Politician Archive
Thread: Thanks to the Devs for the City Ban...
Swg-Addict wrote:
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.
And because it it's important enough to keep repeating:
If someone is making verbal or physical threats (whether they can back them up or not), using foul or offensive language, intentionally disrupting your game play, spamming, or otherwise harrassing you or those around you...you can and *should* report them. If it is evident in a spatial/tell communication, file a /report (which makes a chatlog for the last 10 minutes for your character). Follow up with this by immediately filing a harrassment report using the in-game Holocron and using the "Report a Harrasment" button. Save any relevant e-mails in your mailbox and reference them in your ticket
/report and filing a harrassment ticket is the same difference as /bug and submitting a CS ticket. /report and /bug will get the information to those who can review the information, but only a ticket will get you a response from a CSR. They aren't going to tell you what they did to the offending player, but you can be sure that the issue is being looked into.
Khristen wrote:
If someone is making verbal or physical threats (whether they can back them up or not), using foul or offensive language, intentionally disrupting your game play, spamming, or otherwise harrassing you or those around you...you can and *should* report them. If it is evident in a spatial/tell communication, file a /report (which makes a chatlog for the last 10 minutes for your character). Follow up with this by immediately filing a harrassment report using the in-game Holocron and using the "Report a Harrasment" button. Save any relevant e-mails in your mailbox and reference them in your ticket
/report and filing a harrassment ticket is the same difference as /bug and submitting a CS ticket. /report and /bug will get the information to those who can review the information, but only a ticket will get you a response from a CSR. They aren't going to tell you what they did to the offending player, but you can be sure that the issue is being looked into.
Mayors are not going to get the ability to attack people in their city on sight (/citywarn), but that doesn't mean *any* of us have to put up with harrassment from other players. Customer Service can do a lot more to an offensive player than any of us can do in-game. Let them deal with it.
/report only works if the person you are reported has made "verbal" harrassment. Breaking city rules and disrupting city events via actions (like contantly dueling in "no duel zonesor walking in circles on someone while they are MCing an event) are not verbal and thus are not reportable (system will not allow your to report them).
I am not asking for an "attackable" button, I am asking for a "Temp-boot" button that allows me to kick someone out of the city for X number of hours for when they are disrupting the content of other players. This would not be perminate and would not apply to SF players, If it got "abused" the results would be miniumal (if any)as compared to the old /citywarn and would allow the Mayor to somewhat inforce the cities rules and enviroment.
If your solutionis tosay /report and expect SoE to take the appropreiate action without responding with the same canned response they aslo give (we will look into this) then you are fooling yourself.
I've reported the same person for exploiting 10 different times withsupporting screenshots of it and NOTHING has every happened to that individual.
That is the way it is, reporting someone that has not "verbally" harassed you will be ingored.
NihiMetal wrote:
/report only works if the person you are reported has made "verbal" harrassment. Breaking city rules and disrupting city events via actions (like contantly dueling in "no duel zonesor walking in circles on someone while they are MCing an event) are not verbal and thus are not reportable (system will not allow your to report them).
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
/report only works if the person you are reported has made "verbal" harrassment. Breaking city rules and disrupting city events via actions (like contantly dueling in "no duel zonesor walking in circles on someone while they are MCing an event) are not verbal and thus are not reportable (system will not allow your to report them).
In that case, file a harassment ticket.
Again, all this does is MAYBE do something days AFTER the fact.
And you are kidding yourself if youactually think SoE will do anything to the individual based on a "His word verse my word".
I know this because I have done it and the "solution" (from the CSRs)are that I should ban them form the city, which is my entire point! Move your event inside a structure that he is banned from. Great advice, I become a prisioner in my own city. Which is my entire point. The person that has nothing to do with the city has more of a right to the content that the city provides then the ones who created it and live in it.
All your "solutions" would only be helpful if they responded in an instant, you know they won't get back to in for a few days and by then it is to late, even if they actually did do something about it.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 07-01-2005 01:20 PM
Khristen wrote:And because it it's important enough to keep repeating:
If someone is making verbal or physical threats (whether they can back them up or not), using foul or offensive language, intentionally disrupting your game play, spamming, or otherwise harrassing you or those around you...you can and *should* report them. If it is evident in a spatial/tell communication, file a /report (which makes a chatlog for the last 10 minutes for your character). Follow up with this by immediately filing a harrassment report using the in-game Holocron and using the "Report a Harrasment" button. Save any relevant e-mails in your mailbox and reference them in your ticket
/report and filing a harrassment ticket is the same difference as /bug and submitting a CS ticket. /report and /bug will get the information to those who can review the information, but only a ticket will get you a response from a CSR. They aren't going to tell you what they did to the offending player, but you can be sure that the issue is being looked into.
Mayors are not going to get the ability to attack people in their city on sight (/citywarn), but that doesn't mean *any* of us have to put up with harrassment from other players. Customer Service can do a lot more to an offensive player than any of us can do in-game. Let them deal with it.
Yes, there's a weak, slow, and inconsistently enforced mechanism already 'in-game' for dealing with these issues .... I think what the community has been saying for over two years is that they'd like to stop relying on the weak, slow, inconsistently enforced mechanism as the only solution. You might be able to survive eating only cold oatmeal for three years, but that doesn't mean you'd stop dreaming about something a little more satisfying.
Boscohark wrote:
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.
Khristen wrote:AudioOrgana wrote: (snip)
The answer is, they didn't want to fix it; they didn't try. For some reason there is a segment of the population who has some huge issue with a PC killing them vs. an NPC (even though the former actually has less in-game consequences). Personally I could care less what is controlling a graphic, but that's just me.There *is* a segment of the population that has a huge issue with anything resembling forced PvP (which /citywarn was)...and a much larger segment of the population than those who could care less.
Yes, the FIRST implementation of /citywarn had forced PvP. As I said very clearly above (which you seem to have "snipped" out) it can be done without PvP even being involved. It's interesting you note that the larger segment of the population could care less - I agree, which is why I feel it's folly to err on the side of the people who have a (no pun intended) violent reaction to PvP.
Just because it doesn't affect you, doesn't mean that it doesn't affect someone else in a profound way (whether you understand the reasoning or not). Forcing someone into any kind of situation is Not A Good Thing.
Again, as I said above yet you ignored, forcing PvP isn't necessary.I understand that a certainsegment of players have this emotional reaction to PvP, it's pretty simple to understand - they fear getting spanked and bested by another player. They are pretty open about telling us that.
Regardless,PvP isn't the point at all. The point is, cities need some formof way to warn people to keep them from exhibitingbehavior we don't want in cities. Thosesmacktards using our shuttleports as a "Fight Club"? Those people that stand and advertise for another city in yours?Beggars who that won't leave citizens alone? None of this is something that should be reported to CS - but you know as well as I do they exist.
Perhaps a permanant /warning isn't needed - even if it's just 6-12 hours out of the city (either by banishment or attack by NPCpolice) it would give mayors a modicum of political power that simply doesn't exist in the "placestreetlamp, wait..." gameplay the profession is currently limited to. And if you find you disagree with how your mayor uses this power? Vote him out.
You make it sound like /citywarn was about PvP - it was not.It was about keep undesirables out ofyour city.
AudioOrgana wrote: (snip)
As to the /cityshield, I don't see how this is a "techno nightmare" as it already exists in game in the form of house banlists and things like Aurillia. A barrier is put up, and if you are banned, you can't enter. That simple. If a POI falls within the city, don't allow that barrier to deny access to it. If the city is truly built ON a POI (which was a programming mistake to begin with) as in it's smack dab in the city (any examples of it being THIS extreme?) then again, tough cookies city, you don't get this feature.It's a "techno nightmare" because of the sheer amount of checks the system would have to go through to determine which cities included POIs and were ineligible and which ones didn't.
I just disagree. Sorry. I don't think it's a great technical feat to determine which cities fall within a POI. Or, for them to keep the rules from applying within a POI. POI's already have special rules for calling vehicles and such - I fail to see how it's hard to determine if a Player City falls within that radius or not.
While it *was* a mistake to have allowed Player Cities to be built around POIs, it's a little difficult to change it now. Telling them "too bad" just isn't going to cut it.
You are mischaracterizing my point. The only "too bad" is that people who choose to live in a player city on top of a POI would not be able to control the area as much as a city not on a POI. What is unfair about that? It sounds like a good trade off, doesn't it?
Mayors need a way to protect their city from undesireable elements and enforce their laws, but /citywarn isn't the way to do it. We're creating public communities with Player Cities, not private estates.
I agree. /citywarn in it's initial implementation was not the correct idea. I personally think it's a crying shame that there is no surprise PvP anywhere anymore unless you want to play the non-Star Warsy BH/Jedi game. I never "ganked" anyone, but I found the danger and excitement of surprise PvP to make the game quite fun and unpredicatble occasionally when it happened - but I've had to make my peace with the fact that they have /bowed to the people that can't handle that and prefer their game to be based on predictable AI and spawns so they feel "safe".
This isn't about creating private estates, even though it may be time to look into those. During Player City development we were told "we will look into this in the future", and maybe it's time to allow people smacktard-free enviornments who choose to do so.
The only way to protect against undesirable elements is to have the power to remove them or make staying uncomfortable. This lazy "POI!" excuse is just that - there is no "content" in player cities that is essential to anything and not allowing cities controls over POI's that may fall under their city limits is all that would be necessary.
AO
One of my pet peeves is seeing huge chunks of text quoted just to see someone make a short reply to one sentence. It's just something that bugs me, so I try to only quote the absolute barest amount that I need to in order to clear up what I'm actually replying to. If I don't include part of a post in a reply, it doesn't mean I didn't read the rest or considered it irrelevant. It just means that I was trying to conserve space and went for the "meat and potatoes" of what I wanted to reply to. And, no, this doesn't mean that I don't read posts that have huge quoted prefaces, it just means I scroll through the quoted part that I've already readto get to the reply. Please watch your language, $$ or not.I really don't want to see this thread get locked.
AudioOrgana wrote:
Again, as I said above yet you ignored, forcing PvP isn't necessary.I understand that a certainsegment of players have this emotional reaction to PvP, it's pretty simple to understand - they fear getting spanked and bested by another player. They are pretty open about telling us that.
- I don't like combat in this game and don't have much of an interest in partaking in it.
- I am CL 11. I get forced into PvP, I'm dead.
- I carry all of my stuff with me, crafting tools, instruments, sometimes clothing orders. I don't want it decaying because some player decided to kill me for no reason.