Politician Archive
Thread: The needs of the One outweighs the needs of the Many?
SOE has an apparent philosophy that supports the needs of the One at the cost of the needs of the Many. They fail to recognize that every structure within a Player City is community property. Without controls and balances the huge investment of the residents of that city could be wiped out because SOE will always rule on the side of the individual without regard for those impacted by the individual.
What can a city do to protect itself from Grief? If someone has had a city ban they buy a round trip ticket and they can still come and go as they please. And even if they couldn’t they could swoop in and cause trouble as much as they like and the best people can do is ignore them assuming they are not a visitor who unwittingly visits never to return again.
A “Ignore them and hope they go away” policy is LAME. What is especially lame is that a banned person can still come and go as they please using the city shuttle. And when it comes to a resident who starts up a campaign of grief they can’t even be banned! The town is effectively hostage and both the Mayor and the Militia are powerless to act.
The duly elected Mayor and his/her Militia Representatives should have an effective means to protect the city from troublemakers. They should be able to proactively ban entire PA if they see fit or, in the case of a factional city, all members of an opposing faction. If they abuse this authority the democratic system could be used to remove them and add someone else.
What can the city do to protect itself from a rampaging Mayor? If a Mayor decides too (s)he can destroy the city rather completely and expediently in a way that would be extremely difficult to recover from. SOE says “You voted for him so you accept the consequences” yet at the same time they don’t give the Mayor other abilities for fear they might be abused.
A “It’s ok for the Mayor to destroy the city but heaven forbid they can rezone a house” policy is nothing more than lazy coding. Give the Mayor better zoning abilities but reduced destructive powers. Any structure removed from the city must be placed into the city again within that session or it will automatically revert to its former location.
Once the Mayor has enhanced abilities while the absolute destructive aspects are curtailed the election process can be relaxed. As it stands it is difficult to elect a new Mayor even when the Mayor wants to resign. Have the option for a resident to default to the incumbent or not and if they do not log on for two consecutive weeks have it set so their vote doesn’t count (But they remain a resident).
Granting Zoning shouldn’t be for an unlimited number of structures and shouldn’t be available to Militia. It is a recipe for disaster (and an often repeated disaster I must add). I would like to have more people be Militia because it is a nice RP type of thing but ultimately I can’t take the risk.
A “I can’t afford the risk of having Militia” aspect of a city is a contradiction in purpose. Having militia and giving players more opportunities to be on the militia improves game play for some. A single rogue militia member should not have the power to undermine the city as they do presently.
To summarize
- There should be an option for proactively banning people or groups of people from a city.
- Someone should not be able to shuttle into or out of a city they are banned from
- City Warn should be restored (Except for cities within 1 km of POI)
- The Mayor should have expanded zoning ability to better maintain the city layout
- The Mayor should not be able to dismantle a city
- It should be easier to elect in a new Mayor
- Grant Zoning shouldn’t be in the hands of Militia
I realize there is a huge list of items related to Player Cities that likely won’t be done for a year or more. Once this became apparent I became rather apathetic about the whole forum discussion thing having realized the futility of it all. However, it was on my mind so figured I’d toss it out there anyways =>P.
To Close: Player Cities are a Community and the Many and the Needs of the Many should outweigh the needs of the Few. SOE needs to wake up and realize that there is more to property than a house deed.Business depends on city services and the ability to have the city grow and adapt. A rogue Mayor or griefers can destroy or diminish the value of this property and the Player Cities need to be able to look after themselves. If someone doesn't like the way a city is run they can move out or try and get a new Mayor elected. THAT is democracy.
Gasp wrote:
The only part of your post I don't agree with is the not giving the "grant zoning" to militia. Or I would accept a separate feature to give others that right.
Grant Zoning should be removed from the Militia and granted to a City Planner group
or
Grant Zoning should work for exactly one structure
and
Every time someone grants zoning the Mayor should know who granted it and who received it
and
If structures are placed by someone who got zoning by someone who exploited their authority the Mayor should have a period of time in which they could VETO that new structure and move it outside of the city boundries.
All very good ideas....I especially like the idea about getting a notification about WHO granted zoning to whom. It would sure let you know if you had someone on your militia that's not looking out for the best interests of the city.
Fidgiter wrote:
Gasp wrote:
The only part of your post I don't agree with is the not giving the "grant zoning" to militia. Or I would accept a separate feature to give others that right.
Grant Zoning should be removed from the Militia and granted to a City Planner group
or
Grant Zoning should work for exactly one structure
and
Every time someone grants zoning the Mayor should know who granted it and who received it
and
If structures are placed by someone who got zoning by someone who exploited their authority the Mayor should have a period of time in which they could VETO that new structure and move it outside of the city boundries.
Finnean wrote:
good post brother
while we may never see city warn again, a similiar one that ejects the person or mutes their toon within the town might be good.
I dont think barring someone from entering the city limits should be impossible....
City Warn shouldn't be any issue when beyond 1km of a POI provided there is a suitable amount of time (1 minute) for the banned party to "Get out of Dodge". Ultimately nobody "Has" to go to a player city and even if they find themselves murdered by a ruthless member of the militia they then know "Hey! Don't go there!". Which, in the case where the "victem" was being disruptive, is the GOAL for using the citywarn.