Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: If /citywarn did this....
Must impliment a way for the current mayor revoke ones citizanship and also in doing so force the exiled citizan to remove all said structures in said city. Give them some 30 day time zone to do this. Have the mayor revoke on contact. When this is done the player will receive an email of what has happaned and that he has 30 days left to use city services. And that he needs to remove all his structures.
CIEBrandon wrote:
TH- how about just making them not able to travel in or enter into the city period once they have been banned.
Or.. since players can "grief" each other too easilly how about npc's that patroll the city and can attack players that have been banned. They would have to be lvl 80's atleast though. Maybe make the npc patrolls cost money from the city treasury but atleast it something.
Honestly I dont see how keeping unwanted players out of PLAYER MADE cities can be considered keeping them from content.
It depends on where the city is....
watchfulone wrote:
What about implementing /citywarn but only if your city hall is in an appropriate zone. In other words, any city halls within 1k of significant content would not be able to enable /citywarn as a feature.
Players would just build bigger cities and work to encircle the area. Aside from that, that is also quite a bit of work on the back end.
wildcard1973 wrote:
The issue was never about having ample time to leave the city limits...it was always about certain player cities being located near and among POI and static content, and allowing members of that city to effectively prevent access of the playerbase to that content.
Yes - that's correct.
Personally, I like the idea of a militia. It is a double edged sword though. For instance, players that want to be "the criminal element", this is exactly what they are interested in. Then what would most likely happenis they would go around trying to get banned. While in itself, that isn't a bad idea, it does create a situation where some players are rewarded for bad in-game behavior.
Kurt "Thunderheart" Stangl
Community Relations Manager
This thread reminds me of something I read a while back (on a team letter I think) regarding some idea in the form of a possible future publish/expansion that was to introduce the shady, criminalside of SWG. With the introduction of a real way to role play a bad character the /citywarn could begin to take ona new meaning.
In a post above the idea of having a city faction is a perfect way of monitoring and enforcing some kind of rule of law in each city. Of course the obvious considerations have to be made to restrict real griefing (as TH has already done here) but allowing a city to take on a political role allows some real possibility:
- Factional cities where opposing factions would be attacked on STOPPING in the city.
- The development of politics between cities to encourage trade, research etc...
- Allow a mechanism to regain faction standing for cities (trading, offer treaties, or even city orientated NPC quest givers)
- Introduce community responsibility. ie. Aplayer gets a citywarn, loses 1000 FP to that city. Thepopulation of his home city loose say 5 FP. Everyone effected is notified and can act accordingly (warn him by a threat of eviction or reward him). This of course could increase the RP value of SWG.
ChewaccaBH wrote:TH - Whats the point of a militia member when all we really can do is just city ban. There should be something that allows them to help defend the city, especially when you drop a base and turrets only to have every opposite faction member just come in as a Combatant to blow up turrets and bases. There has to be something to implement to help this situation that happens every day.
Nothing truly gets more annoying than dropping turrets to help defend your base, only to watch a few combatant Jedi come in and use Avoid Incap to tank turrets while others with cyberneticsfire away at the turrets from 80m. Yes we BH's can take the jedi's mission, but it still doesnt help with the others who are free to blow up the bases. Perhaps thats another situation all on its own, but shouldnt Avoid Incap be where you cant attack back while on it?
But back to the Militia members, we definately need something to actually help protect our city.
Again you arent helping your cause if anything you are giving examples of why not to have citywarn. Bases shouldnt even be placeable within city limits and if you place one you are volunteering yourself for the opposite faction to come in. Keep in mind that since the gcw changes in february you dont even lose lots when placing a base. For all practical purposes they cease to be _your_ base the istant you drop them. For a PVE base this holds true even more. By making this arguement you are essentially saying 'TH - we want a way to rack up huge GCW planetary score without possibility of consequence'. It just wont go very far in Dev land. If they do implement /citywarn in a manner that allows players to attack other players then PVE bases would have to come out of cities entirely. Its not your base and once you place a PVE base you do so with the full knowlege its being placed as content for the other faction. PVE bases are there to provide a hint of the GCW and get players into the concept of base taking without the consequence of PVP death. One has to learn to crawl before they can learn to walk. They are not there so you can turn them into a one sided PVP arena.
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".
mindspat wrote:
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".
I agree there's much concern with this. As a Jedi player I make it VERY well known that no one should be banning a BH who's following a mark regardless of who it is. I have also made it known that /citybanned BHs will recieve /cityPardon after 24-48 hours. There should never be a permaBan unless the individual and not the character is at falt.
Very good attitude, I can see why they elected you as mayor. Keep up the good work at making the game fun and fair whenever its within your power to do so.
i do not think there is any 'content' within the city limits of any player cities, at least on eclipse. fort krayt on eclipse is not on fort krayt. it ends a good 300 to 500 meters from where everything spawns.
bottom line, if you are banned from a city you should not be able to shuttle to or from it. you can bike in or out like everyone else. no one has banned you from using your bike.
at least give militia tefs back. /twitch
We went to another player city and legitly destroyed thier bases. To get revenge they sent several players, covert, to our city and made super annoying spam shout macros. Yea sure we could addignore him, but its a large city with a big shopping mall and not everyone is aware of that command. Theres nothing we could do about it really.
Then one of thier players got 2 cybernetic arms to give extended range and started taking out our cities turrets from out of range of return fire. Since he was combatant (as opposed to special forces) there was nothing we could do but watch as one by one he took down 12 turrets. Had we had citywarn we could have prevented that in a second.
What made citywarn abusable when it first came out was that when you died in a player city and you didnt set your clone data anywhere else on the planet you would automatically clone in that city. If they citybanned you you would be forced to just stand up (while taking wounds) and they could use citywarn to attack you again in 30 seconds. This caused major wounds and item decay. HOWEVER, that is all impossible now. Now you can chose to clone automatically at an NPC city even if you didnt set your clone data on that planet. Also there is no more item decay on PvP death and buffs are hardly as important so death doesnt mean that much (plus jedi dont lose xp on pvp death now too). Also you can increase the warn time to 5 minutes or more.
There really isn't much abusable anymore and if used in a griefing manner there is no real penalty. If its a city thats meant for PvP then the offender will know not to come back, and if its a city with vendors, well then they're just hurting thier own business.
Please, this skill is really really useful.
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".
Since when is banning a player from a city to prevent them being able to shuttle in there and therefore make it harder for them to hunt you "greifing"? Or were you reffering to some therorhetical implementation in the thread.
Cityban should be limited to structures/features in player cities, other than what we might consider public structures. Primarily "public" structures may include shuttleports, which from an immersion standpoint may mean that in order for a city to get a shuttleport license, they agree with planetary authorities to allow unrestricted use and access to the public at large, and cannot restrict passage or use. This may also include cloning centers.
Players who have been banned from a city would want to:
- Be able to pass through the city (access nearby content)
- Be able to engage and interact with NPC's and other mobs/wild lairs (content)
- Use of shuttleport (at dev discretion)
- Use of cloning center (at dev discretion)
- Engage in BH-Jedi or PvP actions unrestricted
Aside from the abovegranted activities, players who have been banned could be restricted from all other features in a player city, including:
- entering buildings, including discretionary medical centers and cantinas
- use of vendors
- use of mission terminals
- use of NPC trainers
- use of city attributes (research center, job center, etc.)
- simultaneous restriction applied to multi-toon accounts (jedi or other "same account" avatar)
- use of spatial chat
So, what's the problem?
Message Edited by Crizis on 06-02-2005 02:29 PM
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".
Jedi don't grind in cities anyways. All the BH has to do is wait for the jedi to go out and get xp. If Boba Fett was hired to kill say Luke Skywalker, would he charge in guns blazing if Luke was in a military base surronded by friends? Uh no, thats an example of horrible hunting. Fett would wait pateintly and track him and attack at the best moment.
If theres a player in our city named Ima'spy (using a trial account) running into each of our bases obviously getting information, then we should be able to kill him. It just makes sense. There are many other ways players can grief cities. I dont think theres a way for a player city to completely surround a POI. If a rebel guild places a city near the krayt graveyard and only let other rebels shuttle though then fine. Imperials can always just drive there from the next nearest shuttleport. Heck had the rebels not even placed the city they'd still have to drive.