Cyber Wars Forums

Overview
Newbs are not protected against attacks from gangs who are at war with them, and so are a liability to the gangs they join.

How this can be fixed
Introduce protection for those under 25 during gang wars, so that gangs have no disadvantage in accepting them.

Problem this fixes
Currently gangs only accept strong players because weaker ones are a liability in gang wars. As gangs are a key part of CW, many newbs miss out on this and get bored and quit the game as they don't know how to play, while if they had joined a gang an older member could have taught them.

Drawbacks
Gangs can accept lots of newbs to artificially bump up their numbers to enable 500/1k wars etc. However, they can't stop them from ageing so eventually they would have to boot them and accept more newbs, which would create a constant influx and help train newbs.
I also see no advantage in the current system.

This idea uses Rusty's recomended suggestion layout. If you wish to comment on it or for more info, please go here

Mark wrote:"This idea uses Rusty's recomended suggestion layout. If you wish to comment on it or for more info, please go here" - How far up your own arse are you?

I can see light.

This idea has alot of merit however i do see problems and the main one would be exploitation of newbs thus creating a new brand of problems

Thus i would say it could be a very bad idea

First of all, why should they have it to begin with?

It actually worked like this in the beginning when the noob-protection rule was implemented, but it was removed due to the amount of sheer annoyance this creates. Which I think is great. Having the noob protection working during gang wars doesn't really make sense. Even if you're a noob, there's no reason you should be invincible when your enemy is slaughtering every other stronger person around you. Any member of a gang should expect battles in wars, and he might aswell get familiar with that immidiately, or the shock will be even bigger when he finally reaches day 26 and gets his arse rightfully kicked with a vengeance every single hour or more.

Weaker members in a gang are a liabilty not because they are weaklings, but because a gang cannot be bigger than a certain amount of people to be able to compete with other gangs due to the nature of gang wars to begin with. If gang A has 100 members and gang B has 75, gang A with the most availible targets will always loose, as long as gang B has atleast one single person that's active and capable of beating the majority of the opposing gang. Even if gang A has one equally strong and active player that kills absolutely everyone in gang B aswell, they will always loose regardless. If you add the 25-day rule into that already broken system, you'll end up with two gangs where half the members can't kill the other half for no real reason at all.

It's all working as if taken out of some bizarre alternate universe where an army of few will massacre the vastly outnumbering enemy more easily the worse the odds are.
And on a different note; gang wars should scale directly with the amount of members in each gang imo, I wrote a hilariously long post about that on the pre-reset boards. cba writing one again.

So I could make a gang with a bunch of people that are newly joined and have me be the only one that the other gang can kill?

I respect your opinion, valtam, but you're looking at my suggestion from the wrong angle.
The problem is not with newbs being slaughtered, but from not being allowed in a gang. This means that more of them quit and makes CW a more boring place, as superseding all the flaws with different types of inflation, not getting enough new players is CW biggest problem. I think (though I may not be right) that most of these is because CW is a really hard game to get your head around, and most give up when they see the 10 page tutorial. However, being in a gang is an easy way to get around this problem, as many people prefer to learn through talking to others than reading themselves. Also, gangs are a great part of CW and I know of people who play the game that knew very little about how to play it but enjoyed gangs so much that they stayed playing it.
The current system means gang owners will refuse newbs to join their gangs, meaning they don't get this chance. This can only be bad for CW, as these players don't see the range of features that gangs introduce.
Sure, it means they stay dead less, but who gives a damn about newbs not being farmed? If anything, being farmed will make them leave CW for good, so the less dead they are the better! And yes, a gang can have a load of newbs in to screw the numbers, but then the gang that declared on them should have done their research, as no one goes to war without a plan (Iraq doesn't count ).

[OSX]-Luffy- wrote:So I could make a gang with a bunch of people that are newly joined and have me be the only one that the other gang can kill?

Yea, or you could not go through with the effort and just create a 1 man gang. If you are referring to the 'one strong player and 10 newbs to enable 500 kill wars' or similar problem, the downfall will be that after 25 days all the newbs will then become killable and the gang will be a sitting duck. If the owner boots the over 25s, they must replenish with more each time. This would effectively serve as a training gang, and do a good service to CW in allowing newbs to get the gang experience. In return, they will do well in gang wars. Even better is that this would encourage other gangs to adopt 'counter-newbs' so that they could kill this sort of gang, adding a new dynamic to the already dry gang wars.

Confuzzed wrote:This idea has alot of merit however i do see problems and the main one would be exploitation of newbs thus creating a new brand of problems

How would one go about exploiting newbs?

This would effectively serve as a training gang, and do a good service to CW in allowing newbs to get the gang experience.

so if someone did this and use this tactic you would not call it unfair, but if gangs have members who quit during a war, you don't like it? I'm just checking if thats what you are saying.

How about we just take of the 25 day protection untill about 6 more months in theres no point for it now

This idea will not be added. The current systems works fine.