Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Remain as it is

21 (21.6%)

Removed

30 (30.9%)

Changed (please, reply how and why)

44 (45.4%)

Other (please, reply)

2 (2.1%)

Total Members Voted: 96

[avv]

I support the ideas about encouring players to stay inside towns to get the reward from tc box.

Kilgore's idea of capturing town without timer is okay. It's basically like farming: you go to a place, spend time there risking your equipment and lives and receive a prize. The cycle of tc box resupplies would be something like 10-15 minutes and if it's Redding you get like 30 nuka, cigs, jet and 5000 caps. When the gang thinks it has enough supplies, it simply leaves the town like Kilgore said.

What's problematic here is that this gang would probably just shoot everyone and everything they don't know when they are "guarding" town. Instead of fending off, tc should attract people inside.
So when tc is on, the local merchants could for example start selling high tier mats and weapons that can be only bought with cash via dialogue. When random players buy them, the tc gang gets bonus cash in their locker.

[Nice_Boat]

-The town "economy" (TC loot box) depends on what is going on in there: TC loot will decrease if many NPCs and/or players die (factions might not go happy trigger in the towns they control, and they might keep their militia instead of killing them to get better NPCs) and it could ever drop to no loot at all if there is a terrible and long war in there - this includes NPCs and players dying during Town Control fights. I think it'd work against factions' concentration on a single town: if there is too much mess in Redding because all factions want it, there'll be no reward until those factions start fighting over some other town while waiting for the Redding "economy" to get better.

Oh great, so TC exists so that people can fight each other so let's make TC set up the way that if people fight each other it becomes totally pointless in economic terms. Way to go, you've just broken a game mechanism.

If a faction is able to keep a town for a long time and there aren't many deaths there, the TC loot will increase. Wouldn't be too much because as said they'll always need to have people connected and staying inside the map, so someone else will take the town eventually.

Oh, so it wouldn't even be too much? So yeah, why bother about the box at all... let's go back to the time when nobody cared about the TC loot and people focused on the loot from fighting instead. Oh wait, everyone admitted this shit was totally broken and needed to go.

-No "faction X is taking town Y" server message: the only people that will know about the attack would be the attackers themselves, and the defenders (members of the ruling faction will be in the town as already said, so they'll always know if they're being attacked) - other people won't know about the attack unless they are informed by one of the groups which participate in the fight.

Right, it's better to have them poor PvP monkeys constantly checking pipboy because streamlined interface is for pussies and no fun allowed, especially since:

-Pip Boy statistics: I used to think the Pip-Boy shouldn't tell you who's controlling each town, but players need to know it from some ingame feature somehow, so it shouldn't be changed. With statistics, if you want to meet members of certain town and you can see they are controlling town X, you'll be able to travel to town X and meet members of that faction.

So yeah, there you go, nothing really changes except... where the hell did the timer go? My telephone's alarm clock you say? Yeah, that's right, because streamlined interface is for pussies.

Christ, there should be a giant "think twice before you post" banner on every board accepting input from players because posting obviously broken stuff like that is just outrageous... Same with TC capture windows - they used to be in the game, they made the majority of the PvP crowd cringe and everyone more or less agreed at some point that they have to go. Shouldn't we just move on and forget this WM-camping-based, swarm-infested wait-an-hour-play-15-minutes nightmare?

[kttdestroyer]

It is the developers vision to decide if they want the game to be 95% pvp or 95% RP or 95% PVE. Best is a mix of those. But right now, mostly PVP players are supported (Thats why we have mostly pvp players on the server), to make some RP one has to deal with a lot of game system problems (or lack of avaliblity of interactive enviroment). Not saying that pvp cannot be together with rp, it can but rp needs more support.

There should be way of winning wars(Really...), supported by game mechanics, maybe have a terminal function "Declare War" then in battles, both factions will be given same amount of manpower (this could be somehow diffrent for those two factions dependible on how many players they got?) both factions will have to put in money into terminal (same amount for their own war efforts) then the factions fight eachother in the wasteland, every player of faction A killed by the faction B player (two factions that are at war) is one less Manpower point for the faction in this war, the faction that wins, wins all the pot (All the money that both sides put into war effort terminal). Activity would also be important, winning a town could give a small boost to manpower, if no town is taken during 24/7 it could mean some people deserting (and so loose of manpower). The hours of activity should be mostly rewarded by taking town at most server busy hours, and most less rewarding (or not rewarded at all) by taking cities when most people are sleeping.

Alliances should also be supported by terminal, and so implemented functions into game system. Like town take overs, wars and so on.

If a faction holds the town for 10 days, and losses it. Then the income from TC box should not instantly drop to zero. It should drop by some each hour (maybe 2 times more then when it grows).

Karma and faction reputation towards both other factions and npc factions is also important i think.

Town control is absolutely not good as it is. Militia should turn hostile toward anyone who attacks them and should remember him/her till all town militia is killed off.

I agree, acually i think this is obvious thing to do. Then this crazy militia would not be needed. Like i say, if nobody is online, then 20 average merc militias (400+ hp) can be killed by 4 enemies... (The door blocking part should also be fixed together with this in my opinion)

[Lordus]

This debate goes wrong. Nobody answers of basic question. What should TC be? Developers support of organized PvP or it should be background for roleplaying?

 If you want to support roleplay, you need measures, that brings AND HOLD players in the cities. If you want to support organized PvP, you need to announce to PvP gangs that somewhere will somebody for some reason fight.

 Current TC combines both and it is a wrong way with wrong features. Why? If you want to create roleplay (secure unguard city, invite players, give them roles, chat, organize pve or pvp from that location,...), you have to capture city. But when you capture city, you alarm every PvP chars in wasteland and they arrive and destroy your roleplay (=wrong way). Because of this, militia was implemented and overpowered, so in fact, small or even regular pvp gangs could not capture city (because of alarm), or even take it later, because of overpowered militia and one militia marker player.  (= wrong features). They can capture city only at night hours (if they find militia camping place and have time to get back), so WITHOUT ANY player vs. player interaction.. (=wrong way). Players who wants engage other players only, have to kill militia first, so if enemy players (in full strenght) stay in city, there is no chance to kill them. Even there is chance, you have to kill NPCs, if you want to play multiplayer game.. (=wrong way).

 So again same question.. should players be motivated to stay longer in cities or should they be motivated to come, fight and go away.

 IF the game concept would be so briliant and it will hold a lot of players in at least ONE city (unguarded), then ok, lets focus on concept where gang could hold cities and players will be still there. I will know, that after i log my char, i can pvp or whatever into certain city, meet there people, kill player raiders etc.

 BUT I DONT BELIEVE it, because of recent year experience. Players are not so excited from Fonline like years before. So this game needs stimulations even for PvP. How? Time windows for TC is one example. Or invent different. But idea is still same: give players possibility to join pvp fight of certain quality in certain time, where enemy and ally will be online and ready. DONT offer hours of waiting for pvp, searching in cities ... .

 Kilgores idea, to stay in city for some time, get reward and leave will cause,  that after every gang will have every stuff it needs (cca 2-3 months), they will not need to stay in city for economical reason. So they will stay in cities only as tagets. So the game concept will return to current nothing to do, everything is empty.

 The only existing concept that was succesfull and was not benefit from excitement of Fallout Online! was time windows concept. You knew, that for some time (6-11 gmt plus 1 hour) was some action.

 If there are a lot of canadian french players (argentinian, USA,..), write number of you and suggest time you are obviously online. Dont forget, that you can first PvP, then craft, PvE.. So i think we are able to find ideal window for capturing.

[Nice_Boat]

...

I actually really like your "declare war" suggestion. It would be like implementing a cool feature that gives more meaning to something that's already happening and probably wouldn't even be that hard to code. It would be more or less like gambling on the outcome of your TC battles and would give the winner some awesome boasting rights

[Nice_Boat]

The only existing concept that was succesfull and was not benefit from excitement of Fallout Online! was time windows concept. You knew, that for some time (6-11 gmt plus 1 hour) was some action.

Nice strawman argument there, but time windows have nothing to do with economic viability. The same "don't stay inside and be a target" logic applies to time window based TC; in fact, that's exactly what happened and why when those time windows were implemented we had a very nasty case of "fighting on the worldmap"; in the end the only reason people fought was prestige and that motivation is not going to disappear in unrestricted TC (as demonstrated by every session since the 2238 project was launched). Kilgore's idea at least gives you some incentive to actually stay inside to get anything valuable, so if the rewards amounted to caps, ammo and drugs it would be perfectly reasonable to get those resources even months after the session started from the TC box instead of crafting or farming simply because unlike weapons and armors they get depleted really fast even when you're on a long winning streak.

Edit:
Damn, didn't notice I was multiposting, sorry about that. I'd be eternally grateful if some mod could merge these two posts

[Balthasar]

After reading most of the posts within this topic i'll try to sum up some things, which have been said, including my own opinion (please forgive me if i missed someone/something important). I will try to not go into detail too much, what counts is the big picture of all ideas:

Militia

- the majority of players want to remove or at least make them less powerful (number, HP, equipment) for certain reasons (balancing, swarm reducing, abusing etc.)
- if militia will stay in one or the other way there could be a difference in number, power of them and the equipment they use according to the city itself (like suggested by Nexxos)
- also, if they stay, some major points have to be looked over again:

1. the possibillity to add mercs to the militia maybe should be removed
2. some solution for the "easy killing" problem (miltia trap)
3. more functions: control features for patrol routes/guarding a certain spot, friend or foe features ...
4. should militia increase their power (manpower, HP, equipment) when a gang holds the town for a certain time?

At the time they were implemented they seem to be a good idea and i still think, that there are some few good things about them. But all in all i agree to the point to (at least) lower their numbers and their power. Depending on how the system will work in the future they also could be removed completely.


TC Windows (suggested by several people)

- some point which was discussed a lot because there's a big controversy about it...
- some pros and cons about them (including new ideas of some people here):

Pro

• gangs know exactly when to take town, players can prepare for some certain time(s) per day when they are able to play the game
• between the windows there is a chance for "RP" and/or (in general) players who populate the city (assuming that the faction, who holds the city allows this)
• since there is(are) only a certain time(s) when a city can be taken, gangs can prepare for this well and the winner dont have to fear, that some gang is taking it back for a certain period

Contra

• some players wont be able to take part in TC anymore (work, timezones)
• the point above could lead to an imbalanced situation in gang fights
• that game system "dictates" gangs/players a certain time to take a town is seen as restrictment to their freedom by some people

- some guys proposed to have more then only one time a day a city is takeable (ranging from two up to five windows and more a day)

For me, TC windows were not a bad idea but to have them back feels a bit like to fall back into some older system instead of coming up with something new. Beside this i don't think that adding more windows a day will solve all problems (and adding more and more windows for TC a day makes also no sense ofc). The only thing which would make them a TC system of my choice would be the idea of populated cities between the windows but this isn't something you can count on and is strongly binded to the reaction of the gang, who holds a city.


New TC system ideas:

"Hold the Hill" (suggested by Kilgore)

- timer to take a town will be removed or at least lowered
- the town can't be taken anymore but instead it can be hold by a gang
- as long as there is a minimum amount of players of a certain gang who stays within the town (or a defined area of it) it is officially in their hands
- rewards will be given out every 10 to 15 minutes (for example)
- when the gang leaves the city or gets ambushed and killed by another gang (aka amount of players < min amount to hold it) it switches back to a neutral town, leaving the opportunity for other gangs to take it in their hands

I hope i summed up the main points here. Personally i think, that this idea is simply good for several reasons. First of all it's much more realistic, to have the force, which protects a city or a part of it, around at least, then to have some kind of auto-control over it. Also i think this system can be implemented more easily then some others. But the biggest potential i see in it is the fact, that it could be combined with some other ideas to "round" it up a bit:

(some ideas)

• - after the gang leaves the town there could be some "out time" before another gang can take it (not much though, maybe around 1 ingame hour or even less)
• - instead of having windows when a town can be taken (yes i know this system was suggested as no-windows-at-all-system there could be a small time window each day where it can't be taken (for trading/mining/whatever)
• - a town which has been held for some time period could become untakeable for some time (also not much, maybe 1 ingame day), rewards will be adjusted to only 1 time each 2 hours then but will raise a bit in amount

Dynamic windows and zones (suggested by KTTdestroyer)

I'm not sure if i got this right in all points, so i'll quote destroyer here:

To support this way of thinking, 15 minutes is way to short time to throw out a faction that sees the town as their home. However, 15 minutes is aswell more then enough time to stand and wait for enemy to show up... So it is a problem in both ways. I would suggest something i suggested long time ago, that the towns would be split into 3 capture zones each. The third is the final zone, The zone that can be only reached by capturing the first 2, it must be done by steps. After the first capture the zone remains open for capture for 30 minutes, so the faction defending has an oportunity to strike back. Also once the first timer started, it also sets the time zone for the next day with 3 hours forward and back. For exemple: If a zone is taken at 00:00 GMT+1 and held for this 30 minutes, then next day, any faction can make another attempt at time frame 21:00 to 3:00 am. If it is the defending faction that takes it between 00:00-00:59 the time zone stays the same, if it takes it between 21:00-23:59 then the time zone is moved back 1 hour (20:00-2:00), if after 1:00 am then moved forward one hour. so to fully take over a town you need 3 days and you have to win 3 battles straight victories. Together with this remove TC from 3 AM to 10 AM and you got dynamic TC time frames.

- towns will be separated into 3 capture zones, which all have to be taken (step by step) to be in charge of the whole town in the end
- each captured zone can be retaken by another gang within a certain time window after it was successfully taken in first place
- once a zone is taken it automatically sets a new time window (depending on the time it was taken at) for the next zone (? <-- not sure at this point)

I see some advantages in this idea but also some main problems. What i really like is the idea of dynamic windows but at the same time this may also be the worst part of it. As opposing gang you need to have to observe your enemies progress very well to know when to attack them while they take the next zone. This could be simplyfied by implementing some sort of visible timer in the pip boy (which shows the times a new strike is possible) but all in all it still sounds like it could be a bit too confusing. Also, 3 days to take a town may be a bit too harsh all in all and could lead to frustrating situations when a team almost won a town and then gets drawed back by the enemy just some minutes before it reaches this goal. Still some adjustments of this system could work:

- up to 3 zones have to be taken before a town is in charge of a gang ("up to" means adjustments to smaller towns; Den/Klamath remain at 1 zone, Gecko/Modoc have 2, Redding/BH 3)
- After one zone is taken the gang may choose if they continue on the next instantly (means they may gain some more loot at the end) or to lock the counter for a max time of 1 hour maybe. Within this time another gang can try to take the already taken zone, if they succeed both teams control 1 zone and the fight will continue on zone 2; the winner of that battle holds 2 zones all in all then. The team controlling no zones at all can try to regain the first zone after this fight but will have to defeat the enemy again in zone 2 after this.
- The point above again sounds too confusing i have to admit but actually this zone thing could work out well when there were some rules each team has to obey and some point system (for example 3 wins in whatever zone, in a row means automatically to rule the town and all TC will be locked for a certain time, in addition 2 losses in a row means, that the loser can't try again for some time)


TC and Raid - Split it up! (suggested by Cha)

- the system of TC will be split up in 2 possibilities to gain control over a town
- 1 long term "Annexation" and 1 short term "Raid"
- Annexation provides the status of the ownership a gang has over the town, no matter if there is some "Raid" during this time and would also provide better loot in the end. After a successful annexation there is a time period during which no other gang can annexate it.
- During annexation another gang (smaller team for example) can try to ambush and raid the city to gain some quick loot. This wont change the ownership of the gang who holds the city (it will fall back in their hands when the raid is over) and also won't provide only a small amount of loot (compared to the annexation).

In my opinion this isn't much of a change to the actual system (not meaning that small changes are bad ). Annexation mode would be (at least in cha's vision) some kind of stretch up of the normal TC, like it is now. It would be a bit harder to get the town but if you are successful you can lay back a bit and enjoy your fruits while others still can do little raids. And that's actually the part of this system which is kinda new here. Generally speaking you would have

--> Dat TC (and this system could still be changed as long as it is some type of long term control of a town -> for example see 3 zones idea)
and a more faster way to get some loot,
--> the Raid (also this could be another system --> for example see Hold the Hill )

Cha didn't go much into detail here but thats not that important. The main idea has some attraction because it provides some chance for a smaller team to gain some reward and to do some PvP/PvE. Though, this must be implemented very well to work i think and it probably wont work right in the first place (or at least there's much beta-beta-testing necessary which could lead to bigger frustration by all sides. At least i still like the big picture of it. Having some opportunity to do smaller raids instead of always spending hours on a big TC would be a nice thingy.

Some side idea as i would call it is this one:

"Lets meet in the desert, punks!" (suggested by KTTdestroyer)

- With the faction terminal there could come some feature along to arrange gang fights.
- Both sides put in some amount of caps and meet somewhere in the desert (aka special fight area like hinkley) to fight each other.
- The winner gets the caps and maybe some additional loot
- With a special TC terminal this could work for Town Control too. This time its not (or not only about caps) but its about the reward to hold a town.
- Each fight would be done by equal numbers of players (or some other ratio if chosen and accepted by both sides)

I know i generalized your idea a bit here destroyer (sorry for that , its about the big picture again; everyone can read the details on his own at your post). For me one of the most important things would be to see northern towns populated a bit more again. (I know , i know ..."Leave northern towns to apes!"..."99% of player are PvPler, live with it!" ..."ROAWWR!" and so on . I won't comment on this and it wouldn't lead to anything really for the actual discussion. So just skip this out for now and try to imagine a system were both could actually be possible.)

This system would have a chance to provide this, i think. Also there could be regular gang fights as well as there could be fights for TC (here some minimum gear and amount of players each site should be necessary). And finally the teams would be equal, the winner won, the loser lost...

Finally there are some

General suggestions (suggested by several people)

- fix minimum requirements of a team to take a town --> LSW, RL should count as High Tier too
- increasing rewards and/or TC timer when a gang holds a town for some time --> Awards in general, also see BlackKeys Post
- one gang one town rule
- bringing more life into a town --> faction holding a town could have the possibility to improve it a bit (instead of adding militia only as protection they could add certain traders or special chars too like Gunsmiths or Armorers, Brahmin dealers whatever)

[RavenousRat]

- one gang one town rule

Remove it, as it's impossible to know if "other gang" is not alt-gang of a gang that already controls a town, so one gang can hold more than 1 town by different names, so why not just leave ability for gang to control more than 1 town at a time.

[Balthasar]

Remove it, as it's impossible to know if "other gang" is not alt-gang of a gang that already controls a town, so one gang can hold more than 1 town by different names, so why not just leave ability for gang to control more than 1 town at a time.

Maybe there is some misunderstanding here. These "General Suggestion" were made by several people here. Those are not mine, i just didn't comment them any further.

[RavenousRat]

Maybe there is some misunderstanding here. These "General Suggestion" were made by several people here. Those are not mine, i just didn't comment them any further.

Well then you can comment it as it's useless as this suggested rule can be avoided. Or just forget about this and previous post... it's not important anyway.

[Black Key]

I agree with the economical concept, the faction reputation (great idea ! Should inpact on the difficulty to take control of the town - realistic) and to increase the responsability of the TC teams and blablabla...

But I just would like to speak about RP and security now because, when I read your posts, it seems that the main reasons to modify the TC system turn around that. Protect RP and players when they come in TC cities.

The first problem you have (the only ?) is not TC, it's the players !

When you come in "a town" and when you ask "Where are you from ?" you don't heard "from Sf" or "from New Reno"... And when you start to play your role... People don't play their char most of the time. It's not because of TC. It's not because of the devs. You see Players speaking to Players, not Chars speaking to Chars... Most of them don't even thought about their story. Even when you play a PVP char, you can have a story...

Other problem: some RP players have decided to play their roles in unguarded city... Why There is more guarded city than unguarded. If you want security, go in secured towns ! But don't say that you can't play your role in unguarded city because of TC. Say that you can't play your role in guarded city because there's nobody, because the NPCs don't punish the assholes who bored you all the time, exploit bugs, but please, don't blaim TC !

But you are right, this debate goes wrong. When I read that to play your role you have to control and stay in a city, yes, I think we have a problem... You don't need that. Even when my enemies control Redding I come in downtown with some unknown alts and I play my role... But I don't come with a char who is enemy. You have to assume what you have done and your choices... If you want to play your role in unguarded cities, it's because you want to have the militia and/or to be allowed to kill the people you don't like ! And most of the time, you are the first to blame your enemies when they do that... If so, ask the devs to remove the guards in protected cities. If not, just explain me why you prefer to RP in unguarded cities than into guarded cities...

The last problem I think is that some of you are looners, and have decided to survive alone in the Wasteland, and you would like to rule the world alone... You don't like gangs/teams... But it's like that, and it's realistic, 10 fighters will always win vs 1 player... So don't cry when you are killed alone in a TC city... Especially when you are enemy...

Anyway, if RP players absolutly want an unguarded town in which TC is not possible, AND without militia, so OK, let's do that with one of the 8 towns in which it's already not possible to TC and open a new "NEW RENO"... After this week and the Redding story, I just can't understand why you're asking that...

About the system in which each teams should put money in the terminal: do you remember the Vietnam and the Afghanistan ? Poor countries vs rich countries ? Who won ? The richs or the poors Unrealistic...

And speaking about the declarations of war and alliances we all know how it works... You fuck me, ok it's war... You fuck my friend, ok it's war... You can set what you want into the pipboy, if tomorow our allies fuck us, we will fight surely them before setting something in the pipboy and except if you disable the friendly fire, it will change absolutly nothing !

To finish, if we are waiting at the moment, for RP or PVP, it's certainly because a lot of players are waiting for the wipe... A lot don't even play and just come on mumble... Nobody wants to launch a new project which could be ended by a reset... So we just enjoy the fight... Sometimes... So, it's not because we all feel bored waiting for the wipe that everything should be burned or modified...

And definitively... A TC Windows to protect players while they are mining or playing their roles Fuck ! Do you remember this week in Redding Even if you suppress the TC windows there will be gangs and PKers in Redding... You will never protect you from fights with a TC Window...

[seb910]

When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds! This is your duty to think it up, players are not able to do it.
About RP project: gangs like TTTLA thinks that they could make a fortress which nobody could win and they gonna stay there forever. After 2 days of bluesuit swarm standing on downtown and talking about holy shit everyone will get bored but the fortress will be still impossible to take by other gang. If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?

[avv]

When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds

!

But the players here have underlined pretty good points already. Nerf militia, remove timer, remove increasing tc loot, add enemies of faction in KoS list for militia etc.

If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?

When done right, players can do in tc towns what they would normally do in ncr but without thieves and bombers. Some get bored of talking but that's because the towns lack activities. There's nothing profitable or interesting to do in the end. It's much more profitable to go hunt unity than stand in downtown but when someone is hunting unity, he's basically invisible to everyone else, almost like he was on worldmap. Players in unsafe towns is good for gameplay no matter what they are doing.

[Heckler Spray]

When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds! This is your duty to think it up, players are not able to do it.
About RP project: gangs like TTTLA thinks that they could make a fortress which nobody could win and they gonna stay there forever. After 2 days of bluesuit swarm standing on downtown and talking about holy shit everyone will get bored but the fortress will be still impossible to take by other gang. If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?

What an interesting statement....
Man, keeping Redding to make it a fortress was not the point of our project, it was to make the town as lively and entertaining as possible.   Cause FOnline is based on a famous C-RPG called Fallout.
Cause you probably don't know, but some players like to do other things than PvP in this game. I even know few guys who never play PvP at all.
Sorry for off-topic.
Kilgore's suggestion is a good basis, simple and effective.

[Lordus]

My opinion about Kilgores idea:

 One thing is how you set rules and options of TC system, and other thing is how gang (members) behaviour would be affected. So if i try imagine gang behaviour, gangs would often (temporary) occupied city locations because of income from city. Than they would move to another city or they would be attacked by hostile team.

 Problem i see is: if you want to eliminate timer, you will also eliminate beacon. With no beacon, there should exists two very different situations. First, the pvp activity would be lower then current, because no beacon would mean, that if you want pvp, you have to check every possible location for enemy. In your suggestion, Kilgore, you expect that players could hide somewhere (no TC zones). Ok, but this will also reduce the chance to meet the enemy.

 On other way, removing beacon could result into situation, that more and more players often visit city and do TC, because of no fear from instant enemy attack. So you can meet more players in cities and that means even more PvP. Maybe.

 Problem of this is economical importance of staying in city. If you can get generic stuff from this risky Town Controling, i doubt that many players will risk it. But, if you can give something extra, players will come.

 That leads into situation, if TControling team should get something unnecesary (hides you can hunt elsewhere, cigaretts, you can craft elsewhere,..), or he should harvest, craft this stuff (pvp drugs, tier max weapons, armors) only in those locations, nowhere else. (Like domination mode neverending  idea).

 You can admit, that if you can "craft(mine) and go", teams would not stay many time in cities. So why not this: Town controling gang would get equal amount of mined resources, caps from quests, harvested stuff that is mined, harvested, traded...  in city during their town control. This would force gangs TO NOT BEHAVE LIKE IDIOTS, but it will grant more interaction among players. I.e. controling gangs could give players share from their income, or they can create some event from anothr source of caps. Or controling gang will prevent other players to bring their own booze, but they can free buy it from city NPC trader,... .

 But this requires, that you shouldnt be able to get very same stuff more easily somewhere else.

 PvP element should be supported too. The caps, items... from TC should be spawned in box (again) after certain time, but that box can be locked by players, doors too, location could be mined(OMG, MINES!!!), trapped or baricade by sand boxes. Because the interest (from gangs) high number of players (and their activities) in city, mines would not be used in killing "innocent" players, but to protect city controling activities.