Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: If /citywarn did this....
dont know if this has been said...to many pages not enough time
why not just use /citywarn ..
to stop peaple from using any terminals, vender, cloning shuttle etc in the city
to not allow them to use the cantinna to heal..the med centre to heal...
but dont stop them from being able to enter the citys public buildings like now...so that jedi just cant go to these citys and hide.
this way they can still go to the city if they wish just cnt use any of the ammenities.
If/when the option for citys to fight each other gets put in ...then /citywarn can also be used to allow these peaple from opposing citys to fight...with the militia being given bonuss to hit/damage as was intended
Only allowing citys to fight each other if both citys agree ...like a duel option.
sorry just random thoughts
Dampear wrote:
EEMAN wrote:
Dampear wrote:
Th-I guess Im missing something here. How is keeping someone from using a citiy's shuttle greifing? Or keep them from enjoying the content of a nearby POI? Cant they just shuttle to another city and take a speeder? When I first started playing the game there were no mounts and no cities and we had to walk everywhere. Try exploring POIs then. If its an issue of how close the city is to the POI, why wasn't it written into the code to begin with makeing it so cities couldn't be built within a certain distance of the POIs?
Also, please explain again how exactly BHs being banned from a city is griefing the system? If a Jedi lives in a city, don't they have the right to protect themselves? Making it so the BH would have to shuttle into another near-by city to hunt them be a way to protect yourself? Wouldn't 5 BHs getting the same mission against a low level padawan and hunting said low level padawan together be more a form a griefing then this (since there is no way a low level padawan [or any profession for that matter] could properly defend themsleves from 5 BHs)?
Thunderheart wrote:
Dosi wrote:
What about the jedi who are banning bounty hunters just to keep them from being able to hunt htem in that city?
This is a great example of a way to "grief the system".
Message Edited by Dampear on 06-03-2005 01:18 PM
Message Edited by Dampear on 06-03-2005 01:19 PM
Using a system in a manner "other than what is intended" its the absolute technical definition of exploiting and griefing. Banning a BH because he is a BH is not the intended purpose of cityban and citywarn. this is EXACTLY why citywarn was removed. Go ahead and misuse cityban, see if they dont remove that too. Its intended purpose is for those that come in to harass others, by screaming, yelling, being offensive, threatening r4pe (yes sadly some players have threatened to drive to others towns and r4pe them when they discovered they were played by real women, and i dont mean in game). But aparently those that think like you couldnt use discretion. You choose to use it flagrantly and you lost citywarn. Keep it up and I wont be surprised when cityban goes away too.
You mean cityban and citywarn weren't ment to discourage certain people from comming into your city? WOW I guess I definitly missed the boat on that one then. (maybe) Um where exactly was it posted by a dev what the initial intentons of city warn and cityban were? Also, if what you said is true, then the dev team must be a lot dumber then I thought. How would any rational person think that the only people that would get warned and banned would be those types of greifers? They put something into the game that any and all players have access to use against any and all other players and you think that the players would only use it on a very small protion of the community? Comeon, seriously. I know the devs are not that dumb. Unless someone can show me an actual post from a real dev that states that fact, I think maybe it is you that missed the boat on that one. If Im proven wrong I will apologize. Until then...
write your appology then. Why do you think it got removed in the first place? because it was cool thing to do to just take it away? You must be running an ebay account because anyone who has played the game since 9-26-2003 would KNOW that time and time again the devs left something in the game and later removed it because it was used to greif others. Do you even REMEMBER when furniture in houses was collidable? Do you remmeber when THAT got changed? Do you remember WHY that changed? How about adding the /eject command, do you remember them including THAT? And WHY? How about making you clone at the nearest NPC city because people would /cityban then /citywarn so they could kill you over and over in the same spot thereby decaying every item in your inventory? Yea the devs would never overlook something like that. TH even said in this very thread that its never comming back bacause players use it to greif eachother. Cityban and Citywarn were intended to be used sparingly. Not every 20 minutes. Here is the link where they removed it Clicky
Message Edited by EEMAN on 06-03-2005 04:59 PM
AudioOrgana wrote:
IF YOU BUILT YOUR CITY NEAR A POI, and the borders of your city are closer than 500m (or some other figure) to the POI - TOUGH COOKIES. You are NOT ALLOWED to have a milita and use /citywarn. Your city is gimped and can't participate - that's the price for building your city so close to a landmark.
This is what I suggested a page or two ago.
No CSR involvement, no city relocation, no nothing. The server runs a simple DB query on all cities at boot. If they are at, or cross a POI no-build zone, they lose the /citywarn function.
Or, have the /citywarn function call the check when it's used. End of issue.
FrankLee wrote:
AudioOrgana wrote:
IF YOU BUILT YOUR CITY NEAR A POI, and the borders of your city are closer than 500m (or some other figure) to the POI - TOUGH COOKIES. You are NOT ALLOWED to have a milita and use /citywarn. Your city is gimped and can't participate - that's the price for building your city so close to a landmark.
This is what I suggested a page or two ago.
No CSR involvement, no city relocation, no nothing. The server runs a simple DB query on all cities at boot. If they are at, or cross a POI no-build zone, they lose the /citywarn function.
Or, have the /citywarn function call the check when it's used. End of issue.
see this clicky for your answer. It doesnt solve the problem of citywarn being used to kill bystanders.
EEMAN wrote:
FrankLee wrote:
AudioOrgana wrote:
IF YOU BUILT YOUR CITY NEAR A POI, and the borders of your city are closer than 500m (or some other figure) to the POI - TOUGH COOKIES. You are NOT ALLOWED to have a milita and use /citywarn. Your city is gimped and can't participate - that's the price for building your city so close to a landmark.
This is what I suggested a page or two ago.
No CSR involvement, no city relocation, no nothing. The server runs a simple DB query on all cities at boot. If they are at, or cross a POI no-build zone, they lose the /citywarn function.
Or, have the /citywarn function call the check when it's used. End of issue.
see this clicky for your answer. It doesnt solve the problem of citywarn being used to kill bystanders.
No new player starts in a Player City.
No player is warped to a Player City.
No player is forced to clone in a Player City.
All existence in a Player City is optional. All travel to and from a Player city is STRICTLY VOLUNTARY. If you go there, you might be attacked.
There are no 'bystanders'. If you don't want to subject yourself to the possibility of attack - righteous or otherwise - from the militia, don't go to a Player City. All travel is done at own risk, just like the rest of the flaming Galaxy.
yea...that post was from DECEMBER 2003 and it also clearly states that the removal of /citywarn was temporary and would be implemented because it was an important feature.
when is that coming? publish 4239?
the playerbase obviously wants answers on this issue. we've waited for a year and a half. we're getting pissed off.
Greeleaf wrote:yea...that post was from DECEMBER 2003 and it also clearly states that the removal of /citywarn was temporary and would be implemented because it was an important feature.
when is that coming? publish 4239?
the playerbase obviously wants answers on this issue. we've waited for a year and a half. we're getting pissed off.
"This is a great feature and we will put it back in the game, but thats a future item. It is going to require development time needed to re-design and re-implement /citywarn and we don't have that time right now. " --Thunderheart
give me a freakin break. You're getting pissed off? 90% of this game isnt working right; creatures are still spawning as level 192; crafters no longer can walk outside without having to group w/ someone who is level 80, the Y-8 mining ship was DOA; the new parts that require asteroid resources were DOA for 1 technical reason and 1 design issue; aparently jedi padawan have to rest between every other kill for 5min when hunting things that actually give them xp; Smuggler fix from original launch delayed even longer after 2 years (even before this was removed) of complete admition it was never developed but just hodged podged togeather; Corvette missions no longer work; new crash to desktop bugs; new system lockup bugs, half the new quests from ROTW are bugged and cant be completed and "you're getting pissed off" over citywarn?!?!?! Dude that doesnt even deserve a reply. Take a back seat on this one, noone is going to back you that this is somehow more important than fixing some of these more pressing ones.
FrankLee wrote:
EEMAN wrote:
FrankLee wrote:
AudioOrgana wrote:
IF YOU BUILT YOUR CITY NEAR A POI, and the borders of your city are closer than 500m (or some other figure) to the POI - TOUGH COOKIES. You are NOT ALLOWED to have a milita and use /citywarn. Your city is gimped and can't participate - that's the price for building your city so close to a landmark.
This is what I suggested a page or two ago.
No CSR involvement, no city relocation, no nothing. The server runs a simple DB query on all cities at boot. If they are at, or cross a POI no-build zone, they lose the /citywarn function.
Or, have the /citywarn function call the check when it's used. End of issue.
see this clicky for your answer. It doesnt solve the problem of citywarn being used to kill bystanders.
No new player starts in a Player City.
No player is warped to a Player City.
No player is forced to clone in a Player City.
All existence in a Player City is optional. All travel to and from a Player city is STRICTLY VOLUNTARY. If you go there, you might be attacked.
There are no 'bystanders'. If you don't want to subject yourself to the possibility of attack - righteous or otherwise - from the militia, don't go to a Player City. All travel is done at own risk, just like the rest of the flaming Galaxy.
youre arguing just to be obstinant now. New players werent spawning in the cities back then either. The dev team defined it as grief play, they removed it. End of story. Its gone, has been for a year and a half now. They decided that /citywarn'ing a complete stranger when you had no conflict with him was abuse of power. As a result they took that power away. At one point they thought they might be able to come up with a fix but in the end could not think of a single way it couldnt be abused. Back then some blue dot zoned or walked into town and was being killed instantly. The devs came down, were cloaked, watched this BS behavior for themselves. They banned 3 people on my server for doing it one night. Its an abuse of power and you can argue till the cows come home about how its their choice to go there or not but at the end of the day it already WAS removed. It already WAS put before judgement and a ruling was made that it in fact WAS grief play. To argue that its not grief play with other players once precidence has been set is like argueing Roe v. Wade as if the Supreme Court never passed final ruling. Until the devs decide to rehear the case its griefing.
What do you do for the important ones?
I agree, to a point. There are serious issues. There are balance nightmares. The Y8 is a POS. TH posted here however, so at one point or another, he was interested. If/when it comes down to a 'this or that' kind of priority shuffle, I'm with you. Since we don't know a damned thing about Dev priority though, I'd have to say... Have you seen the nice new multiperson vehicles? Realize that the fat AB1 just resoundingly trumped your other issues.
FrankLee wrote:
You have posted 15 times in this 'back seat' issue.
What do you do for the important ones?
I agree, to a point. There are serious issues. There are balance nightmares. The Y8 is a POS. TH posted here however, so at one point or another, he was interested. If/when it comes down to a 'this or that' kind of priority shuffle, I'm with you. Since we don't know a damned thing about Dev priority though, I'd have to say... Have you seen the nice new multiperson vehicles? Realize that the fat AB1 just resoundingly trumped your other issues.
oh i am well aware of the new multiplayer vehicles and the design flaw that is fundemantal with them too. Unfortunately that will never get fixed
. Its obvious new coders arent even looking through design concepts of existing systems. Vehicles speed and terrain negotiation are inversely proportional. The faster it is on flat ground the worse it is on slopes. This has been as fundemental of a design concept as gravity. Now enters the new vehicles. They made them slow as the X-34 (ok we can live with that they are landspeeders) but instead of giving them the X-34 terrain negotiation they gave them a terrain worse than the swoop. I bugged it but theres way more pressing stuff in my opinion than fixing some bikes.Message Edited by EEMAN on 06-03-2005 09:15 PM
Message Edited by Greeleaf on 06-04-2005 01:36 AM
Heya Peeps,
T'a Anifi here from Flurry, City of New Freeport, Naboo, Guild of Feds. Anyone on Flurry should know that New Freeport is a free market city. As such we have implemented a NO PVP rule within our city limits. This is to include bounty hunters, faction fighting, and anything other than friendly duels. The reason for this is so people can shop within our city limits without fear of being ganked by opposite faction, bounty hunters, opposing jedi, or whatever. We even go so far as to clear any agro from the city limits on the rare occasions when they spawn in our little town. It would be a welcome tool being able to citywarn folks that flat refuse to follow the rules of our town. Not having this ability is akin to having a police force armed with bananas. Someone comes into our town, with the intent of causing either a citizen or a patron of our shops harm, and we can only stand helplessly by while they thumb their noses at us, our rules, and anything else they've a mind to. We have signs by the shuttleport warning of our NO PVP policy, and folks read it, know it doesn't have the ability to harm them in any way, or deter them from actions we consider unacceptable, laugh in our faces, and go on to attack folks within our city limits. This should never happen. Allowing the few grieftards that you will find in any game free reign to grief folks is not an acceptable solution. Cityban is not a useful tool, all someone has to do when citybanned is pull out their bike and move along, sure they can't shuttle back into town later, but they've already done the damage they came to do. What's the point of closing the barn door after all the animals have left? In addition the inability to add someone to the cityban list if they are not physically present is a little inconvenient at best, since folks can attack someone shuttle loading and be gone before militia can get there, they can pretty much avoid this penalty with a little planning as well. I am definitely for re-implementing the citywarn as it was originally. Only a city with a well organized militia will be capable of using it anyway, which is probably rare, and it is impossible to block any content with a city, given a little intelligent coding of no build zones. I would also like to be able to cityban people by name, so someone who is quick on the draw in getting out of town after doing their dastardly deed cannot avoid the just punnishment of not being able to return as easily as they came the first time. I can tell you for sure, I would refuse to inhabit anyplace in real life where I had a total inablity to defend myself or my friends, and woe to the poor idiot that comes into MY neighborhood with ill intent in mind and lets me catch wind of it. 12 guage enema comes to mind 
Point is.....there are always going to be bungholes that try to cause trouble, you need tools to be able to at least make it inconvenient enough that they won't be making a habit of it.
T'a Anifi
Instead of reinstituting citywarn or redrafting cityban, institute /citylockdown.
How it works: City lockdown would kind of be like Housing entrance fees. Mayor goes to the city terminal and puts the city in lockdown. Anyone who is not a citizen would be hit with a pop-up window stating that they have 2 minutes to leave the city or they will be hit with a fine, or they can go ahead and pay the fine up front. This can be done with a simple yes or no. Make this a refundable fee when they leave the city. Exclude the fee from cities that are sitting on top of POI's(no one should have to pay for content).
This is where citywarn or cityban would come in.
/citywarn: 1st offense would be a warning stating that you are crossing the line and to cool it.
2nd offense would be a loss of half of the entrance fee
3rd offense would be a total loss of your entrance fee
/cityban: Straight loss of entrance fee to the city. Also, anytime the player comes back to the city they would immediately get the message that they have 2 minutes to exit the city or they will be charged the fee again, and for every X minute(s) they remain in the city more credits will be deducted.
/citypardon: Would relieve the imposing charges for the current visit imposed by cityban. Basically if someone arranged for a /citypardon with the mayor(only) prior to the next visit any money taken during that visit would be returned to them after they leave the city.
Add 2 more positions: These would be appointed by the current mayor and would require at least something in the politician skill trees. So kind of a cabinet of sorts that would have the same abilities as the mayor in terms of warning, banning and pardoning(on first or 2nd offenses).
What happens to the funds: The funds are placed in a secondary city treasury that only the mayor has the ability to view. Keep this totally seperate from the city treasury for purposes of bugs and such. At the end of the city's refresh cycle any money that is locked up from the lockdown gets dumped into the city treasury.
For the purpose of safety Lockdown should be revoked from the city at least 1 hour before its scheduled refresh to prevent people who enter the city during that time from losing thier entrance fee should they behave and leave the city without incident.
I dont know how feesible this is, but it sure is a better alternative to
Mayor: You're banned from the city
offender: And that hurts me how?