Below is the thread that got grave yarded even tho it had many good points raised there
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have had 10 wars being ended after this update
forming 30days NAP
firstly finding the right faction to build chain on is very hard
loosing (NAP) 9 of them for 30 days is very annoying
specially for weak stats factions, finding one that is suitable to war
I suggest this "ending war" system be changed to how it was
or needs more adjusting.
By badboyz [1033265]
War Declare
You cannot declare on XXXX
You can only be at war with a maximum of 300 enemy faction members at a time.
You're currently at war with 327.
with the amount of people available in my warbase
its impossible for us to even manage 50 chain...
The problem is having 10 wars in warbase saying "failure" means, they count as targets warred
but they are not attackable since NAP is active
By atentat [1583407]
Last hit
25/01/13
12:14:09 AM m3aand hospitalized aphogyi
Auto nap
25/01/13
6:29:03 AM
The war between -iApp- and Tyranny of Evil Men is now over.
We should not have to chain non stop, at the time Atenta mentioned most people will be sleeping
ofc there wont be much or any hits between those factions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By -Clansdancer [65306]
We are not against adjusting it just looking for some post that make sense instead of tantrums.
Just having wars disappear seems kind of weird. Just cause one side doesn't want to participate in the war, the opposing faction shouldn't be penalized for it. If a faction takes the time to mount 100 attacks on a faction, then clearly they are warring. If people don't want to war, then they shouldn't be in a faction.
What about some sort of bonus still for the attacking faction even if the war is deemed "inactive" by the system. It seems hardly fair to a faction that has spent weeks warring another faction...while still making hits on the others in their warbase, to only have the system decide that their time and energy spent in said war was worthless.
Maybe some sort of minimum hit per day should be put in place to keep all wars going, instead of cherry picking certain wars.
Maybe the faction bonus for wars deemed "inactive" should come from the losing factions respect total instead of being created from thin air?
Also if you make 50 attacks, with 10 members, the war won't end for 5 days. This is obviously on 1 faction as you must hit all the factions in your warbase for the right amount of hits to keep the war alive. Hitting 5 hits on 1 faction does not save your entire war base (this is based off a 10 man faction size)
By -Clansdancer [65306]
Well you can either state what you think would work best or post bullshit like that and get no where.
I'm cool either way I guess. I am happy to help you guys get what you want but I am not remotely interested in listening to the whingey post.
My Post was too ReyDuvall
In all fairness RatedR started a thread asking for ideas to improve warring. After several days you went ahead and made changes without taking any views into account.
It was suggested to leave it as it was and just work on developing 2.0 updates. This wouldn't of caused any problems and I personally feel it should be changed back.
By -Clansdancer [65306]
We are not against adjusting it just looking for some post that make sense instead of tantrums.
Just having wars disappear seems kind of weird. Just cause one side doesn't want to participate in the war, the opposing faction shouldn't be penalized for it. If a faction takes the time to mount 100 attacks on a faction, then clearly they are warring. If people don't want to war, then they shouldn't be in a faction.
What about some sort of bonus still for the attacking faction even if the war is deemed "inactive" by the system. It seems hardly fair to a faction that has spent weeks warring another faction...while still making hits on the others in their warbase, to only have the system decide that their time and energy spent in said war was worthless.
Maybe some sort of minimum hit per day should be put in place to keep all wars going, instead of cherry picking certain wars.
Maybe the faction bonus for wars deemed "inactive" should come from the losing factions respect total instead of being created from thin air?
Just spitballing here
I think the point here hun is to declare on factions when you are ready to war them. Having them sit on your war-base is not an option any-more even if we adjust this timing a bit you must declare when ready to war and be active warring.
By -Clansdancer [65306]
Well you can either state what you think would work best or post bullshit like that and get no where.
I'm cool either way I guess. I am happy to help you guys get what you want but I am not remotely interested in listening to the whingey post.
My Post was too ReyDuvall
In all fairness RatedR started a thread asking for ideas to improve warring. After several days you went ahead and made changes without taking any views into account.
It was suggested to leave it as it was and just work on developing 2.0 updates. This wouldn't of caused any problems and I personally feel it should be changed back.
I have nothing to say about the committee. There was nothing decided about this update in 3 days it was discussed much longer.
May I ask why, Clansy? It seems to me that this is much more punishing on factions that really don't want to war but are willing to sit there while you beat on them, because this means you must beat them to a pulp constantly to keep them in the warbase. Before, at least they got a breather, sometimes several days worth. I guess I really just don't understand what problem this particular update is supposed to solve.
i talked with a faction leader last night, they chained a faction 12 hours earlier and when they woke up it had ended due to "inactivity." im curious if this was a serious update or a way to get people to stop warring until the overhaul.
By My_Dying_Bride [1573104]
Terrible for Big Factions unless some new ideas come
Fixed it.
Actually that is a dumb statement. I don't see why it's terrible for Big factions unless the so called big factions are not in the 100+ ranks(they dont have any factions in the 25 ranks above them that are willing to war).
Only thing that makes this terrible for the big factions is the fact that the "big war" everybody seems to be so excited about can't be done with all of the members, so they have kick a few people out.
Because HOF factions will always agree to fight back.
Now, say a smaller faction who is willing to war has only "flower power" type of factions above them in the 25 ranks who are not willing to fight or do anything. That is BAD because if tha tfaction declares on most of teh factions above them all will end in naps roughly 24 hours after the last hit is done letting you no room to have a small train break/stack some energy for the next chain.
Tbh what I would do is make people wanna fight if they are in a faction, like for instance take away their faction benefits unless they are war active.
Just like in the old days peaceful factions did not have any use for the steadfast they had unless they went from peaceful into warring mode.
There's still a lot of room for debate with this update having pro's and con's... I just think it disatvantages the lower ranked factions who are actually willing to war.
Hate on me, but you can't deny skill
I crush all the momentum you guys build with my eyes sealed
Clansy - in my opinion this can be and WILL be exploited by factions flying so the hits cannot be made on them to keep it alive - in this case I think its un-fair.
Is there a way to extend the algorithm if the opposing faction is just flying?
By Chelios [1381155]
Tbh what I would do is make people wanna fight if they are in a faction, like for instance take away their faction benefits unless they are war active.
Just like in the old days peaceful factions did not have any use for the steadfast they had unless they went from peaceful into warring mode.
What's the point of chaining your ass off for steadfast if you can't take the occasional training break to enjoy it?
By Chelios [1381155]
Tbh what I would do is make people wanna fight if they are in a faction, like for instance take away their faction benefits unless they are war active.
Just like in the old days peaceful factions did not have any use for the steadfast they had unless they went from peaceful into warring mode.
What's the point of chaining your ass off for steadfast if you can't take the occasional training break to enjoy it?
Valid point, and I agree, I wasnt making myself clear enough I guess.
I guess I was trying to suggest to implement an update that would make your factions specials inefective unless you were at war (and actually hitting) in the last 100 days.
Meh, tbh every opinion will have a flaw, just like every update will have a flaw... It will just affect people in different ways.
Hate on me, but you can't deny skill
I crush all the momentum you guys build with my eyes sealed
By Chelios [1381155]
Tbh what I would do is make people wanna fight if they are in a faction, like for instance take away their faction benefits unless they are war active.
Just like in the old days peaceful factions did not have any use for the steadfast they had unless they went from peaceful into warring mode.
What's the point of chaining your ass off for steadfast if you can't take the occasional training break to enjoy it?
Valid point, and I agree, I wasnt making myself clear enough I guess.
I guess I was trying to suggest to implement an update that would make your factions specials inefective unless you were at war (and actually hitting) in the last 100 days.
Meh, tbh every opinion will have a flaw, just like every update will have a flaw... It will just affect people in different ways.
That's true. If there was a perfect solution, I'm sure it would have been found by now. I certainly don't know of one.
By -Clansdancer [65306]
We are not against adjusting it just looking for some post that make sense instead of tantrums.
Just having wars disappear seems kind of weird. Just cause one side doesn't want to participate in the war, the opposing faction shouldn't be penalized for it. If a faction takes the time to mount 100 attacks on a faction, then clearly they are warring. If people don't want to war, then they shouldn't be in a faction.
What about some sort of bonus still for the attacking faction even if the war is deemed "inactive" by the system. It seems hardly fair to a faction that has spent weeks warring another faction...while still making hits on the others in their warbase, to only have the system decide that their time and energy spent in said war was worthless.
Maybe some sort of minimum hit per day should be put in place to keep all wars going, instead of cherry picking certain wars.
Maybe the faction bonus for wars deemed "inactive" should come from the losing factions respect total instead of being created from thin air?
Just spitballing here
I think the point here hun is to declare on factions when you are ready to war them. Having them sit on your war-base is not an option any-more even if we adjust this timing a bit you must declare when ready to war and be active warring.
Clansy, whats wrong with that? its not an inconvenience in any way, and alot of faction war periodically. smaller factions find it hard to aggressivly attack factions, and dont get mega results.
look at the Merc's Inc vs 2.0 war. it took 46 hours to finish.
when i was in The Abusement Park, a similar war took almost 6 weeks. the % just doesnt budge that much for smaller factions.
and sometimes, there will be a break of a week or so for whatever reason. chain leaders not being avaliable, real life etc. and then you punish people?
By -Clansdancer [65306]
Also if you make 50 attacks, with 10 members, the war won't end for 5 days. This is obviously on 1 faction as you must hit all the factions in your warbase for the right amount of hits to keep the war alive.
The problem with this update is that it promotes only one way of faction warfare - having concentrated training breaks and then concentrated war periods.
What if you're fighting against a 80 man faction but only want to hit them with bonus hits (assume you're in a larger faction)? for that you'd need to do at least 8 100-hit chain, so this way of war is no longer viable.
What if you're in a small faction but the faction members take the weekend off? bam, all war are NAP by the beginning of the week.
What if you're in a large faction but want to divide your faction into several groups, each group fighting at a different time with the rest of the groups training? now your faction size is working against you.
In all the situation I described above, this new change basically forces all factions to be super active with all members in the faction fighting, regardless of RL.
It makes war 1-dimensional, boring and broken.
This change come from the following misconception:
By -Clansdancer [65306]
I think the point here hun is to declare on factions when you are ready to war them. Having them sit on your war-base is not an option any-more even if we adjust this timing a bit you must declare when ready to war and be active warring.
Why is it not an option anymore? why was that being an option bad? and who said it is bad?
IMO, this change is unnecessary but for it to not be completely broken just extend the 24h to 3 days instead, that will account for the "weekend" period and will be much more flexible.
To be fair, I do want to include that I belong to a faction that chain pretty much 24/7 except for breaks so this change doesn't affect me negatively personally.
By Hot_N_Steamy [243063]
Clansy - in my opinion this can be and WILL be exploited by factions flying so the hits cannot be made on them to keep it alive - in this case I think its un-fair.
Is there a way to extend the algorithm if the opposing faction is just flying?
Or is in self hospitalize mode
PALESTINE
Need members for my faction with 45nb natural..will provide 1 xanax a day and refills for 75k / point
By Hot_N_Steamy [243063]
Clansy - in my opinion this can be and WILL be exploited by factions flying so the hits cannot be made on them to keep it alive - in this case I think its un-fair.
Is there a way to extend the algorithm if the opposing faction is just flying?
So just to confirm... these attacks stack? You can chain every other day provided you hit once for every member of the smaller faction when you do chain?
By -Clansdancer [65306]
We are not against adjusting it just looking for some post that make sense instead of tantrums.
Just having wars disappear seems kind of weird. Just cause one side doesn't want to participate in the war, the opposing faction shouldn't be penalized for it. If a faction takes the time to mount 100 attacks on a faction, then clearly they are warring. If people don't want to war, then they shouldn't be in a faction.
What about some sort of bonus still for the attacking faction even if the war is deemed "inactive" by the system. It seems hardly fair to a faction that has spent weeks warring another faction...while still making hits on the others in their warbase, to only have the system decide that their time and energy spent in said war was worthless.
Maybe some sort of minimum hit per day should be put in place to keep all wars going, instead of cherry picking certain wars.
Maybe the faction bonus for wars deemed "inactive" should come from the losing factions respect total instead of being created from thin air?
Just spitballing here
I think the point here hun is to declare on factions when you are ready to war them. Having them sit on your war-base is not an option any-more even if we adjust this timing a bit you must declare when ready to war and be active warring.
But who is to say you aren't warring them. We had a few wars time out in which we had hundreds of attacks in and over 90%, yet we were unable to attack those factions due to their two or three members fleeing the country and basically doing all they could to evade attacks.
In theory, I guess we are supposed to travel to hit them oversees, yet, say we do and neglect the other wars to keep the one going, then we screw ourselves in those wars.
If the idea is to eliminate smaller factions, then that is fine. But you can't call this update and update that makes sense from a competitive standpoint, from what I have seen thus far.
the time out on wars is ridiculous. we didnt do an attack for 2 days in a war we were fighting, they all are over. a war which no-one has done a hit for like 2weeks is still there. what kind of algorithm is this.
![Blackjack-x [981452]](http://awardimages.torn.com/981452-29823-large.png "Blackjack-x [981452]")
but idk why its so small at 300 i guess 500 is much more reasonable 
![KickRocks [1030718]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1030718-75876-large.png "KickRocks [1030718]")
![-Clansdancer [65306]](http://awardimages.torn.com/65306-79119-large.png "-Clansdancer [65306]")
![Cathead [1581564]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1581564-75842-large.png "Cathead [1581564]")
![ReyDuvall [1526820]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1526820-25168-large.png "ReyDuvall [1526820]")
![JRawR [271642]](http://awardimages.torn.com/271642-39825-large.png "JRawR [271642]")
![LucyLiplock [570368]](http://awardimages.torn.com/570368-83995-large.png "LucyLiplock [570368]")
![ImTheN00B [1290007]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1290007-93712-large.png "ImTheN00B [1290007]")
![Chelios [1381155]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1381155-37184-large.png "Chelios [1381155]")
![[DP]](http://factiontags.torn.com/12863-30736.png "[DP]")
![Hot_N_Steamy [243063]](http://awardimages.torn.com/243063-73655-large.png "Hot_N_Steamy [243063]")
![-Deadpool [1284243]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1284243-75456-large.png "-Deadpool [1284243]")
![Gorgonzola [1300528]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1300528-41236-large.png "Gorgonzola [1300528]")
![python [1009878]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1009878-66721-large.png "python [1009878]")
![vladi07 [1584991]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1584991-14511-large.png "vladi07 [1584991]")
![--Slash-- [220873]](http://awardimages.torn.com/220873-79457-large.png "--Slash-- [220873]")
![weedforever [282052]](http://awardimages.torn.com/282052-48023-large.png "weedforever [282052]")
![Andy_Social [1457236]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1457236-24595-large.png "Andy_Social [1457236]")
![Alex- [435186]](http://awardimages.torn.com/435186-29691-large.png "Alex- [435186]")
![DieHardGunner [1563953]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1563953-11709-large.png "DieHardGunner [1563953]")
![Dilz [1366534]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1366534-10226-large.png "Dilz [1366534]")
![atentat [1583407]](http://awardimages.torn.com/1583407-72793-large.png "atentat [1583407]")
Follow @TornRPG