Cities And Housing Archive

What about those people who live in your city that are not citizens. I have found that this is just as big a problem as inactive citizens. We do need to come up with a fair way to basically evict inactive or problem citizens from our cities.

I like the idea. When i was mayor of Hibernia-I we had a player who was in the guild/city. He started to go insane, talking about a black cloud comming to destroy everyone in the game. I later interpreted this as the Blackhole troopers. He was still a citizen but we wanted him out. This would be a good idea =)

LOL! This Bullmoose guy is funny

On Ahazi, he and his imperial friends took advantage of our disgruntled mayor and placed structures haphazardly around our rebel city, ruining the city plans that existed since the very early days of player cities, and now he's coming up with this?

Ohhh, maybe it's because now it's happening to his city

You sir, are pathetic in every sense of the word.

While I agree it's a problem, this will never happen. The developers will never implement a system that leads to the destruction of items. Think about it... suppose some guy goes on vacation? He comes back and finds his house and everything inside DESTROYED? I'd be kinda pissed...

---

GrandMoffMoosemillion wrote:

To prevent griefers, allow the mayor to submit this to city vote. The citizens name will be posted and votes will be cast to remove them. Should the total vote count exceed 51% of the total city roster, the person loses citizenship and has 14 days to remove their house before it is destroyed.

---

That would be harder to pull off then you might think. Most cities that have reached metro scale have a great number of their "citizens" either elsewhere, really living somwhere else, left the game for a while, or quit. That 51% might as well be 100%.

A more constructive solotuin would be to allow the mayor to pay a moving fee, and relocate a structure in his city, to another buildable part of the city. this would allow a mayor to manage their town, not destroy anything, and allow the needed pruning of vacant buildings.

---

WindSerpent wrote:
What about those people who live in your city that are not citizens. I have found that this is just as big a problem as inactive citizens. We do need to come up with a fair way to basically evict inactive or problem citizens from our cities.

---

And what of those people who have maintained a house in the same spot since the atart of the game? Then almost two years later someone comes along and builds a city that puts this house near the center.

I've had my house outside Bestine from the begining of my time in SWG. Recently a city sprang up near me. I'm exactly 70 meters from the city hall.

I'm not going to be a resident because i'm a resident of my one city. I've kept this house because it is were I started the game and I still feel like playing out of Bestine form time to time.

So according to you I should have to move, I don't think so.

---

Maximus_Bane wrote:

---

WindSerpent wrote:
What about those people who live in your city that are not citizens. I have found that this is just as big a problem as inactive citizens. We do need to come up with a fair way to basically evict inactive or problem citizens from our cities.

---

And what of those people who have maintained a house in the same spot since the atart of the game? Then almost two years later someone comes along and builds a city that puts this house near the center.

I've had my house outside Bestine from the begining of my time in SWG. Recently a city sprang up near me. I'm exactly 70 meters from the city hall.

I'm not going to be a resident because i'm a resident of my one city. I've kept this house because it is were I started the game and I still feel like playing out of Bestine form time to time.

So according to you I should have to move, I don't think so.

---

No, you shouldnt have to move. You were there first. And it is your choice to become a resident of course. This has more to do with those people who drop 20 houses outside of the border of a level 2 city about to expand to a level 3 so that when the borders expand the 20 houses are now part of the city. This causes issues when they are opposing faction, are placing houses out of theme, are placing them specifically to waste useable space, etc.

be that as it may i am currently a mayor of a city that i no longer want anythign to do with there are 53 current citizens in the town over half are inactive 13 of which have been inactive for 9 months or more so either i destroy one of the oldest towns on the server or i retain mayor of an imperial town that is boasting about useing cowardly rebel tactics to remove some houses a rebel spy placed in the town.

---

GrandMoffMoosemillion wrote:

---

Maximus_Bane wrote:

---

WindSerpent wrote:
What about those people who live in your city that are not citizens. I have found that this is just as big a problem as inactive citizens. We do need to come up with a fair way to basically evict inactive or problem citizens from our cities.

---

And what of those people who have maintained a house in the same spot since the atart of the game? Then almost two years later someone comes along and builds a city that puts this house near the center.

I've had my house outside Bestine from the begining of my time in SWG. Recently a city sprang up near me. I'm exactly 70 meters from the city hall.

I'm not going to be a resident because i'm a resident of my one city. I've kept this house because it is were I started the game and I still feel like playing out of Bestine form time to time.

So according to you I should have to move, I don't think so.

---

No, you shouldnt have to move. You were there first. And it is your choice to become a resident of course. This has more to do with those people who drop 20 houses outside of the border of a level 2 city about to expand to a level 3 so that when the borders expand the 20 houses are now part of the city. This causes issues when they are opposing faction, are placing houses out of theme, are placing them specifically to waste useable space, etc.

---

I understand the need to protect your city from the scenario you outline. However what's to stop a mayor from removing a house like mine if they are granted the ability to do so?

My house dosn't grief anyone like the ones you're talking about. I am however pretty sure I'm the opposite faction of the city residents.

I havn't spoken to anyone in the city so I don't know if they view my house as a problem.

---

GrandMoffMoosemillion wrote:

A good point about inactive players and such. I would imagine a quick fix solution to that would be 51% of the "voting" citizens.

As far as coming back from vacation and seeing your stuff poofed, I wonder if there would be a way to scale down the contents of the city into a bank, each player being able to access the contents of their personal property. Perhaps a 30 day warning instead. I honestly dont know at this point what would be feasible.

I perhaps a counter-terrorism option for a mayor, where they can inact harsher taxes than the 2k max, forcing anyone but the most dedicated to leave the city.

I certainly believe that if a citizen becomes unable to pay for their taxes (by having alts with no cash balance for example) they should be removed in 30 days from citizenship.

---

Oh its very much possible. Basically if the house goes to zero maintance , it magically 'poofs' to a special instance server where it resides in limbo until a player returns. The player upon return canaccess the instance from special terminals located in the NPC cities, then they can gather their items and deeds.

All the items in the house would get dumped in a special large container (call it a dumpster if you will), and their houses automatically redeeded and placed in there as well. The house deed and the special dumpster would then be accessed froma 'property recovery' terminal located in the NPC cities.