Anti-Trust Laws

[Illusion™]

Monopoly = Big business that controls the market for their product.
Trust = Monopoly
United States = Most powerful nation in the world :3

In the year 1890, the first anti-trust law was enacted in the United States which banned monopolies from existing in the United States. This allowed smaller businesses to build up bigger and ultimately bring more money to the American economy because now the markets weren't controlled by one business who raised prices because their product was the only product available. Small businesses boomed and the quality of products produced increased dramatically, ultimately increasing the quality of living and ensuring all citizens of the US are happy.
Now, I know this is not a suggestions post, but I want a discussion about something like this being enacted on Perp, where organizations would take the place of monopolies. As it currently stands, there is one org, TBD, that has literally taken over the entire server. Everyday for the past few days, the PLPD has had to shut down the entire city several times a day because this org is constantly shooting cops and raiding people. They truly are a monopoly. By enacting rules which prohibits one organization from dominating the entire server, players will ultimately come back because they know they have a fighting chance. If no one noticed, when Olsen died, the player count dramatically increased, and now that this new org is here and taking over fast, the player count is slowly dropping. This is due to the organization literally not allowing anyone to make money. They raid anyone and everyone and they bring their A game every single time. What I am proposing is a rule that bans these organizations so the players can actually enjoy their time on perpheads.
Now, before you rate this post dumb or disagree, I really want you to think about the statistics and study them closely. Think this post through logically and really take the time to realize what I am actually saying here. If you took the time to read this entire post and thoroughly understand it and still disagree or think it is dumb, feel free, the rating system is here, however I ask that you reply with why you rated my post the way you did. I really want a discussion on this because I know this has been an issue for not only me, but for many many players.
Thank you for reading this post, and please take the time to read it in its entirety and really take in what I am trying to convey here.

 

[Bean Can]

This is perpheads not the American Industrial Revolution.

There's not any monopolies in perpheads and it wouldn't even be possible to have one. Also if this implies to organization actually care about listening to police shutting down their organization(they are growing drugs and killing cops they don't care about the law).

 

[Stomper]

And when stomper played roleplay increased

 

[Aquaa]

I don’t want to come off as rude but I’m really just sick and tired of seeing kids finding it unfair how there is one big org dominating everything, and I don’t even play perp anymore! Get some fucking guns together and fight back like an American because that’s what you want to compare perp to.

 

[Husky]

TBD, that has literally taken over the entire server.

@Dom_ @ShadowJoey

Ffs its only been a week. @John Daymon we revived perp

 

[Garret_Pp]

FOR one

For two anti trust laws are idiotic. They seem okay on the surface but the thing about the free market is that is fixes itself. Who cares if a company is a monopoly? As long as they serve the customers well! If not somebody else can easily take their place. In fact even only REAL monopoly is government, because if it fucks up nobody else can come in and do a better job... you’re stuck with it.

This applies to PERP orgs. The only real monopoly “org” is the PD and you’re stuck with that. If you don’t like the PD or what they do or how they do it then you’re shit out of luck because it’s here to stay. That’s governments. Orgs are free market enterprise. They don’t just serve themselves but they serve their members big and small and buy in large the people of the city in things like ammo sales, gun sales, and general gameplay dynamics. If the org becomes a problem people complain for a while but it eventually works ITSELF out. Just like what happened with Olsen Banden or so many orgs before it. The answer isn’t more regulation, it’s less. The server works itself out. Stop trying to push market forces or you’ll screw up the flow of the free market.

 

[Jay]

No matter what in perp there is always gonna be that one powerful org. There isnt much you can do about it other than trying to fight back and stop bieng a little whiney bitch about losing weapons, not pointing any fingers.

 

[Shokron]

i dont think its a good idea , there always was a powerfull org if its not TBD then it was olsen if not olsen then pp and so on, i dont think making a "law" to remove it will be good, and i dont think it needs to be removed as it creates competition

 

[Deleted member 6228]

How about make a decent org and fight back, stop complaining and match your words with actions

 

[Cody Garrett]

@Dom_ @ShadowJoey

Ffs its only been a week. @John Daymon we revived perp

Good joke. I came back and perp became active.

 

[joey]

In all honesty, when Olsen died, the player count actually dramatically dropped. When we started, the player count increased because we are regularly there to cause huge situations. We’re just that org that the cops need to plan to defeat, it’s happened a few times, it will keep happening. Banning or suppressing powerful laws seems a bit like “you’re better than us so go die!!!!” I severely disagree with this idea.

 

[blobvis 2.0]

It aint a monopoly as there are multiple org, that one has the overhand, well that happens.

 

[rat]

The only anti trust laws we need are between the playerbase and the staff team

 

[John Daymon]

Absolutely no need to rate this post dumb as it isn't even a suggestion as a lot of people think it is; it's a damn server discussion.

While you can argue that it is unfair that an organisation has loads of members because it goes against you; That really isnt how it is, any organisation with a lot of members just means that there is gonna be people who wanna shut them down, gather them and make your own organisation and take them down that way; That's literally how Belinsky Family died, @Loejseren and @Feng got pissed off at the actual cancer that was going on in the Belinsky Family and decided to form a small organisation to simply just shut them down and that is literally what happened.

There is always going to be a big organisation that runs the most parts of the city, there can't be any between there because some are just going to be more and better that way, simple.

In all honesty, when Olsen died, the player count actually dramatically dropped. When we started, the player count increased because we are regularly there to cause huge situations. We’re just that org that the cops need to plan to defeat, it’s happened a few times, it will keep happening. Banning or suppressing powerful laws seems a bit like “you’re better than us so go die!!!!” I severely disagree with this idea.

No? TBD was made after Olsen died and the playercount didn't drop at all, as soon as people heard this they started playing again as they knew that some of the players that left Olsen would either start their own organisation or just join any other organisation that is open. I disagree with the fact that you're saying that you supress the organisation with a law like this, rather just make it harder for them which could be seem as a fair gameplay in a lot of eyes but it still isn't something that is necessary.

Yes you have to plan something out when some of the members run up to the PD and kill cops when they're raiding slums, can't do shit about that to be fair.

@Dom_ @ShadowJoey

Ffs its only been a week. @John Daymon we revived perp

I revived perp.

 

[Deleted member 6228]

Absolutely no need to rate this post dumb as it isn't even a suggestion as a lot of people think it is; it's a damn server discussion.

While you can argue that it is unfair that an organisation has loads of members because it goes against you; That really isnt how it is, any organisation with a lot of members just means that there is gonna be people who wanna shut them down, gather them and make your own organisation and take them down that way; That's literally how Belinsky Family died, @Loejseren and @Feng got pissed off at the actual cancer that was going on in the Belinsky Family and decided to form a small organisation to simply just shut them down and that is literally what happened.

There is always going to be a big organisation that runs the most parts of the city, there can't be any between there because some are just going to be more and better that way, simple.



No? TBD was made after Olsen died and the playercount didn't drop at all, as soon as people heard this they started playing again as they knew that some of the players that left Olsen would either start their own organisation or just join any other organisation that is open. I disagree with the fact that you're saying that you supress the organisation with a law like this, rather just make it harder for them which could be seem as a fair gameplay in a lot of eyes but it still isn't something that is necessary.

Yes you have to plan something out when some of the members run up to the PD and kill cops when they're raiding slums, can't do shit about that to be fair.


I revived perp.

People complain but won't pick up a gun and fight

 

[Imperial Watch]

If no one noticed, when Olsen died

In all honesty, when Olsen died

TBD was made after Olsen died

WE DIDN'T DIE OK REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

But in all seriousness, how would this even be regulated? Number of players in org?? collective capital????????
And don't say staff discretion lmao i would shit myself laughing even more at this suggestion tbh
If you're so dissatisfied, git gud, get some money, level up your marksmanship and gather lots of members and gats

 

[Husky]

Actually player count died when Olsen started to leave, just because myself, nade and martino still played doesn't mean Olsen are still active. If you looked at statistics properly you would've seen the day after I created the org it was the first time it hit 75 in over a month.

P.s I revived perp @John Daymon

 

[TinySlayer]

Banning a monopoly is only ever going to start arguments. It shouldn't be done through rules.

If you're going to do anything like this, you need to code something into the game. The obvious thing to consider is membership limits for organisations. This may stop organisations becoming too dominant, but still allow organisations to work together. This may create "sister" organisations and end up back at the same place, however there are obvious disadvantages of having to communicate with your allied organisation.

There are obvious downsides to this method of implementation, but it sure beats trying to ban a certain organisation.

Another concept would be to give more benefits to smaller organisations. Perhaps this could be done through the "org bank" concept, where smaller organisations get a higher reward per person than larger ones. This might encourage people to split from larger organisations.

I'm not saying we should do any of these, I'm just suggesting better alternatives.

TL;DR: Change the mechanics, not the rules.

 

[Dom_]

The org hasn't even got a name yet lmao.

 

[Alliat]

I agree that the police should be the dominant force in the city. If orgs keep beating the PD officers should recieve better training in stead of banning the org. Whitch is already happening if you look at the TFU.