Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: city hall shouldn't equal guild hall
Page 1 of 1
Cuit
Wed May 18, 2005 9:10 am
#1
what do I mean?
The Devs added player cities because we begged and demanded for them. Once they were added . .everyone guild wanted one . . . but there was limit . . . so we cried.
The devs increased the number . . . so now more guilds could have cities.
IMO Player Cities should not be just a place for a guild to lay down houses . . . . they could do that before though with a city hall, they were safe from spawns . . .and they could get personal terminals and trainers. But guild only has 25 people in it? . . . and the city has 10 additional residents from other server baragins (you know . ."hey can you put a house in my city on Chiliastra and I'll put one in your city here so we can get them to upgrade? don't worry just make me admin and I'll take care of maintanence") yes the devs partially solved this with the inactivity clause but I don't think its enough.
I know why . . .guilds invests so much money in cities that they are afraid that someone will come and take over. er . . . thats kinda whe way its supposed to work. I'll give you a personal experience . .
My guild was invited into a city on tat. Some of my guildies were friends with the residents and actually had houses in it already. In hopes of helping the city grow, we all moved over and it was a two guild city. everyone contributed and payed taxes and what not (though we later found out there was a bug that didn't put taxes in trasury) and things were good. The we heard the rumor . . . the guild that started the city was thining of moving the city to another planet so it could get a possible shuttleport . . . we approached the mayor about it . . . the rumor was in fact true and many were thinking of starting a city there ad abandoning this one. My guild not being a combat heavy group didn't wish to move to this more hostile planet and decided we would would try to get control of the city so we wouldn't lose it. Well this just pissed off the mayor who felt we were stealing from them and began the daily routine of removing the treasury with reasons like "becasue I can" Hence the city fell . . . and memberof my guild decided to make a new one (now afraid that what happened before would happen again . . made it a guild only city) which is more than likely about to fall as well.
Personally i think that citiesshould need more residentsto be upgraded or even created. Thiswould mean that one guild couldn't support it alone and generate cities with multiple guildsincreasing the social interaction of players. It would also support the guild war option (which i don't think ever worked). No one in a city want to see it fail . .. regardless of who is in control. There shouldn't be any fear of who's in control.
I'de like to see a player city that needs 2 or more shuttleports, multiple guilds, people active. A real city build by players for players . . . not the guild outposts that litter my planetary map 
Jedi Paddy unlocked 11/13/05, 11:00 pm est 
Andur
Fri May 20, 2005 4:00 am
#2
Maybe you should have talked with the Mayor prior to assigning a new competitor to the city. Of course he current mayor thought you would take over his City because you didn't ask him if you could. I would be rather agressive if someone was trying to take over my city, even if I'm about to leave it.
TorgSmith
Sun May 22, 2005 6:55 pm
#3
If you go out and get new building for the city. (i.e. new city hall, garage, bank, etc) Offer them to the mayor in exchange for leaving the existing building there and electing a new mayor.
Thank You,
Torg Smith
Eykrie
Mon May 23, 2005 3:35 am
#4
Thats not the point, the point is that Cities are owned and operated by guilds. Not coalitions of players, Guilds own all the cities, except the occasional merchant outpost outside a major NPC city.
My guild is no exception, we own two cities on corellia, and generally only let guildies in. The guildleader keeps the guild and town seperate, but they are essentially the same, anyway.
Page 1 of 1