Architect Archive

This is supposed to be a social game, private cities runs contrary to everything the game is trying to do. Yes, some folks may make a run at a hostile takeover of a city, but nothing is going to stop you from doing it to someone else. It is part of the game.

I hope they give Mayors a type of placeholder lot. From what it sounded like on the dev chat, it is going to be a free for all. Harvestors are still allowed in player cities. If we want to plan an actual layout of a city, we need some way to hold land in reserve.

I know if I build parks, shuttle ports and banks for my city I am going to build with my friends and then have some bigger group come by and decide they want a free city and take over, that is theift. I built those structures, paid for them in resources and time to build them. Those structures should in fact belong to me or whomever I sold them to for their city. It is bad enough to be griefed out of your land, but out of your structurestoo. It would be likeif a bunch of people moved in next to all your harvesters and magically gained ownership of them, that just isn't right.

I expect player cities to be incomplete, poorly thought out, inadequitely testedand completely expoitable when they come out. The history of this game teaches this.

For placeholders might i humbly suggest the decorative city items such as parks, fountains etc.

Or if you are desperate just plop downpersonal harvesters with spaces in between.. in a pattern which deters bigger harvesters.

I thinka city should gradualy grow out from a center... you shouldn't be able to immediately grab an area 500meters across with just a 10 person city. So no reservation of space.

You mean like the Republicans thougt it was theft when all of a sudden people voted for Bill Clintion when they had their George Bush Sr in office?

Or the Democrats thought it was theft when George Jr got into office?

You dontown a city,The peopledo, and if they decide tovote someone else in then that is theway it is.

Just like the real world.

Politics is never pretty, special interests will be a problem.

Unfortunately the game is not set-up with the ability to make everyone happy. The devs interest is adding as many strategic facets to the game. They are setting up cities and politicians to require strategy and planning. As the other guy said, they are maximizing risk and reward.

Yes it would be nice to have private cities and be able to set up a city grid exactly as you want and have a private part of the world. But the devs don't care about what is nice, just what will add an additional facet to gameplay.

Also, there aren't going to be enough buildable sites to allow each group to have their own private city. In the limited gamespace we have private cities are not feasible.

Neilla you got me thinking

( you should know better than to get me thinking )

This Galaxy is NOT the USA, it is a time of political strife, an overbearing empire, rebels, the trade federation lots of factions vying for power.

The player cities as presented is likely to make this game more like Star Wars than anything else so far.

I am not saying it is fair, Im saying it will be great, and terrible, it will upset peoples scheme of things. Everything you said is probably true, the question is...... is that a bad thing? Or is it actually what we need to happen to create interest, intrigue and outrage.

The good guys don’t always win ya know

Ive been reading this post for the better part of half an hour and have formulated my opinion.. so here goes..

Whats the point to this game? Thats right i said it.. thinkon it.. there are many who complain that this game has 1) to much money in it now, and that there are not enough money sinks.. 2) is not very challenging.. 3) has a serious lack of content 3 months in.. 4) boring after you make your 'perfect' character template..

Player cities might be the answer to these problems..

1) it will move the money into tax... wanna live in that massive city with amazing benifits? ure gunna pay a fortune.. and it is very possible for more money sinks to become available in pa cities.. if pa cities become private then tax could be set to 0.. and the urban planner could build the city for free (inside of a guild or something of this matter)..

2) wanna keep your city your own? well heres challenge enough.. a new level of PVP.. politics... ive learned so far in my career as an architect that politics is very important.. and public image and reputation is more important then money/skills.. heres my challenge to you.. forget money.. and become well known.. u dont compete against the game here.. u compete against everyone else.. best of luck

3) How are we going to fix lack of content without having alot of open areas for people to explore - by this i mean possible concepts people might like to try out and implament.. if we restrictt he game more and more.. then we lose this concept.. and we defy the title displayed proudly on the box to the game.. and all over the instruction manual.. "this is YOUR story".. so what if they come and take over your city? fight back.. thats your story.. the people who saved the city from the evil people.. etc.

4)Great, your godly, now compete in the field of the mind and not in the field of clicking to kill things. Wanna beat the invaders outa town? ure gunna need that blaster...

My overall point here is why keep a town private if it only restricts the game.. the fun you can have defending a town could be far more entertaining then keeping your guildtown safe from other guilds/oposing faction guilds.

<Dariuas> *[TMPST]Werzoth* Could you tell us a bit more about the 5 ranks a city can have? (requirements to go up/down (citizens, structures?), radius granted at each rank, rewards, etc.).
<GreenMarine> The five ranks scale from outpost to metropolis. A city earns rank as players join the city as citizens.
<GreenMarine> In order to be a citizen, you have to own a declared residence within the city.
<GreenMarine> Ranks enable city abilities. A rank 4 "city," for example, can have a shuttleport. An outpost (rank 1) can't.
<GreenMarine> The idea is that as you work to build your city, you are rewarded for the effort by unlocking new structures.
<GreenMarine> done.

<Dariuas> <Ichiir> What is the minimum distance a player city has to be from an existing static city?
<GreenMarine> The radius of the city can't overlap an existing static city. Ideally, you want to build your city away from no build regions so that you get the most out of your radius.
<GreenMarine> The max radius of two player placed cities cannot overlap.
<GreenMarine> So even though your city might start small, the max potential city size can't interfere with the max potential city size of another city.

<Dariuas> *Kluz[Mos_Tera]* Does the radius grow every time a citizen joins? and if not, could you explain how that works?
<GreenMarine> There are fixed points at which the rank and radius increases. There is an advancement window open to all players in the city that shows how much is needed to get a new rank.


While we don't know the actual radius values, let's label the different rank/radius values R1 through R5. We can't assume that the no-build zone near static cities represents R5. R5 may, in fact, be the distance where you get the message "Entering/Exiting Lag Eisley". Regardless, the above responses indicate that the centerpoint of a city (the town hall) should be some distance away from the no-build line of a static city. Why? Because you don't want to lose part of your city circle region to a no-build zone.

The second and third response seem to indicate that, while a city radius may change as the city grows, the restriction that the pre-determined "max potential city size" can't overlap is in-place as soon as a city is declared. This means that player cities are restricted to 2 times R5 away from one another.

Ok, to my point:

PAs who think they 'own' the city will need to remember that, given the way this isbeing developed,they do not. Another PA can move into an area and elect a mayor at any point. The idea of creating and mantaining an outpost still works, but only if you do so in an area where you don't have a lot of buildable land. You can maintain your dominance of an area by insuring that those loyal to you hold the majority of the buildable ground.

I think the cities should be an expansion of the guild concept. The city should be open to visits by anyone. And anyone should be able to pass through without problems. But to join the city... meaning build a residence as part of the city you should have to get an invite for either the mayor or the city council. And teh taxes collected from the residents should at least i part go to paying the Urban Planner for new construction, that benifits the entire community.

The leaders of the city should be up for election, just as the guild leader was supposed to be. But if they are elected by members that were invited into the guild the possibility of griefing is pretty remote. It would more likely be used if the leader leaves the game or goes insane.

Yes this game is a social game, in as much as it is difficult for a solo player to get very far in it. But I prefer to choose my friends and neighbors.

Sorry I disagree MCO, what Jimbobway said is exactly what I am looking forward to. If you want to pick your friends and neighbors, you don't get a city. If you want a city you have to play the politics game.

As I understand it the mayor does have the ability to take money from the city treasury to buy structures. However, the problem they are going to have is how to make it so that the mayor can't take all the money out of the treasury right before an election and take off with it. Gonna be a little tricky.

You can always choose your friends, but it is a free gamespace, so you can't choose your neighbors.

This thread is so ridiculous, it is funny.

Let's break down this completely irrational fear, and fear is what it is, and examine the plausibility here of these so-called "griefers":

A Group of players, say 50 of them,(either collectively or via a PA organized effort) form a city and elect a mayor and start putting up city structures, etc. Let's call these people the citizens of Happytown. For some reason, the citizens of Happytown anger someone else, possibly another guild, or barring that a large group of non-PA organized but nevertheless highly effecient griefers (at least 51 of them), who proceed to move their 51 houses into the city limits of Happytown. These evil griefers all declare their new houses as their primary residences, and proceed to elect a new mayor (Grief-Mayor). Then, they levy huge taxes on the existing citizens and go around /warning and /banning them.

Anyone else see the inherent problems with this idea?

1. The Griefing aspect of this would require a huge amount of organization, so much so that it would seriously take an entire PA composed only of griefers to pull it off.

2.Most PA's will want to form their own cities, rather than organizing raids to disenfrancise other players. Moving a large group of people out of your city and into another, will require those individuals to declare their primary residence in the new city, which will harm the griefer PA's city and make it unable to have that shuttle port.

3. Doing this would require a huge amount of organization, money and work. Workis not something griefers like to do, they like something they can do over and over again, in order to really piss people off quickly. Waiting a week to actually try and grief someone doesn't strike me as it is going to be a common griefer tactic.

4. Imposing high taxes would effect the griefers as well. Supposedly they could possibly get the mayor to reimburse them, but we don't know that. Perhaps city taxes will go into a locked fund for city maintenence, much like the harvestor maint fees, etc. I doubt the mayor will be able to simply withdraw the funds and distribute them at his whim.

5. You cannot /ban /warn players who are citizens of the city. So doing this would not enable the theoretical group of griefers to do ANYTHING to existing residents.

So that's it. This will never happen. Likewise, people who live near other player cities but aren't actually members of the overarching PA running it shouldn't worry either. If you don't want to be part of the city, don't declare the house as a primary residence. But then worry about being /banned /warned at your peril.

And in the future, please think before you post,

-I AM WARGHUL