Politician Archive
Thread: Petition To Thunderheart stop a Player City Change.
Xscape wrote:
I doubt you would feel that way Faellyn if you were in risk of this, Im sure the lezzer cities would love to grow beyond their competing cities, but remember the cost will be alot less players on the server a load will quit cause of this like it or not thats the basic. This is an SOE invite to loose customers, this proposed system is not thought out and will hurt the game more thenmost changes so far. Also dont expect the cities to loose status to sit idly by and watch this happen some will go aggessivly after the "more populated" cities and try to take over and cast out the previous owners inviting massive city griefing.
And that's all fair, and part of the challenge of running a successful city. For ever player you claim will leave the game, a dozen more will just leave your city for one that's managed better.
Xscape wrote:
The very notion of a game punishing a player and that players community cause he does not log in for whatever period is nutz, as gilean pointed out its a game not a second job. And I doubt they have realized the end results of their utterly stupid idea.
Geez, Xscape, listen to yourself...
Logging in once every 3 weeks is too stressful, and like a second job?!!Puh-leeez!
What's so hard about giving your login & password to a friend that can log you in. And the end result will be more opportunities and server capacity for players who actually PLAY the game.
So, if I have a small player city with active, motivated, players, that can't rise above the cap because the next city over is padded with players that can't log in even ONCE, every 3 WEEKS, that's fair?! I say get out of my way - my $15 is just as good as yours.
Well as it happens I do live in guild city and we usualy invite people to join the guild if they wish to stay in the city but there is no requirement for that, it is up to them in the end. I'd say if people are not in guild cities they risk of city level downgrade is more at risk.
If a particular city is a guild only city they there is no reason what so ever for them to be taken buy supprise by your city losing citizens, unless the guild members do not talk to each other at all? If they talk and person A lets their PA leader know they are going to be away some simple planning can be put into place to make sure the city does not fold.
You still dont get it these are in many cases people who went on breaks long before anyone even thought SOE would be stupid enough to implement this thing and what this would do is force them to reopen their accounts to move a house lol get real dude. SOE needs to either drop this idea or move those houses when they remove citizenship its that plain and simple. Or loose the remaining accounts in that city,
I also think your city does not fold the minute it drops, nor do the civic structures outside of the city boundries, you are given until the next update to either get the citizen number back up and all is well or then and only then will things go poof.
And with that final poof a massive ammount of account cancelations and bye bye swg.
I've not seen any constructive argument as to why this is a bad idea. All I see is SOE are bad, SOE will lose players, SOE are bad, Correllia has the wrong terrian, SOE are bad! It just strikes me as a bit of sour grapes that's all. If a city is thriving and has an active community and is well planned then the mayor should have a waiting list for people wanting to move in. If a city is hanging on a thread by in-active players then it deserves to go poof and make room for better cities.
I think you only see what you wanna see maybe you should try reading all the posts before you make a statement like that. curious how many of your cities citizens have logged in the last 3 weeks, and how old is the city.
Every city will get some inactive players from time to time but it strikes me that the people who are complaining about this are those which know that 50% of there population is made up of "People on Holiday"
And you strike me like the sort of player that would love to see your city expand at the expense of other cities.
For those who want to be in a city but know they are only going to log in for 10 minutes every three weeks because sony don't have a right to tell them when and when not to play why do you need to be part of a city, why not just plonk your house down anywhere play maintainence, you're happy, the mayor will not have to worry about you going in-active and you can log in whenever you like?
And that's all fair, and part of the challenge of running a successful city. For ever player you claim will leave the game, a dozen more will just leave your city for one that's managed better.
This has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with mismanagement of a city. Most inactive houses has maintainance paid for 3-6 months and will block new construction for a very long time and by then it can be too late for many cities to regroup.
Geez, Xscape, listen to yourself...
Logging in once every 3 weeks is too stressful, and like a second job?!!Puh-leeez!
Ibet your liketoo young to have a clue about real life yet.
What's so hard about giving your login & password to a friend that can log you in. And the end result will be more opportunities and server capacity for players who actually PLAY the game.
Hmm again your making assumptions, what if I dont wanna give my login to someone else I would also think SOE would prefer if people did not give their logins out left and right.
So, if I have a small player city with active, motivated, players, that can't rise above the cap because the next city over is padded with players that can't log in even ONCE, every 3 WEEKS, that's fair?! I say get out of my way - my $15 is just as good as yours.
I agree that is not fair but again running over other players with a steamroller to make your city grow at their expense is not anymore fair.
You obviously have no sense of community at all Pax is a guild who started in Anarchy-Online years back and we stick together and most of our inactive will most likely return be it soon or for the space expansion. This is not unique to pax there are lots more guilds formed like this from EQ/AO etc guilds.
So the crux of the problem here is you know your city has a load of people who will not be playing for some time to come and you fear the worst? So what you are really saying, is that rather then let those who are actively playing the game the chance to be part of a thriving city. You want to deny them this so that you and your guild can keep your empty city, so that when the rest of your guild (in their own time) feel the need to return they wont have to start again.
When I think of a community I think of everyone who plays the game here and now and not a guild I am in or myself. If I wanted to take some time off I would not deny someone else a chance to experience the game in the way it is meant to be played.
I think six weeks is not too much to ask for someone to log in. I really somehow doubt that this change will be the downfall of SWG.....
the issue is not removal of someones citizenship that I can live with as long as they also remove their house if they dont remove their house then leave the rest alone or they will effectivly ruin cities with plenty active players also.When I think of a community I think of everyone who plays the game here and now and not a guild I am in or myself. If I wanted to take some time off I would not deny someone else a chance to experience the game in the way it is meant to be played.
Wellyour playstyle is not everyone elses playstyle and there are many I play for my guild and my friends more then the game itself atm, as the game is totally void of interesting content atm outside the cities and the community they hold.
I think six weeks is not too much to ask for someone to log in. I really somehow doubt that this change will be the downfall of SWG.....
NO the issue is not removal of someones citizenship that I can live with as long as they also remove their house if they dont remove their house then leave the rest alone or they will effectivly ruin cities with plenty active players also.
Agreed and I offer this as a solution:
* Removal of citizenship at 6 weeks (which someone mentioned it got changed to otherwise 3).
* Caping of maintainence on houses within city limits to 7 (or 4) weeks.
That way it prevents abuse of people just putting houses in a city and the never logging back in to use up space. Allows other cities to grow if people drop out for a while. If you are a PA like yourselves you can easily arange for people to log in once in 6 weeks and pay a bit more maintaince on their house.
Couldn't ask for fairer than that now could you?
Agreed and I offer this as a solution:
* Removal of citizenship at 6 weeks (which someone mentioned it got changed to otherwise 3).
* Caping of maintainence on houses within city limits to 7 (or 4) weeks.
Well Im 100% against the entire notion of citizenship removal still always will be and I truly believe it will ruin the game for alot of people, But if they do decide to force this thing through then your idea or something similar would be an absolutly required addition.
That way it prevents abuse of people just putting houses in a city and the never logging back in to use up space. Allows other cities to grow if people drop out for a while. If you are a PA like yourselves you can easily arange for people to log in once in 6 weeks and pay a bit more maintaince on their house.
Couldn't ask for fairer than that now could you?
3 weeks is ample time for someone to just log in.
/not signed
