So let’s f**k over smaller factions some more .. sounds like a great idea
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
So question on item #4- how does this optimizer work for those of us seeking to unlock a new branch 20 items at a time to keep one branch partial?
Details in this Q&A thread.
Details in this Q&A thread.
Mentions: Faction Respect Auto-optimizer Tool (poll item #4)
Not really bigger factions would have the training and waring perks and middle ones would stuck just with training
This just takes a bit of strategizing and planning of leadership (because we needed to plan specials around events and wars)
Anyway, I think we need to ask to change the gym branch not 3 days cooldown because in other way we will be stuck with 1 effective stat training.
This just takes a bit of strategizing and planning of leadership (because we needed to plan specials around events and wars)
Anyway, I think we need to ask to change the gym branch not 3 days cooldown because in other way we will be stuck with 1 effective stat training.
Seems like a boost to smaller facs since pricing scales the more you have, could be wrong though.
Depends on your point of view I guess, but definitely a boost for smaller factions mathematically. The total effect is more difficult to predict, all factions would face some tough choices and what they do would depend on what they think their competitors are going to do. I bet a lot of factions would be tempted to drop criminality to make room for war perks for instance. I can see why people are worried, but would definitely give factions an opportunity to specialize too.
Yeah, more of a more everything for new facs, enough of everything for top facs, and a bit of a nightmare for everyone in between. If nothing else, it's certainly incentive to try to get more respect.
I've actually read all of this thread and considered the fore and against arguments - I initially voted "yes", but as more information came to light I have wondered if I have made the right choice, I now sit on the fence with a marginal "yes" due wholly to the 50% reduction in respect sweetener, but fear the inflexibility will handicap factions in future upgrades.
I'd like to know when implementation of any of this is to happen? This Tuesday, next Tuesday, two months time...
Ched, it is obvious that faction leaders are in desperate need of further information regards your plans and Ranked Wars - please provide us with solid information and not turn Torn's community against you.
I'd like to know when implementation of any of this is to happen? This Tuesday, next Tuesday, two months time...
Ched, it is obvious that faction leaders are in desperate need of further information regards your plans and Ranked Wars - please provide us with solid information and not turn Torn's community against you.
Maybe there should be like a war load and peace loadout , just like weapon loadout we can set 2 kind of upgrade trees, one that can be set during a faction is in war , that way you can have max supression and agression for wars and after the war your perks reset to back peace loadout , This will allow low respect faction to be flexible and also fight with full war perks , if ched implements 3 months perk reset limit this would cause lower factions to just stay in train perks all the time , which is kinda unfair for them
if i understand chedburn correctly we should compromise on perks - it would certainly be interessting, having to think about how much one can invest into training without getting blasted for not having war perks.
however this compromisng on perks contradicts the current setup of expential branch cost (x8, x16, x32, etc.): if the goal is to compromise across branches that scalign should occur inside of each branch instead of penalizing having more branches
however this compromisng on perks contradicts the current setup of expential branch cost (x8, x16, x32, etc.): if the goal is to compromise across branches that scalign should occur inside of each branch instead of penalizing having more branches
Looks like Ched doesn`t rush. I was 90% sure that this will be implemented today, I am glad I was wrong and we have more time for discusion.
It is a boost to small factions that leave their perks static for long periods of time, as 3 or 4 resets per year should be plenty for them.
It helps and hurts small and medium factions that change their perks regularly.
It helps and hurts small and medium factions that change their perks regularly.
Whats the possibility of letting factions reset everything when/if this new system goes into place? What i mean is the main ones that are not branches, because if a faction cant swap out trees anymore they might want to scrap some of the things like nuke lab or territories to buy the other branch they used to swap with...
Yeah, screw all those waste of space lvl 15 noobs ;)
I guess that depends how shiny the perks are in those 2 new branches which means the bigger factions have to choose 8 out of 10, and whether they would do better splitting them off into the training sub.
Prepare for a great troll update from Ched, along the lines of day zero of the Cayman's bank and Stocks update.
Boom - game goes down for maintenance and announcement for the update goes live, all factions are locked into their current branches and will receive their first "global branch reset" in 12 weeks time.
I jest of course, surely that would never happen ;)
Boom - game goes down for maintenance and announcement for the update goes live, all factions are locked into their current branches and will receive their first "global branch reset" in 12 weeks time.
I jest of course, surely that would never happen ;)
Personally I don't think that core upgrades which may have been taken advantage of in the past within a faction should be refunded.
Until we don`t start getting respect for training in the gym, doing crimes (OC's don`t give enough respect for normal FC grow) or for revives here will not be truly specelizaited factions because the only way to get respect and growth is from chains and attacking (Territories included because you can`t keep them if you don`t war time to time). So why this idea of specialization is so pushed by ched when here is no real way to implement it in the current respect earning model?
Larger faction families - respect farming 2.0 (Ranked warring)
Haven't we been here before?
Haven't we been here before?
No that is absolutely not the case at all! I've been stuck in a catch-22 with faction trees almost since their release. I wanted to have just one attempt at steering faction trees in the intended direction, or drop it forever and embrace the current mindset. I'd already gone through dozens of lesser ideas over the years, so I'm not interested in wasting any more time going round and round with this - and would happily yield knowing that at least I gave it a shot.
To say that my original plan (in OP) isn't an improvement, is to say that we somehow stumbled upon the perfect version of faction trees completely by accident due to a last minute ill-thought-out unsetting mechanic. Maybe against all the odds, we did? I don't think this is the case, but I do think that the mindset is now too engrained to be changed, and a lot of players will just always believe it's the best, because it's all they know.
With 30% in disagreement, it's clear that the plan I had in mind is not as unanimously favourable as I was looking for. We'll instead need to proceed in the less controversial direction, one that doesn't require players to adapt or change their mindsets, and thus won't upset so many people. I'm content with this decision, and very happy to bring this to a close.
We'll keep things in line with the current flexible short-term upgrades system that everyone is already used to. I'm planning to adjust the unset timers from 100 hours down to 72 hours for now, with no additional changes.
However there's still some issues that I'd like to resolve in the future...
- Branches being immediately unset upon being unlocked, with the intention of only keeping them for the minimum duration.
- Branches being kept in a constant state of being unset / cancelled to minimize time if they're suddenly required.
- Ranked matchmaking time can be unpredictable, factions would feel bad having war branches 'unnecessarily' active.
- Reduced grind & progress satisfaction since branches change too quickly to actually have any continuous and meaningful progression.
A future update will see factions having two separate modes (or loadouts) of their specialization branches, 'Peace' and 'War'. The faction chooses the branches they want during times of Peace or War, and then can instantly switch to the other with immediate effect, with only a 24 hour cooldown before being able to switch back. This will resolve my remaining grievances with faction trees.
For those providing clear and constructive feedback and opinions within the 33 pages of responses, thank you for this, it was very helpful. To the small minority who went berserk, resorting to anger, swearing, and sarcasm... You were less helpful, but thank you for your participation all the same. :)
To say that my original plan (in OP) isn't an improvement, is to say that we somehow stumbled upon the perfect version of faction trees completely by accident due to a last minute ill-thought-out unsetting mechanic. Maybe against all the odds, we did? I don't think this is the case, but I do think that the mindset is now too engrained to be changed, and a lot of players will just always believe it's the best, because it's all they know.
With 30% in disagreement, it's clear that the plan I had in mind is not as unanimously favourable as I was looking for. We'll instead need to proceed in the less controversial direction, one that doesn't require players to adapt or change their mindsets, and thus won't upset so many people. I'm content with this decision, and very happy to bring this to a close.
We'll keep things in line with the current flexible short-term upgrades system that everyone is already used to. I'm planning to adjust the unset timers from 100 hours down to 72 hours for now, with no additional changes.
However there's still some issues that I'd like to resolve in the future...
- Branches being immediately unset upon being unlocked, with the intention of only keeping them for the minimum duration.
- Branches being kept in a constant state of being unset / cancelled to minimize time if they're suddenly required.
- Ranked matchmaking time can be unpredictable, factions would feel bad having war branches 'unnecessarily' active.
- Reduced grind & progress satisfaction since branches change too quickly to actually have any continuous and meaningful progression.
A future update will see factions having two separate modes (or loadouts) of their specialization branches, 'Peace' and 'War'. The faction chooses the branches they want during times of Peace or War, and then can instantly switch to the other with immediate effect, with only a 24 hour cooldown before being able to switch back. This will resolve my remaining grievances with faction trees.
For those providing clear and constructive feedback and opinions within the 33 pages of responses, thank you for this, it was very helpful. To the small minority who went berserk, resorting to anger, swearing, and sarcasm... You were less helpful, but thank you for your participation all the same. :)
We'll keep things in line with the current flexible short-term upgrades system that everyone is already used to. I'm planning to adjust the unset timers from 100 hours down to 72 hours for now, with no additional changes.
[image: tenor.com]
![[image: tenor.com]](https://tenor.com/view/steve-harvey-thank-you-jesus-grateful-praise-gif-9591328.gif){kind=link}