Politician Archive
Thread: /citywarn should go
I have mixed feelings on this topic. I personally feel that /citywarn must stay otherwise the militia is useless and players will be griefed because of the lack of ability of the city militia to stop it. Ex:
Rebel/Neutral city with a rebel faction HQ. A group of imperials camp the city waiting for rebels to come back with a TEF to kill them. The city militia hears about this, but being mostly consisting of neutral players, the city militia can only sit back and watch when they should be able to /citywarn the imperials and kill them off for killing citizens of the city. This was an example, so the roles of rebels and imperals can be reversed.
Now, I completly understand that /citywarn is being abused. The initial purpose of /citywarn was to protect the citizens from players that pose a threat to the citizens. What defines a threat. Verbal Abuse, maybe, but that is what /report is for. So what exactly is the purpose for using /ctywarn. Well, in my opinion it is to get members of the opposing faction out of your city. The problem is, people who don't like to participate in PvP are saying they are being griefed.
I disagree with this opinion. SWG is a PvP game. Yes, it is possible and is usually the case that people don't participate in PvP, but the devs have made it clear that PvP is a large peice of the game and it is here to stay. I do agree that those that don't want to PvP should have some way to avoid it. So in reading this post, a few ideas came to mind.
1. When a player is /citywarn they are immediately kicked from the city (brought to the nearest border (preferrably away from NPCs and creatures). They then are told that if they re-enter the city, they will be attackable. There could be an indicator somewhere letting them know when they are within 50m of the border (or make the border visible on the overhead map). The /citywarn should last for two hours.
2. As a complement to 1, instead of having the player immediately kicked from the town, they should be muted (ie: no spatial will be allowed from the player while in the city) and if they perform any hostile action while in the city (fighting with other players or NPCs/Creatures) after the 30 second timer, they become attackable. This will last 2 hours so the person can't come back in after 5 min like they can now.
3. Players that are /cityban are always muted (can't use spatial) while in the city. When they enter the city, a message is sent to any city militia in the area so that they are aware a banned player has entered the city. In the area is within 1km of the city border so if they are doing missions, they may get the message.
4. No missions or NPC/Creature spawns should occur inside the city. This will prevent people from being griefed while doing their missions.
5. Players attacked due to /citywarn should not generate a TEF. It is unacceptable for a rebel to, /citywarn a rebel and have in the battle, both generate TEF and can be targeted by overt rebels and rebel NPCs. If the /citywarn player is in a group, the group should be able to help defend him/her.
With these changes, the city militia can still get unwanted players out of there city and give the chance to players that don't want to PvP to get out of the city themselves. If players don't want to PvP, but choose to stay in a city they are warned in, they deserve to be killed. It should be made easy to know when you are attackable by the city militia and when you are not. A warning must be given when approaching the city boundaries so players know that they will be attacked when they enter the city.
Opinions?
Kerico wrote:
The loss of this command lies solely on the backs of jackass players.
This is where I disagree. Before I continue, I do want to point out that I am not one of these abusers of /citywarn and to my knowledge the entire militia of my city have not abused it either. We are fair to every visiter. We talk to them about their business in our town. I have only used /citywarn once and it was on a citizen so we could try it out.
The reason I disagree is any city that wants to be run as a military state has the right to kick people out of their city by force. It is there city, you are trespassing and they are taking action. Now, there are bugs that SOE needs to fix, like the cloning on the spot you died, causing you to be attacked again (with 5% decay) and getting attacked outside the city border. I don't blame the people that do this as they are just doing what they are supposed to do. Protect their city from unwelcome outsiders. I blame SOE for introducing a bug and not fixing it promptly.
Now, I am by no means saying that there are people abusing the command to the point that SOE realizes their bugs and are taking away the command as a quickfix, but we should place some blame where blame is due. I have recommended ways that SOE could fix /citywarn and allow people to keep their military state while reducing the grief factor that non PvPers have to suffer.
I agree cities should have this ability, but like the original poster, doing /warn without verbal communication (especially since there is no way to know a towns laws), pursuing people outside the city borders isabusive and clear dangling of themilitia's e-peen.
My city's militia is under these directives.
a) use /log and screenshots to document the case
b) inform the offender of the city laws
c) contact highest ranking militia (militia chief, officer or mayor)
d) ask offender to desist orleave, re-inform him of the trespass or offense
e) pass case to the highest available officer
e) if uncooporative, /cityBan the offender and inform him (structure ban on cantina and med center if possible)
f) ifuncooperative and adequately supported, inform the offender he'll be warned.
g) if uncooperative, /cityWarn the offender and proceed with combat
h)end /log. email the militia chief and the mayor with details
i) /report the individual if TOS offense
This brings a new idea. When someone enters a city, it tells them they have entered a city. They should be told that the city policies can be viewed by typing /citypolicy. This would show the player what the cities policies are and how they can make there stay a welcome one, if one could be welcome in that city. Again, there will be abusers that will say there city welcomes all and in reality, they only want to grief players by killing them when they think they are welcome (but combined with some ideas I posted above this should not be an issue) but in the end, many cities will be able to get their intent across before a player enters too deep into the city.
Kerico wrote:
I agree cities should have this ability, but like the original poster, doing /warn without verbal communication (especially since there is no way to know a towns laws), pursuing people outside the city borders isabusive and clear dangling of themilitia's e-peen.
I'll love to be able to have a one-time standard 'Welcome Letter' sent to everyone who enters the town limits.
You should bug that. If you did leave the city then you should not have been attackable. You sure you did not kill a NPC or somehow got a TEF in some other way?
I hardly see how this would warrant the removal of /warn. There is no griefing here. The person doing the warn did not know what your doing, but on the other side there is no reason for him to tell you why you got warned or even talk to you. I would think the added excitement of chasing a bounty into a “unknown” town would add to the fun of the game, add some more layers to it but that’s just me.
Maybe he knew you to be the other faction, maybe your PA just attacked the town. Maybe he knew of the attempted take over the “siegeing” (that Jaspor thing) Ref:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=Politician&message.id=8969&page=1
who knows. But if indeed this happen out of town and it was not some other reason (some other type of TEF) I would hope you bug it and they fix it.
As you may or may not know Lord before player cities the most we had as our own was a PA hall and some houses. We would ban the greffers from them. Easy to do, the only people that knew we were there were the people we fought with, we could ban the entire clan if we wanted to, we used what we had to handle the job.
The city is not like that, its more public, it’s more of a “target” for griefers, most buildings will not let you ban a entire clan, we have more then our PA in our city no way to have all of them ban a person or PA. We have shops that cannot be private, I could go on and on but I think you get the idea, they changed the playing field when they made citys we had the tools to handle it, but they took that tool away.
Analogy
Before getting around walk/run
After getting around vehicles/mounts
Lose your ride? Then walk like before.
Compared to player city same scenario and I believe you main point
They cut off one leg and you have to hop around. Sure you can do it, but its not easy and it is not as good as before. They will not even give me a crutch.
Get the point?
The Cityban works by targeting a single person, that person can no longer use the shuttle, clone center and possibly the bank and town hall, they still can enter any house that is public, the cantina, med center, theater Factional HQ's and the rest.
You can ban people and PA’s if you’re the administrator of a house (shop) however we are talking at least 8 separate mall/shops in our city alone that’s quite a lot of people to get a hold of and organize the banning of a person. It is also something the Mayor and militia shoudl take care of, not individual shopw onwers, else our crafters would not be crafters but warriors.
City warn was a temporary thing to a player. It easily removed the problem yet allowed them later to come back later and be nice. The above way of banning takes to long and is not 100% foolproof and it is a harsher punishment then warn IMHO. I would rather get killed and have the option to clone back to a neutral city, or make my peace with the city and shuttle out, then get banned and have to walk but I guess that’s just me.
We get our fair share of griefers, but it is not something I would bug the dev’s about and besides this removal affected not just me, if affects everyone. It has much deeper meaning to it then what it first appears, along the lines of the way the game itself is turning (carebear), the way “they” addressed the problem (quick removal of it, without listing to the tremendous pleads to keep it). The bottom line is a player city without some way to control problem players, regardless if that’s a griefer or we are rollplaying, may as well not exist.
we have a couple of rebels always scoping out the city and planning attack.. personally before we always city warn them and they move out of the city and all is good.. now (last night) they just sit around, tossing each other words... our militia is reduce to saying "please leave our city now... or... I'll have to suffer to look at your ugly mug" boy... did that player take off so fast... NOT! they just stay around... I had to get different shop owners and such to manually ban the player one by one in EACH homes and shops..... now that is tedius...
As the mayor of my city and my militia respectively should be able to throw people out of the city. I have the right kick someone out for saying something I disagree with or even because they are a wookie(I wouldn't do that but I should be able to)
Since /citywarn was removed I have no way of dealing with people that are detrimental. I feel that without it the mayor loses a lot of city managing ability and is therefore put in the role of decorator. I want to have more control of my city, not less. If one of my militia miss behaves I punish them or take away their status. But I should have the right to warn anyone I see fit.