Politician Archive
Thread: I am SO ENRAGED!!
Havoclord wrote:
Grow-up - you should have read the well-documented situation regarding city caps before you embarked on this - that you did not know this was going to happen is hilarious.
Yes, but there is no way to know your city caps on your planet and server, yes?
THIS is the issue that needs resolution.
RbT
When the city updates and has enough citizens to grow to the next rank and fails to do so, a message should be generated for the mayor explaining why the city did not advance. "Dear Mayor, your city was not able to advance due to the limit of X number of Y-size cities on planet Z."
[/quote]
That email is sent, I know cause I got it yesterday. Now it is time to bring down a lv 4 city }: )
My suggestion would be to bite the bullet and invest in developing the less popular planets. Talus on our server is starting to get nicely populated, now has (to my knowledge ) 2 level 3, 2 level 4+ and a level 1 city. Resident and passer by numbers are nice and the whole planet is developing nicely and the cities are known. On somewhere like Corriella it's much harder to be a known city. Because of two things, chances are there are already lot's of level 3 cities whch people know about and use and the sheer number of cities.
IsaacPalinander wrote:
The kids without jobs get everything.
Theodis_Darkstar wrote:
I resent your post. I work for a Fortune 500 company as a Top Flight sales executive, and placed in round 1. Alot of it was luck on Day One, but some people just know how to planand manage their time.IsaacPalinander wrote:
The kids without jobs get everything.
I don't care if you resent my post. What happened on your server might have been different than what happened on mine. I placed on Day 1 as well, although we had planned from the start to place on Lok knowing we would be shut out of the core planets. Planning and time management mean nothing when the server comes up at a random time during the patch day at a time when adults with jobs are at work. Not all of us have a pet unemployed person or college kid willing to skip class at our disposal. I'm glad you and others did, but you make due with what you have.
Some people 'lost out' due to the extended downtime, due to work commitments, and for that, I sympathise, but I really dont see any need to come here on the forums and tar all those Metro city mayors with the same 'kids without jobs' brush....
The caps are there, and were announced at very short notice, but there has been more than enough discussion on them in this forum for at least 1 member of a city planning 'team' to have known about it ?
My pet unemployed person is the leader of my guild. altho I don't think she feels like a pet or a slave to me, more like a contributing member of my community. She logged into my account to place the city hall. It was easy.
What some people who are mad they cannot have a huge city are failing to realise, is that the city limits are in place for one reason and one reason alone, because the servers suck. You know the little message that you get when you enter a city, how do you think you get that message? It is caused by the server trying to figure out where ever object in the game is in relation to the city center. The more city halls, the more of these city zones that the server has to waste time babysitting to figure out what is in and what is outside a city's limits.
A lot of the ways the game was set up make server lag a serious issue. When the city limits were originally proposed, the developers said clearly that it was a server issue. They said they would test city limits for a while and see what the servers would be able to handle. The current limits imposed on December 16, 2003 are the results of that testing.
Whenever the servers get slow, something has to give, and regretfully the player city code was a HUGE limitting factor. Serious lag occured and many many game bugs with zoning were revealed when cities came into play. Further server lag is also caused by vendors and quantities of items loaded into the game, this can be seen by the current proposal to limit the number of objects which can be put up for sale in a vendor. Again, a flaw in the design code is leadign to an inability for the game to operate as intended.
Do not expect to see more and more player cities allowed in the future without major upgrades to the hardware and upgrades to how the SWG databases operate. For you Star Trek geeks out there, the expression "Captain! She canna take anymore!" should turn a lightbulb on in your head as to what is happening with SWG. The way the systems of the game were put into place is limitting the advancement of functionality in the game. The more that gets added, the slower things get for everyone, and then the systems crash.
1000 groupings of houses around a planet map will not cause server lag, but 1000 groupings of cityhalls, all trying to calculate which buildings and objects and people are within the city limits, continually, 24/7...eventually leading to what? Server panic and restart.
It's pathetic that SOE cannot figure out a way to make their own code run smoothly, but in all reality there are limits to technology and if you really sit and think about what is actually in this game, you should be amazed that anything actually works. Each day's server restart is to clean up the database of millions of objects all with stats and needing updated information so that the servers will not bog down and crash. It makes me wonder what the Space Expansion will do to the game... Fear it...
Chibi-Bar wrote:
there also a chance that some city may fall.. there have been some cities that fall.. due to internal issues.. and you might raise to level 3.. some day..
This is an excellent and critical part of this social cycle.
jawlz wrote:
I'm curious... Say I have a level 4 city on the same planet of the same server as this person who couldn't grow from a level 2 to 3. Does this mean my level 4 city is safe from falling to a level three city, thanks to the cap? How does the cap work? Obviously it keeps lower level cities from growing if the cap has already been reached, but does it also keep higher level cities from shrinking? If this is so (and knowing the state of other things in the game, I wouldn't be surprised if it were), this would present a VERY serious problem to the "natural ebb and flow of cities" and all that.
Great question! I wonder if they thought of that. I'd guess it drops to level 3. Anyone know for sure?
My city has 2 others close by in NW dantoonie. It can take up to 30 seconds forobjects to load in a house. The lag at times makes me thing I just walked out of the coronet starport. The subserver crashes everynight. Hunting in a group can have up to 10 seconds of lag. The lag out there is quit horrid. Before cities I was out in that area a lot hunting force sensitives. There was only a few people out there. There was zero lag that I could notice.
Player cities really drag down a subserver. So yeah, they need to put restrictions in place to allow the game to be playable. Of course I personally would like for them to upgrade those 386s they have running those subservers. I hear P6s are now cheap or even the old 486s. Anything would be an improvement, cause in the end, I should get to play without any lag, and you should get your full level city.
The only course of action you have now is to recruit people from an existing city that is rather poorly built and run or rather inactive or put in a spot that isn't desirable. People won't move out of a great city, but find a sucky one, and get their members to move so their city goes below 3. The only proactive thing you can do, otherwise it is wait for a city to fall or wait for them to upgrade.
if a city falls a level the city next in que to promote would likely move into the next higher lvl to replace it. Thus, there would be an opening at each level for the cities to fill. That is how it should work in theory. There will be arguments and griping by the cities in line to grow when it isn't them though, but, people are doomed to complain becuase they cannot have everything.