Skip to content
TORNLIFE More

HT vs Nameless Alliance Sector 7 Showdown

Started by RandyMcSplooge [3391107] on in Faction Discussion.

932 replies · 4.25k views · thread synced · 4 days ago · View on torn.com

Posts archived: 933 / 933 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch

Stretch [1846075] Officer Officer

I mean if you WANT to make more action on the map, I am sure I can swing in with a couple of my friends and crap you back to whatever corner you crawled out of, keep staff and any of that nonsense out of your mouth

Tyrech [2091318]

A few words before going to the point. First, I do understand some of the points brought up by HT. Secondly, some nice jabs being thrown by Crypto people xD and I'm not being condescendent btw, I can see me throwing the same one if the roles were reversed. And third, I'll admit to some bias, being in OBN. That being said, these are my thoughts on the matter:

 

                       - TT warfare is f**ked! 

Tbh, the previous statement is the highlight of this text and I'm 99% sure I can't top it, so keep reading at your own risk. But going a little deeper into the issue, the reason TT warfare is f**ked is because Chedburn's stance of letting the community have free reign and will in determining how the game will grow goes into direct contrast with the main reason people play games which is to win. Time and time again this has been proven to be right, content is added to the game and people, individually or in groups, try to max their outcome. Difference for other games is that in Torn there are a lot less restrictions which leads to unbalance. 

 

TT warfared being f**ked isn't nothing new. The possibility for multiple factions to declare on one faction at the same time and the mechanism behind "fake walls" has always made it a numbers game. It was less noteworthy before rackets, because TT wars were a money sink and TTs didn't provide income, so alliances were smaller. Introducing rackets, without a change in those two mechanics or without introducing a limitation on alliances (number of people or of factions), was fun in the beginning, but longterm was never gonna promote an active warring environment and instead lead to the current set-up. Which in turn sucks for everyone (stale game), but sucks even more for smaller or unallied factions because they're getting shafted money-wise. 

 

Regarding this war and trying to put myself in an unafilliated spectator pov, whilst I agree with Qfiffle's analysis on the not so great benefits of Nameless maneuvering within OBN territories compared with S7 airdropping, they have the advantage of a (in case of) defeat for them only meaning reduction in number of TTs to be shared but by retreating into S5/S6 areas, which might seem unfair for HT. I understand the feeling, but with a part of The Nameless Alliance being integrated in OBN that is a benefit they have, alongside other benefits and alongside their due duties. HT are free to build their own alliance or try to integrate existing ones if they so wish.

 

As for OBN's stance, I think the crux of the matter here is that we players are only consumers. Ched and the rest of the team are very down-to-earth and player engaging for sure, but ultinately the decisions regarding devs / staff work, game changes, etc, befall him and his team. As such, the only thing that is required of OBN is that they play by the game's rules, and they have no duty to head a crusade to make TT wars great again nor do they need to accomodate other players wishes for their wars to be more fun, and being the "top dog" in this part of the map, they get to rule it how they see fit and make whichever "rules" or paint tiles with whichever color they want. If anyone has a problem with that, I'm pretty sure there's a declare button for every people with war management perks.

Eromis [2144510]

I'd argue at the end of the day Torn has always been, and will be, a sandbox game. You have to define your win condition. A lot of people who come to Torn are used to most modern game having seasons, and other types of mechanics that create win conditions. Torn doesn't have that, and it creates friction with a chunk of the player base who expects that in the modern gaming world.

Ched tried to address this with ranked wars, to give people something to compete towards and a shiny medal next to your faction name. The community proceeded to min/max it to achieve the dopamine rush that is known as "number go up". If he got rid of the monetary reward to RWs we all know that the majority of the playerbase wouldn't touch it.

I think that de-flated Ched quite a bit for trying to address this particular issue, because competitive players are going to min-max the competition straight out the game, and will hardly ever compete for the sake of competing.

So we now have our current sandbox, until either the playerbase decides to kick over the sandbox and start fresh (Ched is probably hoping this will happen with the DB changes) or the Developers finally decide enough is enough and give the box a shake.

On the other side of it all though this exists again. We'll enter a few months of strife then the meta will settle and the cycle will repeat itself. It's just kind of the nature of a sandbox game.

The game is also suffering from respect inflation at this point. High respect factions give premium territories to lower respect factions because frankly they don't need the respect anymore.

M, CR, NS, and many more, none of them need the daily respect that comes from territories anymore. This has the additional problem of making raids less important. Some of these factions would have to be consistently raided for a long period of time to even lose a single perk.

All this to say that Torn does not have a lot of the staples of "modern" game design, and suffers from being in the later stages of a sandbox game. Territories were just the first to suffer from all this.

Rouge [2873463]

To add to your point, past 10M respect, there simply is no real good reason to gain respect. Factions can do chains to make their dicks look bigger, but that's it. (I say look because B3 still has a lot of respect on paper, but they were falling apart internally for months before everything finally came to a halt) RWs are fought entirely for player profit (hence the frequent terming of RWs that puts factions that quite frankly do not belong in diamond in diamond), and Raids are solely for grudge matches. 

 

TT warfare is at the place it is now because after Project C3 (or whatever the treaty was that stopped the last big island war) was signed, everyone in the alliance top leadership chats said f**k this shit, we're fine where we are. Because of the big alliances, nobody can challenge the status quo of WW/OBN/CRyPTo, and if nothing happens to change that, WW/OBN/CRyPTo will stay the status quo longer than any other alliance has been the status quo. If one of the big 3 alliances' main factions gets weaker because of quitting players, other factions will step up and take over being the face of roughly the same alliance, and nothing will change. Ched's DB changes were a nice change, but unless some domino effect leads to a big dick measuring between one of the three alliances, it changes absolutely nothing. 

 

TL;DR: Something needs to happen to shake up the status quo, or the gameplay loop will stay the exact same through generations of players and top factions. 

Alfi [2156072]

This is a really good analysis imo. The only thing I'd add to it is that since covid inflated his early game subscribers he (and bogie et al) are looking at the rosy revenue figures while blindfolded or uncaring to the apathy of the core heads that built the 'sandbox' - in terms of content creators -  leaving in droves. They've been content to witness an exodus of committed 5 year + active players for quite some time. Even though that section of the customers drives the content and drama that we all hope for. 

Kanzu [231334]

The other issue is that once conflicts reach alliances of this size, the game mechanics effectively grind everything to a halt. With dozens of factions able to fake-wall, it can take months of stalemates before any territory meaningfully changes hands. Large-alliance wars become tedious exercises in waiting for RNG rather than strategy.

 

That waiting is not passive. It often means asking players to sit at their computers for hours, repeatedly clicking a button in hopes of catching a declare. That is not a particularly engaging or sustainable gameplay loop.

 

If the DB change works the way Ched described, my concern is that territories have become even more frozen. Fake walls already stall progress, and now HOF factions can stack DBs to make regions effectively impassable for months. At that point, large-scale conflict is less about coordination or planning and more about endurance. Making these fights viable will likely require a change in game mechanics.

Dsla [2807954]

01:21:49 - 02/01/26 afeng26 (and 14 others) attacked and hospitalized you [view]

01:21:54 - 02/01/26 You used early discharge to leave hospital recovering 608 life and reducing hospital time by 3h 34m

 

01:27:12 - 02/01/26 Deputy_Cracker (and 12 others) mugged you and stole $275,499 [view]

01:27:18 - 02/01/26 You used early discharge to leave hospital recovering 780 life and reducing hospital time by 0h 31m

 

 

Eromis [2144510]

I imagine the thought train is that the DBs cause scarcity in territories, and less land means more fighting for what is left. You can't have mega-alliances if there's no land to give?

It won't play out that way in the current system though. Imagine hypothetically Crypto fights their way to the island, through what could easily be a month of fake walls and then all you have to do is db a dummy faction on the bridge and now the island can't be pushed for "months".

As far as I'm concerned post DB changes the only way the island changes hands is if you nuke the entire thing to reset and then sit at the border and race in the moment the territories become available again. Which honestly just sounds awful.

Vernunzio [730674]

That's kind of the point though, Stretch, you AND your friends. You alone are not a match for Mikk, but the fact that you have some friends who are permits you to feel secure in speaking kind of obnoxiously to him. 

 

And bringing friends is all well and good, that's what we have factions for, with room for you and 99 of your friends. 

 

Congrats on your team's astute political maneuvering, but when it gets to the point that you and Kanzu and others are so bored with your political stranglehold that you are trying to talk tough about some S7 conflict, and you and your friends means threatening the weight of up to 179 factions out in said S7, what are we even doing anymore?

Taxxon [882264]

I'm all for a fight but 179 Factions would definitely be a quick way to get us to turn tail.

 

The same people people preaching 'you can build your own alliance'  are also the same people telling players to stop building factions from scratch, join an established faction.

 

If it takes years to build up a competitive faction from the ground up it would take even more so years of min/maxing to assemble an alliance big enough with enough resources to even come close to causing a dent in the map in any significant way and that's not factoring everything those alliances would be gaining from their position that entire time.

 

As it turns out, as reflected by all the termed Ranked Wars, people do not really want to fight; they want an easy payday. If it takes joining WestWorld, OBN, Crypto, or whatever major alliance needs more factions, that's what most end up doing.

 

We have had three or four attempts to take land with our own formed alliance over the last few years and have been successful in both claiming and defending S7 land. Mostly being ended by the likes of major alliances once they decided they wanted the land for their friends.

 

The pickings for independent groups are slim to none these days when the option you have is facing down the barrel 179 Factions.

 

There's nothing wrong with having friends and alliances but ultimately it's hard to have a right to complain about staleness and state of the map when it's almost entirely player-driven.

 

 

With all that said, Thanks to OBN for staying an observer in all this fun we are having.

entrapt448 [3522864]

Update for today 05:00 02/01/26. Unfortunately no psychosis and x-mass from me!

 

Summary

 

  • If you take start of war from IB's initial assault on EAA the war has now been running for 11 days, 7 hours
  • If you take start of war from Extinctions initial assault on NBA the war has now been running for 6 days, 9 Hours

 

  • Current net loss 11 TT for Group A
    • 3 of which being Sector 6
  • Current net gain 2 TT for Group B
  • Current net gain 1 TT for Group C
  • Current net gain 12 TT for Group D
    • 3 of which being Sector 6
  • Current net gain 1 TT for Group E
  • Current net gain 2 TT for Group F

 

 

Recent Highlights/Lowlights

 

  • The Untouchables blitz through sector 6 - what a wild couple of days
  • The ongoing tug-of-war over PVB between VR and IMF
  • Obviously Randy's video updates live from the battlefield
  • Moshes "Welcome to the mosh pit" comment
  • The ideological discussion brought about from Eromis within the thread

 


[image: i.ibb.co]

 

Mentions: -Aurora- [32395] · Blue Rock Cartel (BRC) [14386] · The Untouchables [6799]

HT-Supermikk [108922]

This.

 

Stretch pretty much prove my point. Comming in flexing his big muscles and farming some cheap karma.

I am not aware of Chedburn even know that one of his main guys are also the one that does everything he can so NOTHING will ever change with TT wars.

 

But do what you like Stretch. Come in here in sector 7 and  remove us if you like, and prove my point even more.