Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: Condemmed Houses? Say it isn't so!!!!!
Kinshi wrote:
I feel for ya, but welcome to the R/L world of city management, where personal property rights trump the city.
Ever seen a POS house and wonder why its still there? Its because the law doesnt allow for the property to be seized unless its in arrears on property taxes.
As long as someone pays the taxes, the place can be a rathole for a LONG time (until someone burns it down for insurance money)
Bout all you can do is make sure new citizens place buildings according to your city plan (you have a plan right? RIGHT?), and only allow people who will enforce the city plan to be militia members. As Mayor you need to stay in touch with your citizens and encourage them not to abandon buildings or move buildings that dont belong.
I think most of you would be pissed off if you say got sent away on extended military duty, and all you built just went POOF because you handnt logged on on for 2 months. Also SOE is being smart for the time being in that the expect a lot of people to return to SWG and they want to make sure they have a chance to preserve the stuff and keep them as active subscribers (I mean cmon how would you feel about starting over from ground zero having to buy all new houses at 100k a crack?)
My thought is prevention is worth far more than cures. Its up to Mayors and their militia to make sure people dont stick houses wherever they feel like and be willing to tell their citizens, NO. (you realize that the unwanted, abandoned house in the bad location was allowed to be built by someone with the power to make sure it didnt get built there in the first place?)
Ok captainclueless is back and I have to respond to him
Condemned houses here mean no maintenence, no money in the bank ... SO THEY ARENT PATING THEIR TAXES.................
You are not a mayor of a city and have no clue.
People on military duty are sure to place mnore than enough maintenence in their houses. Or they admin a friend to make sure their house stays up.
Oh wait but that taks accountability and evidently you dont want that...I am sorry
There is limited space in teh city and when condemned houses occupy the free space where are you supposed to place them....and these taxes generate no revenue for the city maintenence
When you run a metropolis and get a clue let me know. Until then keep you clueless comments to yourself.
This is the second thread you started imeediatly flaming without you having any idea of what you are talking about
DarthScin wrote:
Y'all are missing a very, very important point here.
Structures take up space, yes. Having structures not decay takes up increasingly more space, yes.
This means that space becomes more and more limited, correct?
And therefore, more and more valuable.
And what do we do with valuable things? We charge money for them.
As they become more valuable, we charge more money.
What's to stop people from just building outside city limits? Well now. That's a problem of making city space more valuable than wilderness space. If you can make this happen, you can make a tidy sum.
It's not just property tax. No, politicians should be landlords as well.
Scoooter wrote:
Kinshi wrote:
.....
As long as someone pays the taxes, the place can be a rathole for a LONG time (until someone burns it down for insurance money)
.....
Ok captainclueless is back and I have to respond to him
.....
You are not a mayor of a city and have no clue.
.....
When you run a metropolis and get a clue let me know. Until then keep you clueless comments to yourself.
This is the second thread you started imeediatly flaming without you having any idea of what you are talking about
DarthScin wrote:
Scoooter wrote:
Kinshi wrote:
.....
As long as someone pays the taxes, the place can be a rathole for a LONG time (until someone burns it down for insurance money)
.....
Ok captainclueless is back and I have to respond to him
.....
You are not a mayor of a city and have no clue.
.....
When you run a metropolis and get a clue let me know. Until then keep you clueless comments to yourself.
This is the second thread you started imeediatly flaming without you having any idea of what you are talking about
I think you should learn to control your temper, boy. He was not flaming. You are flaming. So calm the **** down before you start posting about someone else's comments.
And as for me not making sense, clearly I did not use simple enough language. I will reiterate.
More houses = less space = lower supply = greater demand = willingness to pay for space.
And to reiterate again in different terms to assure understanding:
By reducing the amount of space available (decrease in supply), people are more willing to sacrifice things - such as credits - to obtain the limited space available (increase in demand). This is basic economics.
Yay! I managed to restrain myself from flaming anyone. I'm so proud./laugh
Part of my flame was because of the flame he did in another thread.
Paying for space does not cit it. People are just not willing to do that. Plus the game mechanic for paying for the space on a long term nasis is the property tax. That is the only thing you can count on. One time payments is not a lonmg term solution.
Plus mayors are constantly trying to stock their cities with active players. But this is a game and not real life and active players come and go and there is no way you will know who will lquit the game and who will not. So the house not burning down takes up space and city revenue.
Both of you need to talk to some mayors of large cities and see what the challenges really are
Message Edited by Scoooter on 01-27-2005 02:15 PM
Dezelle wrote:
Why do some of you overlook the obvious here???
Ya know what ,call me names, call me whatever you want. but I don't care if you got called to duty, bank what you can, give the rest away, or to someoen to hold, and when you come back in 6 months, start OVER! It's not like it's hard to rebuild....
call you names.... ok
Visionary, Wise, Correct... that should do it.
As for anyone who isnt paying attention:
Bank holds 50 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Inventory holds 60 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Backpack (equiped)holds 50 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Buy 5 droids with storage and you get 50 extra storage free of charge that does not delete them or damages them
thats 210 storage for a player who decides to quit the game and possibly return within a day or a year or a millenium.
that should be more than enough.
BWVictorious wrote:
Dezelle wrote:
Why do some of you overlook the obvious here???
Ya know what ,call me names, call me whatever you want. but I don't care if you got called to duty, bank what you can, give the rest away, or to someoen to hold, and when you come back in 6 months, start OVER! It's not like it's hard to rebuild....
call you names.... ok
Visionary, Wise, Correct... that should do it.
As for anyone who isnt paying attention:
Bank holds 50 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Inventory holds 60 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Backpack (equiped)holds 50 items free of charge without ever deleting them or damaging them
Buy 5 droids with storage and you get 50 extra storage free of charge that does not delete them or damages them
thats 210 storage for a player who decides to quit the game and possibly return within a day or a year or a millenium.
that should be more than enough.
If for any reason a guy has to leave the game without having the chance to store his stuff and return after many months, then the perma houses would have been fair. How many times this happens? only if you dont care about your stuff. Worst case scenario you ask a RL friend to use your account details to store your stuff while you are away.
When I play quite often I have noticed harvesters burning.... after a day or two they are gone. If permastructures occurs soon there will be prime resource spots overcrowded with condemned harvesters. Isnt this nice?
Bank holds 100.
Lets face it, players planning to return place a boat load of credits in their houses, they do not need the condemned structures. Or they admin a friend. Or the liquidate as many assets to credits.
Dezelle wrote:
Talk to us SOE, and tell us you are looking into this "condemmed" housing plan you implimented, and are trying to work up a comprimise to accomidate our concerns...
/echo
The first city I lived inended up havingso many inactive residents that not only was it a mess (there were houses standing for 6 months after ppl left the game)it became impossible to elect a new mayor when our current one left the game very suddenly, and we had to abandon it
The town hall crumbled 2 weeks before they introduced the new voting rules that would have saved it.
Although the voting issue has been resolved, thecore issueof old characters houses remaining andtheir still be declared residents means not only do current cities have problemsas stated in many posts above, but alsomany old cities live off dead populations and allow no room for new cities with new and current players, especially on the 3 core worlds. The need for deleted/left-the-game characters to be purged/cleared (at least from our cities)is one that has needed addressing for some time -this is, as Dezelle has so clearly stated, a game for the playing.
Down with condemmed houses RA RA RA!!!