Turf war balance[SOLVED]

[krecik]

I'm coming with idea to make turfs be balanced, literally as a turf player i can say thoose turfs are so shitty now, cuz winning side is always with more alliances, but there's simple solution just add a rule that saying u can't help other gangs in their turfs or do something about amount of helping people, whatever just to balance it... Its really boring to fight 30 vs 10

[WenDo]

Make your side more attractive for new upcoming gangs and you will become boost ? There are 4 gangs that will probably get spawns soon.

[BurakO]

@wendo he's in the winning side actually...

[Dinaz]

@wendo
Winning side is the perfect example for "Attractive", to make it attractive you've to guarantee them the winning of their zones and their stability. Your side remains on the top since you have more active people and more alliances. Take RF for example, they were with us at first when we and NavM were active enough to handle an attack against 4 of your side, they were with us, after a while what happened? They went to your side since it always had the zones the next morning due to y'all not limiting the turf. Turf starts yes, but it never ends since y'all try-hard the shit out of it to have your zones back and stabilize again. Turfs have to be limited so you won't spend most of your time trying to get a zone then get it taken just cuz you gave up and the opposite side is just desperate as fuck. All this is a reason of the discouragement to turd these days, let alone other enemy gangs that attack one of your zones when you're fighting against 2 gangs already.
Another example for "attractivity", look at CDC, old gen one was with us, why do you think they joined your side? Just open /war and see yourself.

[krecik]

Well, for me best solution is just to make rule u can't help in turfs, u can keep ur alliances for free zones tho and alliances still can help u by turfing other zones and making enemis split for example. (If u'll ask what's point of changing it when alliances can turf other zone, trust me difference is big, i know what i am saying)

[Latinoo]

@dinaz said in Turf war balance:

@wendo
Winning side is the perfect example for "Attractive", to make it attractive you've to guarantee them the winning of their zones and their stability. Your side remains on the top since you have more active people and more alliances. Take RF for example, they were with us at first when we and NavM were active enough to handle an attack against 4 of your side, they were with us, after a while what happened? They went to your side since it always had the zones the next morning due to y'all not limiting the turf. Turf starts yes, but it never ends since y'all try-hard the shit out of it to have your zones back and stabilize again. Turfs have to be limited so you won't spend most of your time trying to get a zone then get it taken just cuz you gave up and the opposite side is just desperate as fuck. All this is a reason of the discouragement to turd these days, let alone other enemy gangs that attack one of your zones when you're fighting against 2 gangs already.
Another example for "attractivity", look at CDC, old gen one was with us, why do you think they joined your side? Just open /war and see yourself.

/assist they dont have spawn

[WenDo]

@dinaz said in Turf war balance:

@wendo
Winning side is the perfect example for "Attractive", to make it attractive you've to guarantee them the winning of their zones and their stability. Your side remains on the top since you have more active people and more alliances. Take RF for example, they were with us at first when we and NavM were active enough to handle an attack against 4 of your side, they were with us, after a while what happened? They went to your side since it always had the zones the next morning due to y'all not limiting the turf. Turf starts yes, but it never ends since y'all try-hard the shit out of it to have your zones back and stabilize again. Turfs have to be limited so you won't spend most of your time trying to get a zone then get it taken just cuz you gave up and the opposite side is just desperate as fuck. All this is a reason of the discouragement to turd these days, let alone other enemy gangs that attack one of your zones when you're fighting against 2 gangs already.
Another example for "attractivity", look at CDC, old gen one was with us, why do you think they joined your side? Just open /war and see yourself.

Of course, I can't speak of all, but winning or losing nothing of both is attractive to me at least. We ( M ) joined the UE side while it was getting fucked by NavM & ThC due to their huge numbers of members online. There are for sure gangs that get attracted by any advantages of the players and their positions they have in groups etc and therefore they try to join the side to get overall advantage. But yeah, it's up to everyone to decide what he want

[krecik]

@leonard said in Turf war balance:

krekic with all due respect your suggestions are always shit asf

Na but now serious, maybe they're, but u know, im not limiting myself to one server.And trust me on thoose servers even cop side is that balanced it's having sometimes more online cops than crims, so everything is possible, but u know it's better to do something useless like limit turf war to only inside turfzone which will even make it worse or change car vmax for 5 kph, heh...

[Riley]

@burako said in Turf war balance:

@wendo he's in the winning side actually...

Which gangs are on the winning side then? I'm really not familiar with them right now, how either side is made up

[BurakO]

@riley NavM and ThC dominated whole 2020 with some help of BB and some others but they didn't help much like Lunas / INKAS / LE, we fought against X M Z UE HS O CripZ and a few others. in early 2021 NwA GSF and JK joined us, but helped only few months and then rip. UE side dominated most of 2021, but is normal, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. After NavM departure and ThC inactivity this side completely died, i don't see it as a problem, not manny people from this side is interested in turfs, only a few ones, the old carrys are inactive. krecik were part of Z and as now SSB i think.

[Crank]

@krecik
Your suggestion will not work out the way you think, because the main problem currently is not the number of helpers inside one turf zone, but the number of gangs ganging up on one attacker at the same time. It happens, that 3 or 4 different gangs are each attacking one gang in several different zones, leaving the attacker scattered & outnumbered in every zone, resulting in a loss.

The argument of inviting more gangs to the outnumbered side is also invalid as new gangs will not voluntarily decide to join the losing side for the sole reason to farm activities & money by taking allied turfs with no opposition. Furthermore, new gangs aren't formed as frequently as they were more than a year ago, so even if one gang decides to join the losing side, it will barely have any effect.

---

It just takes away the fun when you DM one gang in one turf zone, just to be AFK turfed from another gang in another zone. I have stopped using the said tactic to -split- the enemy because of the effect it has on the joy of gameplay. But that is not what I want to talk about. I would rather counter your suggestion with an in my opinion better suggestion that would leave more options for any gang participating in turf wars:

The change has to come from within the script itself because we as players can't change the direction to where turf wars are going at the moment. It was a suggestion that was already brought up. If you could introduce a cooldown to turf zones, that would appear immediately after a zone is taken or defended, it would help immensely. The attackers can take zones, and the opposition is forced to defend. I'd suggest having the cooldown at ~30 mins because 10 minutes would have little to no impact. The same goes for 15 minutes. Gangs would just wait for the cooldown to disappear & to attack the zone to slow down the attackers consistently, as they are then forced to defend on 2 or more fronts again. There would also be a cooldown for successfully defending a zone, so gangs cannot attack 1 zone over and over again. Furthermore, to prevent abuse from defenders, that spray immediately after a zone is getting attacked (so they get progress down to 0 or below 0 to get a defender cooldown) a certain amount of progress is needed to trigger a cooldown for the zone: 50 progress should at least be reached for the cooldown to take effect. 50, because spraying 3 times achieves progress of 45, so you would need to farm 5 more progress to get a cooldown as a defender. Such a thing would also prevent people or allies from accidentally triggering and leaving a zone, which would result in an attacker being unable to take the zone.
An example of how this would work out: ThC attacks a Z zone, ThC gets over 50 progress, thus if Z successfully defends, the zone would have a cooldown. If ThC takes the zone, said cooldown will also appear. If an ally of ThC accidentally attacks the zone and gets defended by Z immediately, there will be no cooldown as 50 progress was not reached.

Through this minor change, gangs would have to be strategic about which zone they attack, as it could very well turn out to be a waste of time if defended. Defenders need to defend or they would lose more zones. More momentum/movement for an attacker, less stagnation. Longer turf wars, longer fun.

This change alone will not save turf wars, but it will be a start of balance. There are still problems with crowded zones, but that is a topic for another time because at least crowded zones are more fun to DM in than whatever is currently practised. If this gets enough support, I can make a new suggestion topic with a vote, to see who would be interested in my suggestion.

[Tut]

Gone around and hid a few unhelpful posts in here. Let's try and stay on topic please!

[Brophy]

This Question has been marked Solved and moved to the archive.