A Way To Increase Competition in Wars

[Smarty Pants]

I think the intent of the thread is good, but the implementation would be an administrative/coding nightmare and GREE doesn't need help in that department.

I'll suggest another approach that is analogous to amateur golf handicapping. What if the winning team had all syndicate bonuses drop 5 levels (25% to 0), second place drops 3 levels, and 3rd drop 1 level? Each subsequent war the bonuses increase one level, unless you place top 3 again and then you take more reductions. For example, FC wins and bonuses drop to zero, if they place first in next battle they drop 5 more levels so the "bonuses" are now 25% penalties for the third battle. This would help with their "we are too strong and can't score any IP" argument too. You are welcome.

This solution not only protects/increases GREE's revenue stream (which is the only TRUE requirement of any change), but also ensures some movement at the top eventually, which was the original intent as I understand it. Most of all it keeps teams together giving them a chance to overcome (translation: spend even more $$$$) the new challenge.

This was not my idea but i felt it deserved its own thread so that it could be looked upon by the whole community, i personally think this is a good idea in the right direction and i dont say that often about many ideas.

[Enforcer]

Terrible...

[Back hand emus]

This is exactly what is wrong with the "everyone's a winner" syndrome people seem to be raising their kids with. There are people in life who will be better and have prettier pixels than you. It's not like there isn't a way to get into fight club, most people just don't want to pay the price. No need to penalize them for being good at tapping the screen repetitively.

[Smarty Pants]

what you two dont understand is that regardless of what your elitist opinions may be; gree exists to make money, gree makes money by generating fair competition.....the idea is to create fair competition. It has nothing to do with everyone being no1 it has to do with a decent number of people having at least a shot at it.

[Muffhole]

Bad idea I think..

[Back hand emus]

How is the competition not fair? Win the lottery put all of it into crime city and you can win number 1 too. It not like they aren't making money off of fight club anyways.

[Back hand emus]

You're basically suggesting to make it fair by making it unfair to fight club. Brilliant! Smarty pants 2016

[Smarty Pants]

How is the competition not fair? Win the lottery put all of it into crime city and you can win number 1 too. It not like they aren't making money off of fight club anyways.

Are you seriously this near sighted? Fight Club is 1 team, however many points fight club can put up the other 9 top10 teams can put up 5x that (5x the gold) but they dont because there is 0 competition. I dont expect you to understand even the most basic ideas behind marketing and economics but the above is just common sense and you'd be ignorant to say otherwise.

[Smarty Pants]

You're basically suggesting to make it fair by making it unfair to fight club. Brilliant! Smarty pants 2016

Actually it is brilliant, its ideas like those that stop monopolies like Fight Club from even being created. Why should Gree let one single team dictate how much profits they earn? Countless other competitive entities including sports, presidential campaigns, even worldwide economies thrive off the idea that the more competitive a pool is the more participation it receives. Why do you think Super Bowl winners receive the very last draft pick, why presidents have limited terms in office, why governments put in laws to prevent monopolies?

You clearly are narrow minded and have no understanding of how the world works, come back after you get some common sense.

[Back hand emus]

Keep insulting me instead of ignoring the facts it does wonders for your argument. Fight club doesn't have an unfair advantage, making it 100 percent fair. They spend more money than you, get over it. Your arguments are completely out of place for the monopoly. The problem with monopolies is that only one person gets a piece of the pie, with the syndicate wars you,re still getting prizes if you're 1st 2nd 3rd or 4000th. A monopoly is partially defined as having barriers to entry, what barriers to entry do any syndicates have to be number one? None. Not to mention that some monopolies are actually a benefit. Which is another lesson for another day. Please tell me I'm wrong so that I can completely disregard anything you say as you would clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

[JBE]

This is actually a really good idea.

But guys, basically, you have to accept that there are two schools of thought on Crime City:

There are those who believe that Crime City should be a game, and that there should be a skill element, and that it should be competitive.

And there are those who believe it should be a total capitalist environment, in which the richest win by buying their way to success.

I happen to believe that Crime City should be a mixture. Spending money should give you an advantage, but you should not be able to use money to achieve total advantage, which is what has happened in the game of late.

If you are of the total capitalist POV, then these threads are not for you. You are happy with the way things are, and do not need to discuss possible changes to the syndicates. Move along.

But for the rest of us, it's not unreasonable to discuss ways in which the game could change so that we can all play. It is certainly not to Gree's fiscal advantage if everyone leaves and only FC remains.

[GU7 F4WK3S]

Actually it is brilliant, its ideas like those that stop monopolies like Fight Club from even being created. Why should Gree let one single team dictate how much profits they earn? Countless other competitive entities including sports, presidential campaigns, even worldwide economies thrive off the idea that the more competitive a pool is the more participation it receives. Why do you think Super Bowl winners receive the very last draft pick, why presidents have limited terms in office, why governments put in laws to prevent monopolies? You clearly are narrow minded and have no understanding of how the world works, come back after you get some common sense.you forgot to mention entities like mafias, cartels and gangs....we're playing crime city right?

[jmeijer]

I think that this is a terrible idea. You're penalizing groups that've spent the most to win. How do you want to keep costumers? By rewarding them.

[bald zeemer]

Even if this ridiculous idea got up all anyone would have to do is have a 2nd synd and bounce between them every war.

[jmeijer]

Even if this ridiculous idea got up all anyone would have to do is have a 2nd synd and bounce between them every war.Agreed. Some guys in FC (like Trev, AppleMacGuy and also you) have ridiculous IPH's; it's probably no problem to get all bonuses in a short period.

[JBE]

Even if this ridiculous idea got up all anyone would have to do is have a 2nd synd and bounce between them every war.

This is precisely why I first suggested (thread here: http://www.funzio.com/forum/showthread.php?63325-Here-s-how-to-fix-the-Syndicate-imbalance-quot-The-Super-Bowl-model-quot) that the winning syndicate get retired for two or three wars, and the winners dispersed into the 60 best teams by order, along with a winners medal.

They can reform later, but inherent with winning should be an exclusion from gaining all the best prizes the next time round - that is how you prevent a monopoly.

[Walshii]

Even if this ridiculous idea got up all anyone would have to do is have a 2nd synd and bounce between them every war.

The OP said it was an idea in the right direction, not that it was absolutely flawless. But I do agree it is a good idea to consider, FC does basically dictate the ip maximum for each war.

[bald zeemer]

Actually 2nd dictates IP. FC just win by a set margin based off that.

jmeijer:I'm not FC. But if I were I don't think I'd be top 50% for iph.

[Walshii]

Actually 2nd dictates IP. FC just win by a set margin based off that.

jmeijer:I'm not FC. But if I were I don't think I'd be top 50% for iph.

All FC has to do is lay the smack down hard enough and fast enough until SAS gives up trying any further. The members of the top syndicates are trying to reach their minimums, they only try to overtake FC if they see an opening.

[kgod]

It happens in sports all the time. Look at all the championships the Yankees bought because they could afford more top players than other teams. And I'm sure there plenty of examples like those pertaining to European soccer but I watch real men's sports so I wouldn't know.

[Enforcer]

Pay to win game. What's so complicated about that for some of you to understand?

Even with your horrible Super Bowl analogy, the champion team coud still make the crappiest team an offer to get their draft pick.

[JBE]

I think that this is a terrible idea. You're penalizing groups that've spent the most to win. How do you want to keep costumers? By rewarding them.

Actually, you are completely wrong. Yes we are consumers - consumers of a GAME. That is what you fail to understand. The act is not in winning, it's in playing.

People will continue to play as long as there are challenges. When do people stop playing games? a) when they are bored because the game becomes predictable. b) when they feel they can't win and the games no fun anymore.

GUESS WHAT? Even being in FC right now must be boring and predictable. Going through the motions, spending the gold, not even a slight buzz, no sense of danger, so sense of achievement when you win, same old items, even the graphics of the items are recycled, yawn.

And as for point b, incase you hadn't noticed from all the threads complaining about the syndicate wars - they are no fun anymore, because people feel they can't win. There's no skill involved, it's just pure spend.

[Walshii]

JBE brings up valid points, why do you think a good portion of Fight Clubs original members have quit already, where do you think all of the games very first players go? They got burnt out and left the game.

[MichelleEvelyncc]

I'm willing to bet that over 90% of the people complaining in those threads don't even get to compete for top 25. There is a very very large silent majority that doesn't care about fight club winning everything, because, like me, they aren't even close. Getting top 500 will be a victory for my syndicate and many others. For every whining thread there are probably 1000 players who don't care.

And if I ever get to the highest levels and somehow the competition is too much for me, I'll just take on another game or start over with a new account.

And guess what, if fight club members start to get bored, they'll start spending less or quit and likely they'll be replaced by new fight club members with deep pockets or will be overtaken by another syndicate, which won't make any difference in the world for the hundreds of the other teams and thousands of other players.

[Sideline Sal]

Very well put, MichelleEvelyncc

[JBE]

And guess what, if fight club members start to get bored, they'll start spending less or quit and likely they'll be replaced by new fight club members with deep pockets

This is a valid point! Exactly why Gree needs to implement some kind of handicapping system

[Lurker]

Awesome response, good job MEncc


I'm willing to bet that over 90% of the people complaining in those threads don't even get to compete for top 25. There is a very very large silent majority that doesn't care about fight club winning everything, because, like me, they aren't even close. Getting top 500 will be a victory for my syndicate and many others. For every whining thread there are probably 1000 players who don't care.

And if I ever get to the highest levels and somehow the competition is too much for me, I'll just take on another game or start over with a new account.

And guess what, if fight club members start to get bored, they'll start spending less or quit and likely they'll be replaced by new fight club members with deep pockets or will be overtaken by another syndicate, which won't make any difference in the world for the hundreds of the other teams and thousands of other players.

[Stooboot]

This is exactly what is wrong with the "everyone's a winner" syndrome people seem to be raising their kids with. There are people in life who will be better and have prettier pixels than you. It's not like there isn't a way to get into fight club, most people just don't want to pay the price. No need to penalize them for being good at tapping the screen repetitively.
haha great

Penalize the winners.. ur a psycho

[Pistol Pete MB3]

686-073-339 Miami Beach Bad Boyz MB3----Your profile has been reviewed and selected to join an elite few as part of a fast growing syndicate.---
686-073-339 Miami Beach Bad Boyz MB3
--In the 1970's and 1980's one of the largest crime waves in American history swept the city of Miami, Florida dwarfing Prohibition era Chicago. It is said that without organized crime the city of Miami might not be what it is today. --213-678-518 add me if you meet the 50k ip requirement for this super team

[Lueds]

This was not my idea but i felt it deserved its own thread so that it could be looked upon by the whole community, i personally think this is a good idea in the right direction and i dont say that often about many ideas.

My post was in response to how to create parity in CC, it had nothing to do with if there should be parity. I was just proposing a handicapping system that would be feasible to implement using the existing syndicate bonus framework instead of hot-swapping players around.

Personally I don't care about the if part because this is only relevant for the top ten teams and, even if I was willing to spend the money to be top ten, I would never spend the time. For me CC is just an amusement, not something core to my identity.

I find it amusing that the if questions has fallen into a socio-political debate. News flash: it's not. It's all economics. If GREE can make more money they will do it, if not they won't. I just don't want to see them break the game with Frankenstein code chasing more money if they decide to do it.