Major problem of mercs is their artilery (spawn instakill ability), because one proxy merc leader could eliminate 4 or 5 real players, i will repear it again: 1 click of real player could eliminate 4 or 5 also real players. This has nothing to do with fair play and with game balance or with challenging genius tactic of enemy. Nobody use mercs in the middle of map, it is only the artilery or stopper at spawn points. Using mercs in the middle of cities needs full atention and they are there less powerfull.
I dont believe that any aproach based on economy changes would affect imba of mercs. If you set harder condition to get those mercs (bigger value), only most powerfull gang would use them. Most powerfull in this game means most numerous gang. If you set conditions too low, it is the spam of supermutants like now.
Simple equations:
less powerfull gang = less mercs X more powerfull gang = more mercs
less cheating gang (no proxy, dual logs) = less benefit from mercs X more cheating gang = bigger benefit
Question n.1
Do mercs raising the gamebalance of PvP or they dont?
Question n.2
Would the PvP be less entertaining without mercs or not?
Q. n.3
Is there any real ingame possibility to eliminate mercs proxy abusing or not?
Militia problem.
Dont you think, that existence of militia at north cities is the reason why they are so abandon? First few eras, there were PKs everywere, mostly in northern cities, but there was also always normal players.
Most players identify militia like potential problem, because there is always chance that one marking hit would kill you, even if you have best stuff and marker has only bb gun. It does not matter, who actualy controls the city, every player got own bad experience with militia (marking players) and this is fact that they generaly dont visit northern cities, because players "learn" that those places are death zones.
The fact, that one gang or alliance or roleplayproject could use this ability to roleplay is only theoretical. Try to review this ability. Does this sometimes work, and if yes, what were conditions (how many players were on server, which era, how many players were online,..). I know that this could sound absurd, but too restrictive policy, like safe zones, militia, could result in opposite effect that they were design for. PKs are abusing the rules in safe cities, militia dont helps to guard roleplay city, but it is constant reason to attack this city. Do you remember first Modoc militia? This project stoped after implementing of militia.
On other way, i admit that changes back would not always return the same playability. I.e. Namecolourizing. There was a massive apeal against this, in hope that this would restore old small gangs PvP actions, but it fails, like i presumed, because alliances evolved into something more than basic colour taging, something like online game virtual friendship and this can not be eliminated by erasing of NC.
The same fact could be with eliminating of militia at northern cities. Players learned to not to visit those places, so why they will start to visiting that places again.. only because there is not exist any instakill probability?
