Gonna bore grind

I think we would benefit from alternatives to gaining rep. We have 3 primary sources the give out personal rep and Territory Bounties will provide Cartel Rep. 

Territories currently are very lackluster and offer very little to cartels and individuals alike. I think that Territories should be re-looked and consider small individual reputation rewards after a certain amount of time spent with a cartel, 6 months + to prevent Cartel hopping for boosts and greater rewards for the Cartel that holds the TT increasing those rewards per week held say by 50%. This would incentivise wars, long term commitment to your Cartel and so on.

I think another untapped potential for Rep gains are our expeditions. Adding rep gains to those would help all players move at a steady pace as the race to the final location is fairly common. It wouldn't be a lot. Say 10 rep per hour and maybe a university course to eventually double the rewards from expeditions. That way if I do a 17h expedition at most I would get is 340 per.

I don't think we should nerf the rep from attacks, but maybe adjust how it is calculated. I don't think level should hold as much weight as it does, I think it should be responsible for approximately 20% of the rep gained from a fight. The true effort would be attacking people with a 3xFFM. I Dwarf a lot of people in our small rep trading circle when it comes to stats so it makes sense for me to be a good target, but for me to still average 1200~1300 rep on people less than half of my battlestats because they are a higher level is kind of a problem. We so often tell new players to level hold so they don't get farmed, but tge reality is now we have older high BS players who hide behind that mechanic and reduce the number of viable rep targets available. Level holding should be discouraged as you don't get the additional health and hurt yourself and others in the long run.

I think if we did move forward with your suggestions, we should alter the change of rep calculations and make the level of another player a much smaller variable that way we could open up attacks to more players and have more fair fights. 

The current rep grind system has meant that people have completely and utterly trivialised production prestiges from something that should have taken years to weeks/months. That just isn't healthy for the game long term.

Vaelinn made it clear this wasn't Fait accompli but a discussion and thats healthy

Every game needs balance and finding that is probably the biggest thing each game faces. You can't take away from one type of player to appease another type. Making most people mostly happy is the best you can hope for. The idea will most likely be implemented in some shape or form it's a matter of finding the right shape or form.

I have ran out of cliche's

It's no secret that I'm a big fan of the rep farming playstyle and this would make it if not obsolete, a lot harder and more complicated to do.

There's currently an interesting alternative between either being a gym maximalist, or investing energy and/or jobs heavily into speedrunning productions. They both have their pros and cons and different kinds of players find it each on engaging in turn.

The two problems raised are that:

* it doesn't lead to a variety in targets - I don't see why this is an issue, especially in a game with such a small playerbase
* rep gains are too fast whether for cartels or for players, especially on church boost days, which the rest of the game ie. non-rep farmers can't keep up with it - that's true but they're also not sacrificing energy for it and gaining stats instead

I'm a good example, being very close to max prods right now. Most of this rep came from attacks, 17k to be precise, which if trained would have added about 4.25b stats. Rep farming has gotten more efficient since I started, so maybe for a smart new player it'd only be 10k attacks, or 2.5b stats never gained. Rep farming with a willing target also costs money, 10k hits would be around 20b.

In my book that plus the hundreds of extra active play hours needed for farming compared to gym is a fair tradeoff for unlocking prods early. 

The production update has been added with the new meta in mind and I think 15m rep for all maxed is a high enough number.

I would agree that when it comes to cartel rep, the progress does come too fast and too many cartels have maxed or are near maxing already. Adding a global multiplier on cartel perks and resetting them could be a solution, or maybe more aggressive scaling on the higher levels of them. There are also current suggestions on new cartel perks too which would further push the 'maximum' out.

This is a proposal, not a locked change. I want it to be a fair discussion, not a hidden nerf. This is probably one of a couple of suggestions of this type I will throw out.

This suggestino came about as discussion and concerns raised by some in the community, so I opted to surface it myself as one option of addressing the issue of no variety in attacks.

Right now a lot of combat reputation comes from doing the same thing on a loop: beat the same person, wait for a revive, beat them again. That works. It is also very safe. Hospital time and cash loss exist; the reputation from that loop almost never gets worse no matter how many times you hit the same name.

That has two effects I do not think are healthy long-term:

• Variety dies. The best day is often a short list you already know, not a hunt. Rinsing the same target day after day has become normal play, not a special case.
• The numbers run away. When the same body is worth full reputation all day — especially under Church or Deal bonuses — personal and cartel reputation climb much faster than the rest of the game can keep up with. Boosts make a good day better; they also make a farm day enormous.

I do not want to stop people fighting, and I do not want to delete anyone’s level. I want the first time you put someone down to matter more than the thirtieth, and I want a real scrap (they hit you back, or you are at war) to stay valuable. Switching targets should feel like an upgrade, not a chore.

The idea below is called Fresh Blood. Fair Fight, mugs, hospitalise, Church bonuses, Deals with Diablo, and the war bonus would all still work as they do now. This only scales the reputation you get from a win.

What you’d see

Before you spend the energy, the attack screen would show one number: this hit is worth X%. Same idea on the hospital / enemies list, so you can pick a fresh target on purpose.

A first win on someone you haven’t beaten in the last 24 hours is Fresh Blood (a small bonus). Repeat wins on the same person pay less. You can always still attack them — the floor is 10%, never zero.

Your wins on the same player (last 24 hours)

1st win (Fresh Blood)	115%
Wins 2–5	100%
Wins 6–10	75%
Wins 11–20	50%
Wins 21–30	25%
Win 31+	10%

The timer is a rolling 24 hours, not midnight. Five hits at 11:59pm and five more at 12:01am still count as ten. Old wins drop off one at a time as they age out.

Only your wins on that player count for this table. Losses, draws, and same-cartel hits do not. Cartel reputation still gets a quarter of whatever you actually earned.

When other people have already hit them

If other players have already beaten that person a lot in the same 24 hours, later arrivals also get paid less. Your own hits do not count against you here — this is to stop a line of other players or cartelmates each taking a “fresh” 100% on the same body.

0–12 wins by other people	100%
13–20	80%
21–30	55%
31+	35%

That extra cut stacks on top of your own table. One person farming alone only uses the first table. A pile-on uses both.

What does not get punished

• They hit you back. If they have a win on you in the last 6 hours, your repeat penalty against them is halved. A punching bag who never beats you cannot give you this.
• Territory wars. War wins do not fill either table, and still get the usual war bonus. Repeat hits during a war are the point of the war.
• Bounties. Tickets stay as they are. The reputation from those attacks would still follow the tables above.

Church and Deal bonuses still apply. They do not ignore the percentage — a huge Deal on a 10% hit is not a full payout.

What I want to hear

• Are 5 full-value hits too many or too few before it drops?
• Is Fresh Blood at +15% enough to make switching targets feel worth it?
• Should “other people have already hit them” start biting after 12 wins, sooner, or later?
• Is the 6-hour “they hit me back” window fair?
• Should war wins be fully exempt, or only when the fight is actually close?

Useful replies sound like: “I hit the same person X times a day, and this would change that like this.” “Nerf farmers” / “don’t nerf anything” is harder to design from.

VAELINN - 15/09/2026, 22:48:54

If we want to apply this, then the FFM should be a bit easier. The diversity isn't there mainly because of this FFM. I have a lot of good tragets but their FFM is so bad that I stick to only a few of them. 

Maybe make FFM high for the first attack on a person. That way we can encourage diversity in targets 

This change would especially punish new players since there aren't many good rep targets with low stats. A lot more people hold their level than their stats. It's already hard to find many targets as an old player, so new players would be stuck in the rep grind loop for a lot longer.

I think rather than making the level less important for the rep gain, I'd add an incentive to level up so players have a reason not to hold their level forever. For instance, the rep gain could depend on your own level in combination with your opponents level.

In addition, I also don't think that the rep gains from attacking are too good. Like Boonie said, they pay a huge price for it by not training stats and medouts also cost money. Jobs and regular rep grinding (without paying for medouts) can also get you far. I personally focus on Arson and my rep targets between 100 and 200 rep and I still gained over 6mil rep, which is comfortably within the top 20 on the rep leaderboard. And that is without great rep targets for my account age. Keep in mind though, everybody above me is trading rep. Still, it's very viable to get rep without rep trading.

i think in theory this is a nice idea, but especially if the territory wars will be exempt the rep farmers will just make sure they are next to eachother on the map and fake war to rep farm.

i think as it stands now all it will do is hurt the higher level/rep people by getting randomly hit even more and not being able to really play the game.

i understand a lot of people are not a fan of the "easy" rep farming, and i understand you want rep gained to feel more meaningful than just farming the same people over day after day but im not sure this is it, i wish i had more constructive feedback but i dont at this moment will give it more thought and come back if i do.

I think we would benefit from alternatives to gaining rep. We have 3 primary sources the give out personal rep and Territory Bounties will provide Cartel Rep. 

Territories currently are very lackluster and offer very little to cartels and individuals alike. I think that Territories should be re-looked and consider small individual reputation rewards after a certain amount of time spent with a cartel, 6 months + to prevent Cartel hopping for boosts and greater rewards for the Cartel that holds the TT increasing those rewards per week held say by 50%. This would incentivise wars, long term commitment to your Cartel and so on.

DAS_DADDY - 16/09/2026, 00:16:55

In my mind making the reward better from keeping a TT longer would just disincentivice wars even further. Heck, doing the opposite would incentivice wars more, having them become worse after not having been fought over for some time, meaning that you would have to go looking for new territory if you want a boost. Maybe even a boost for having been newly contested

What this proposal is ultimately trying to solve is about how we earn rep in the first place.I don't have all the right answers but I thought my 2 pennies might spark some more solution-orientated minds and prompt a wider discussion on this.

In my view, people should be rewarded for punching up more. If your build counters another player who has double your stats, you should be awarded with the appropriate amount of rep recognising how genuinely hard that might be for you, not just giving a 3x ffm range that's really wide. This could work a bit like in the original proposal, adding in an extra %age multiplier if this is the case. 

Boonie's point also resonates a lot with me. As one of the early adopters of the production first mentality, when i did my initial rep run to 640k (which took almost 3 months), my best targets were giving 400 rep/hit. Now with level inflation, the best targets are giving 1.4k/rep hit at 3x ffm. Clearly for Boonie, myself and others to get to being a target who provides that to others, we have invested a signficiant amount more E and time than any player now looking to rep farm. What would have taken me 3 months, now with the right target(s) and stats, can be speedrun in a fraction of the oriignal time invested - I have a friend whose account is 55 days old that has surpassed my 640k rep already - clearly there are other additional rep sources in the game now (like missions for eg), but the point still stands, with level inflation and time played, rep becomes easier to earn over time. It also makes the high level rep farmers very attractive targets - which most I'm sure would say they are happy to give back to the community, but I do wonder whether we are "too attractive". 

Personally I would like to see rep calculated by level and stats more clearly. Some of the 20b+ players, who have also commented in this thread, are now farming the rep farmer community for 1k/rep hit at 2-2.5x FFM. There is no way on this earth that any of the rep farming community could beat these players and it's not a challenge. We should still be "attractive" as a target, like some of my inactive targets are who give less rep, but they should be incentivised to fight people they are much closer to in stats, even if they are lower level.

I'd love to see some data on how frequent players in the top 50 battle stats actually fight one another, even more so in the top 10-20. This should be encouraged more - missions are a starting point, but often times because of how the combat system works, those looking to do the 'epic' or 'legendary' version of a fight can often only win if the target is fully naked, or they might not be able to win at all without the target being fully debuffed on coke.

Furthermore, we should also be encouraging genuine PvP rather than trading as a means to secure rep if you want to use your E attacking. One simple example - I've always found it interesting that hosping gives less rep than leaving. While the wall change to give 1.25x modifier for rep might be a catalyst for more PvP, I don't know if it is the right route to reward genuine PvP. We are yet to see this beyond Cartels rightly exploiting this amongst the farming community. What I'd like to see instead is cartels receiving a proportion of a racket's previous proceeds when winning a territory for example, and for those who participate, they receive bonus reputation based on the number of attacks they do.

All that being said, I do think the current meta of rep farming is a bit boring. This is a cartel crime game, but we get no rep through doing things that benefit our Cartel, it is a totally individual endeavour and that feels like it should not be the primary route to get rep.