If Funzio does this, I want creator benefits :)

[G Wiz]

Think about a full circle Crime City event.

"Floating weapons"

What happens here is that you have very powerful weapons that it is not consumable, but it can be lost as others aquire it through fighting you successfully!

It will be tiered as it always has been, maybe in multiples of 25!

At the end of the event, whoever has the weapon will keep it!

What do you guys think?

[enahs1]

I love this idea

[joaquim]

I love it but I think there should be more than one weapon per tier. Maybe 5-10.

[joaquim]

Oh almost forgot! Before the event starts, Funzio has to take a look at all the players to make sure that cheaters don't get a chance to participate.

[QPR]

Great idea wiz

[Joeycool]

Good idea.

But what would happen is that the strongest players would end up with all the weapons.

The weaker players would end up with none.

Perhaps It would work if you had a chance of taking the weapon regardless of if you won or not. Or you loose a weapon attacking someone even if you won.

[Dr Girlfriend]

A player could acquire the weapon then dump mafia to get off the rivals list in order to keep it.

[joaquim]

A player could acquire the weapon then dump mafia to get off the rivals list in order to keep it.

That's a good idea too but it would make life too easy. I think to make things fair, you shouldn't be allowed to drop mafia to end up against players with stats much lower than your own.

[Max Power]

Good idea.

But what would happen is that the strongest players would end up with all the weapons.

The weaker players would end up with none.

Perhaps It would work if you had a chance of taking the weapon regardless of if you won or not. Or you loose a weapon attacking someone even if you won.

This.

It would be another event that would favor the strong and punish the weak.

[Nudie]

This.

It would be another event that would favor the strong and punish the weak.

I agree with Max. But isn't that the way things have always been? In games as well as in RL?

[Plumbernick9]

This will never happen. I wouldn't put anymore thought or energy into this idea.

[G Wiz]

Well its all harmless brainstorming here.

You guys do raise valid points about the strongest players having all the weapons. To counter this, maybe Joeycool's idea that you can lose a weapon regardless of fight won or loss with differing percentages for the wins and loses.

Having multiple weapons might be a consideration, per tier, as well. Only one "floating" weapon can be acquired at one time perhaps.

Good critiques fellas

[Ramshutu]

Turning it on it's head...

Each player is given 100 decoy devices.

Robbing or attacking players will allow you to steal them. If you attack and rob, and loose, you have a chance of loosing them.

The 100 people with the fewest items at the end of the tournament wins. Remove 1 from your inventory every hour using gold. Probably difficult to implement though.

[Fig O Ni]

What do you guys think?

For an event it don't sound fair.
In each tier, the strongest mafia's are near enough guaranteed the weapon.

So the loss of gold sales from the events, from mid-low range players will have a knock on effect to the business & very strong player need not spend cash buying gold.

Even though event seem unfair, they are still made so anyone can win.

Your idea need a rethink on how to make it more FAIR and get people consider BUYING gold to use in the event.

Once these criteria are met then the event can be a go.

[Luke 3457]

That be real cool! Yes the weak lose always so I'd be cool with it!

[Babytway]

i think its a great idea but would need some work from what others said bout the strong getting them and keeping on to them because no one can beat them. but all in all i think you have something here if you can tweek it to work for the strong and the weak equally

[DenZ1]

Good idea.

But what would happen is that the strongest players would end up with all the weapons.

The weaker players would end up with none.

Perhaps It would work if you had a chance of taking the weapon regardless of if you won or not. Or you loose a weapon attacking someone even if you won.

Yep. This one is very flawed. All weapons will end up in the hands of several players.

[G Wiz]

Yep. This one is very flawed. All weapons will end up in the hands of several players.Flawed...the apple of funzio's eye lol.

You guys do raise valid points tho no doubt. Something like this is really fun I believe though. It would definately keep people glued to their devices.

[Babytway]

what if im already glued

[mongorie]

G wiz, i want to smoke what your're smoking right now!

[G Wiz]

what if im already gluedThis question is the answer...


G wiz, i want to smoke what your're smoking right now!For this quote right here :)

[Max Power]

I agree with Max. But isn't that the way things have always been? In games as well as in RL?

Yup. We don't need events or programming to achieve what we already have.

I think the game would benefit all, from gold spenders to spendthrifts, if events are added to draw more parity rather than reward just the spenders or the strong. But that seems counter to Funzio's mission. The "give a little now-get a lot later" concept seems alien to them, and maybe with the life cycle of these games, they are ultimately right. They have studied this stuff far more than me.

[emcee]

They should just have another economy event. This time with a longer playing window.
Hand out super weapons, 5 per best 10 level brackets. This will give you a breakdown of the best of best in 10 level increments or something along that line.

Or about time for an end event item for +100 defense.

Or an end event item which gives you a choice from previous end event items. So even with someone who got all of them they can still get a +100 attack for instance; whereas stacking upgrade reduction times or any further reduction in upgrade cost will not be allowed.