Ticket Steal sounds like it can really cause a tug of war and I like that. 

I am on the fence with fair fight gate I feel it could stall ticket progress, I think a good alternative would be signing up for participation. Say 40% of cartel has to sign up in order to qualify and Territory Bounty Page shows only those who signed up for the fight and are the only ones who give tickets. Now this doesn't prevent those members from participating in support roles like Reviver or Grenadier. But those players don't earn or reward points. It would still be worthwhile to hosp them if they are providing support or to hire merc's to keep care of those not earning tickets.

 Cartel Perks are great and give cartels more to work towards with their rep.

As far as options, I'd say 1 and 2. Depending on your idea for perks rewarded for winning in 3 and length I think it would be fun to host a bi-weekly King of the Hill and a monthly territory bounty with high stakes. This pair with the roster sign up it gives cartels the option to opt out of a bounty should they need to recover from a previous battle or lack of attendance.

 Now would we have additional perks if a cartel holds a King of the Hill Territory for multiple events in a rowm?

1

Change nothing. Crime Scene! deserves nothing but pain and suffering

Ticket Steal sounds like it can really cause a tug of war and I like that. 

I am on the fence with fair fight gate I feel it could stall ticket progress, I think a good alternative would be signing up for participation. Say 40% of cartel has to sign up in order to qualify and Territory Bounty Page shows only those who signed up for the fight and are the only ones who give tickets. Now this doesn't prevent those members from participating in support roles like Reviver or Grenadier. But those players don't earn or reward points. It would still be worthwhile to hosp them if they are providing support or to hire merc's to keep care of those not earning tickets.

 Cartel Perks are great and give cartels more to work towards with their rep.

 

As far as options, I'd say 1 and 2. Depending on your idea for perks rewarded for winning in 3 and length I think it would be fun to host a bi-weekly King of the Hill and a monthly territory bounty with high stakes. This pair with the roster sign up it gives cartels the option to opt out of a bounty should they need to recover from a previous battle or lack of attendance.

 Now would we have additional perks if a cartel holds a King of the Hill Territory for multiple events in a rowm?

DAS_LOBOTOMIST - 06/08/2026, 02:19:29

Hmm, if only select people within a cartel have to sign up to be eligible, and not everyone in the cartel signs up, what is to stop just the to hitters in a cartel from signing up? That would make participation from players who are not as strong kind of moot wouldn't it? Or is it a 40% threshold for the whole cartel to be enlisted?

There were some other suggestions that were sent my way around being able to opt in, I just worry only the strong players would opt in and it would be completely lopsided and uneventful for lower stat players.

I also like the mix up of weekly king of the hill and a once a month proper territory bounty, I was hoping for this to cause some map churn.

For the options:

As Das said earlier, having both option 1 (KotH) together with 1 of the other options could work well, however you could also mix up option 2 and 3, so the victor will be given the option to take over the TT or upgrade one of their current TTs. You'd still need to be within your cap to take over the new TT, I think TTs currently have to stay connected to own multiple, but since that doesn't seem to be a problem in option 2 I'd let it be up to Vaelinn whether this would need to be upheld to overtake the new TT.

If it should be encouraged to overtake the won TT it would make sense for the new TT to gain a new fully upgraded perk, while if keeping your old TTs to chose one of your current TT perks to upgrade.

For the rules:

Ticket steal: I don't know if I like the idea of stealing all tickets when attacking an opponent faction with tickets, I think half the amount being stolen and half being generated would be better, or 1 stolen and the rest generated.

Fair fight gate: I think getting less tickets for lower fair fight is good enough already now that there isn't a defender getting piled on anymore. (I guess the lead cartel might get piled on, but opportunists who wants to get hits can still beat other cartels if the leaders are all hosped.)

If we end up going with some form of option 2, where the TT can be taken over, I think it would be fair for the cartel risking their TT to get some form of boost as they're defending their home turf. Something like a 10% boost to stats, med cd or ticket gain during the bounty.

Ticket Steal sounds like it can really cause a tug of war and I like that. 

I am on the fence with fair fight gate I feel it could stall ticket progress, I think a good alternative would be signing up for participation. Say 40% of cartel has to sign up in order to qualify and Territory Bounty Page shows only those who signed up for the fight and are the only ones who give tickets. Now this doesn't prevent those members from participating in support roles like Reviver or Grenadier. But those players don't earn or reward points. It would still be worthwhile to hosp them if they are providing support or to hire merc's to keep care of those not earning tickets.

 Cartel Perks are great and give cartels more to work towards with their rep.

 

As far as options, I'd say 1 and 2. Depending on your idea for perks rewarded for winning in 3 and length I think it would be fun to host a bi-weekly King of the Hill and a monthly territory bounty with high stakes. This pair with the roster sign up it gives cartels the option to opt out of a bounty should they need to recover from a previous battle or lack of attendance.

 Now would we have additional perks if a cartel holds a King of the Hill Territory for multiple events in a rowm?

DAS_LOBOTOMIST - 06/08/2026, 02:19:29

Hmm, if only select people within a cartel have to sign up to be eligible, and not everyone in the cartel signs up, what is to stop just the to hitters in a cartel from signing up? That would make participation from players who are not as strong kind of moot wouldn't it? Or is it a 40% threshold for the whole cartel to be enlisted?

There were some other suggestions that were sent my way around being able to opt in, I just worry only the strong players would opt in and it would be completely lopsided and uneventful for lower stat players.

I also like the mix up of weekly king of the hill and a once a month proper territory bounty, I was hoping for this to cause some map churn.

VAELINN - 06/08/2026, 12:43:02

A 40% threshold to participate, up to 40% of a cartel must be signed up for the entire cartel to participate up to 100% can sign up. I think that allows enough players and I think it should be based off the maximum number of players a cartel can have, not how many they have. This keeps people from making a a small war group if they have low members. If only 40% of a half full cartel joins then they can send just the best.

I personally like the idea of King of the Hill. Rather than calling it Territory Bounties, it would be much better to call it Territory Raids instead. It could be a weekly event.

For the features:

• Ticket steal — this should be an essential mechanic to keep other cartels in check.
• Fair fight gate — not a fan of this. I believe that Das's suggestion on having a 40% minimum threshold of your cartel registered would be the best case/idea.
• Bounty-focused cartel perks — I love having more cartel perks to encourage the cartel to grow instead of stagnating at a certain reputation level.

I have published a thread for what my plans would be to support the idea of King of the Hill accessible here. These suggestions is what I would like to see in the future if or when KOTH is implemented into the game.

Thank you very much for your great work, and I look forward to more of your work!

I'm personally strongly opposed to Option 2. Putting land on the line makes things unduly complicated given that cartels are limited on how many territories they can own, what if a cartel with all their territory slots full wins, what happens then? With option 3, does the winning cartel steal the perk from the defending cartel, or simply also gain the perk for a time? 

I really think that there should be some form of opt in, whether that's from a cartel precentage or based on the capo's decision. But I think forcing players to participate in a war-like event weekly is a bad idea. It should have some form or opt-in. Players can then choose to join cartels that fit their gameplay, rather than everyone being forced to fight. 

I think ticket stealing could be a good idea. Does the idea mean that each player in the cartel will have their own tickets or each cartel has tickets? For example, if player *** has attacked two people from the defending cartel then they have 2 tickets. If I attack *** three times I only steal 2 tickets because that's all they had. Or is it cartel based so I can  attack anyone from that cartel as long as the cartel has tickets? Personally I like the idea of individual tickets but I do think it's a good idea either way. Not a fan of the fair fight gate idea. 

I wouldn't mind having weekly KOTH fights as long as they are optional. Then a monthly bounty/raid, but I think much more notice should be given, minimum 24hrs, but really I would go with 72hrs. Although if I'm being honest, I would rather not have any bounty thing at all. The concept of everyone fighting against one cartel is just a bad idea imo. But optional cartel arena KOTH fights would be fine. It would be similar to torn's RWs but with more than two factions going at it, which I think could be quite fun.  

Ticket stealing has to be a mechanic, otherwise rigging the fight becomes very easy.

FF minimum is a good idea. Rewards cartels for keeping some noobs around too.

And option 1

Option 1 is my pick.  Close 2nd to option 2.  We definitely need a mechanic for stealing tickets to make it so it isn't a complete steamroll