Skip

Thank you all for your time!

"Early Discharge Adjustment: While enabling early discharge by default may streamline gameplay, it inadvertently overlooks the strategic depth it provides to weaker factions.

By removing requirements to trigger early discharge, the update may inadvertently favor larger & stronger factions, limiting the tactical options available to smaller factions."

Could you elaborate on how you think it does this?

If you are going to get AI to write your points for you at least elaborate on them

Smells like ChatGPT.

Certainly!

Earlier before the update, early discharge system usually allows factions to strategically trigger ED to defend against outside attacks. In the past, unmatched factions could make use of machineries to gain tactical advantage over stronger opponents.

However, by enabling early discharge by default without the requirement to trigger it manually, the update may inadvertently favor larger and stronger factions for several reasons:

1. Resource Advantage: Larger factions often have greater resources at their disposal, including more active members, higher levels of coordination, and access to powerful mercenaries in Torn. With early discharge enabled by default, these factions can capitalize on their resources more effectively, making it more challenging for weaker/unmatched factions to mount successful attacks.
2. Strategic Flexibility: The ability to strategically deploy mercs provides smaller factions with a crucial element of surprise and unpredictability. the ED update limits the tactical options available to smaller factions, diminishing their ability to outmaneuver and outwit their opponents.
3. Defensive Dominance: Without the need to trigger early discharge manually, larger factions can maintain a constant state of defensive readiness, making it exceedingly difficult for smaller factions to breach their defenses. This defensive dominance further reinforces the advantage of larger factions and reduces the likelihood of successful attacks by smaller factions.

Overall, while the intention may have been to streamline gameplay, the default enabling of early discharge overlooks the strategic depth it provides to weaker factions. Instead, it inadvertently tilts the balance in favor of larger and stronger factions, limiting the tactical options available to smaller factions and potentially exacerbating existing disparities in RW.

I hope you understand

In the previous iteration of RW, we can trigger ED by placing bounties on our players or have them mugged. It takes a while to trigger, but once it's in place, we can safely protect our inactive players.

With this new system, we can still do that, but because of the 60-sec protection, it's harder when you're up against an enemy with high activity. It's a fair concept added to fix the mercs problem. Activity and tactics triumph, after all. My faction heavily relied on mercs and bounties, but I have to say this change is a good and a fair change.

If we're looking at problems with these changes, it's the activity modifier. Due to it still only speculations. Having inactive players, before or after the changes, means they are essentially deadweights in our faction. I understand that not everyone will be war beasts, but if you want to get profit, you gotta contribute in war.

We (my faction) cut down a lot of our spendings on bounties and mercs, but in the foreseeable future, we'll have to spend more money on buying ecans, fhcs and medicals if we really want the win and really up for war. This is a terrible thing. Not only are we spending more money and be more active to war, we also got shit on due to cache prices keep on dropping every minute/second.

No matter how you guys see these changes, no matter how much you shit on my opinions from the two previous threads, I will still say it. There's no reason for any of us, in any rank/division (Unranked to Gold specifically) to ever do a real war, let alone 3+ real wars in a row. The payout is shit, the profit/saving is shit, it's just not worth the health and time investment.

We already had enough of overworking irl, there's no reason working as slave in a game to earn pixel money.

Ah, are you here to critique my post or perhaps offer some constructive feedback? ?

Your discerning eye and insightful observations should be propelled towards expressing your concerns on the issues raised rather

Let's keep the dialogue open and constructive, shall we?

Making an AI post, and responding to people with more copy paste crap isn't exactly what I'd call a discussion

If people wanted to do that they would simply write their post into chatGPT on their own

Get off your high horse

How many posts do we need to litigate the same things over and over

The participation bonus is just a flat score bonus cause ched can't implement anything more complex than that.

Thanks for sharing your insights.

Your perspective on the activity modifier and the challenges it presents is valid.

Let's keep the discussion going and find ways that younger factions can adapt and thrive with this new update.

Lovely


[image: i.ibb.co]

the thing with AI is their vocabulary usually resembles ML based off of old articles and whatnot. I enjoy reading it though, it gives renaissance vibes

Here's what Ched said:
The requirements for achieving the maximum reward modifier are reasonable - during a real war where both sides are actively engaged, it's unlikely a faction would fail to meet them.

So what would happen if over half of a faction members have little/no contribution in a RW.

Will they still get the usual RW caches or will it be reduced?

I'm blown away by how little you managed to say in so many words. If this isn’t AI then you need to stop trying to sound smart because all it's doing is making you seem dumb.

You say that before the changes "unmatched factions could make use of machineries to gain tactical advantage over stronger opponents." Then after the changes "Larger factions often have greater resources at their disposal, including more active members, higher levels of coordination, and access to powerful mercenaries in Torn."

This is a contradiction and also untrue. Everyone has access to mercs in the same way. Bigger factions do not have access to more powerful mercs.

I'm not going to go through point by point arguing with what is likely an AI generated argument but each point made reads like a kid trying to waffle their way into a few marks on a question they don't know the answer to.

Lmao, prompt this: sounds like a skill issue!

it's literally so easy to rig caches now (no stat matchmaking) - essentially you just let the actives hit your inactives and vice versa until the 'chosen' winner starts hitting the actives after like 1-2 hours of trading hits so that they win

it's the same as before, but now with more energy waste

This is exactly the format chat gpt uses, lol :D

It's based on the score achieved by the faction against the initial target. Individual performance is irrelevant.

Graved due to original content having been edited out.