Arguing about what was in mind with how a system was created, with the person in charge of the "mind frame" of it being made isn't going to be an argument you can win.
Though, I do feel like this is one of those things where if Ched literally played his game, and saw how this looks from the players prospective he'd be able to have more insight on what to expect players to do. The problem is, that it detracts from the time he is able to do other tasks, that are equally important. So instead, he is opting to have things coded, and fix it up when he thinks something isn't up to snuff.
yes exactly!! Ched intended to give territory war hits more respect and also to give retals more respect. Its not that hard to see what has to be done to gain max respect on a hit.... Only need to be "lucky" that a faction in a territory next to yours is also active enough to do it.
The idea that came with territories was factions working together, really that is the biggest benefit to territories now - not the land you hold, but who your neighbors are and who you are able to work with effectively.
Torn in general is all about maximizing your efforts and repeating it, this wall/retaliation method has been used countless times for nearly every faction bonus and was clearly the best gain possible by the numbers that were released regarding chain multipliers. So I don't think that anyone was trying to "make the most out of such an 'exploit' .. 'before it was patched' ", we were using the system given to us to its full potential.
The system right now is very standard, individually (as a player or faction) gain respect, there is little interaction between factions necessary, unless you want to take advantage of the multipliers. Maybe that will change with further updates to chaining, territories, and warring?
At least we gave a break to all those high level and level 100 accounts that have been hosp'd 24/7 since the release, who are targeted because they give more respect and xp than standard hits.
edit: I feel that retals between two players giving diminishing respect would be the easiest way to combat this issue
One "solution" or way to balance this mechanic would be making retals require hospitalisations instead of leaving or mugging. Suggested by Hank in faction chat.
Think of your own Real War. If Member 1 of Team A hits Member 1 of Team B then some member X of Team B will retaliate. And some member Y from Team A will counter it too. That's what your System is designed if you say real war.
So I don't think where is the problem in it?
Its just like You poked me I poke you the war is on !!!
Edit: How long are you willing to spend 1 mil for 5+ respect. Cant go on forever. And not every Faction has a reviving Faction. Its just like a Practice Time Simulation of the Real Time War.
I dont think alot of people are willing to spend 1m per attack for 5 extra respect. It would still be worth using in chain bonus multipliers though, which would be nice.
Which is why like 6 HOF factions have their own reviving factions now.
Look at Pt, they basically hit the same person 20-30 times in 5 minutes while the retal was still active, to get more respect. (when this was still possible)
Think this is a great potential solution - hospitalizing goes with the theme of retaliation, and gives a good trade off to be considered with both respect and xp, and I agree while reviving is possible if someone is willing to pay/supply it, but it gives the desired effort:worth ratio.
I think that's an interesting idea for this specific scenario. Also discussing removal of the war bonus (from territorial wars at least) and increasing base rate to compensate somewhat - saving the 2x bonus for competitive warring. If factions want to collaborate, it feels silly they should have to start a fake territorial war with each other first.
With this in mind, perhaps how bonuses work could be looked in to as well. In a similar theme, having to orchestrate a lot of very specific things for one hit (or you miss out on tonnes of respect) has seemed a little silly for a while now.
Fully on board with what you've said in this thread so far for the most part, but I would like to say that no one in R considered this to be an exploit at the time. We felt it much the same as ensuring bonuses are maximised.
Yes, making bonuses simpler is one of the aims, the group attacking one especially feels slightly odd currently. I was playing with the idea of having interval bonuses max all others by default automatically - that makes it super simple. I'm certain we'll get the best possible system over time.
Regarding 'exploit', from my point of view, it really did appear as if everyone had discovered something 'amazing' that wasn't working as intended and were attempting to make full use of it as quickly as possible. Those factions are two of the biggest in Torn, I need you to work with me - not against me. In these circumstances things were nowhere near as bad as they initially appeared, but I still had to close retals while we looked into it. If I determined it to be a real exploit, it would be simple to close the chain and remove all the respect gained, deleting those who actively and knowingly participated in a serious exploit for personal gain - fortunately that wasn't the case.
Well if you put it in context with the convo it would read as "lets make max use of the game mechanics". I can agree that my words were poorly chosen.
Also it isnt even an exploit to begin with. Just using game mechanics as they are supposed to be used in a very efficient way. The stock thingy (just to name something) was a real exploit. Since it was never intended to be used in that way.
Further more I have an issue with just simply quoting me without context, also because faction chat feels sort of private. I have no issue with you checking faction chats to discovers game abuse or any other abuse that's illegals by law. But quoting people in the open goes bit to far. Could have just said smt like: in a faction chat i found someone saying this (insert quote here)
We don't make the rules. But people who are trying to be successful are going to use the rules to their advantage.
I doubt Ched had the idea of Happy Jumps in mind when he first set things up, but now it's fairly common for people with lower stats to spend a day and half stacking energy, then use 5 edvd's and an ecstasy to boost happy, then train. IMO, that isn't an exploit. It certainly does take the rules in place and try to get the biggest gains possible.
This is similar. If it isn't giving results you want, then change the rules. But don't blame us for trying to use the rules to our advantage. That would be like saying "OMG, you're using 3 xanax every day to get extra energy to train". Yes, of course I am. It makes me stronger.