» Menu
» OB/Site News
» Articles
» Barafranca News
No news found. Reset in progress?
 |
|
article
After last night's war, a group of families has decided to target the attackers.
Koolio + Paria + Illuanna + Gallia + Sublime → Gambino
Paria → Equestria
Kurosawa, Caliente, Brada → Zerilli
Koninkrijk → Brada
Koolio + Paria + Illuanna + Gallia + Sublime → Gambino
Paria → Equestria
Kurosawa, Caliente, Brada → Zerilli
Koninkrijk → Brada
statements
Deaths (as of 07-08-2014 13:40:00*):
* Kills between 07-08-2014 21:53:08 and 07-08-2014 23:57:56 missing
|
0* Kills between 07-08-2014 21:53:08 and 07-08-2014 23:57:56 missing
statistics
| War started on: 21:13:03 01-08-2014 | War ended on: 14:30:05 09-08-2014 |
| Bullet difference: -27,856,038 | War duration: 7d 17h 17m |
| Money difference: -$1,577,330,047 | Players died: 475 |
deaths
Dead Families:
Deaths per family:
|
|
Solstice (17:12:01 - 13-08)
Seltik (17:01:54 - 13-08)
After all the suggestions posted on all this coments below, if nothing changes is not because there aren't players interested in the continuity of the game and in bring more people to it.
I just hope not to conclude in the end that the game is dead on the OCrew side.
I just hope not to conclude in the end that the game is dead on the OCrew side.
Seltik (16:49:42 - 13-08)
Tijgertinus at 13:08:48 on 13/08:
Well Omerta Crew, Time 2 change!!
I read so much good ideas of the other Gangsters, so Do something with it.
I like the ideas of solstice very much, This will Stimulate activity of the lacky-players! and reward the people spending online-time
Go for it :D
Well Omerta Crew, Time 2 change!!
I read so much good ideas of the other Gangsters, so Do something with it.
I like the ideas of solstice very much, This will Stimulate activity of the lacky-players! and reward the people spending online-time
Go for it :D
+1
Tijgertinus (13:08:48 - 13-08)
Well Omerta Crew, Time 2 change!!
I read so much good ideas of the other Gangsters, so Do something with it.
I like the ideas of solstice very much, This will Stimulate activity of the lacky-players! and reward the people spending online-time
Go for it :D
I read so much good ideas of the other Gangsters, so Do something with it.
I like the ideas of solstice very much, This will Stimulate activity of the lacky-players! and reward the people spending online-time
Go for it :D
Solstice (09:26:11 - 13-08)
Nuke at 03:41:04 on 13/08:
I didn't see it at first.. I actually tried posting like 4 or 5 times before I received the Spam detection.
MurderInc at 03:38:54 on 13/08:
Our spam detection flagged your post as spam for some reason (it's usually pretty reliable, we've had maybe 2-3 false positives in the last 3 months). You should've seen some message about that after trying to submit (something like comment flagged as spam, will be reviewed before publishing), did that work?
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
Nuke at 03:34:38 on 13/08:
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
I didn't see it at first.. I actually tried posting like 4 or 5 times before I received the Spam detection.
Not gonna quote your whole story, but i agree. You put on your lackeys, then you wait till you can kill, that is about the fun that there is to be had atm. I've said this somewhere else, but i'd remove rank as the most deciding factor and use account strength instead. Then implement a lot of stuff that plays into that.
Make groupcrimes give you account strength, like 40 heist/raid is 1 point, 20 oc's is 1 point, 4 moc's is 1 point. Half the timers on those. Make racing give you account strength, you can race what, 1 time every half hour? So, 60 races is 1 point or something. Make some sort of shooting crime that gives you a bit of accountstrength(not KS, KS sucks). Make the experience you gain play into group crimes, the more races, the better you are as driver etc.
Make training bg's a group-activity and give bg's a specific task, 1 to protect you, 1 for better crimes, 1 for better heists, 1 for point efficiency or some shit and so on. Maybe have a scout bg, that figures out if a target is in your points range, or maybe when you train it further even the specific points. Differentiate between where you can train them. For 1 bg you have to travel to detroit, for another, go to palermo.
This way you get rewarded for doing stuff manually again, and you are forced to interact with others. You also get to differentiate that way between the active and not so active.
Then when you die, you keep your points, so there is a point to ranking up again and also you won't be shot by a random lackeyer that wants an easy kill.
Anonymous (08:59:32 - 13-08)
What can you expect of a game that still has an clicklimit of 11 clicks in 2014?
Any new player who sees that immediately quits but admins are short-sighted.
Any new player who sees that immediately quits but admins are short-sighted.
Ahyes, the 1vs1 meetings, what a glorious waste of time that was.
Also this game is about the most newcomer unfriendly game in existence. It barely has the right to call itself a game unless you are top, in which case it turns into a unpaid job.
But alas, a super-computer isn't able to calculate the amount of fucks admins do not give about any suggestions given throughout the years.
Also this game is about the most newcomer unfriendly game in existence. It barely has the right to call itself a game unless you are top, in which case it turns into a unpaid job.
But alas, a super-computer isn't able to calculate the amount of fucks admins do not give about any suggestions given throughout the years.
Nuke at 03:41:04 on 13/08:
I didn't see it at first.. I actually tried posting like 4 or 5 times before I received the Spam detection.
MurderInc at 03:38:54 on 13/08:
Our spam detection flagged your post as spam for some reason (it's usually pretty reliable, we've had maybe 2-3 false positives in the last 3 months). You should've seen some message about that after trying to submit (something like comment flagged as spam, will be reviewed before publishing), did that work?
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
Nuke at 03:34:38 on 13/08:
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
I didn't see it at first.. I actually tried posting like 4 or 5 times before I received the Spam detection.
MurderInc at 03:38:54 on 13/08:
Our spam detection flagged your post as spam for some reason (it's usually pretty reliable, we've had maybe 2-3 false positives in the last 3 months). You should've seen some message about that after trying to submit (something like comment flagged as spam, will be reviewed before publishing), did that work?
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
Nuke at 03:34:38 on 13/08:
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
I didn't see it at first.. I actually tried posting like 4 or 5 times before I received the Spam detection.
Nuke at 03:34:38 on 13/08:
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
Anyway, published it in the meantime.
Sorry for the multiple posts.. I tried doing one as a categorized summary, but it did not show at first, so I wrote another as an essay.
However, I think they each make a slightly different point, so I hope they do not get deleted.
However, I think they each make a slightly different point, so I hope they do not get deleted.
Aart at 23:55:05 on 12/08:
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
Nuke at 21:38:50 on 12/08:
Yeah.. City spots and objects will have to mean something again before that happens. The only spots that really seem to matter are Detroit Bank and two Bullet factories, and they're just not worth shooting for. Once you free them, the server is typically decided in the process.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the next best alternative is to diversify your bloods from server to server. I guess the problem with that is having to shoot friends, which honest people don't really care for. We've become a small community of veteran players.. Everyone knows everyone here.
My solution to all the monotony of this game is for Omerta to set a different purpose or objective for this game.. Make it so that families are working to be the most powerful without actually having to eliminate one another. Perhaps actually running a family corporation (requiring teamwork), where money, territory, and bought government influence are the objective and wars are both economically and politically costly, would change things up a bit.
.. Then again, that sounds too creative and too costly for Omerta's current staff to venture into. It would require a talented story writer and a resilient group of coders to make it happen.
Solstice at 11:08:06 on 12/08:
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Nuke at 12:08:36 on 11/08:
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Solstice at 10:17:23 on 11/08:
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Yeah.. City spots and objects will have to mean something again before that happens. The only spots that really seem to matter are Detroit Bank and two Bullet factories, and they're just not worth shooting for. Once you free them, the server is typically decided in the process.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the next best alternative is to diversify your bloods from server to server. I guess the problem with that is having to shoot friends, which honest people don't really care for. We've become a small community of veteran players.. Everyone knows everyone here.
My solution to all the monotony of this game is for Omerta to set a different purpose or objective for this game.. Make it so that families are working to be the most powerful without actually having to eliminate one another. Perhaps actually running a family corporation (requiring teamwork), where money, territory, and bought government influence are the objective and wars are both economically and politically costly, would change things up a bit.
.. Then again, that sounds too creative and too costly for Omerta's current staff to venture into. It would require a talented story writer and a resilient group of coders to make it happen.
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
Well, I wrote out an entire essay about what's wrong with this game, but this site would not post it for whatever reason, so here's the short version.
I don't believe I'm the one who is off.. It's not because of wars that people are choosing not to play this game.. Wars were always pointless and one-sided for the exact same reasons since at least 2.1.
The game is dying because it's not attractive enough to gain new players. A newcomer does not give a shit about which families are working together or whether or not the families have fought in the past week or month.
All a new players cares about:
- Is it free to play and compete?
- What is the objective? How do I compete?
When they finish reading the story and make their first 11 clicks, the following page is all most people need to see to be turned off by this game.
If they're still curious beyond that, a few days after typing image codes and getting nowhere, they begin to realize that there is no attainable object to this game and they simply don't come back.
This game did well before facebook made it convenient to play browser games with actual friends.. Now that there are more convenient browser games, this game has been declining ever since. The bitter rivalries between old families has kept it afloat for a very long time, but you can't expect the same old gamers to keep donating their time forever.
At some point, Omerta is going to have to make creative changes to attract newcomers, else it's going to become too big of a money pit for the owner to keep it online.
Seltik at 03:08:10 on 13/08:
Interesting concept, i agree. But i'd rather see bloodship limited instead of simply erased because "bloods" are part of the game (and its history).
I really don't see any problem in two families working toghether.
But i liked the overall idea i've read on that concept, despite i also agree it can be improved.
I just wonder why admins refuse to pay attention to new ideas and constructive criticism.
Interesting concept, i agree. But i'd rather see bloodship limited instead of simply erased because "bloods" are part of the game (and its history).
I really don't see any problem in two families working toghether.
But i liked the overall idea i've read on that concept, despite i also agree it can be improved.
I just wonder why admins refuse to pay attention to new ideas and constructive criticism.
I have to assume it's the fact that Omerta is not making enough money to pay for a full time staff and they have resolved to keep things as is until it is no longer profitable enough to run.
Aart at 23:55:05 on 12/08:
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
That sounds more like rifle and bayonet war game of lining up to shoot until either everyone is dead or one side retreats. Not very much like a mafia game at all. Put a token in and you're ready to fight!
The problem with this game and why it's ever-declining has two reasons to blame.
Imagine yourself as a newcomer, bored out of your mind.
Cons:
1. It's not free to compete.
2. It doesn't offer what the title and synopsis suggest. Why would anyone continue to click and type codes here for more than an hour after stumbling upon this game?
Example:
"OK, I loved the Godfather movies. This story line sounds pretty spot on.."
A) You begin exploring and suddenly come across a click limit after 11 clicks. You follow the directions to avoid this and find out that it costs $4 to get beyond that... - WTF? You still aren't sure that this game is even played by actual people and it's asking for your money?
B) If you're truly bored, you might continue to press on.. Within an hour to a day, you discover that there's little to nothing to do while ranking up. You're simply watching a timer and typing image codes. - What is to be gained by this? Is this a joke?! (No, it's just a scam)
C) You are convinced that some of these accounts are actual people, and out of curiosity, you jump through the hoops to give it a try. However, you probably didn't get the memo that there was going to be a reset several days ago and you're ranked in the bottom 90th percentile of accounts. - I don't want to pay $4 to avoid a click limit and another $4 for lackeys.. I can't afford DC's on Obay as an empty suite.. To hell with this.
Pros: ? (Remember, imagine yourself as a new player)
The only reason someone new would start playing this game:
None of the above applies to you.. One of your friends told you about this game and he won't stop bugging you to rank up. He spots you your first two DC's and you get to enjoy the pointless waiting before everyone reaches Brug so that they can try their luck at claiming victory for their pact. You die in the first war, but all your new online buddies are excited because they either survived or put up one hell of a fight.
Seltik (03:08:10 - 13-08)
Interesting concept, i agree. But i'd rather see bloodship limited instead of simply erased because "bloods" are part of the game (and its history).
I really don't see any problem in two families working toghether.
But i liked the overall idea i've read on that concept, despite i also agree it can be improved.
I just wonder why admins refuse to pay attention to new ideas and constructive criticism.
I really don't see any problem in two families working toghether.
But i liked the overall idea i've read on that concept, despite i also agree it can be improved.
I just wonder why admins refuse to pay attention to new ideas and constructive criticism.
Aart at 23:55:05 on 12/08:
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
Maybe there's some way to run a light-version of this without any dev changes - if a sufficient number of tops agree to those rules and some way to enforce them (e.g. if you don't play by those rules, everyone who's agreed to do so will gang up on you), it could work.
Aart (23:55:05 - 12-08)
Nuke at 21:38:50 on 12/08:
Yeah.. City spots and objects will have to mean something again before that happens. The only spots that really seem to matter are Detroit Bank and two Bullet factories, and they're just not worth shooting for. Once you free them, the server is typically decided in the process.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the next best alternative is to diversify your bloods from server to server. I guess the problem with that is having to shoot friends, which honest people don't really care for. We've become a small community of veteran players.. Everyone knows everyone here.
My solution to all the monotony of this game is for Omerta to set a different purpose or objective for this game.. Make it so that families are working to be the most powerful without actually having to eliminate one another. Perhaps actually running a family corporation (requiring teamwork), where money, territory, and bought government influence are the objective and wars are both economically and politically costly, would change things up a bit.
.. Then again, that sounds too creative and too costly for Omerta's current staff to venture into. It would require a talented story writer and a resilient group of coders to make it happen.
Solstice at 11:08:06 on 12/08:
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Nuke at 12:08:36 on 11/08:
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Solstice at 10:17:23 on 11/08:
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Yeah.. City spots and objects will have to mean something again before that happens. The only spots that really seem to matter are Detroit Bank and two Bullet factories, and they're just not worth shooting for. Once you free them, the server is typically decided in the process.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the next best alternative is to diversify your bloods from server to server. I guess the problem with that is having to shoot friends, which honest people don't really care for. We've become a small community of veteran players.. Everyone knows everyone here.
My solution to all the monotony of this game is for Omerta to set a different purpose or objective for this game.. Make it so that families are working to be the most powerful without actually having to eliminate one another. Perhaps actually running a family corporation (requiring teamwork), where money, territory, and bought government influence are the objective and wars are both economically and politically costly, would change things up a bit.
.. Then again, that sounds too creative and too costly for Omerta's current staff to venture into. It would require a talented story writer and a resilient group of coders to make it happen.
You are missing the point. You know nothing Nuke.
Seasons are changing, winter is comming (okay enough with GOT) and like every year... omerta will probably get a little more populated again than it was the last 2 versions (hopefully).
For many years now this game has gotten less and less attractive to play (for large and active fams - as well as small and less active ones) due to massive wars, blooding, winner vouchers, etc etc.
Omerta is a maffia game which has the sole basis to shoot/kill one another. Setting different purposes for an objective, like you are suggesting, is not gonne extend the life expectancy of this game. For example see .dm. Kcode can implement new territories, governments or 400 new objects... i'd still wanne kill you and the rest of the server, cause i'd like to play to win.
In a text based game with text based accounts with fairly little 'items' to distinguish your account from others it's really hard to 'create' a kick ass fine tuned Kill Algorithm. Personally I was pretty happy with the one there is now though it has 1 glitch: when your biggest enemy or the strongest family on the server starts a war, your family has got to go to war too since you'll be in huge disadvantage if you don't (account strentgh). If you won't, you'll eventually bite the dust shooting vs their accounts. So this creates a train reaction.
Ways to counter this are.... oh yea... gangbanging a family which needs to be taken down in order to extend the version's 'life expectancy'. Not fun for the gangbanged family - and let's face it - gangbanging active fams out of a version is not very fun for a version either (hint hint current fams)
Enfin, This will not change out of free will from the current playerbase... why would it if playing dodgy/slowly/avoiding wars/you name it - will only get you killed before you can win? I've said it before and will say it again, the only way to counter this is to implement 1vs1 wars. Myself and about 10 other players/tops from various families took the effort to write somewhat of a concept for this a more then a year ago (on developers request in the holy #4.0 IRC channel).... never heard jackshit about it afterwards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/
15scj7YuoPYrSM9jEjzQwTPTE6ht43VyxYHO9VjybPqU/edit?pli=1
(that's 1 link but i can't c/p it as a whole).
Anyway, that was my two cents' worth. I stopped trying a long time ago. Remember it was just an unfinished concept so don't jump on your high horse if something isn't brightly worked out.
Solstice at 11:08:06 on 12/08:
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Nuke at 12:08:36 on 11/08:
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Solstice at 10:17:23 on 11/08:
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Yeah.. City spots and objects will have to mean something again before that happens. The only spots that really seem to matter are Detroit Bank and two Bullet factories, and they're just not worth shooting for. Once you free them, the server is typically decided in the process.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the next best alternative is to diversify your bloods from server to server. I guess the problem with that is having to shoot friends, which honest people don't really care for. We've become a small community of veteran players.. Everyone knows everyone here.
My solution to all the monotony of this game is for Omerta to set a different purpose or objective for this game.. Make it so that families are working to be the most powerful without actually having to eliminate one another. Perhaps actually running a family corporation (requiring teamwork), where money, territory, and bought government influence are the objective and wars are both economically and politically costly, would change things up a bit.
.. Then again, that sounds too creative and too costly for Omerta's current staff to venture into. It would require a talented story writer and a resilient group of coders to make it happen.
Solstice (11:08:06 - 12-08)
Nuke at 12:08:36 on 11/08:
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Solstice at 10:17:23 on 11/08:
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
We're not whining about the opening war btw, that was awesome. Family's saw an opening and went for it. Was very enjoyable for all of our tops, eventhough we fell short at the end. It's just the selfrighteous bullshit from families that were standing in line to blood us, that's getting old.
That's part of the problem, I guess..
You could say a bigger part of the problem is that 1/3 of the server is blooded in that pact, while another 1/3 (Crusaders) is blooded in another pact, while the remaining 1/3 (Amateurs and Idealists) has no affiliation to one another.
That would be fine, but then we go back to the problem that you addressed. Some people don't like the attitude of one group, so they try to crossover into the other group. That creates the lack of balance. Then, every now and then one of the idealists manages to pick up 5-10 extra rank sluts and becomes a main player. That also tilts the scale.
The best way to handle this is for the Pact and the Crusaders to either pick up everyone else that they can and have one war each server, else limit your bloods to a minimum and wait to see what other groups begin to form.
Blood limiting sounds good in practice, and we are actually for that. The problem is, if you are the first to limit yourself, especially as a family that fought a lot in the past, you get stomped by pretty much the rest of the server on the first war. The set-up of the game has to change somewhat, before we'll see 1on1 wars and short bloodlists again.
Anonymous (22:53:12 - 11-08)
Aart at 22:37:50 on 11/08:
1 is fine, as long as you are a donating member you can enable it at your profile settings. I can advice you not to put 2 dc's active and become a donating+ member since it's one of the most useless additions i've seen in this game.
Anonymous at 22:28:50 on 11/08:
Hey , do I just need 1 dc or gold donating status to show my kills and bullets shot?
Hey , do I just need 1 dc or gold donating status to show my kills and bullets shot?
Thanks man. I appreciate your time and input. I agree on 2nd being useless, never even used one since coming out of retirement to a game ran by lackeys.
After all the suggestions posted on all this coments below, if nothing changes is not because there aren't players interested in the continuity of the game and in bring more people to it.
I just hope not to conclude in the end that the game is dead on the OCrew side.
Well, work has been done behind the screens. We can see the first rough draft of that on .dm. But it needs to be improved further, which they said they would do. I actually got a bit of confidence in Kcode allthough he didn't do anything so far with the suggestions made by a group of tops/veteran players.