I wanted to get the official word on whether a couple of tactics that seem to be getting more common are allowed.The first, "HQ Dumping", involves players leaving a gang, creating Headquarters and then rejoining the original gang in order to boost that gang's points and get more headquarters than that gang would normally be given.The second involves either leaving a gang, or having a dedicated alt outside of the gang, whose sole purpose is to attack properties of another gang to inflate the value of those properties.Neither of these things seem to be within the spirit of the game, but they are occurring. If a gang wants to keep up, they would almost certainly need to use these same tactics. But I would like to get the developers stance on the issue because after all - it is your game.It seems like it would be hard to prevent - because some gangs can legitimately have a large number of HQs if they merged with another gang. The only thing I can really think of is preventing a player from re-joining a gang that they leave, but that probably wouldn't be a popular solution.I guess the bottom line is that due to the competitive nature of the game and the high value placed on headquarters, people are going to try to get as many as possible. At least if we have the official word on whether or not it's allowed, everyone could be competing on a level playing field. Because as it stands, it seems some people feel like it's cheating or wrong to do and others feel like it's part of the game and is OK to use as much as possible.

Honestly I wouldn't say it's cheating. But I would say it's frowned upon. In some cases your second issue is needed. Some of my gang members had to leave me to attack my areas as all of them were 200 men in defence and we were unable to play the game. After it was half and half they rejoined giving us something to play again. The purpose wasn't meant for income raise yet that was still an outcome.The first issue is the main thing frowned upon buy it's what gets players points. If you think about it. Players still need to wait a long 5 days to place one and in most cases it's actually more of a pain doing it than just going out and attacking._________________DevilsNipple! Do it the Awesome Way!

DevilsNipple wrote:Honestly I wouldn't say it's cheating. But I would say it's frowned upon. In some cases your second issue is needed. Some of my gang members had to leave me to attack my areas as all of them were 200 men in defence and we were unable to play the game. After it was half and half they rejoined giving us something to play again. The purpose wasn't meant for income raise yet that was still an outcome.The first issue is the main thing frowned upon buy it's what gets players points. If you think about it. Players still need to wait a long 5 days to place one and in most cases it's actually more of a pain doing it than just going out and attacking.Yeah I understand the issue with having all your squares filled up and having to kill men just to be able to keep doing missions (or having to drive quite a ways to get more turf) - that's more why I said solely for the purpose of inflating value.Also, I agree that HQ dumping is probably not 'cheating' per se since it's not abusing a bug or anything, it's just gaming the system. But so far, I have refrained from letting anyone in my county do that because it seems a bit shady. It's just seeming like if other people are doing it it might be the only way to remain competitive.And the 5 day wait isn't really a big deal compared to the reward. If a gang has 5 people do it, they would get 5 HQs every 5 days instead of 1. Assuming the minimum value for a full HQ ($2000), that's $8000 more than they would have normally - every 5 days. At that rate, even the top gang in the game could double their value in a short amount of time if they had enough people do it. So the reward is huge.I'd just rather see the game be based on who can attack, hold and maintain the highest value properties than who can make the most headquarters. I do like the idea of multiple HQs, since it allows everyone in the gang to have a chance at placing one - but it seems like that has had some unintended consequences.

Bump! Please answer!_________________SCIOTS [214]http://www.reddit.com/r/CityDominat ionRexButtercupGangsterMessages : 69Date d'inscription : 2014-07-01Age : 34Localisation : Dallas, TX  

295k

Saturn wrote:295kPlease stop spamming the forums with your nonsense. No one outside of your gang cares what your score is, and the only thing it has to do with the topic at hand is if you are using these tactics to get that score.Just stop.

@Saturn... bro.. really? The pm in game was pushing it but this is definitely not the place.The devs are well aware of this tactic. It has been going on in the French community for a while.I have been brainstorming and this is what I came up with. When a player leaves their gang instead of them leaving all the land, they take it with them. If they take it with them they cant retake it to boost the value and then rejoin again. The value of the land should get cut in half if they leave as a punishment. But if they are kicked it should keep its value. The gang they leave will lose the points. In order for this to happen the game would need to track what belongs to each player. And if a player gets kicked or leaves then they should have to wait 30 days before they can make their first HQ. Then it would go back to every 5 days. This should stop the kicking or leaving for the purpose of building HQs.The only problem is what about the players that leave a gang because they don't travel much and have taken their whole town already? This must be a problem for players with little completion. And the only thing I can think of is Bots. More bots attacking more often... as often as a real player could. I know some hate bots but they are essential for the ones that don't have competition.  _________________Don't you ever come here empty handed again! You got to pay for the pleasure of my company!Bill The ButcherGangsterMessages : 103Date d'inscription : 2014-06-24Age : 33Localisation : Washington, USA  

Bill The Butcher wrote:@Saturn... bro.. really? The pm in game was pushing it but this is definitely not the place.The devs are well aware of this tactic. It has been going on in the French community for a while.I have been brainstorming and this is what I came up with. When a player leaves their gang instead of them leaving all the land, they take it with them. If they take it with them they cant retake it to boost the value and then rejoin again. The value of the land should get cut in half if they leave as a punishment. But if they are kicked it should keep its value. The gang they leave will lose the points. In order for this to happen the game would need to track what belongs to each player. And if a player gets kicked or leaves then they should have to wait 30 days before they can make their first HQ. Then it would go back to every 5 days. This should stop the kicking or leaving for the purpose of building HQs.The only problem is what about the players that leave a gang because they don't travel much and have taken their whole town already? This must be a problem for players with little completion. And the only thing I can think of is Bots. More bots attacking more often... as often as a real player could. I know some hate bots but they are essential for the ones that don't have competition.  I figured they are aware of it - but I haven't seen anything saying whether it's allowed or not, so I wanted to get the official word. I didn't know that the French version had the HQ thing for longer than we did.. Has that always been a thing? I thought it was only recently that a gang could have more than one HQ and if two gangs merged, the merging gang lost its HQ. Anyway..I like the idea of the 30 day cooldown before a player that leaves a gang can do a new HQ. I'm not sure how feasable the 'properties staying with the player' would be - as far as whether they've been stamping each property in the database with the person who attacked it - but if so it sounds OK on the surface - I just wonder if there might be some unintended consequences with that as well..The way I see it, if the player is truly leaving the gang because they own everything nearby/can't travel then being able to kill the henchmans defending that turf (which can already happen) is fine. They already can't affect the value of the property for 48 hours if they leave - which is plenty of time to kill off some defenders and re-join the gang and continue being able to do missions, etc. I can't really support them needing to do more than that because at it's core, this is a geolocated game. If you can't move around in the real word, you aren't going to be as successful at it.

ScrobDobbins wrote:.....but I haven't seen anything saying whether it's allowed or not, so I wanted to get the official word.I haven't read anywhere in the rules that it isn't allowed. I'm sure the devs haven't banned anybody for it since I know of French gang leaders that do it openly. Although It is frowned upon by most players. ScrobDobbins wrote:I didn't know that the French version had the HQ thing for longer than we did.. Has that always been a thing?  I thought it was only recently that a gang could have more than one HQ and if two gangs merged, the merging gang lost its HQ.  Anyway..Nah... they haven't had it longer. At least not to my knowledge.  I was referring to the "tactic" of leaving and rejoing, for the purpose of land boosting._________________Don't you ever come here empty handed again! You got to pay for the pleasure of my company!Bill The ButcherGangsterMessages : 103Date d'inscription : 2014-06-24Age : 33Localisation : Washington, USA  

Reading all of this I have came up with an idea. I like the idea of a long cool down for HQ's but I dislike that it would happen after you left a gang for 30 days. Instead we couldo allow a HQ to be placed every 5 days as usual but you cannot merge that HQ with a gang you previously left until a 30 day cool down._________________DevilsNipple!Do it the Awesome Way!