I think the 50% reduction will be useful for all factions and we might get a few more upgrades than we might already have currently, count MMCP in for it
Faction tree recalibration flexibility [POLL]
Started by Chedburn [1] Admin on in Faction Discussion.
Posts archived: 779 / 779 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
Is there deadline for voting on this? It's a big offer and we want to know how much time we have to decide?
The current system seems fine since it allows for strategy. 72 hour reset instead of 100 would be a solid fix.
Rigid upgrades with a 64x/128x multiplier will just mean that factions will have to give up some important branch for warring or training at all times. It's going to have to come down to which branch factions value the least which means that excursion or criminality will get the shaft at all times.
Rigid upgrades with a 64x/128x multiplier will just mean that factions will have to give up some important branch for warring or training at all times. It's going to have to come down to which branch factions value the least which means that excursion or criminality will get the shaft at all times.
Ahhh. Ours are offline atm.
KK.
KK.
Will there be new perks inside each branch, or they will remain the same?
The specialization branches will all remain the same for now, only their costs would be reduced, by half. We are keen to add new branches in the future to increase customisation, we have some ideas.
What does "strictly limited" refer to?
Exactly that - it's limited strictly, to the extent where factions will no longer switch out branches back and forth on a regular basis. There's no specific plan yet, but I imagine factions being able to only unset / switch 3 branches per year. So the tree can evolve with the faction and its members over time, instead of arbitrarily flipping between branches depending on the situation.
If a faction starts to upgrade a branch and then decides that wasn't the right path, is there a way to go back or they will forever locked like how it happens with core upgrades?
They'd be able to reset and/or switch branches, but this would be far more restrictive. Mistakes can certainly be corrected.
What would happen to our current trees?
Nothing, other than potentially being reordered to be more optimal. Your faction would just suddenly have more respect to spend on further upgrades, due to the reduction in costs.
How would this work with steadfast perks?, are we only able to get 1 stat above the 15% gym gains? (and 2 above 10%)
voted yes, because it does seem better for the game, but do wonder about steadfast where you need to pick between things
voted yes, because it does seem better for the game, but do wonder about steadfast where you need to pick between things
What does "strictly limited" refer to?omg ched lol
Exactly that - it's limited strictly
I feel this would destroy smaller factions.
The current big factions had the opportunity to more easily farm respect.
A new and growibg faction will have the need to be able to switch perks as they go.
Limiting that means you limit their possible growth. It also limits their warring capabilities normally bot a single smaller faction would want to spend all their respect on war perks.
Imo you are just gonna create which factions will dominate the game even more. People who want multiple aspects in their torn career will have to switch because a smaller faction can not change the perks from training to war easily anymore.
We are gonna end with pt faction 10 monarch faction 10 and ns faction 10 (figure of speech)
The current big factions had the opportunity to more easily farm respect.
A new and growibg faction will have the need to be able to switch perks as they go.
Limiting that means you limit their possible growth. It also limits their warring capabilities normally bot a single smaller faction would want to spend all their respect on war perks.
Imo you are just gonna create which factions will dominate the game even more. People who want multiple aspects in their torn career will have to switch because a smaller faction can not change the perks from training to war easily anymore.
We are gonna end with pt faction 10 monarch faction 10 and ns faction 10 (figure of speech)
Would you allow a day/week/month notice for us to reset the perks without any penalty before the start of this system?
Currently, factions can unset any branch upgrades they wish without a penalty, in 100 hours.
Just a missed punctuation, I guess.
Just a missed punctuation, I guess.
If trees are locked for a much longer duration, the steadfast branch may require a revamp.
Out of the 4 training streams, beyond 10% we can have 2 & beyond 15% we can have only 1 stream.
Currently factions managed this by rotational unset & reset.
This will have to be changed if branches are going to be permanent or even locked in for a long duration.
The other proposed changes sound good.
Reserving the vote for now pending clarification on locked period & the Steadfast branch.
Out of the 4 training streams, beyond 10% we can have 2 & beyond 15% we can have only 1 stream.
Currently factions managed this by rotational unset & reset.
This will have to be changed if branches are going to be permanent or even locked in for a long duration.
The other proposed changes sound good.
Reserving the vote for now pending clarification on locked period & the Steadfast branch.
can we get a faction upgrades simulator with the new proposed changes, to test effectively what would be the outcome for a faction, depending on how much respect is available? maybe @kivou or @icebluefire could modify the ones currently available on YATA/Tornstats....
also @ched enable the forum mentions pls
also @ched enable the forum mentions pls
Base on my first read when I got the event with the limited info, the further expansion on the bits that seemed unpalatable to myself are more palatable with the further expansion into possible avenues that could go down
To your #3
We’ll always have players going to high respect factions just for the perks, and not wanting putting work into building.
But not all players are like that, the community and growth of a small faction is a lot of fun, and brings players closer together.
We’ll always have players going to high respect factions just for the perks, and not wanting putting work into building.
But not all players are like that, the community and growth of a small faction is a lot of fun, and brings players closer together.
1- no
2- yes
3- nuetral
4- nuetral
I saw someone suggest loadouts for specials. I like that. Can we do that?
The problem isn't being competitive. We like being competitive. We don't like being pointless. Without ranked warring we don't really have a clear path so chaining is basically building for the sake of building.
We want to he more competitive so any feature that reduces competition is bad.
2- yes
3- nuetral
4- nuetral
I saw someone suggest loadouts for specials. I like that. Can we do that?
The problem isn't being competitive. We like being competitive. We don't like being pointless. Without ranked warring we don't really have a clear path so chaining is basically building for the sake of building.
We want to he more competitive so any feature that reduces competition is bad.
As someone who has been co-lead of a few smaller factions, and now runs a non-faction I can see this would help some smaller factions get bigger, if they specialised. Weirdly, some people do play Torn and don't want to get involved with the gym training, warring etc, and for them this would be excellent. A smaller faction could specialise in travel bonuses, or healing and be able to attract people who don't give a darn about getting a boost to gym gains, and don't want the constant pressure some of the bigger factions give of training and chaining.
However the middle ground, the smaller factions who want to become bigger WILL suffer, because they will be directly competing for members and will need to find some sort of unique selling point to draw members in, whether that be a shared interest, free Xanax or whatever.
If you want to be the next Iribuya or Oran a small faction with great bonuses for flying when you get started might help, especially if you don't want to chain etc, but if you are the average player who wants to take part in all aspects of Torn, this will see the growth of the big Faction Families who instead of changing their perks every month will change the membership roster instead ie a gym faction, a war faction and a flying faction who change membership each month rather than perks - a pain in the ass for members, but if you want the big perks until someone unlocks all the branches it's what will happen.
TLDR - Small Factions good, medium factions bad, big factions don't care
However the middle ground, the smaller factions who want to become bigger WILL suffer, because they will be directly competing for members and will need to find some sort of unique selling point to draw members in, whether that be a shared interest, free Xanax or whatever.
If you want to be the next Iribuya or Oran a small faction with great bonuses for flying when you get started might help, especially if you don't want to chain etc, but if you are the average player who wants to take part in all aspects of Torn, this will see the growth of the big Faction Families who instead of changing their perks every month will change the membership roster instead ie a gym faction, a war faction and a flying faction who change membership each month rather than perks - a pain in the ass for members, but if you want the big perks until someone unlocks all the branches it's what will happen.
TLDR - Small Factions good, medium factions bad, big factions don't care
I've seen the question asked and Ched hasn't answered.. so .. er... *clears throat*
What about steadfast dex/def spd/str perks?
Will we still have to choose?
What about steadfast dex/def spd/str perks?
Will we still have to choose?
this is going to break my Faction Upgrades Simulator
This ^^ perks really aren't everything... the sense of achievement and growth you get is worth sacrificing a couple extra nerve or hours booster CD for lol
"They weren't meant to feel forced to frequently reset their branches in order to be competitive with others."
Of course it was forced, there is no possible way nobody in the committee didn't bring this to your attention. I'd assume ALL of them did because this was one of the most obvious outcomes of the update. For you to say you didn't know it would happen is concerning.
I voted no as things are fine the way they are, all you need to do is lower resets to 24 or 48 hours.
P.S - this poll was always going to be "yes" considering every faction will gain MORE perks from it. This entire idea was silly considering you're asking people "hey do you want more perks?" ....another very obvious outcome, shouldn't have even made the thread.
Of course it was forced, there is no possible way nobody in the committee didn't bring this to your attention. I'd assume ALL of them did because this was one of the most obvious outcomes of the update. For you to say you didn't know it would happen is concerning.
I voted no as things are fine the way they are, all you need to do is lower resets to 24 or 48 hours.
P.S - this poll was always going to be "yes" considering every faction will gain MORE perks from it. This entire idea was silly considering you're asking people "hey do you want more perks?" ....another very obvious outcome, shouldn't have even made the thread.