Skip to content
TORNLIFE More

New warring changes

Started by Indubitably [2117849] on in General Discussion.

500 replies · 9.96k views · thread synced · 8 days ago · View on torn.com
About this thread

Posts archived: 501 / 501 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch

Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.

Archived posts
501
Discussion span
→
Authority score
65 / 100
Historical score
54 / 100
Story score
76 / 100
Engagement score
93 / 100

People posting, likes and official posts are not counted for this thread yet: on threads longer than one page they come from a periodic pass over the archive, which has not covered it.

Most-liked replies

  • Naako [482424] · 134 likes ·
    Good job ched. Make players like me less active. Some of the most active players in torn guest. Not just for money or changing wars but for fun. Your current mechanics and the way warring works there are very few …
  • Proxima [1879587] Wiki Editor · 97 likes ·
    Closed door discussions with a group that isn't nearly representative of the active players this will affect :/ Can you outline the logic for us at least, while we're put through this trial.
  • Chedburn [1] Admin · 87 likes ·
    I wouldn't get your panties in a twist just yet, it's a trial culminating from significant discussions within the committee. The logic behind it is more complex than initial thoughts.
Indubitably [2117849] · #1 · edited
You're now unable to join a wall once a territory is attacked if you were not in the faction to begin with. Learned this after Relentless just hit Nuclear Armageddon and we're unable to help.

This gives a huge attacking advantage since you can stack the faction and hit. But that means they'll need to stay as well to hold the territory.

Thoughts?

I like the idea in theory, but it still doesn't work. It's just a battle of whoever attacks first wins. This basically ruins proxy factions and if that was your way of doing it.. this was a very stupid way to do it.
Naako [482424] · #3 · edited
Good job ched. Make players like me less active. Some of the most active players in torn guest. Not just for money or changing wars but for fun.

Your current mechanics and the way warring works there are very few wars. So people like me jump around to find new wars. By adding this you basically kill half of my desire to play this game.

You screwed the stock market and the fun there and now you are screwing the last part of this game I find fun.

I guess now I just sit in SA and wait for wars instead of searching for them. And slowly go inactive.

Damn great idea ched. Take away fun things to do from your most active players.

Applause
Chedburn [1] Admin Developer · #6
I wouldn't get your panties in a twist just yet, it's a trial culminating from significant discussions within the committee. The logic behind it is more complex than initial thoughts.
Naako [482424] · #7
You think of just one part. But not the fun aspect of torn.

My panties will now sit in SA and war rarely.
Adrenalinas [1974447] · #8 · edited
still, they can jump in and assault attackers territory and jump on that one.

And I think this does n`t prevent proxy factions for farming rackets. They just assault racket with other FC that has members already and took that back if racket will be taken by someone else.

This thing just hit hard for guest services providers, but I don`t think anything will change for racket's farming.

Some points to Ched for trying, but this doesn`t work.
Proxima [1879587] Wiki Editor · #9
Closed door discussions with a group that isn't nearly representative of the active players this will affect :/

Can you outline the logic for us at least, while we're put through this trial.
Insi [2034939] · #10
Are there any mercenaries on the committee? I doubt it because you just killed that whole way of playing torn
_Abaddon_ [1617737] · #12
How abt limiting the number of guests ? I mean ofc an entirely different faction joining as "guests" is pretty unfair. But entirely banishing it is kinda boring as well.
Kidnapped [1841988] · #14
I think the committee are doing alright, at least they are doing something rather than not contributing anything at all eh.
Indubitably [2117849] · #15
It makes proxy racket farming a lot more difficult at least. But it also ruins other aspects of the game and the trade-off isn't even good.

We'll see what Ched has lined up to add onto this to see if it makes any sense because as of now it doesn't.
Naako [482424] · #17
It doesn't even kill proxies. It just kills Merc work. There are 2 ways around this I see currently.

Good job ched. Prox is right, you have nobody who is a Merc on the committee. And none thought about this.
Naako [482424] · #18
Prox u just want on the committee lol. But your point is valid. No mercs on the committee so nobody thought about this.

And some home making people stick in their factions is a good thing. Idk how that was overlooked.

There have been several changes in the past to promote poeple moving factions.
Mob [2251781] · #19
I think it's more so the fact they didn't announce it and just rolled out one extreme of a change. Announcing it and getting community feedback would probably have been the better approach, considering how unsatisfied people are with the warring system. But I could also understand that would slow the process, but better to be safe than sorry right?
Sky [380980] Committee Committee · #20
Allowing mid level and young factions to fight for their own territories without having to pay stat monsters to wall sit should encourage activity and fairness for a large portion of the playerbase non represented by the loudest people in the forums. My initial thoughts are guesting for another faction should have a risk reward element to it. And yes it favors attackers, but you can set yourself up to respond

Outside hits and paying for revives can still decide a wall fight even if you cant physically join the wall.

To Nabisco's point about mercenaries, I agree that to the extent he uses it, this update hurts his gameplay.

Ched said it's a trial, so those who hate it should come to the table with helpful feedback rather than raging against ched and the committee

Lots of discussion for pros and cons, I'm hoping to seeing constructive discussion on this, to see if a better solution or logical adjustment can be presented