Cities And Housing Archive

Two wrongs don't make a...
ah never mind...
Let's stay on topic.


- Omadda Szool
Kauri

May the force be with you.

Hey it worked for the red named boys and girls, why not me? Im nearly red, just add a bit more red and a little less yellow and Im there!

Theres not really any point anymore. They removed the ability and have no intention of putting it in. Someone had an idea, it was shot down by pretty much everyone in the community and the devs made their exit leaving us to pick it appart because its on the dev tracker.

---

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".

---

How would this be griefing the system? A city should be able to protect all of its citizens, even its jedi. Or what about the cities that are built by jedi for jedi? The jedi would have to leave the city at some point, either for missions or for getting materials and so forth. I would think that having a militia that could actually become able to attack those who are hurting its citizens would be another great idea. I don't have a jedi myself, nor do I plan on getting it, but I have friends who are jedi and it's really stupid that when I see them getting attacked, I can't do anything to help them.

Here's a couple ideas along those lines:

Limited number of militia depending on the size and number of it's citizens.Perhaps1 militia for every level, up to metropolis and then 1 militia for every 25 citizens beyond that.

If a declared resident of that city gets attacked by another player then the militia can go to the city hall and "declare" themselves. After the threat is over, they would immediately become undeclared. Also this declaration would extend to the city limits and no further. If the combatants left the city and then re-entered, the militia would have to redeclare.

Have city planners who would be the people who would allocate housing rights.

Removing people from a city is a bad idea, but using a warning system that would give the "offender" ample time, maybe 10 minutes, to leave the city, or the militia would then be able to attack them. It would be up to city and its citizens to determine what elements they wanted in their cities.

Also, make it impossible for cities to block poi's. This would require a lot of coding though for my idea... Cities are currently limited from being placed a certain distance from each other, but if this were extended to allow a certain range between city limits and then if there is a city that is placed within a set limit only allow the placement of harvestors between those cities to keep houses from being dropped that could close off the distances... Or increase the foot print of a house unless it's within a city to prevent houses from being butted up against each other.

It also wouldn't work because it would bar bounty hunters from completing Jedi missions if the Jedi is at the city center.

I'm not sure I buy the whole excuse that griefers make to re-instate /citywarn. /Citywarn is nothing but a tool for griefers. If people truly wanted to have /citywarn to get rid of troublemakers, then they would be lobbying for a /cityignore feature that "silence" anyone standing inside the city borders.

I say give milita the ability to put other players in a prison or a brige. Come on, thats a whole new RP aspect waiting to happen.

---

Fallen_Snow wrote:

---

Colaboy wrote:

I was happy to see citywarn go away. One time I entered a city to purchase a house from an architect, and I was warned the moment I entered the city. I honestly think they should get rid of city ban as well. 90% of the time its being used to grief other players. One time I went to hunt a Jedi within a city limit, after I collected my bounty, I was banned. Come to find out, that Jedi didnt even live in that city.. TH said that those types of options can easily keep players from certain content of the game.. Isnt /cityban essentially doing the same thing to my content as a Bh?? If someone's responce to my question is ""But you can still speeder in from another location"" The same can be said about game content with citywarn...

---

Im not sure if you are advocating the return of citywarn or supporting the removal of city ban. your last sentance just makes it to confusing from the first. First you say you are happy about citywanrs removal. Then you say if someone has the argument to support keeping citybans that is upheld what about citywarn.

Incase you didn't figure it out, cityban is being defended and now you just stated that you think if cityban is defended then so should citywarn.



Also, some citys have guilds inside of them. They make city policys that dicate no hunting of jedi in their city limits. If you violate this policy they ban you. Regardless of if its a factional based city, a guild based city, or what have you. Its called, politics. Its ran by politicians. And, thats the name of their profession. Imagine that.

---

My last couple sentences was in reference to this....

---

---

CIEBrandon wrote:

TH- how about just making them not able to travel in or enter into the city period once they have been banned.

---

Thunderheart wrote:

Thats actually how it used to work and what happened is players would build their city next to some piece of content in the game (like the Krayt Graveyard or one of the static Imperial Bases) and prevent every player they could from even getting there.

I want /cityban gone..

---

AschMhaRhee wrote:

We all know that /citywarn was being abused by jerks.. so how about this.

If I /citywarn a troublemaker in my city, they are instantly transported to a random spot on the city border. This would get them out of the city and make a slight inconvenience for them but not leave room for it to be exploited or abused. It would just get them out of the city.. which is really what we need to have happen anyway.

Because the location was random, they would not be able to say we were abusing them by dropping them in a lair of agros.. but the chance would always be there, so perhaps the threat of a citywarn would have a little teeth if you lived on a planet where the agros were a problem.

It seems to me that this would be a fairly simple implementation and a more gentle solution to some of our city woes.

---

since this discussed quite controversial id like to throw in a new idea.

How about a /citywarn that just asks for leaving the city? The warned person can decided to do so within the next 2 Minutes, but could also stay in the city. If the warned person stays in the city, it gains visibilty (i.e. a bail is put on him) just like a jedi. The exact bail rules would go like visibility for every player within 32 m perimeter. The citywarn will wear off, if the warned gets killed by a BH or after 14 days, or so.

This should be seen in a larger context of Bounty Bails also for Contraband-Scans in NPC Cities (in the case of possession of illegals) ....

In this scenario there is still room for some kind of griefing, but since the consequences of Citywarn are somewhat postponed (i.e. BHs have to pull the mission) its more like a decission made by the warned person, if he complies with the warning or takes the risk of getting hunted down by a BH.


just my 2 cents

What about the jedi who are banning bounty hunters just to keep them from being able to hunt htem in that city?

---

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".

Kurt "Thunderheart" Stangl
Community Relations Manager

---

Dosi wrote:
What about the jedi who are banning bounty hunters just to keep them from being able to hunt htem in that city?

---

How does that prevent hunting in that city? Just means you can't use their shuttle to hop in and kill them, you actually have to hunt them down. Shucky darn.

---

Kijyata 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?

---

How does that prevent hunting in that city? Just means you can't use their shuttle to hop in and kill them, you actually have to hunt them down. Shucky darn.

---

No, when the hunter is banned, they can't go in to hunt at all.

---

Dosi wrote:

---

Kijyata 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?

---

How does that prevent hunting in that city? Just means you can't use their shuttle to hop in and kill them, you actually have to hunt them down. Shucky darn.

---

No, when the hunter is banned, they can't go in to hunt at all.

---

Um...that's not how it works. /cityban only prevents them from using the city facilities....you know like the shuttle, cloning facities, toilets, etc. Bounty Hunters can still ride in and hunt the Jedi and ride/clone out.

Thunderheart, after reading another posters idea of NPC level 80 patrolling the city I actually came out with a simple implementation for your dev team. I assume the logistics would be NPC constantly doing database queries on every person within 65m of them to see if they are on any kind of list correct? What if you used the already existing NPC faction system in place? Elite level 80 NPC patrol the player cities. When a player gets /citywarn he takes a faction loss against that city (lets say -200 per infraction with a 5min timer to avoid spamming /citywarn). This gives them -200 faction for that city and 5min to leave or they lose another -200 and so on. As their number plummets into the negative they run a higher and higher chance of getting attacked by the NPC guards. After they reach -2000 being attacked on sight is a fair certainty. As a balance one could implement a /citypraise to increase faction standing as well to give the opportunity for redemtion available should someone have a change of heart and want to amend their behavior.