Cities And Housing Archive

Thread: The Death nail to player cities is on the test center

SakeO
Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:45 pm
#40

How about instead of destroying condemned structures, mayors could relocate them? A mayor could just drag the house to somewhere in the city and pay an amount based on the distance moved. I'd suggest something on par with a 1000cr per meter to reduce the willingness of cities to drastically relocate houses without any consent. This would allow for the civic planning needs while still preserving the storage for the player.


You might even be able to do this with other structures with a sucessful referendum and the fee going to the owner to better deal with griefing structures and citizens holding out and disrupting the city's progress.


SakeO
sweatyclimber
Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:47 pm
#41






SakeO wrote:

How about instead of destroying condemned structures, mayors could relocate them? A mayor could just drag the house to somewhere in the city and pay an amount based on the distance moved. I'd suggest something on par with a 1000cr per meter to reduce the willingness of cities to drastically relocate houses without any consent. This would allow for the civic planning needs while still preserving the storage for the player.


You might even be able to do this with other structures with a sucessful referendum and the fee going to the owner to better deal with griefing structures and citizens holding out and disrupting the city's progress.


SakeO






qfe


a supurb idea!



Cheers,

famousFATWOOKIE
Master musician, Master entertainer of Mos Oasis
-I support ATK people and playstyles.
Find FFWB Here!A SWG History
Jhett
Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:29 am
#42

To answer your question, Liamo, city structures don't have maintenance. At least the City Hall doesn't. It's funding comes from the city treasury. And it is my understanding that when that goes dry the city is toast.




Jhett Dark
The Honorable Legion (HONOR)
Mos Vegas, Tatooine, RADIANT

Cybst0rm
Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:58 am
#43






SakeO wrote:

How about instead of destroying condemned structures, mayors could relocate them? A mayor could just drag the house to somewhere in the city and pay an amount based on the distance moved. I'd suggest something on par with a 1000cr per meter to reduce the willingness of cities to drastically relocate houses without any consent. This would allow for the civic planning needs while still preserving the storage for the player.


You might even be able to do this with other structures with a sucessful referendum and the fee going to the owner to better deal with griefing structures and citizens holding out and disrupting the city's progress.


SakeO






From what I have read, that can't be done either. It has something to do with the location, the items in the house and where they are tied to. Also, that could be a grief as well. A Mayor could move a house to the other side of a city and the player has no idea what happened to the house.



.:Karthes Braxis:.
_/-Viper Squadron-\_
+BXI+ Corp
Megacity, Corellia

SakeO
Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:00 am
#44






Cybst0rm wrote:


From what I have read, that can't be done either. It has something to do with the location, the items in the house and where they are tied to. Also, that could be a grief as well. A Mayor could move a house to the other side of a city and the player has no idea what happened to the house.





I think you are correct that individual items are located in their own seperate cooridnates in space and not in relation to the structure they are "in". As long as all the items tagged as taking up space in the house were moved the same directions as the house in respect to x,y,z and rotation, it should work out.


There might be smalldiscrepancies but, most players either won't care or have the skill to adjust the decor back in order. The exception would be the guy who paid a decorator to furnish his house. Either way we are talking about a house that was abandoned to some extent and it is still far preferrable to having it all go "poof!".


Thinking about it over night, I see where the referendum idea could become a griefing tool very easily. My assumption would be that the structure owner would get an email notification as to where it is. Besides, with the cost I suggested, it would cost like half a million to relocate a house to the other side of town. Doable but, not done lightly.


If the coding for this function was added, it could even be made a desirable service, as it could be much easier than transporting the entire contents of one house to another and the extra lots, it can require.


SakeO


Message Edited by SakeO on 01-27-2005 10:03 AM

Thradd
Thu Jan 27, 2005 5:46 pm
#45






SakeO wrote:

How about instead of destroying condemned structures, mayors could relocate them? A mayor could just drag the house to somewhere in the city and pay an amount based on the distance moved. I'd suggest something on par with a 1000cr per meter to reduce the willingness of cities to drastically relocate houses without any consent. This would allow for the civic planning needs while still preserving the storage for the player.


You might even be able to do this with other structures with a sucessful referendum and the fee going to the owner to better deal with griefing structures and citizens holding out and disrupting the city's progress.


SakeO







Great idea. I wish we could do that. There are a few code issues with doing that but it would be nice. I'd be happy with just being able to redeed and drop a house in another location.


No matter how well you think you know one of your residents there is always an unseen factor that can not be predicted. Not all of us have the luxury of living next door to fellow gamers or being IRL friends with them. And since that is a fact with many towns, it seems that a mayor should have more control over housing.




Official PvP Rules for
Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided
==N
Star Wars Galaxies:
Providing male fantasy
gaming fulfillment for closet geeks
since 2003
Sign up now for a free Imperial tour of Deep Space
Your Name Here


sweatyclimber
Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:05 pm
#46






SakeO wrote:






Cybst0rm wrote:


From what I have read, that can't be done either. It has something to do with the location, the items in the house and where they are tied to. Also, that could be a grief as well. A Mayor could move a house to the other side of a city and the player has no idea what happened to the house.





I think you are correct that individual items are located in their own seperate cooridnates in space and not in relation to the structure they are "in". As long as all the items tagged as taking up space in the house were moved the same directions as the house in respect to x,y,z and rotation, it should work out.


There might be smalldiscrepancies but, most players either won't care or have the skill to adjust the decor back in order. The exception would be the guy who paid a decorator to furnish his house. Either way we are talking about a house that was abandoned to some extent and it is still far preferrable to having it all go "poof!".


Thinking about it over night, I see where the referendum idea could become a griefing tool very easily. My assumption would be that the structure owner would get an email notification as to where it is. Besides, with the cost I suggested, it would cost like half a million to relocate a house to the other side of town. Doable but, not done lightly.


If the coding for this function was added, it could even be made a desirable service, as it could be much easier than transporting the entire contents of one house to another and the extra lots, it can require.


SakeO



Message Edited by SakeO on 01-27-2005 10:03 AM





with all the broken taxes, it could also be an income generator for the city if someone wanted to move but not redo the house.. pay the mayor x amount and have him move it.



Cheers,

famousFATWOOKIE
Master musician, Master entertainer of Mos Oasis
-I support ATK people and playstyles.
Find FFWB Here!A SWG History
DragonSnack
Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:31 pm
#47


If I read the original post correctly then

Once a structure reaches 0 hitpoints, it will flag itself as condemned instead of deleting itself. Condemned houses are not enterable,


and

To uncondemn a house, simply enter it with enough money in the bank to pay the repair cost


How do you enter an un-enterable house?


This needs to be reworded to say deposit enough money in the bank to cover the maint costs.


The process should be changed so that once a properity starts to decay then the mayor (if the structure is outside a city only the owner gets notified)should be granted admin rights to the structure. Themayor should have allrights including destroying the structure.

Expand this to allow the mayoradmin rights for any structure that the owner has not logged in for2 weeks.


Edited stuff below


added note to clarify the term destroy.

Evertmine I want to remove one of my factorys I have to insure the maintenance fees are paid to a sufficient amount and the option on the radial menu is not worded redeed it is worded destroy. If destryh is not the option then I mean to redeed.


If the owner doesnt reclaim the deed then the mayor can sell it or give it as a gift to a new citizen. If sold then the money goes into the city treasury and not the mayor's pocket. ((Unless I happen to be the mayor))

Message Edited by DragonSnack on 01-29-2005 12:42 PM

Thradd
Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:43 pm
#48






DragonSnack wrote:

If I read the original post correctly then

Once a structure reaches 0 hitpoints, it will flag itself as condemned instead of deleting itself. Condemned houses are not enterable,


and

To uncondemn a house, simply enter it with enough money in the bank to pay the repair cost


How do you enter an un-enterable house?


This needs to be reworded to say deposit enough money in the bank to cover the maint costs.


The process should be cahnged so that oncde a properity starts to decay then the mayor (if the structure is outside a city only the owner gets notified)should be granted admin rights to the structure. Themayor should have allrights including destroying the structure.

Expand this to allow the mayoradmin rights for any structure that the owner has not logged in for2 weeks.








Good idea. I don't think people will go for the destroy option but mayors should at least have a redeed option.



Official PvP Rules for
Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided
==N
Star Wars Galaxies:
Providing male fantasy
gaming fulfillment for closet geeks
since 2003
Sign up now for a free Imperial tour of Deep Space
Your Name Here


Bravo12
Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:58 pm
#49

Well, I would hope that structures on inactive accounts would decay like before, even if the player left the game with 800 mil credits in his/her account. Otherwise, the person might never come back, but their house will be there forever. This is gonna cause a big headache for the devs later on when they have to field requests from mayors to remove houses belonging to players who have been inactive for months.



____ Sergeant ___________________________________
IMPERIAL RANGER SPY
------------------------------------Treb Kenna-----

Page 4 of 4