Politician Archive
Thread: Thanks to the Devs for the City Ban...
Makkaio wrote:
Giving players the ability to shut off content to the game with a slash command is pure bunk. Plain and simple. I don't blame anyone for using it, but I blame the devs for it being in the game to begin with. Commands like /cityban and /citywarn immeditately take away role-play elements from a ROLE-PLAYING GAME.
I'm just wondering, what "content" would yoube excluded from?
/cityban and /citywarn help maintain the ROLE-PLAYING atmosphere of the people who live in the city, not those that may or may not visit that city. You should not have the right to go to any player city you want and demand that they all behave in a mannor that fits your Role Playing. However, the people that live in that city do (or should)have the right to set thier own rules for city conduct so that they can create the Role Playing atmosphere that they created the city for in the first place. And if you refuse to obide by those rules, the Militia should be able to remove you.
How hard can it be to allow citys to declair them self as "Stongholds" or "Restricted". What that, each city could list the "rules" of the city. If you try and enter the city (via a shuttle ticket) you have to agree to follow the rules of that city. You would be ?warned" before traveling to that city what the rules are and what the consiquences are (/citywarn or force PvP). Thus, if you go there, you are accepting that risk.
IF you travel to that city by foot or bike, and you conduct your self via a mannor that is unaccptable and you get banned, you should be removed from the city. If you try and re-enter the city, you would get the noticifcation of the "rules" and as a result you would assume that risk.
I'm not saying that people should be "forced" out of the city, but I am say that we, as mitila, should be able to enforce the defined rules of the city with more athoridy then "I'll report you!) (like those ever get paid attention to).
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 02:22 PM
Swg-Addict wrote:
Your argument is "they are doing their job".
But...you lost TOTALLY out of sight, that their job is a CRIME !
davemusic wrote:
Swg-Addict wrote:
Your argument is "they are doing their job".
But...you lost TOTALLY out of sight, that their job is a CRIME !
WRONG ! Ask the Emperor ! All he will say is : Execute Order 66 !
It is against the law to kill someone, but it is not against the law to kill someone in self defense or via the dealth penilty. So Bounties are the same way. If the Law Enforcements allows forBounty Collection then itwill not be considered against the law, if they don't then you might be in trouble.
It's similar to being able to carry a gun in Florida (where it is not a crime to do so) but not being able to even have a gun in New York. Same action, two different results.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 02:32 PM
FSCSexplorer wrote:
here here Audio....
And if the person cloned at the npc city they ported into they wouldn't get "griefed"
And if they didn't leave their personal home or better yet if they didn't play the game they wouldn't get griefed. What's you point? It's ok to grief someone to hell and back because they could have, should have, if only they would haveanticipated the worst in humanity being online with them and prepared for it?
Maybe some people did "lag" and not see the warning but then again if you adventure out of the npc cities aren't you aware that there are things that can kill you ?
That appear as blue dots on my radar one instant and are red the next? Nope I've never heard of that unless I chose to go overt. Only problems I've ever had would be latency not catching up to me and having mobs spawn on top of me, never had lag turn an ally into an enemy.
It's not forced pvp.
Then what would you label forcing a person to respond to attacks by the militia which could have been completly unprovoked? Super happy fun time bananariffic surprise?
One freely entered a situation that could result in pvp. It's not the militia's problem that the person doesn't know how the game works.
I must have missed all those 'Warning, militia-men will /warn you for no reason what-so-ever' signs posted around telling me that noone is welcome here in this public setting.
It's why we have the stupid GCW pve now.
Actually a large part of it was the absolute hatred of the revenge TEF. Themepark campers played their part but they weren't the only cause.
"Personality whaaa" wanted access to all the cool things of the GCW and being overt, but they really didn't want to pvp and hoped they could get around without getting into pvp.
Yeah, imagine that expecting there to not be 20 man dark jedi ganksquads 20 meters from a rebel stronghold. The 5 minute TEF overt/covert system left a mile wide hole for people to do nothing but denigrate and worsen another players experience just to get their jollies off.
When they were engaged in pvp by others ( and lost) then the floods of whaaa started and the game got changed.
Novice Marksmen being angered by Master Defenders killing them, tea bagging them, and then harrasing them with /tells all because they wanted to see Emperor Palpatine in a Star Wars game?! The horror.
In my nearly 8 years of playing mmorpg's it's the "personality whaaa" that ruins these games over and over.
Thereare basically two types.
Those that get their overpowered abilities that allow them domination taken away from them ( pvp'ers) If you're talking about the people who rant and rave whenever their 'I win' button gets taken away they're also known recreationally as a*sholes who can't get past FPS mentalities or understand the concept of empathy. If you mean the normal PvP'ers who act respectfully then nevermind.
Those that have no pvp intentions or find they can't pvp welland want the game curtailed to benefit their playstyle as equally as those willing to take the risks. Colloquially known as, people who play the game and don't want to get ganked by jacka*ses left and right. Left to play with other people in an environment that doesn't spark competition and in so doing spark unfounded hatred and idiocy. The ones that like to stay away from the 'anonymity jackhole symptom' that the internet can breed.
You see, deep down both these types do want balance.................
For everybody but "my account".
Does this mean because I don't want my lvl 1 crafter or merchant getting killed while making harvester runs that crafters and non combat characters should get a godmode switch ?
It probably means they don't want a 3 meter tall wookiee that can rip people's arms out of their sockets to be killed by a sewer rat in under 4 seconds.
Even offline if a stranger shows up in a small town the local police keep a close watch on them.
If the person doesn't get an "appearance approval" they are even asked to move along and visit somewhere else.
Wow you must live in a crappy town. I've never seen cops hassle anyone without reason where I live. Unless of course you mean giving out of state drivers heftier speeding tickets?
The BH in the original post wasn't stopped from getting his mark, only delayed.
Again, your city, your rules.
Nobody is "forcing" you to go to a player city.
And the point of player cities is to bring people together so noone is forcing you to drive them apart. Rather they're implying and promoting you to do the opposite. If you want a gated community where you don't have to deal with 'unwanted' people there are some great single player games, or multiplayer ones that you can have your own dedicated server with.
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
Let me ask you this, based on what you are saying, should anyone who want to move into a city have the right to do so? In other words, are your greifing someing if you do not grant them zoning rights inside your city?
After all, according to you Player Cities arepublic and restricting accessof limiting game content, so should Player cities have the right to choose who is a citizen or not?
If you think that they should not have to give everyone access to live in the city, how is that not greifing or resrticting content based onyour own arguement?
They can still wander the streets, they can still experience everything that a city has to offer. Being a citizen simply means you are immune to the militia and a part of a community just like a guild. Being a citizen is not intrinsically tied to experiencing content in the game or content that a player city provides it's just a perk to yourself. You can enjoy all the benefits that are rightfully yours while being /banned from every city in the galaxy. However being /warned prevents you from that because it produces large areas of the game that you cannot safely transverse. (NPC attacks are easy to avoid compared to PC)
So no, I feel that player cities can be exclusive in their choices of who gets to reside there but not who gets to experience there without being hypocritical. You don't have to bea Chicagoan to enjoy 'the taste' or the rich architecture and beauty of the city.
- You don't have people going toChicago and telling the police (ie Militia)to take a hike because they are ruining thier vacation and if they want to fight in front of abars (ie: duel in front of the cantana) then they have a right to do that and any attempt of the city to stop them is enfriengeing on their rights (ie removing content).
- But this is what you are saying to player cities. You are basicly saying. Than you for creating this city and paying for this city so I can have something to do and you have to cater to my demands, and if you do something that I do not agree with you are Grief me and restricting my game content (even though I do not need to be here and can get everything you have to offer from an NPC city).
Roam the streets? Experiance what the city has to offer? How are you going to do that if you are banned from all the things that player citys has?
Why is it that you have more "rights" to experiance my city then I do to create the experiance?
Khristen wrote:
It's not restricting or griefing to not allow a particular player zoning rights in your city because your city isn't the only Player City out there. There are many player cities on several planets so that all players that have a desire to be a part of the Player City system can do so. They can even start their own, if they chose, although they may not be able to do so on a particular planet because of the city caps.
It's when characters are "physically" restricted from entering certain areas by other players that it becomes an issue.
Execpt for houses and other structrures right? It's alright to grief them by not allowing them in your house.
I am yet to have either of you answer the question as to what "content" you are being restricted from having? What is in a player city that you cannot get somewhere else or from a NPC city?
The only content that a player city brings are the "perks" of being part of the city (which right now are none). So, if you are not a citizens of a player city, what content are you not being given access to if you cannot go to that city?
If you are banned, you cannot use any of ther terminals (same terminals in a NPC city) or the trainers (same trainers in a NPC city) or structures (same structure in an NPC city). So, all your whinning is because want to be able to just aimless rome up and down the area of a Player City having no access to any of it at all?
And that ability to aimless roam is more important then the player's who live in, pay for, and play in that city to have the freedom to remove people from their city?
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 04:21 PM
NihiMetal wrote:
Why is it that you have more "rights" to experiance my city then I do to create the experiance?
I'll answer with a question: Why is it that you feel that you have the right to cut off a section of a planet and make it your personal property? (And don't tell me the houses do that same thing, because no house is as nig as a city.)
I am yet to have either of you answer the question as to what "content" you are being restricted from having? What is in a player city that you cannot get somewhere else or from a NPC city?
As the previous poster said, the content is the land your city is built on.
And that ability to aimless roam is more important then the player's who live in, pay for, and play in that city to have the freedom to remove people from their city?
Why would you need to ban someone who is aimlessly roaming? And there you go with the money again. What, do you want people to have to pay a fee to enter your city?
It also allowed people to grief others. And I'm so glad you feel you need to avoid me. /rolleyes What would I do? Spam at your shuttleport? Report me. Look around at the pretty town? Oh, the horror.
Cafa wrote:
/citywarn allowed us to form a social community and govern its contents. It was the promise of player cities to avoid people, like you, that believe we are all here for your entertainment. Unfortunately, the devs thought otherwise and refuse to have any conversation on the subject, which is par.
Fivo Asia
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
Why is it that you have more "rights" to experiance my city then I do to create the experiance?
I'll answer with a question: Why is it that you feel that you have the right to cut off a section of a planet and make it your personal property? (And don't tell me the houses do that same thing, because no house is as nig as a city.)
- The Million Dollars a week that I pay to OWN that piece of land is my right! Just like the money you pay to maintian your house gives you access over the house and the land.
- You telling me that since that land is game content, someone can call you a greifer because you have a house on it and they cannot get to it to pull resources?
I am yet to have either of you answer the question as to what "content" you are being restricted from having? What is in a player city that you cannot get somewhere else or from a NPC city?
As the previous poster said, the content is the land your city is built on.
- How is land content?
- No wonder this game lacks so many things to do, you are defining content as land? So in your eyes, if they add another planet with nothing but the same creatures and tons of land, they have added content?
- You don't have the right to place a harventer on the land, you don't have to right to place a house on the land?
- So if land is nowcontent, how is me not granting your access to "use" the land not griefing too?
And that ability to aimless roam is more important then the player's who live in, pay for, and play in that city to have the freedom to remove people from their city?
Why would you need to ban someone who is aimlessly roaming? And there you go with the money again. What, do you want people to have to pay a fee to enter your city?
- Sure. It's a sight seeing fee. I tell you what, why don't you go and create your own player city. You have that right. Nothing is stoping you. Then when you do, and once you get it set up. I'll come and tell you how to do things and what I want and what you have to give me. And I don't care if you are trying to RP in your city or what you are trying to do because you don't matter. Try and see of your opinion changes.
- Better yet, you have a home. How about if I come and live in it for free and there is nothing you can do to stop me, infact, if you try, you would be the one to go to jail.
- I would not ban someone for visiting or kick someone out for visiting, but I would if they are always there dueling in front of my cantina (after repat requests not to duel in the city), pulling out thier Band instruments outside the city hall steps just annoying people. Not by saying anything, but by just being childish and ruining the enviroement we are trying to create in our city.
- Or people that sit there and spam to come visit thier vendor to everyone that runs by. OR the annoy little kids that love to run around you while you are trying to have a RP event or get up on the Theature Stage while people are perfomance during an event.
- Yes, I would like to and feel I have the RIGHT to kcik people out of the city, even if it is only for a X amount of time so that STOP runing the content of the people that gathered in the city to begin with!
- But to you, his right (as a non citizen) to ruin my gaming content (who is part of the city and the one PAY to have the content in the first place) is more important.
- THAT IS LAME!
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 04:56 PM
NihiMetal wrote:
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
Why is it that you have more "rights" to experiance my city then I do to create the experiance?
I'll answer with a question: Why is it that you feel that you have the right to cut off a section of a planet and make it your personal property? (And don't tell me the houses do that same thing, because no house is as big as a city.)
- The Million Dollars a week that I pay to OWN that piece of land is my right! Just like the money you pay to maintian your house gives you access over the house and the land.
- You telling me that since that land is game content, someone can call you a greifer because you have a house on it and they cannot get to it to pull resources?
How did I know this was coming? Look up and reread what I highlighted in green. (Yes, I did just fix a typo.) It's a matter of size.
I am yet to have either of you answer the question as to what "content" you are being restricted from having? What is in a player city that you cannot get somewhere else or from a NPC city?
As the previous poster said, the content is the land your city is built on.
- How is land content?
- No wonder this game lacks so many things to do, you are defining content as land? So in your eyes, if they add another planet with nothing but the same creatures and tons of land, they have added content?
- You don't have the right to place a harventer on the land, you don't have to right to place a house on the land?
- So if land is nowcontent, how is me not granting your access to "use" the land not griefing too?
Sure, land can be content. However, letting me place a house and letting me walk or drive through are two different things.
And that ability to aimless roam is more important then the player's who live in, pay for, and play in that city to have the freedom to remove people from their city?
Why would you need to ban someone who is aimlessly roaming? And there you go with the money again. What, do you want people to have to pay a fee to enter your city?
- Sure. It's a sight seeing fee.
Are you serious? That's sad. Really, just find a new game if you don't want visitors.
- I tell you what, why don't you go and create your own player city. You have that right. Nothing is stoping you. Then when you do, and once you get it set up. I'll come and tell you how to do things and what I want and what you have to give me. And I don't care if you are trying to RP in your city or what you are trying to do because you don't matter. Try and see of your opinion changes.
I have had my own player city, and I will assume leadership of the one I currently live in in about a week. If you mean literally come to the city, feel free to visit. Desert City, Lok, Corbantis. We have a shuttle. I'm not sure what you mean by tell me how to do things, but feel free to offer suggestions.
- Better yet, you have a home. How about if I come and live in it for free and there is nothing you can do to stop me, infact, if you try, you would be the one to go to jail.
/rolleyes Again, not the same and you know it.
- I would not ban someone for visiting or kick someone out for visiting, but I would if they are always there dueling in front of my cantina, pulling out thier Band intruments ourside the city hall steps just annoying people. Not by saying anything, but by just being childish and runing the enviroement we are trying to create in our city.
Then /addignore and /report them. That's what I would do if I ran into a situation like that.
- But to you, his right (as a non citizen) to ruin my gaming content (who is part of the city and the one PAY to have the content in the first place) is more important.
No, it's not. They are both equally important. But what you want to do is play your own game. You can't hide in your city and pretend no one else plays this game. Really, I think you should go try SimCity, then you won't have other people to ruin your fun.
- THAT IS LAME!
I'm glad you feel that way.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 04:49 PM
asdf123 wrote:
Thunderheart wrote:
Blimigerite wrote:
Jilea wrote:
So let me be clear and ensure I understand this. Thunderheart you said previously that player cities could be used to deny people content if they were built close to said content but in this recent patch the ability to shuttle to these cities was cutoff right? Is this not the same as what you are preventing. If it is not then why were you waging the previous argument 3 weeks ago?
There is a subtle difference. Not being able to shuttle only adds a delay to the content. Players can still go to the city via swoop bike. But citywarn allowed the local militia to kill other players and thus keeping them out of the city indefinitely as long as there were enough militia members to get the job done.
Blimigerite is correct.
Since when did content spawn in player cities....gimme a break, you took the lazy way out and took away city warn because little cry babies hated dieing in cities. Then came along coverts being able to blow up "FAIRLY" placed turrets on PvP bases and AGAIN you took out the lazy way out and just removed the turrets from the game, instead of adding back in city warn. City warn, or even better making it so coverts couldnt attack PvP bases items, would have been the proper, most logical way to fix that issue. Lets not even get started with the ranged arms...
There is a city on Corellia on the Bria server that is built around the small hut where Sludge Panthers regularly spawn. The hut is, in fact, right next to their shuttle port, I have often ported in and come face to face with three angry panthers!. Sludge panthers are part of the Padawan quests. So, if Citywarn was in place a person could be locked from that content.
Another example is the Gungan, Imperial Battle ground. The one on Bria has houses all around it. One is right next to the temple! If someone had wanted to they could have placed a City Hall their and had that POI would be wthin that cities limits. Again, players would be denied a place they could take part in an ongoing battle and earn faction points.
While Player Cities will prevent mission spawns and random spawns from appearing within their limits, spawns that are tied to a poi still appear. That is the kind of content a player would be locked out of due to city warn.
Please stop discussing /citywarn. It's gone, it's not coming back.
Move along...
Sighryn wrote:
Please stop discussing /citywarn. It's gone, it's not coming back.
Move along...
Hey now, be careful, I would hate forthe same to be said of your Floor Plans on Naboo.
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
FSCSexplorer wrote:Even offline if a stranger shows up in a small town the local police keep a close watch on them.If the person doesn't get an "appearance approval" they are even asked to move along and visit somewhere else.Wow you must live in a crappy town. I've never seen cops hassle anyone without reason where I live. Unless of course you mean giving out of state drivers heftier speeding tickets?The BH in the original post wasn't stopped from getting his mark, only delayed.Again, your city, your rules.Nobody is "forcing" you to go to a player city.And the point of player cities is to bring people together so noone is forcing you to drive them apart. Rather they're implying and promoting you to do the opposite. If you want a gated community where you don't have to deal with 'unwanted' people there are some great single player games, or multiplayer ones that you can have your own dedicated server with.
As to the first point ... these planets aren't Earth, they're supposed to be semi-civilized worlds embroiled in a bitter civil war .... when you approach a strange town for the first time, you should have some doubt in your mind whether it's more like Tombstone or Paris. Instead, they're basically all the same bland version of a rather uninteresting shopping mall with the broken, featureless system that's in place.
As to the second point, the only 'point' of a player city is whatever the inhabitants decide the 'point' is ... because the game mechanics are too broken and inadequate for anyone to seriously claim that the design implies a single, one-size-fits-all 'point' that every city serves.
/citywarn as initially implemented had exploitable design flaws, and instead of fixing them the whole concept was junked at the same time that most of the Player City concept's potential was abandoned to pursue buggy expansions. That's the crying shame of it all, that so much potential was so poorly used.
I'm not in favor of forcing anyone into PvP, especially when it's so broken and unbalanced. But there are many more options than that if you use a little imagination and creativity. There could be an option which the Mayor can enable that turns the city 'Hostile', where the militia would have the power to /warn and initiate pvp, but a 'Hostile' city would show on the planetary map circled in red or some other obvious symbol. You could get a System message as you cross the city limits 'Now entering Tombstone, Mayor has advised the city is currently in a state of Martial Law and strangers violating curfew may be subject to attack -- turn back now if you wish to avoid becoming attackable by Militia.' So maybe you miss the message or it's a very laggy day and you don't get the message until you've already been turned Overt by spending 45 seconds inside a Martial Law city .... and you die. Well, ok, it won't be the first or last time that a bug kills you in this game, that's for sure. But now you know you want to avoid Tombstone.
The point is that this is not a binary design choice where there's either NO spontaneous pvp in cities or ALWAYS possible pvp in cities. The problem is that basically no development time or resource has been applied to the Player City system in years. As far as the management team is concerned, we already paid for Player Cities, so why improve them? They want to improve things that we can only get in an expansion, so we'll buy more shiny boxes. The things we already paid for, they're perfectly happy to let rot.
You can't do much except refuse to buy the expansions and continue to harangue them about the shameful quality of the product you paid for and expect to be properly maintained with your monthly subscription fee.