CUEmu - Thread Posts

PadiOne

Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:28 am

i realized recently that many cities are dying due to no fault of the cities politicians. Players come and go from rpgs and unfortunately leave their house full of crap in the middle of your town.

Recently the devs implemented a change that cause long time MIA's to not be counted in a cities population. I agree iwth this move. I keeps you from having artificially large cities just so a guild can get a shuttleport by cross server trading their lots for a bigger town. I think that this is a good way to limit the number of successful player cities in the game and concentrate the server population into them in order to promote interaction between the players.

Having stuck up for the devs on that point, I now need to chastise them for not taking this measure far enough and causing politicians undue grief. How many dead houses do you have in your cities becuase the maintenance is paid thru next year? This makes bringing fresh blood into your town a difficult task. City planning becomes increasingly hard due to the number of structures in your town that you can't move and don't count toward your population. I know its a difficult point to find a solution too, but there needs to bea way to remove these structures. It would be simple for structures tied to cancelled accounts. Just let the politician demolish them. However, alot of these structures were dropped in cross server trades that are part of active accounts, but that the owner truly plays on another server and jsut dropped the house to getone in his city in kind.

____________________________________________

Kerico

Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:21 pm

#2

On top of that... they also made a change where it takes about 6 weeks to decay once it gets to 0 maintenance.

THEEVILFORCE

Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:14 am

#3

we have this problem with city growth cant move stupid houses to plan our bigger city.

politician should get a /move command that tells a player they have 30 or 60 days to move the structure if it does not, the city mayor gets a /wipe command to remove the structure.

DarthRyo

Sat Jul 17, 2004 1:14 pm

#4

we can dream for those command...

oh, in 2005 maybe

Darsth Ryô
Leader of GOTH
(Glory of the Hunt)

Naboo, Eclipse

SeismicEdge

Sat Jul 17, 2004 8:43 pm

#5

PadiOne wrote:

Recently the devs implemented a change that cause long time MIA's to not be counted in a cities population.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

When did this happen? We have a town with over 40 inactive player houses that have votes still registered for a Mayor that has no politician skills and we have had this situation for several months now.

If the devs have implemented a change where they no longer count, when does it take effect?

OteTwilek

Sun Jul 18, 2004 12:36 pm

#6

here is something i read the other day is along the same lines. I agree with some (not all) of what is stated.

Ieshediwrote:

i realized recently that many cities are dying due to no fault of the cities politicians. Players come and go from rpgs and unfortunately leave their house full of crap in the middle of your town.

Recently the devs implemented a change that cause long time MIA's to not be counted in a cities population. I agree iwth this move. I keeps you from having artificially large cities just so a guild can get a shuttleport by cross server trading their lots for a bigger town. I think that this is a good way to limit the number of successful player cities in the game and concentrate the server population into them in order to promote interaction between the players.

Having stuck up for the devs on that point, I now need to chastise them for not taking this measure far enough and causing politicians undue grief. How many dead houses do you have in your cities becuase the maintenance is paid thru next year? This makes bringing fresh blood into your town a difficult task. City planning becomes increasingly hard due to the number of structures in your town that you can't move and don't count toward your population. I know its a difficult point to find a solution too, but there needs to bea way to remove these structures. It would be simple for structures tied to cancelled accounts. Just let the politician demolish them. However, alot of these structures were dropped in cross server trades that are part of active accounts, but that the owner truly plays on another server and jsut dropped the house to getone in his city in kind.

O'te, RETIRED
Never Upset A Dragon
Because You Are Crunchy
And Taste Like Ketsup

OteTwilek

Sun Jul 18, 2004 12:38 pm

#7

repost (dont know how to edit posts yet

)

Ieshediwrote:

This situation is total unexceptable. Short of mediating disputes within the planetary sytem, what can SOE do that lessens the chance of this happening? They can limit cross server citizens (probablywouldbe hugely unpopular), Make citizens vote every week, instead of carrying votes forward.! (Also, probably not possible... Unless voting could also be done from a Capitol terminal on the planet the city is on.) Deactivate inactive accounts...? Hmmmm. Here's what I recommend:

- Levy an Imperial Citizen Tax on any peep not a member of a city, say 20% of the weekly maintenance cost of a small house.(Where am I going with this? Hold on I'm getting there!) If a player is a member of a city, any city, then they only get taxed by the city, not the Federation. Why? It will encorage people to be citizends (Buy a house and declare). Ok. What happens if they aren't a city citizen and can't pay the Imperial Federal Citizen's Tax each week. (sorry fresh out of funds.) No problems, you can't use public transportation for that week and are agro'd by any Imperial NPC.

- Make voting terminals in the Capitols of each planet, as well as the City Hall. At the terminal,the player accepts the city for which he is a member, looks at who's running and votes. (Banned players can now vote.) Voting only, no adding players for the race - that's still done at the City Hall.

- Voting occurs every two weeks, not weekly.

- Any player account that'sinactiveis automatically deleted after 48 hours.

- Limit cross server citizens creation to only one a week per server, or after the next planet election cycle, whichever is longer. (If you're on Chilastra and your account goes inactive or your player is deleted, you must wait until after the next election to create a new character.)

- Make it impossible to /cityban a citizen. (see next one)

- Give Mayor's the ability to /condemstructure which, 1) Sends a message to all city residence that the Mayor has issued the command for structure at xxxx,xxxx,. 2) Sends a message to the structure owner that notifies the owner of the impending destruction. 3) Marks the structure for automatic destruction seven days after server confims receipt of notification by structure owner. 4) Automatically destroys the structure seven days after confirmed notification to owner or 30 days after command if notification undelivered to owner. (i.e. player hasn't logged in.) - PLAYERS WHOSE STRUCTURE IS CONDEMNED CAN NOT BE /citybanned. Also, the Mayor can only have one /condemstructure active at a time.

- Limit the number of new /cityban to one, or two a day and have no more peeps banned than 20% of city size. (i.e. 100 citizens, only twenty bans for the city.)

- Citizens must be a city citiizen for one election cycle before being able to run for Mayor. (Help prevent hyjacking)

O'te, RETIRED
Never Upset A Dragon
Because You Are Crunchy
And Taste Like Ketsup

Fneegan

Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:53 am

#8

First, I like the 6 week of inactivity that removes cits from the cit list after 6 weeks of inactivity so much that MAYBE it should even become 4 weeks. Hey, if you haven't logged on at least once in a month -

But, the mayor should get advance email on this such as "PadiOne has not logged on in 3 weeks and will be removed from the cit list next city update " or something to that nature.

That has noBIG effects.

These have bigger effects - some are :

+Harvesters. If a player places a harvester(s)(cross server or not) and never logs in - well you get to keep those forever as long as you pay the maintenance.

Houses.If a player goes away with the military for 4 or 6 months,they should have a method that I can pay maintenance on my houseand keep their items. Sure,being offthe cit listhelpsmayors for voting purposess but houses and belongings shouldn't be zapped because a LEGIT player isaway for an extended period.

Problem is Legit and Non-Legit players....

Maybe, what is needed is a VACATIONstorage that is set up to 6 months.From the radial buttons on your VACATION chestyou add your vendors, harvester and items and you put up a AWAY for xyz days flag.

Cahito

Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:48 pm

#9

The problem is that if the 6 weeks inactive rule is brought back.... it could cause some devestating effects for player cities. Small house maintence is cheap! The odds are that the inactive player probably has LOTS of maintence in that house. If I am correct on this... houses dont disspear right when a player stops paying for their account,....the housewill stay there for up to 6 Months (if there is plenty of maintence in that house). This creates a problem for the city becuase there is not much room for the city to grow. Those houses could prevent new possible residents from finding a spot for a house. In my opinion... as long as the house is physically sitting there.. the owner should stay a resident. I agree that having inactive cities in the game is not a good idea... but the problem of what to do with the houses MUST be solved first. If not... for some cities.. even the best.. willface a difficult time operating land development because of the high percent of land owned by inactive residents.

Cahito
Mayor of Plucky DuckyVille

LadyPirate

Wed Jul 21, 2004 4:45 am

#10

No offense to the devs...you've done some good things

but if they cant stop that annyoying slide everytime you sit down somewhere what makes you think they can do all this?

"Duct tape is like the force: It has a dark side and a light side and it holds the universe together."
- Carl Zwanzig

ThirdJEM

Wed Jul 21, 2004 9:32 pm

#11

This is a very anoying problem, something needs to be done.

And some sort of city planning tool would help out alot too... but yeah these "dead" structures are very very very anoying.....

Laviniaa Andronicus, Mayor New Hope, Dantooine--Ahazi;
Quintus Andronicus, Master Bounty Hunter (Here.. I'll track you so you can kill me.);

Covenant

StumanKadir

Wed Jul 21, 2004 10:51 pm

#12

Actually, the problem with the old 6 week rule was not that it didnt work (it did), or that cities dropped because of the fact that they were comprised entirely of cross-server trades (some where and some did). It also wasnt really due to any backlash from the community (once people saw what it wasdoing, they largely agreed with it).

It was more the bugged nature of the patch that brought about its demise. The patch resulted in some players being kicked even though they had logged in the day before; of Mayors being booted from residency even though they had been logging in daily (which resulted in some cities being inadvertently destroyed at the next update) and of a fair few players reporting that once they had been booted, they had to redeed their house, drop it back down and redeclare residency again. There were also large numbers of reports of cities loosing infrastructure even though they had temporarily dropped a level during the week but were back to the correct number at the next reset. The list of bugs to do with that patch is very long.

If they had the resources to correct these bugs we would see it back in force. But with the way things are going, I seriouslt doubt it will get addressed at all this year.

Stuman Anikadir
Maker of stuff - on hiatis until they work out what they are doing to this game
Will be back once the Crafting Upgrade is announced
Sick of playing with kiddies, come play with the old folks, we are just as gamey as the next person

OteTwilek

Thu Jul 22, 2004 10:40 am

#13

i agree with a lot of this. but then we come to the 6 week thing. i think it's a good idea, but i know that the devs aren't going to do anything about it as poli isn't at the top of their little list. they are far more worried about having "idej" running around. but wasn't that an elite group? something special? but hey, who am i to complain that i've seen 75 idej in a day?

anywho...what about the /condemnstructure thingy they mentioned. i have no citizens that aren't ever online. but after a while i think it would be a good idea. that way the mayor has the control of it. and what about a way to excuse a citizen from your city to avoid a possible "hostile" takeover. what if the mayor and other citizens have an issue with one citizen? you can't kick them out can't make them leave. then they start bringing in their cross server friends and one of them possible poli (you don't know they are their friends just a hypothetical senario). Where does that leave you and your citizens?

lots of questions with no resolution in sight...shame on the devs for thinking that other aspects of the game are more important. i think they are all important. they need to hire specific dev groups for different aspects of the game. that way everyone gets a fair chance. but you've got the same devs working on Empire Divided that are working on JTL. That makes a lot of sense.

O'te, RETIRED
Never Upset A Dragon
Because You Are Crunchy
And Taste Like Ketsup

Politician Archive

Thread: Dead cities