Small changes - Massive outcome

I think that we have enough mechanics to punish members and the faction as a whole, It's a bit much that all ive done thus far can be completely destroyed by raiding. As it stands now I do see non ranked warring as somthing for only established factions with millions in respect, intended or not i dunno but I can also see how this has made a cold war scenario for most faction alliances.

 Not that my faction is in any position to be leading attacks on other factions, but I am even paranoid that I or a faction mate will start beef with someone in a faction that would be more then happy to raid us into oblivion. I suppose thats content but it definitely enforces "keep yo head down, do nothing or be destroyed"

Side note, If there is such a spot on the map for small(very tiny) factions to engage with, it would be neat to not have to play game 24/7 if casuals have to stay out of warring thats fine I guess but somthing for everyone could be cool.

Suppose it should also be noted this is coming from a faction that dont even have enough members for ranked wars. So Not necessarily intended audience this is just my thoughts on the matter.

Maybe if an opportunity to pick up a DB (or something very valuable) from a territory/block and it just happened as a reward after 30 days (or such) there would be more of an incentive to fight for TTs.

even if its not removed, theres plenty of issues with a raid that should be addressed:

there should be a much larger penalty for a faction that initiates a raid and is behind in score, or loses and the opponent ends the raid, why can the loser literally just re-initiate the raid back on the faction they just lost to????  there should be a limit an incoming raid based on proximity on map, at least then theyd have to move, or maybe based on size. even a cooldown for a winning faction in a raid would probably be a good idea

also alot of your concerns are more oriented toward TT wars which i personally enjoy alot, and i think 1 fix that would be fairly easy and would mitigate ALOT of bullshit on the map, limit how many territories a faction can drop/pickup/move between with 1-3 days cooldowns for consistency with other map mechanics. a faction moving across the map the assault something and give it to their underling doesnt really make any sense int he first place, when a faction is on a territory it should be more like a home to them, like how a faction is a home to a player, and were not allowed to just hop around faction to faction so why can the factions just move 100+ territories around the map, attack someone, and go back later the same day?

you also have to remember that changing these things would negatively affect a staff ran faction family who benefits greatly from the current system, so even the most solid idea that would revolutionize the game and be super fun for thousands of players will likely be rejected, sadly

Just thinking how to get around what could happen instead for the more average independent factions (would consider IB an outlier due to the stat top-end), but no immediate solution comes to mind yet:

Territory attack -> Threat of perma hosping for at least a few weeks (until they get bored) from the whole mega alliance even without the raid respect loss, but emphasized to be refreshed permanently during PvE events like Halloween/Easter/Christmas -> Don't attack again.

There is a lot in this idea that could work / has merit, yet fundamentally even if implemented still wouldn't greatly change the dynamics of TT's wars which is what ultimately I think your trying to archive here. For example, without raids, Factions would take a couple of TTs before Heavy hitters came through the map to clear out. Yes, factions could rinse and repeat across different areas of the map, yet the heavy hitting factions wouldn't mind that either as it gives them something to do. 

Torn has 100K DAU's, that's 1000x factions at max capacity. That's plenty of scope for PVP action(s) yet we don't as the overall mechanics were built and designed for when a fraction of that number was playing. Historically, a TT war or Raid could be started by 1-5 players in a leadership position saying it's a good idea, now we have alliances, with committees and sub-committees. 

• As the saying goes, there are always 100's of reasons to say NO and only a couple to say YES - and more people = more NO's 

Therefore TT's need a fresh approach, rather than our individual TT spaces, we need the game to actually recognize alliances and have a fully integrated alliance set up, with all of the features you'd expected. Allocating respect, Setting % of racket incomes etc. Raids could easily become a part of this, even becoming an integral part, such as remove X respect from Alliance linked factions, gives X bonus or reward. 

TLDR - we can keep finding ways to tweak an old machine, yet at some point, a newer, faster and radically more capable one will be needed.

Personal Context - I have day to day involvement with Digital Products, and Torn is at a scale now where you have a couple of segregated teams / developers looking  at their specific areas. This means isolated changes, such as we're seeing with Ranked Wars. Yet because of this, the root cause never truly gets addressed, because there is no one "North  Star".

For example, if I'm quoting Andyman right, he said CHED told him he wanted to see more drama in the game - yet pretty much all of the decisions over the last 2 years, have not been taken to increase drama, but taken to increase player activity. That's fine, 100k DAU's is cracking result by ANY business, yet drama causes issues, which can negatively impact activity and this appears to have caused a conflicting approach - you don't get 100K users logging in daily to spend all that time looking at a hospital page. 

Edit - typos

YAD3TARWS

it almost spells retard if you squint and guess a bit

change raiding to steal cash/items from the faction vault instead

dirty bombs arent even a good tool for removing respect. I was debating whether I even think we would want a smaller dirty bomb option after removing raids and I think the answer is no. Remove raids, just dirty bombs to do some damage and send a message, but they should still cost a lot to make them mean something. The lack of a way to hurt another factions respect will only be missed by a handful of players and we can easily ignore their opinions lol. Alternatively I would argue that raids need to be buffed. 

Why down vote this guy for a totally valid point? This should be in bolder letters. Territory is a Psy-Op to make you want to be part of the hierarchical elite.

Marches' website shows about 250 to 280 allied factions with territory, and says another 70 not allied have land (sitting on allied land though lol). So maybe a total of 320 to 350 factions even have territory? Definitely a priority fix. Urgent even. 

Bc the poors disgust me

Load image

do big factions even care about respect in 2026? i dont think i have ever seen someone mention how ranked wars caused a gigantic respect inflation the last couple of years (in both small and big factions)

factions holding the best rackets already have enough respect to max their perks 2 times over (we personally ran out of good options at 8m, top 50 respect has 12.5m and top 1 has over 22m!!), so unless you are dropping 100k bonuses on their small sister factions i dont see how buffing, nerfing or removing raids would change anything when it comes to large scale wars

when it comes to small scale wars, moving IB for example, regardless of raids/respect you would still get physically stopped by alliances before getting close to zone 3-4 rackets, either being bodyblocked by a main shell making their way there or simply just outside hits knocking you off the wall, and even tho you get ED you are still limited by the 5e joins

either way the big issue for both small and large scale territory wars is that its simply not worth the cost, even tho rackets generate a ridiculous amount of wealth it still doesnt compare to the expenses of warring, with big alliances being formed to avoid burning energy/money while (historically) being able to cash in the rewards for multiple years

if i had to make a suggestion it would be

1. reduce the amount of rackets by atleast 50%
2. increase the rewards by 300-500%
3. lower the lvl variance
4. fully disconnect the racket spawning/lvling mechanic from zone tier
5. give rackets a hidden lifetime between 3-9 months

bigger and scarcer rackets being able to spawn anywhere on the map would ridiculously increase map movement and probably fragment the 2-3 big alliances into smaller ones to protect and chase specific rackets through the map

I like the weird angle you're taking to solve the problem. It's an interesting approach. Tweaking the surrounding mechanics is a much softer approach to changing the meta. Not sure if I'd remove raiding entirely though. Maybe let people initiate raids to adjoining terts? That would also shake up the meta a bit. Being side-by-side with an ally would be valuable both offensively and defensively.

Absolutely can’t stand D3vl

But this might actually be a good idea from him for once. It’s to easy for 1 HOF family to “protect” an entire alliance with the threat of a raid, no need to move on the map, no need to actually do anything just the threat.

If removed then you want to defend an ally you move to defend them on the map

k, now i understand the OP.  :)

Thought about same thing and yes. Raiding is what you get for merely trying... My own idea was to just limit faction number that can raid you but honestly, this idea is better...

impressive D3vl not a bad idea for once

I think a cooldown of a some sort would be great addition to your already great idea . Like now you can cross the whole map in a few seconds to come defend your allies (for some big names it's enough if they show up )

then push you off the map and be back in their territories by the time rackets ara paying out ... 

Factions largely aren't prevented from warring due to threat of a raid. It's due to politics and game mechanics themselves. The CRyPTo Island war showed how fake walling basically stalls warfare until people get bored. It's the game equivalent of medieval walls. Wait put the enemy. Also, with the major alliances as their agreement,  it's essentially a 2 alliances vs 1 if any of them tried to take territory. 

The other problem is it's resource intensive and stunts individual growth. People eould rather RW or train then sit on stacks, waiting for shit to happen.

Raids aren't the problem. The problem is the mindset of the community and the idea of opportunity cost.

I'll +1 this as I feel it's definitely a valid discussion point.

But the real problem with territory wars is that there's still no reason to really fight them. I've said it so many times that there are too few rackets on the map to fight over. It's completely illogical to fight over 30 territories to get to a single racket that might despawn by the time you even reach it. Or if you do reach it, it could disappear long before it's ever worth the investment. If there were say 10 other rackets on the way to the one you want, then perhaps it's worth a little risk to stir up some crap. 

There's gotta be at least 10x as many rackets to incentivize factions getting off their asses and fighting. 

But yes, removing the threat of being raided for merely trying to take someone's shit is 100% something that I can get behind.