Politician Archive
Thread: Thanks to the Devs for the City Ban...
NihiMetal wrote:
Hey now, be careful, I would hate forthe same to be said of your Floor Plans on Naboo.
The Naboo medium house footprint? The jury is still out on that one. Maybe it'll be recalled, maybe it won't.
But on /citywarn? The DEVs, the RED names, have stated that it ain't comin' back. Not maybe... not "at a later date"... it's not happenin'. Period.
JodoKai wrote:
Swg-Addict wrote:
I dont agree with this at all..If you wana ban the BH from useing City things or Keep him outs buildings thats your right..It isnt your right to threat'n to report someone for doing there Job..yes, the BH could have acted better but, if the Jedi is there he has a right to be there...
...which is the masterquestion!
Lets see it in a way of reallife:
We have laws
We have cities
We have the administrative in charge for the very local city laws.
I am a mayor, so i am the administrative of my city.
My city has a simple law:
Be nice, dont hurt any of my citizens.
Your argument is "they are doing their job".
But...you lost TOTALLY out of sight, that their job is a CRIME !
A BH is no "official", a BH is a "secretly hired" professional killer stalking his mark - which is a member of my city.
If see a "criminal" (BH in this case) trying to get his "job" done in my city, i ban him.
Be overt, and you get even killed instantly for "being a treat to my city".
What does the police do in real life, when some1 is trying to kill some1 else ?
Right, they will open fire on you after warning.
I am the police, my millit is the citys police.
I cant see griefing here.
But i DO see griefing in BH Level 80, stalking low level Paddys. Or BH ganks stalking a mark 5:1.
Its not your fault tho, this is something which needs to be adressed by the Devs, "removing the hatress from the game".
FYI:
I am a BH and Jedi myself, i know both sides and i do understand both sides.
Thats why i say "There is no balance, one side will always complain".
Remove the "old relict" of XP loss for Jedis from the game (old relict cuz it was brought in to prevent a Jedi overpopulation, which has failed as we all can see, so this "intrument" is outdated).
Jedis dont care cloning (make sure your insurance is up to date), but i consider it "griefing" by "manipulating" the grindprocess of a paying player due to other players (note plz that both pay the same ammount/fee).
My 0.02....
Ah but here's where you're wrong. Yes you are Mayor of your town, but you still have to abide by "state" law, and the states have to abide by "Federal" law. According to "Federal" law (The Empire) being a Jedi is against the law. The Empire has offered a reward for a criminal and Bounty Hunter is trying to bring a ciminal to justice. The police would be helping the BH not trying to stop him. This is just as it is IRL. We have Real Life bounty hunters that go after criminals that have a reward for capure.
I see the OP is totally wrong. From the story it sounds like the BH was role-playing. Picture the scene: Boba Fett drives into town on his "hog". He get's off looks around a bit. Some official comes up to him "Can I help you"
How many of you picture Boba Fett saying "Yes please ma'ma. You see I'm trying to bring this mean jedi to justice and claim my reward. I do hope you understand"
I see him turning his head to the official, and then carrying on with his task. When he was banned, he said he was going to kill you both, obviously he knew he coudln't kill anyone that didn't want to PvP and this statement fits exactly what a BH would say. The OP laughing and breaking character doesn't mean the BH was an "immature kid" maybe he was just role-playing his character, something the OP certainly wasn't doing.
Ok, let me make this clear one last time for the People that are either not reading the entire post, or they just don't care and want to have a go at someone...
When I said this "kid" wanted to kill us...he went to another server and Threatned me with a Real Life threat...His exact words were...
****If I didn't make this clear before, my appoligise*****
"I'm going to find you and you [Edited] Husband and I'm going to cut your neck from ear to ear"...Also, As I said before, My City that I built Ground up, My Rules...
I was Protecting MY Jedi that is a Citizen in My city...whether it had been my husband or not. I have 3 Jedi's that live in my city and 2 more on the way. I will ban whomever I see causing Greif for any of my citizens, Jedi or not. If I owned my own town, I could care less who you were, Make threats, and you get kicked out.
If you want to be a BH and Hunt My Jedi, in My City, you'll need to get through me first. I don't allow it, I won't allow it.
Plain and simple.
WunShot wrote:
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Well, I'm Not, Because I protected someone from Losing a Ton of XP they had to Grind months of, from some BH that used a respec...
1. Noone should have to face a ban because they don't want to talk to you.
There were Other reasons.
2. "He was trying to get into our houses" - Houses can be set private, if your citys patrons do not want their houses to be entered, they can set them private. Noone should face a ban for trying to walk into a building
I wonder if you would Think that way if someone tried to go into your house in RL, or because you forgot to place it to private in game..
3. Ultimately, you banned someone for trying to hunt your husband,
Uhmmm Yah, and I was PROTECTING Him as well
no matter what other excuses youmade upNOT Made up, the Truth, However I would expect an attitude like this from a BH...you weren't there, we were......How would you like someone to ban you from their city just because you created your own city?
Well, if you created your own city, I'm sure you would have rules as well, and I could actually care less if I was banned from someone else's city.
Because you banned a BH for doing what BH's do..what difference would that be?
Because I banned a BH from Hunting Jedi in MY city, I do as any good Mayor would.
4. I hope you just realized you've put up a huge "COME KILL OUR JEDI" sign up on the forums for everyone on your server to see.
This is where you are wrong, because I have had NO problems since.
Yes im a BH....been bh for over a year. I rarely hunt Jedi..in fact, i've only hunted 5 jedi in my time as a BH...but i'd like not to be banned by some#$%^&#$ when i do.
And the way you call others foul names, I would ban you on sight because of the way you act. If this is how you treat others on the forums, how do you treat them in game and RL...scary thought
If the BH was greifing your jedi....ok...but what you did i just plain wrong
Only a BH would think this.I find it Quite Funny how most of the people who have had a go at me are either BH's from the start or Respec'd BH's. They seem to be the only ones that are upset about this.
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
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.
- I don't think you missed it at all. You are talking about it very much, so how can you claim that you do not know that going to a player city runs the risk of getting /warned?
- What do you lose if this happens? 15 seconds of game play? If you get gank (rarely happens bu the way) then don't return to the city (unless you bring friends
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.
- Hatrid for TEF did not create Combants, that came because some people what to be able to do everything with no risk or consiqence for doing it.
- They want to be able to pretend to be in a"WAR" but not be attacked for picking a side in that war.
- They want to pretend to be in a war and attack people on thier terms, but not have the risk of being attack on someone else's terms
- They wanted a war were you now have an Imperial Player watching a player attack a NPC Stormtrooper (thus making that player an Obvious Rebel) and the Imperial Player has to "pretend" that he sees nothing because there is nothing he can do about it.
- "No, that is not a rebel I see over there killing that stormtrooper, it cannot be because I am Imperial and if he were a Rebel I would attack him because he is my enemy. Thus, he cannot be a rebel because I cannot attack him, even though he is killing that stromtrooper"
- Now, that is a WAR if I have ever seen one!
"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.
- I agree here, TEF was horible and so was Group TEF. But the "Combantant" status is not much better because it is watering down the GCW.
- If this is truely to be a WAR, then you should have to either be in it or out of it, no middle ground.
- Jedi are a seperate issue.
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.
- Your are not totally correct.
- The point of a Player City is to bring together players that become citizens of the city. Not bring together people that are not citizens of the city and all them to do whatever they want to at your expense.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 03:18 PM
NihiMetal wrote:
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.
I don't think you missed it at all. You are talking about it very much, so how can you claim that you do not know that going to a player city runs the risk of getting /warned?
What do you lose if this happens? 15 seconds of game play? If you get gank (rarely happens bu the way) then don't return to the city (unless you bring friends
Rarely? Hah! what server do you play on? Getting ganked was as much of a part of shuttling between worlds overt as the ticket droid was on Bloodfin. People camped the themeparks and spawns 'because it was the only place to get garunteed PvP' ...from novices. If your experience is that people won't do whatever they can to kill/grief you at the drop of a hat then you've lucked out. Plenty of players on 'fin that are respectable and mature but plenty of those other types too.
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.
Hatrid for TEF did not create Combants, that came because some people what to be able to do everything with no risk or consiqence for doing it. They want to be able to pretend to be in a"WAR" but not be attacked for picking a side in that war. They want to pretend to be in a war and attack people on thier terms, but not have the risk of being attack on someone else's terms They wanted a war were you now have an Imperial Player watching a player attack a NPC Stormtrooper (thus making that player an Obvious Rebel) and the Imperial Player has to "pretend" that he sees nothing because there is nothing he can do about it. "No, that is not a rebel I see over there killing that stormtrooper, it cannot be because I am Imperial and if he were a Rebel I would attack him because he is my enemy. Thus, he cannot be a rebel because I cannot attack him, even though he is killing that stromtrooper"
Now, that is a WAR if I have ever seen one!
Actuallythe largestvoice that I had heardto keep the current system was coming from those who hated the group TEF's and how they simply ruined your experience in a fight since you had no idea who your enemies where. All the ones vocally against it, pointing out how it screws up the RP part of this game where all the 'hardcore' PvP'ers who had never expressed any interest in RP before this. Some of 'em even went out of their way to try and ruin events.
Besides, I know the charcter names of imperial leaders, I've stood next to them in starports. Clearly being a rebel 'under cover' I should have been able to simply whip out a gun and kill them instantly as a great sacrifice to the Rebellion right? No?! Even though he's the cause of millions of my colleagues deaths? It may not be realistic, but then guns have a longer range than 64 meters, people can't 'lunge' 60 feet, lightsabers cut through anything in 1 touch, speeders can go over rocks, you die once and you're dead for good, rebels took part in strike and fade operations instead of en masse fights.
This is not the true Star Wars universe and sadly it shouldn't be treated as such. The new system streamlines combat though, you're either fighting other players or you're not. No hidden group members lurking the corners waiting to shoot you from behind. Rebel v Imperial both well known. Downtime has been eliminated so now the only thing barring you from a good fight is yourself.
"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.
I agree here, TEF was horible and so was Group TEF. But the "Combantant" status is not much better because it is watering down the GCW.
Only if you can't find any SF'ers. If I wanted to go out and get some PvP it wouldn't be hard at all, and I'd know who my enemies were on the field. If anything I've seen an increase in PvP since then because it's funner not worrying about GTEF.
If this is truely to be a WAR, then you should have to either be in it or out of it, no middle ground.
Tell that to people funding groups secretly but not overtly followers of them. There is a middle ground, it's called sympathizer and there are plenty of 'em.
Jedi are a seperate issue.
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.
Your are not totally correct.
The point of a Player City is to bring together players that become citizens of the city. Not bring together people that are not citizens of the city and all them to do whatever they want to at your expense.
From your point of view. From mine I've payed my dues in order to be able to explore every square meter of this world so long as my factional ties or completed quests allow it. Every inch ofCorellia is some content, some perspective that I haven't seen just yet and am privy to discover. Unless I'm performing a reportable/bannable offense I have every right to be anywhere. And you've yet to explain to me how you aren't allowed to do whatever you want to in your city thanks to that 1 character wandering around your streets.
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.
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.
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
I'm sorry, but does it not seem crazy that Players are being asked to invest significant amounts of game money to create and maintain something so that OTHER peope can use it?
No, that's pretty much the purpose of player cities. Your city is not your private playground and other people will use it. This is something you accept when you create a player city.
Again, you are wrong. This is a change to the system after what we were promised got nerfed by whiners that cannot walk 500 meters around a city and that's exactly the problem. Instead of walking 500 meters around our city, jerks that get their entertainment from causing as much grief as possible sit there for DAYS spamming curse words, random trash and being as harassing as possible. The luck of the draw is which CSR you get to solve the problem. Some are really cool (spawning DJM's on the offender) and some tell you that you will be banned if you file a ticket again.
/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:
It happens. RL mayors don't own their cities.
Um, for all intensive purposes, they do own the city if elected to the position. Please name me a town where the mayor, acting within the law which was established to give him/her that power, doesn't pretty much get to do what he wants to?
Fivo Asia
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 !Yikre
The Emperor is no official elected adminitrative, he is a criminal as well, in dictature-style charge due to a operation which is comparable to ...DOH, i stop here, i wont bring any RL politics into a gametalk:-P
Anyway, thats why got "removed" in EP6 :-P
Message Edited by Swg-Addict on 07-01-2005 04:08 AM
Khristen wrote:
Just a couple of points:
- A City Hall ceases to be personal property the moment it is placed. When the city is created it becomes part of that city and is tied to it.
Good morning Khristen
I disagree here.
The TECHNICAL gamemechanism of binding the CH to the city doesnt implicate the change of the right of property.
The deed MIGHT have been made by myself, or at least i bought it, it is my personal property which i "feed" into the gamemechanism by placing it to build a city.
The satisfaction of the gamemechanism is not automatically removing my right on this property.
(When u lend your son your cellphone to use it, its still your property)
Im the inital mayor (by placing the CH). I have the ownership on the CH as long as i agree to it, or if the city (made out of its citizen) is paying the costs of the deed into the citytreasury, or - if i simply DONATE the deed. This all is an individual "deal".
When the cityhall is still in my posession and i get elected out, i could pull the cityhall. This would cause a fallback of the city to level1 but not destroying the city when a new CH get placed within 24h.
Although this behaviour is crap, its just showing (and therefore explained once) what another view of "my city" could be. Dont blame me, blame the gamedesign:-P
This all would be much easier, if SoE would give the politicians the loving they are asking since ages for...
If a CH would be "replacable" like a PA, all these "problems" would be solved.
Furthermore, as long as im in charge (besides the above property issues) as the city mayor, i consider this city "mine", at least from the POV as "representing its executive" (elected by MY citizens).
I make the laws (rules), i tag my milit (police).
I disagree that a playerbased/placed city is a public "good". It is ACCESSABLE by the public, but you are a GUEST in a foreign city.
As a guest you will follow the cityrules and act appropiate.
Nanatree wrote:
How is it that people can make a threat that is considered a real life threat and then get all comfy-cozy while they hide behind the claim (by them and others) that they were/are "just roleplaying"? Let's get real...people who play for the roleplay aspect are laughed at quite often..yet it is the FIRST place someone who is being a "jerk" will try to go when s/he is "caught". Pulease..if you want to roleplay fine..if you want to be a Billy-bad butt go right ahead...but do it within the spirit of the GAME. Why on earth should anyone have to put up with threats? For that matter..why do people feel the need to claim "grief" when they don't get "their way" and yet if they are griefing someone claim it is all in "roleplay"? I pay my money to play and you pay yours..til one of us is paying for both of us neither has the right to tell the other how to play ; however, real life threats are just WRONG no matter how you cut it. What's next...I mean Bounty Hunters canhave a player offered Bounty put on their head..heck ANYONE can have a Bounty put on their head just because someone doesn't like something they said or did..yeesh. "I don't like the fact that player "x" is selling this item I want for what I consider is too much money...yo Guildies..I'll pay 100k to anyone who can kill this person." *boggle* Just sad.
This isagood comment you made, though I am not sure what it has to do with the topic at hand.
I will agree, as I think most people will, that we all pay the samefor our accountand because of that we all have the same right to what the game has to offer for that account. The issue we have stepped into here, with respect to player cities, is who's right to content does the Player City reside.
My feeling is that the content of Player Cities resides with the citizens of the city first, then to the public (hence the name "Player City" - to me that applys that the city is owned and opperated by the players of the city). Others have expressed (and it appears that SoE agrees based on action or lack of) that the content of "existing" Player Cities belongs to citizens and non-citizens equally. While I agree that all players should have the right to par-take in creating a Player City, I do not think you have a right to par-take in another player's exisiting city if they do not wish you to participate.
It's like scheduling a Guild Event and then being told that you have to include everyone and cannot exclued anyone. You put the time in to set up the event, plan the event, but you are being told that by not letting people particiapte that want to you are greifing thier content.
This is just a fundimental issue and one that SoE has been consistent on. SoE places more value on your ability to do everything without fear of consiquence more then having a system that holds people somewhat accountable for their actions.
- TEF was theconsiquence of attacking rival faction NPCs.
- People wanted to do this action without any consiquence and SoE removed TEF and made it so they can do whatever they want without fear of rebuke (ie combatant status)
- Now, within that, removing TEF made some sense as the Group TEF, Revenge TEF, and Gank TEFwere being abused, but perhaps a better "fix" would have been to just not create a Combatant Status and if you want to do GCW things then you would have to be SF. With some things that could be done without being SF (like themeparks and the like)
- Not saying that that is the right answer, but it preserves the "consiquences" for participating in a "war"
- /citywar was removed from the city options.
- This was something that gave city milita a means to remove unwanted people from the city (for whatever reason). It stated getting "abused" and was being used as a form of force PvP (ie greifing).
- No one is saying (at least I am not) that this was a good system, but to remove the ability (ie concept)100% was not the best action (even if it was the easiest).
- As a result, while to ability for City Militia to "greif" non-citizens has been completely removed, so have theconsiquense to Non-Citizens who "grief" citizens.
- City Ban is not a "real value" because the banned player can still disrupt the city anytime they please, thought it does help
- the concept of /citywarn is still valid "The ability to remove unwanted people from your player owned city" and seems that with just a little thought and time there could be a medium that could be reached (a Temp Excile) that acheives both goals
- Alpha Jedi
- This is most definitly more controversial then this topic, but one that illistrates what I am saying.
- Players want to be able to acheive an Alpha (Uber) powered profession but do not want the consiquence that comes along with that power.
- When Jedi came out, Soe stated that they would be Extremely Hard to acheive, HArd to level, and the risk would be such that few would even want to try it. With that, they would come with more power then all other players.
- As a result, SoE has (over time) removed almost every consiquence associated with being Jedi (granted they have reduced the power, but not by as much as they have reduced the risks)
- Removed Perma Dealth
- Remove Perma TEF
- Removed XP Loss for PvE dealths
- Removed XP loss for PvP dealths (except for BH kills)
- Reduced Visiblity rules
- I don't care to debate Jedi, but I point it out as an example of how this game is focused on removing the consiquences to the choices that are made.
Anyway, the converstaion (while heated at times) has been a good one and one thatI am sure will continue in many other post in the future.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 07-01-2005 08:27 AM