Forums
First  << 1  2  3 >>  Last
Forum Main>>General Discussion>> Offline players in other countries.
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 10:25:28
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?

nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 10:49:47
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


A protection mechanism was available to them. It was legit.They used it - as is their Right.

Case closed.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DB_farid

ID: 1398886
Level: 69
Posts: 6035
Score: 3385
IBBDB_farid [1398886]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 11:55:07
Well I have a suggestion to make it interesting. How about remove the protection and also not show the inactives on the list. This way people will need to work their way to find them.

5770a01d-5dad-7f6a-83816.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DB_farid

ID: 1398886
Level: 69
Posts: 6035
Score: 3385
IBBDB_farid [1398886]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 11:59:29
By DarthBrogo [21801]
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


A protection mechanism was available to them. It was legit.They used it - as is their Right.

Case closed.


Protection mechanism? WTH. Well its not players chioce to be protected they get it automatically.
And the most ironic part of this protection is that it is given to players for free and especially in a crime game.
Yes protection to staff and the lottery winners is exceptable but why the inactives, well this is the thoery of ched.
Save the inactives and screw the onliners.

5770a01d-5dad-7f6a-83816.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 13:35:16
By DB_farid [1398886]
By DarthBrogo [21801]
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


A protection mechanism was available to them. It was legit.They used it - as is their Right.

Case closed.


Protection mechanism? WTH. Well its not players chioce to be protected they get it automatically.
And the most ironic part of this protection is that it is given to players for free and especially in a crime game.
Yes protection to staff and the lottery winners is exceptable but why the inactives, well this is the thoery of ched.
Save the inactives and screw the onliners.


Piff and twaddle. The protection existed, it was known, they took it, and it is not yours to alter or even question that decision.



Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
J0NATHAN-

ID: 760969
Level: 50
Posts: 1245
Score: 569
J0NATHAN- [760969]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 15:08:01
I like it because when I go out of town or backpacking for a extended period of time I can just fly to SA and leave my bazaar open without worrying about getting mugged.

I was there.
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Pluto

ID: 541636
Level: 82
Posts: 3368
Score: 1315
FTWPluto [541636]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 15:35:48
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


I know of one case - my ex faction leader, always rich etc.

Logged back in to find his beloved faction deleted, company gone.

HOWEVER - he had the tenacity to fly - as in the rules.

Why should he get raped all the time for stock bennies (which were good at the time) etc????

So, as per your question - if you fly and stay inactive for 24 hours you are not visible - ergo in the rules and is part of the game. You know, the game where YOU abused the SB system to give you massive DEX, (albeit part of the game)-then as part of the committee decided it would be good to nerf it.

Pot/kettle.

Absolute disgrace.

And the players have a choice - fly and become inactive or remain as a punchbag - you are saying them that remain in TC need the same protection as them that did not fly? Even though the rules state you can fly and be inactive safely?

Is your next request anyone with the letter J in their name is unable to be attacked?

29lzm79.jpg
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DB_farid

ID: 1398886
Level: 69
Posts: 6035
Score: 3385
IBBDB_farid [1398886]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 15:46:08
Pluto just thinking are you for the motion or against it.

5770a01d-5dad-7f6a-83816.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 16:56:02
Farid, if Pluto's post waa TL;DR for you, then I can condense it to this.


People who have the INSOLENCE to suggest removing the protection are an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE.


And I quite agree with him.



Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
_Bored_
ID: 1708335
Level: 23
Posts: 431
Score: 343
_Bored_ [1708335]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 17:10:29
[i]By Pluto [541636]

So, as per your question - if you fly and stay inactive for 24 hours you are not visible - ergo in the rules and is part of the game. You know, the game where YOU abused the SB system to give you massive DEX, (albeit part of the game)-then as part of the committee decided it would be good to nerf it.

Pot/kettle.

Absolute disgrace.



Owned lol

car.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Praetorus
ID: 156563
Level: 32
Posts: 43
Score: -53
Praetorus [156563]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 17:20:11
By DieZel_ [1708335]
[i]By Pluto [541636]

So, as per your question - if you fly and stay inactive for 24 hours you are not visible - ergo in the rules and is part of the game. You know, the game where YOU abused the SB system to give you massive DEX, (albeit part of the game)-then as part of the committee decided it would be good to nerf it.

Pot/kettle.

Absolute disgrace.



Owned lol


Agreed.


Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Hobbie

ID: 443763
Level: 77
Posts: 11282
Score: 2397
eVÝHobbie [443763]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 18:02:26
Any particular reason that removing it is the worst idea of the history of the world?
Yes, broken 'promises' and rule changes aren't ideal - but you can't never change the game for this reason. Self-busting needed to be nerfed, and it was.

It doesn't really make sense them being unattackable I agree. I doubt they would be attacked very much anyway, unless they have a load of money on them - which they should put in a vault if they want to protect it. Whilst I don't want to make inactives suffer unnecessarily - if someone goes offline for hundreds of days and comes back to find themselves in a slightly compromised position, well I'm afraid that's what happens if you don't play the game.

pyramelepainsig2hobbie.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DB_farid

ID: 1398886
Level: 69
Posts: 6035
Score: 3385
IBBDB_farid [1398886]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 18:04:13
By DarthBrogo [21801]
Farid, if Pluto's post waa TL;DR for you, then I can condense it to this.


People who have the INSOLENCE to suggest removing the protection are an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE.


And I quite agree with him.



Well is your freind under protection or what?

And after reading Plutos post 5 times I got what he was saying.

5770a01d-5dad-7f6a-83816.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Fujiko

ID: 341315
Level: 55
Posts: 6418
Score: 4858
Fujiko [341315]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 18:52:47
By JimmyJames [581165]

Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


*Ah, James, you must miss the days of my lengthy forum posts, to ask me such open-ended questions for me to exploit like this*

They had companies back then? I'm pretty sure this was before the implementation of companies and the stock market... Be that as it may, I never said any of those things were ok. I have issues with most of the things you just listed. Hence my assertion that it would simply add another broken promise by Chedburn Networks Incorporated to the list.

It wasn't so much a matter of the wars timing out through the system, which I concede was not yet implemented, as the wasted slot in the war base, but I'm sure you know this. Solo hunter factions were part, if not most, of the reason timeout was added, if memory serves. Eventually the big factions would tire of warring a single noob in a hunter faction, and just accept their surrender, because they would periodically fly back to Torn, train once, reinvest their bank, send surrenders, and fly back to South Africa. In this way, they did time out, through their own natural means, rather than timing out through the system. Every slot in the war base counts, because it would be impossible to give everyone unlimited war slots. Some idiot would have tried to declare every faction and flood their war base causing errors, wasting server resources, effecting other factions, and the game itself.

To answer your question: Back then, Torn City (as it was then called) advertised its versatility.

Ched would make big threads expounding upon Torn City's versatility (to encourage donations obviously, and those foolish enough to fall for it, like myself, were eventually disappointed that those expectations would not be met, rather, they would be whittled away in much the same way that America's "freedoms" that it touted when I was a child have been within our lifetimes) that Torn was a game where everybody wins ("confirmed" by the addition of the "iwin" button http://www.torn.com/iwin.php, but that in itself was double-edged, because one can only use the iwin button if you know about it, and I'm sure several, if not many, new players don't). He went on to explain that each player could set their own goals and develop their own unique character in the manner of their own choosing. He drew upon the examples that you could be very active and work on battle stats and participate in the attacking aspects of the game, or be as inactive as you liked, login once every three months (or more) and collect your bank (if you chose to use it) and then go inactive again, collecting spendable job points (if you chose to have a job, as there was a benefit to not having a job, which was decreased happiness loss when training, as I recall) even during the periods of inactivity (bearing in mind at the time this was written, all we had were what we now call "starter jobs", which have since been revamped, and probably in a manner detrimental to those players).

Then again, Ched lied about a lot of things. He trys to act as if he had built the game from the ground up, when, in reality, it was a scramble to be the first to complete Raven's Unfinished Text-Based Gangster Game, a public domain code donated to the Internet by someone who had given up on making a game similar to what we now enjoy here today. He had help, of course, and Quacks [2] was his biggest help. If memory serves, Munchielord [89] also helped with it, though not nearly as much as Quacks. Yet, he quite unabashedly denies these things here: www.chedburn.net

By Chedburn [1] When we say our games are original, we mean it. We dont use any pre-made codes, scripts or engines. Everything is created from scratch by us. Our own blood, sweat and the occasional tear go into all our products.


Perhaps Ched is an hypocrite for being so harsh with people who "steal" code from this game, as he himself resorted to it a time or two, but the names of those sites, if posted here, conveniently, will display as "torncity".

Right, so to answer your last question, after flying was implemented, it was stated by Torn City, that the way to avoid being attacked, was to fly out, and this has been repeated since, though with the more recent addendum to go inactive. We could, of course, encourage them to slide further down this slippery slope, but I do not feel that this would make the game any better. I can concede that this is a progressive game, but only in that it gets progressively worse. The fact that Chedburn Networks Incorporated has gone back on the customer expectations that I, and presumably many others, were given as new players in no way justifies that they should do it more.

Before anyone asks, no, I am not a restart, nor am I Quacks, nor am I aware of knowing anyone currently playing Torn in person, nor was I "there". But, I have done a bit of networking, back before the community degenerated into the "Its ok to scam other players, this is a crime game" sort of place it is today. Admittedly, it has never been against the game rules to lie or disseminate disinformation, nor can I prove with screenshots what was actually said back then. However, I hope that more than just me read those threads by Chedburn back then, and have enough programming knowledge to confirm that Chedburn is, in fact lying in the above quote on the above linked site to confirm that he has used MC codes, if not to go so far as to confirm that he had started out so long ago with an unfinished text-based game that he found on the Internet.

As there was never an official retraction of Ched's open invite that we can say whatever we wish about him, that he would rather we flame him than each other, I feel it appropriate to include the above as the context of my perspective. I do not fancy that I know everything. I am certain that there are players older than me who know much more than the bit that I have gathered or been given.
It is my hope, request even, that they would share what they know, or have been told, as I have.

As much as I dislike the degeneration of this game, and as much as I would like to stop it from going further down the path, I cannot judge Chedburn. He just wanted to take an useless unfinished game and make it become an earner and, to that end, he was quite successful, which is admirable. Also, he always gave me the impression that he wanted us to, not only differentiate between doing crimes, which hurts only NPC's, and other players, by which doing things to them hurts a living, breathing person at the other end of the screen, but to draw the parallel between the degeneration of Torn, to the similar degeneration of other corporations, including governments and the U.S. Federal Reserve. Were he as successful at that as he was at making this game an earner, he would have my utmost respect.

189becd3-7317-bbf6-341315.gif
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
DarthBrogo

ID: 21801
Level: 51
Posts: 3844
Score: 3149
DarthBrogo [21801]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 19:15:54
By DB_farid [1398886]


Well is your freind under protection or what?

And after reading Plutos post 5 times I got what he was saying.


In that case, you could simply have read it 5 times

[staff edit]

Last Edited: Fri May 03, 2013 00:21:58
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 21:28:52
By Pluto [541636]
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


I know of one case - my ex faction leader, always rich etc.

Logged back in to find his beloved faction deleted, company gone.

HOWEVER - he had the tenacity to fly - as in the rules.

Why should he get raped all the time for stock bennies (which were good at the time) etc????

So, as per your question - if you fly and stay inactive for 24 hours you are not visible - ergo in the rules and is part of the game. You know, the game where YOU abused the SB system to give you massive DEX, (albeit part of the game)-then as part of the committee decided it would be good to nerf it.

Pot/kettle.

Absolute disgrace.

And the players have a choice - fly and become inactive or remain as a punchbag - you are saying them that remain in TC need the same protection as them that did not fly? Even though the rules state you can fly and be inactive safely?

Is your next request anyone with the letter J in their name is unable to be attacked?


He wouldn't lose his stock benefits or the items gained from them... Cash dividends would be the only thing that could possibly be lost. But why should his be protected and not mine or yours?

You're not gonna change my mind, it's pointless and should be changed. The only argument for keeping it is that's how it's always been, which isn't exactly true either.


And about self busting: seriously it's been two years, get over it. Sorry you weren't smart enough to take advantage of it, but it would have destroyed the battle system if it wasn't stopped. If you can't understand that after all this time, then I can't explain it to you.

nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
ReyDuvall

ID: 1526820
Level: 64
Posts: 2615
Score: 2461
PTReyDuvall [1526820]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 22:10:51
By Fujiko [341315] If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


By Fujiko [341315] Hence my assertion that it would simply add another broken promise by Chedburn Networks Incorporated to the list.


I missed the part where Ched promised you'd always be un-attackable overseas after 24 hours.

Link it for me, please?

And if breaking promises is already Ched's policy as you imply, wouldn't it make sense that he'd do it here?

You're referring to how he makes changes to the game? The only promise relating to that is the implicit one that a game-owner will always update his game and try to improve it. So far as I can tell he's done the opposite of breaking promises. By continuing to move the game forward, he's upholding his end. Slowly.

Last Edited: Fri May 03, 2013 00:07:46
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Pluto

ID: 541636
Level: 82
Posts: 3368
Score: 1315
FTWPluto [541636]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 22:18:44
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Pluto [541636]
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


I know of one case - my ex faction leader, always rich etc.

Logged back in to find his beloved faction deleted, company gone.

HOWEVER - he had the tenacity to fly - as in the rules.

Why should he get raped all the time for stock bennies (which were good at the time) etc????

So, as per your question - if you fly and stay inactive for 24 hours you are not visible - ergo in the rules and is part of the game. You know, the game where YOU abused the SB system to give you massive DEX, (albeit part of the game)-then as part of the committee decided it would be good to nerf it.

Pot/kettle.

Absolute disgrace.

And the players have a choice - fly and become inactive or remain as a punchbag - you are saying them that remain in TC need the same protection as them that did not fly? Even though the rules state you can fly and be inactive safely?

Is your next request anyone with the letter J in their name is unable to be attacked?


He wouldn't lose his stock benefits or the items gained from them... Cash dividends would be the only thing that could possibly be lost. But why should his be protected and not mine or yours?

You're not gonna change my mind, it's pointless and should be changed. The only argument for keeping it is that's how it's always been, which isn't exactly true either.


And about self busting: seriously it's been two years, get over it. Sorry you weren't smart enough to take advantage of it, but it would have destroyed the battle system if it wasn't stopped. If you can't understand that after all this time, then I can't explain it to you.


He should not get raped for his dividends just because he is inactive.

If the 'feature' says you can go inactive abroad for 24 hrs and be safe so be it.

Do you think if someone is getting hit 40 times per day while they are inactive that they will log back in and play again? They will log in and leave - for good.

Sure, you are so selfless that you think only about yourself and not about losing members of the community. No members return, lost potential $ for Ched, and the game. Then we all suffer advertising.

Oh, two years it may be, is that why your dex is ... what is it now? 6 billion? More?

YOU still do not get a cap would have been better, but yet again look after number 1 - 'I am alright Jack'


29lzm79.jpg
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Pluto

ID: 541636
Level: 82
Posts: 3368
Score: 1315
FTWPluto [541636]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 22:21:57
By DarthBrogo [21801]
By JimmyJames [581165]
By Fujiko [341315]
If you'd like a good reason why it should remain, James, I can provide that for you.

At one time, people could not be attacked at all when flying. They would go to Hawaii and send each other fun events, and it was a "safe place" without all the mugging, hosping and attacking like in Torn, like being on holiday. That was one of the things announced as implemented for the "fun" nature of flying. Of course, people complained about it, citing faction wars as a reason. If, for example, a faction war against a solo faction, the player flew out, hunted in South Africa until the war timed out, and done.

So, attacking overseas was implemented, with the constriction that inactives would not be able to be attacked, as they would not be any help to a faction anyway. There is a chance that legitimate, one-account fair players of this game who went inactive for any multitude of reasons with that understanding, who might decide to return one day. If that is changed, it would be adding to the already lengthy list of broken promises by Chedburn Networks, Incorporated.


Wars didn't time out then, they stayed until a surrender was accepted. Many warbases had perpetual wars with solo hunting factions. Wars timing out is a fairly recent addition.

These legitimate fair players that you speak of, assuming they log in after a few years of inactivity, will log in to see their company deleted, their faction destroyed, and someone else using their name... all things that weren't possible at the time. Why is that okay, but them being attacked is such a taboo? Or, if that's the case why not protect all players who are inactive? Why does someone deserve protection because they happen to have flown before hand. What makes them more deserving than people who didn't fly?


A protection mechanism was available to them. It was legit.They used it - as is their Right.

Case closed.


Top reply. Sorry if it is a double post.

29lzm79.jpg
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 22:47:52
By Pluto [541636]

He should not get raped for his dividends just because he is inactive.

If the 'feature' says you can go inactive abroad for 24 hrs and be safe so be it.

Do you think if someone is getting hit 40 times per day while they are inactive that they will log back in and play again? They will log in and leave - for good.

Sure, you are so selfless that you think only about yourself and not about losing members of the community. No members return, lost potential $ for Ched, and the game. Then we all suffer advertising.

Oh, two years it may be, is that why your dex is ... what is it now? 6 billion? More?

YOU still do not get a cap would have been better, but yet again look after number 1 - 'I am alright Jack'


He wouldn't get raped for his dividends because he's inactive, he would get mugged because he has cash on hand... Just the same as happens to active people every day.

Why is the guy who doesn't even play worthy of protection over say.... this guy (clicky). Kind of ironic that some of the same people who laughed in that thread are the same ones saying we should protect inactives.

My dex is actually 5bil, but would you like to know what it would be if self busting wasn't stopped? roughly 3,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. I realize this may be difficult for you to grasp, but try to imagine what attack logs would look like if half the game had dex similar to that. So it's better to have 20 or so people with a few billion dex than to completely destroy the battle system.

Yes, it was out of control, yes it should have been stopped much much sooner. The only reason you are so butt hurt about it, as you've admitted in the past, is because you never got to take advantage of it yourself. So who is the one looking out for themselves? I assure you I would still be miles ahead of you even if it wasn't removed.

but for the record, my exact quote was "Self busting needs to be stopped or nerfed I would prefer nerfed but if this is the vote so be it. Bottom line is it needs to be fixed before it gets any more out of control" (View it here).

If you would like to cry about self busting, start another thread, I will not respond to that anymore.

Last Edited: Thu May 02, 2013 22:48:27
nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Thufir

ID: 1569410
Level: 35
Posts: 315
Score: 73
CgDhThufir [1569410]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Thu May 02, 2013 22:50:34
By EmperorGarm [1682299]
I vote no. If you remove it, doing so may very well brake the game. Gangs can easily set up and chain mug/chain hospitalize a player into oblivion, which happens already. Since you can't med your way out of the hospital overseas, your best bet is to turn off your game for 24 hours, then return and fly out as soon as you can. Denying the ability to do see will inspire more of this sort of activity, whether to mug all the riches off of someone or to just bully someone else for whatever reason.

Aside from the practical, I like having an "off switch" as it were. I like knowing that my character isn't going to be messed with while I'm away doing whatever it is I do when I'm not on Torn.




I agree a lot with what is said here. Maybe a system that keeps the invisibility feature after 24 hours, however if you stay invisible for a set amount of time the country deports you back to Torn. It allows the active person the escape and protection but reduces clutter abroad from the inactives.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Perdyfly

ID: 925123
Level: 45
Posts: 1556
Score: 453
Perdyfly [925123]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 01:11:13
By Tiger [1188572]
I agree that it should be removed, the only downside I can see to removing it is that the page will be congested with players that are inactive and you've countered that with the other page for offline or inactive users.

There are other exp. targets in torn.


I do not agree
the page will be way to congested.



201212120-925123.jpg
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Butters

ID: 34298
Level: 71
Posts: 5666
Score: 3278
LDNButters [34298]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 02:25:19
By JimmyJames [581165]
Not so much to do with mugging, really (hell, this thread is asking about experience targets). It has to do with the cut throat nature of the game that allows people to mug, steal, and rip off everything you own... unless you happen to fly before you log out. There's no reason for it. If you want to protect your money, use one of the many features of the game that are actually designed for it, like the offshore bank.

In a game based on greed and stabbing each other in the back, it makes no sense to protect people overseas. I've never heard a good argument for why it was implemented or why it should remain... Besides Butters not liking events, lol.


One thing you're forgetting there Jimmy - even though you're low-id, high level, old-money rich and stat heavy (much more so than I am in every respect at least anyway) the last time I checked that doesn't translate into you automatically being given anything you feel you should be entitled to just because you say that's how it should be.

All I see on your side of the argument is "blah blah blah I want to be able to mug the gold mine that must be hiding out there amongst all those inactive overseas players blah blah blah" - in reality you're looking at a very short term mug-fest as active muggers swarm overseas trying to root out long term inactives with accumulated cash.

Once that mug-fest is over tell me what exactly removing the protection for overseas inactives will achieve in the long term - apart from bringing a bit more idle cash back into circulation and pushing inflation up a bit (and we of course want that to happen as well don't we)?

You guessed it - absolutely nothing.

Once the overseas mug-fest has run its course I doubt anyone will even bother going overseas to attack inactives. They certainly wont be in a faction, wont be pissing off anyone to receive bounties, wont be scamming anyone, wont be winning cash in the casino, and wont be making cash from item/stock market sales (I'm not even bothering to include stock dividends there as we know how crap they are now), so there'll be no real reason to hosp or mug overseas inactives and there are lots of weak targets (inactive or otherwise) in torn to attack and leave for power levelling exp.

If you actually had an argument on your side of the fence that held water (other than "I want to mug $$$ from inactives") then I'd actually support you.

The only other angle that has been tried is how it's somehow "unfair" because players who went inactive in torn aren't protected - well that's tough as the ability to do park yourself overseas and slip "off the grid" was always there ever since attacking overseas was introduced.

For players whose playing "career" was cut off suddenly for whatever reason, well unfortunately shit happens (which iirc was the justification you put forth for your argument wrt inactives / players taking a break overseas getting mugged down to their socks).

Fact of the matter is that you have nothing else to put forward - indeed your insistence on saying "well it's all about greed and stabbing people in the back so why not" shows exactly how little you have to back up your stance.

/end of story


Last Edited: Fri May 03, 2013 02:39:02
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 02:46:43
By Butters [34298]
By JimmyJames [581165]
Not so much to do with mugging, really (hell, this thread is asking about experience targets). It has to do with the cut throat nature of the game that allows people to mug, steal, and rip off everything you own... unless you happen to fly before you log out. There's no reason for it. If you want to protect your money, use one of the many features of the game that are actually designed for it, like the offshore bank.

In a game based on greed and stabbing each other in the back, it makes no sense to protect people overseas. I've never heard a good argument for why it was implemented or why it should remain... Besides Butters not liking events, lol.


Seriously cram it already Jimmy you trumped up arrogant ass - I very well may be the only player going against the mug-lobby on this, but even though you're low-id, high level, old-money rich and stat heavy (much more so than I am in every respect at least anyway) the last time I checked that doesn't translate into you automatically being given anything you feel you should be entitled to just because you say that's how it should be.

All I see on your side of the argument is "blah blah blah I want to be able to mug the gold mine that must be hiding out there amongst all those inactive overseas players blah blah blah" - in reality you're looking at a very short term mug-fest as active muggers swarm overseas trying to root out long term inactives with accumulated cash.

Once that mug-fest is over tell me what exactly removing the protection for overseas inactives will achieve in the long term - apart from bringing a bit more idle cash back into circulation and pushing inflation up a bit (and we of course want that to happen as well don't we)?

You guessed it - absolutely nothing.

Once the overseas mug-fest has run its course I doubt anyone will even bother going overseas to attack inactives - they certainly wont be in a faction, wont be pissing off anyone to receive bounties, wont be scamming anyone, wont be winning cash in the casino, and wont be making cash from stock market sales (so no real reason to hosp them and no real reason to mug then - there are lots of weak targets to attack and leave for power levelling exp in the city).

If you actually had an argument on your side of the fence that held water (other than "I want to mug $$$ from inactives") then I'd actually support you.

The only other angle that has been tried is how it's somehow "unfair" because players who went inactive in torn aren't protected - well that's tough as the ability to do park yourself overseas and slip "off the grid" was always there ever since attacking overseas was introduced.

For players whose playing "career" was cut off suddenly for whatever reason, well unfortunately shit happens (which iirc was the justification you put forth for your argument wrt inactives / players taking a break overseas getting mugged down to their socks).

Fact of the matter is that you have nothing else to put forward - indeed your insistence on saying "well it's all about greed and stabbing people in the back so why not" shows exactly how little you have to back up your stance.

/end of story


Like I told you last time, unless someone has an insane amount of cash on hand, I will not be flying to mug anyone. I hate traveling and it's not worth it for me when I can mug all I want in Torn and not be restricted from actually playing the game. Traveling is mind-numbingly boring.

BUT even if that is what I wanted, so what? It's a valid reason. Certainly better than not wanting to log in to 40 events.

There may a slight bit of inflation at first, but it will die out soon. I don't know how much money you think is sitting on inactive accounts... hell, most people who are inactive for extended periods log in to find themselves negative from paying upkeep. Money exchanging hands is good for any economy.

and please? low-id? says Mr 5 digit ID... t I do not expect everything handed to me, which is evident by how I've busted my ass to become rich and high stats, more so than you... even though there's over half a million accounts between us.

And you're wrong, it hasn't always been like that, you were able to attack them at first. But I guess when you have no argument to stand on, resorting to insults and false facts is the next best thing.

nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 02:56:41
Ways this protection can be abused....

The most obvious way... Faction A and Faction B are in a war for over two weeks and a large bonus pot has built up. Faction A is about to win when the leader of faction B kicks out all the members, flies to Africa and logs out for 4 days. Faction A is unable to finish them off, and loses out on that large bonus.

Besides that, a lot of inactive people are still in factions. With the limited amount of targets available in a warbase, having a few inactive people sitting overseas can really hinder a faction. Imagine if someone collected them and decided to declare on other factions to tie up warbase slots? Me and 30 people sitting inactive overseas would clog up 10% of a warbase. I'm sure I could charge for this service, pay me to declare on someone before you do so I reduce their available warbase... Now imagine 5 or 6 people doing the same thing, it could seriously hinder a faction's ability to chain.

Dog tag contest. Think about how many dog tags were instantly out of circulation because overseas inactives weren't able to be mugged. Maybe more people, especially newer players, would have been able to earn the honors.

These are just what I come up with in a few minutes thinking about... Surely that outweighs not wanting to log in with a bunch of events, and the thought that a few billion dollars might enter the economy (which would most likely get spent/gambled almost instantly anyway)

nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
Butters

ID: 34298
Level: 71
Posts: 5666
Score: 3278
LDNButters [34298]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 03:15:06
Right back at you Jimmy boy - you are the one that doesn't have an argument to stand on here.

Last time I checked the dismissive/derisive/arrogant swipes started on your side of the fence mate (remember this: "Besides Butters not liking events, lol"?) - and we both know there'd be plenty of cash sitting on inactive overseas accounts.

For the record when I was referring to justification behind removing the protection the reference to "I" was more of a general one rather than being directed specifically at you (although I'm sure you could come up with a few inactive account id's from the good old days that you would probably wander over to check out if the protection was removed).

As for wanting to mug these players being a "valid" reason for removing the protection - don't make me laugh. The issue here is that players flew overseas knowing that they'd be protected and now you come along and want to change the goal posts for what? A bit of cash from mugging? Give me a break...

Name me one other tangible benefit of removing the protection for overseas inactives and I'll come back at you with a viable alternative which doesn't involve opening up genuine inactive players for attacking purposes.

RE: the attacking thing - good job clutching at straws there because the protection has still been in for a bloody long time (much longer than the period for which it wasn't there). But then again that's all you've got really, clutching at straws and your "greed is good" argument - hell your comment about how (currently idle) money changing hands (and pushing up inflation in the process) is "good for the economy" nearly made me fall off my chair I was laughing so hard.

As for the rest of the drivel you posted above - no offence because I know you're a hard working fella whom I respect greatly and I actually like you in general, but on this level hubris much?

(the pointing out of the difference in id's made me lol - mostly because it obviously totally invalidated everything else I said about you expecting to get what you want here just because you say it should be so)

We're both wasting our time here - let's just agree to disagree and move on.

Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 03:35:00
You're right, neither of us are going to change our minds. Pointless to continue.

nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
BuckWyld

ID: 1009930
Level: 70
Posts: 6003
Score: 3644
BuckWyld [1009930]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 03:42:36
By JimmyJames [581165]
And about self busting: seriously it's been two years, get over it. Sorry you weren't smart enough to take advantage of it, but it would have destroyed the battle system if it wasn't stopped. If you can't understand that after all this time, then I can't explain it to you.


You bastard. I hate you Jimmy.
Why the hell was i busy earning merits & doing other aspects of the game instead of s.b. ing?

2 yrs. later & this is still bullshit, Im fuming mad. I demand a complete dex reset, or 5 bill added to my dex. I mean c'mon it's only fair.

To add something to the subject, the only thing that earked me about s.b. ing, was i had just killed my nerve to do it, & got it use it for a whole 2 weeks before the change was implemented. & at the time i had my own faction & used the last bit of my respect to upgrade pertinent.

But that was also my fault for not starting it sooner, we all knew it was gonna go eventually. Same story with the stock market. But hey, it is what it is, as with anything in life, ya win some ya lose some. Plus it was also 2 years ago. Yea sure i could stay mad over an imaginary text based number with worse graphics than microsoft word. but luckily for me I've busted a nut in something besides my hand in that amount of time.


Just thought id add some humor to this bitch fest & let y'all know it's summer time.Pool's are getting ready to open, Bird's are chirping, flowers are starting to bloom, grass is green. & there's this thing called women outside. & in nice weather some of em like to wear haltor tops & booty shorts.

Or we can all stay on Torn, say f**k the weather, & bicker about mickey mouse shit that means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. which is equally fun.


Last Edited: Fri May 03, 2013 06:50:01
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
EmperorGarm

ID: 1682299
Level: 42
Posts: 486
Score: 364
~BS~EmperorGarm [1682299]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 10:50:41
By Butters [34298]
RE: the attacking thing - good job clutching at straws there because the protection has still been in for a bloody long time (much longer than the period for which it wasn't there). But then again that's all you've got really, clutching at straws and your "greed is good" argument - hell your comment about how (currently idle) money changing hands (and pushing up inflation in the process) is "good for the economy" nearly made me fall off my chair I was laughing so hard.


I was hoping Jimmy would quote Alec Baldwin's brass balls speech from "Glenngarry Glen Ross" as his "wise man" this time. Better speech and a better movie.

I don't think anyone here went up against my argument that if you remove the protection that you could browbeat players into the ground by hospitalizing/mugging them non-stop without being able to med your way out to escape (I saw one guy agree, if I missed the post, apologies). That is potentially game-breaking right there. As it is now, you can turn off your game for 24 hours, return, be okay and fly back.

How to combat this? Then you would need to be able to med out from foreign countries. How do you do that? Do you have access to your inventory while overseas or would you have to bring some with you. Would this count against your item limitation? If so then that would directly impact flower/drug runners. So then they're to want something altered in their favor. If you have direct access to your inventory, then you might as well expand the game and make the other countries new cities to play in. Which might be fun, actually, if there was more to do in China than go to the fortune teller. But that's a big change and lots of work.

It's fine the way it is. There are other aspects of the game that need improvements... and this is something that's not broken. There are experience targets. Use them. There are mugging targets, they change, but that just means you have to do some work. Get busy.

By JimmyJames [581165]Dog tag contest. Think about how many dog tags were instantly out of circulation because overseas inactives weren't able to be mugged. Maybe more people, especially newer players, would have been able to earn the honors.


Please... that competition doesn't suffer from a lack of available dog tags, it suffers from a terrible imbalance between the players of different stat levels (i.e. it needs the equivalent of weight divisions).

Did you read the post of the low stat guy and what he had to do to reach the top ten? His entire month was planned around the event, including alarms in the middle of the night and getting his work meetings lined up around attacks and travel time (cited from recollection from a thread I started asking about people's experiences) and he ended with fewer than half of first place. Reading that post is like watching a a Rocky training montage. In my book, he wasn't eighth place, he was first. He was Kazushi Sakuraba, the little guy who fought larger opponents in Pride FC. If this competition was in any way balanced, he would have dominated, and it wasn't for a lack of available dog tags from inactive characters.

Moreover, having that protection was the only way I got through the competition with a merit and was the only reason why I participated. Take that away and next dog tag comp, I'm willing to bet you'll have even fewer active participants.


By DB_farid [1398886]
Well I have a suggestion to make it interesting. How about remove the protection and also not show the inactives on the list. This way people will need to work their way to find them.


My guess is that it would take someone a week or two to comb through the ID's one-by-one, create a list, sell it which would then freely circulate and presto chango, no work need be done. While the meat is fresh, there would be a surge of attacks on the ID's with money, scripts built and there would probably be some degree of inflation. Not to mention, it still doesn't change the fact that these players went into the protection believing that they're safe to return whenever their lives allow them to, whether a day, week, month, year or decade and maybe they would have prepared differently had they known that they would be mugged into oblivion by a Gorgon Gekko.

It doesn't need to change just for the sake of altering the game. That's what I have for this subject.

F4ACZPa.png
Super secret reinforced spam barrier 2.0
JimmyJames

ID: 581165
Level: 82
Posts: 12444
Score: 9282
eVÝJimmyJames [581165]Reply | Quote | Report

Posted on Fri May 03, 2013 13:43:19
By EmperorGarm [1682299]
By Butters [34298]
RE: the attacking thing - good job clutching at straws there because the protection has still been in for a bloody long time (much longer than the period for which it wasn't there). But then again that's all you've got really, clutching at straws and your "greed is good" argument - hell your comment about how (currently idle) money changing hands (and pushing up inflation in the process) is "good for the economy" nearly made me fall off my chair I was laughing so hard.


I was hoping Jimmy would quote Alec Baldwin's brass balls speech from "Glenngarry Glen Ross" as his "wise man" this time. Better speech and a better movie.

I don't think anyone here went up against my argument that if you remove the protection that you could browbeat players into the ground by hospitalizing/mugging them non-stop without being able to med your way out to escape (I saw one guy agree, if I missed the post, apologies). That is potentially game-breaking right there. As it is now, you can turn off your game for 24 hours, return, be okay and fly back.

How to combat this? Then you would need to be able to med out from foreign countries. How do you do that? Do you have access to your inventory while overseas or would you have to bring some with you. Would this count against your item limitation? If so then that would directly impact flower/drug runners. So then they're to want something altered in their favor. If you have direct access to your inventory, then you might as well expand the game and make the other countries new cities to play in. Which might be fun, actually, if there was more to do in China than go to the fortune teller. But that's a big change and lots of work.

It's fine the way it is. There are other aspects of the game that need improvements... and this is something that's not broken. There are experience targets. Use them. There are mugging targets, they change, but that just means you have to do some work. Get busy.

By JimmyJames [581165]Dog tag contest. Think about how many dog tags were instantly out of circulation because overseas inactives weren't able to be mugged. Maybe more people, especially newer players, would have been able to earn the honors.


Please... that competition doesn't suffer from a lack of available dog tags, it suffers from a terrible imbalance between the players of different stat levels (i.e. it needs the equivalent of weight divisions).

Did you read the post of the low stat guy and what he had to do to reach the top ten? His entire month was planned around the event, including alarms in the middle of the night and getting his work meetings lined up around attacks and travel time (cited from recollection from a thread I started asking about people's experiences) and he ended with fewer than half of first place. Reading that post is like watching a a Rocky training montage. In my book, he wasn't eighth place, he was first. He was Kazushi Sakuraba, the little guy who fought larger opponents in Pride FC. If this competition was in any way balanced, he would have dominated, and it wasn't for a lack of available dog tags from inactive characters.

Moreover, having that protection was the only way I got through the competition with a merit and was the only reason why I participated. Take that away and next dog tag comp, I'm willing to bet you'll have even fewer active participants.


By DB_farid [1398886]
Well I have a suggestion to make it interesting. How about remove the protection and also not show the inactives on the list. This way people will need to work their way to find them.


My guess is that it would take someone a week or two to comb through the ID's one-by-one, create a list, sell it which would then freely circulate and presto chango, no work need be done. While the meat is fresh, there would be a surge of attacks on the ID's with money, scripts built and there would probably be some degree of inflation. Not to mention, it still doesn't change the fact that these players went into the protection believing that they're safe to return whenever their lives allow them to, whether a day, week, month, year or decade and maybe they would have prepared differently had they known that they would be mugged into oblivion by a Gorgon Gekko.

It doesn't need to change just for the sake of altering the game. That's what I have for this subject.


I see no problem with pinning someone overseas. It's the only way to really punish someone in this game. And it only takes a revive, or logging in at the right time. Surely you can click fly faster than someone else can click attack, wait for lag, click their weapon, however many times, with lag in between, and then click hospitalize. It's not that hard. Besides if you pissed someone off to the point that they're willing to sit in another country forever just to keep there you, then you probable deserve anyway.

Maybe if there were more ways to actually hurt people it would be different, but hosping someone in Torn is pointless, can't destroy factions, can't do anything except on the off chance that you catch someone overseas. It's the one thing that you can do to effect someone.

Go back 5 years when there wasn't hyper inflation and morphine wasn't abundant and being hosped meant something, people would get stuck in the hospital for days... but we all stuck around. And factions would get destroyed because you said someone to the wrong person... again, we all stuck around. I had someone hospitalize me for a month straight because he didn't like I rented a castle off the market. I just waited it out, trained and did crimes in the few minutes I was out of the hospital, and learned to love white. Eventually, I was stronger than him and I still get my payback, although now hosping and warring him means nothing now...

p.s. Put that down coffee, coffee's for closers only

Last Edited: Fri May 03, 2013 13:44:26
nenajimmyjamescouplehh8865_zps03c95bd0.p
Buying bulk Boxes of Grenades 1mil each - Just start trade for fast sale
Forum Main>>General Discussion>> Offline players in other countries.
First  << 1  2  3 >>  Last