the war without fighting for it which then makes territory wars pointless.
"It's a simple capture the flag game that somebody clearly hasn't understood the rules or the concept."
You'll figure it out eventually.
paying for drugs and boosters to take down your enemies and paying for bounties to take them down how does it make a difference we are using our money to do it. The game isn't all about brute stats
bounty services will be more popular then. and the war is not always about strength, there is strategy too
First of all, I want to note you should have read and studied the rules of territory warfare before. You're obviously discovering them now, and you not being happy about it comes far too late, as it's been like that since, I think, months. Basically since territories were first released.
Second, your suggestion seems out of place and lack of objectivity, as you're protesting on something as you are on the losing end and as such, lack the cool head needed to suggest something while taking all factors into accounts. Besides, it's pretty rich coming from a faction who spent more than 6M on bountying me alone, and probably is something closer than 25M of bounties on the faction they are facing. Apparently, bounties are only bad when they are thrown your way.
If you want to have the moral high ground on something you are suggesting, please don't go the opposite way. You will come out as an hypocrit, and your suggestion as a tool to advantage yourself.
Does this make factions with a lot of member stronger as a result, seeing they can take more spots on the wall? Yes. Does it makes territory war not a duel, but a clash of ressources closer to a free for all advantaging rich factions? Yes. Is it unfair? Yes.
I will throw you a bone and say I agree with you. The system as it is gives an unfair advantage to the factions which are already strong. I honestly would like it to be changed. But that's not how it was designed.
I would really like the small factions to be able to carve their way if they have the strategic planning, organisation and sheer will to do so, but as it stands, that's not possible.
Pro tip for you guys: Try to stick to small territories. There are only a few of you, and you are strong enough. On a small scale, you will operate better. On large territories, you won't be able to hold, no matter how much money you throw at the problem.
Wrong but get effort.
It's your job to be on the wall it's our job to knock you. Gang attacks temporary weapon stacks were all design for the territory wars. So factions could fight each without outside interference.
Smoke grenades stack up meaning 4 players can attack one and beat him territory wars was designed for 1 faction to fight another for the desired piece of territory.
It was designed for factions to come together make the effort organise with each other bringing a sense of accomplishmental team moral.
They were designed for rich fations to not engage. It renders the whole point of territory wars redundant. Why have group attacks why have temporary weapon stacks?
Bounties shoukd play apart in the game but not territory wars.
Your faction is organised you have 3 times more members the fact is we probably wouldn't have held.onto the territory but outside interference has meant we haven't been able to try.
If people want bounties in and want outside interference then it shoukd come at a cost to.the territory war.
This who bounty increase the target number if trying to take over and those who are defending decrease the target number meaning a faction should be about players coming together fighting for what they want engaging as a group not a restarter or multi with billions (no I'm not accusing) can just buy territory due to outside interference.
It's made me realise that if this is what territory wars are they are definitely and absolute pointless part of the game.
If people.can't understand that it should be 1 v 1 for a piece of territory that the other one holds and that outside interference shoukd be made obsolete or kept to an absolute bare minimum as in you bounty you increase the target score...then faction territory wars are pointless as money wins and that's just pathetic for a warring game to be decided by the bigger bank balance
If you want faction vs faction, stick to your basic wars. If you think Territory wars are meant to be that way then you must really forget that it was made to make things interesting, not generic and the same. You can argue that people can step on a wall, but that is not all that different as strategy would be all to similar: attack the enemy on one front, hospitalize them to get the true reward (just as out right war leads to respect for hospitalization, hospitalization takes more time and medical items to recuperate from resulting in higher med cooldown and thus increased chance to be out right unable to join a wall), keep it up till it's over.
Territories wouldn't have made the whole "You lose any fight, you're off the wall" thing unless they intended for outside interference. A lose of any type kicks you from the wall, getting mugged by anyone kicks you from the wall. Hell, losing a attack you made kicks you from the wall! It never mattered to who, it just mattered that you happened to lose. If you want to have you're fac vs fac style then I'd recommend to avoid territory wars altogether as it was never made to be that way by simple analysis of conditions to remove a player from the wall alone.
lmao.
If a player choose to attack someone outside the territory war and loses he/she should get there dumb arse kicked off the wall but you shouldn't be able to win territory wars by throwing millions upon millions at them what's the point?
Ched should have just auctioned them off to the highest bidder as faction territory wars are pointless.
When people can have several tv networks and oil rigs in a faction making hundreds of millions a day territory wars become all.about money.
It's a game based on attacking that's why groups attacks were brought in so people with high stats were beatable. Everyone in the game can be beat if factions perform and act as a group.
They may as well just chose 20 random players from each faction and click on a button that says outcome why bother creating something that only money can win in a fighting based game?
Or they just open all territories and randomly give them to all factions for a week at a time.
Why create something that should be extremely fun interesting tactical and completely ruin in allowing the win to be bought??
This is fun, interesting, and tactical.
You just don't like the tactics. Because you guys got spanked.
Thanks for the experience. It's been a long and fun ride. We are using a lot of money to win, but you guys are spending a lot of money to lose. And I'm not wasting any E, didn't make a single attack during all this fight, lol. That counts for most of our members, that couldn't even scratch you guys in single combat, yet, the strategy is working and, well, quantity over quality, at least in this particular case.
Good game, had fun.
lmao. u guys are funny. just accept the defeat.