Politician Archive

Thread: Um....Baj? I'm not sure this is a good idea on TC...

Hunden
Fri Jan 23, 2004 5:51 am
#40






SlothDroid wrote:

The 3 week rule discriminates against casual players.


Please do NOT let the 3 weekrule go through. Create a workable solution.






i know it is hard to read all the posts on a thread like this sometimes, but something changed, which has been mentioned a few times in this thread... in the notes on the test centre board it no longer says 3 weeks it says 6 weeks



Citizens will now be removed from a city if they haven't been online for about 6 weeks.




yes, i am still against it... but i want to make sure that people have the facts before passing their own judgement.



the link is in the first post on this thread and can be checked by anyone that cares to look it up.



hund




1st holo: BH - done... finaly.
2nd holo - commando - done
3rd holo - BE
Avallach
Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:43 am
#41

Yes, that's a change. Yes, that's a positive change. But they're still fixing the wrong problem entirely. :-(


(I'd *much* rather see our top 5 worked on than this much effort spent on something like this....or see the database optimized to allow for higher caps....or see new content....or....well, the list gets longer as I think.)





------------------------
-Charin Ianaro, Aventine Neighborhood, Temenos, Naboo

"I was born to laugh--I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love--I'm going to learn to love without fear."
-Karin Bergquist/Linford Detweiler (www.overtherhine.com)
RotorofCorRng
Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:52 am
#42

Obviously they are doing this to crack down on the crossserver trades, and the temporary buddy characters that were used to lvl up outposts, etc, etc.

My problem with this is, inequity. If they are doing it with citizens, how about doing it with harvesters? That way I dont have to compete with people who have 100 or even 200+ static harvester farm, which pretty much just about gurantees unlimited resources.

If it is all about the database, then same rule applies.

It is BS.



Rotor - Will cease to exist May 3rd.
DaQuilla
Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:30 am
#43






Bajeezus wrote:



and his property, which is removed directly from his house's maintenance pool potentiallycausing his house to poof morerapidly than if he were removed as a citizen.





As far as I know you pay property tax no matter if citizen or not (taxing harvesters wouldn't work otherwise).



Now as I see it is 6 Months it takes to kick a player off the citizen list I'm a bit more releaved. Anything less would be unacceptable .. especialy thinking about summer break etc (half a town could be empty for weeks in that time periode).


Still I think this is (again) a fix at the wrong place. Besides that it should have never even come to this (e.g. through restricions of having to have played for X hours before registring as citizen) it hurts cities with citizens who are taking a longer break due to either RL issues or simply because the game is still not what it's supposed to have been on many levels.





Kheraba City - . - . - . - . - M a y o r - . - . - . - . - . - . - Etraes'Khar
A place to call your home - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - Many are called, few are chosen
- Where they play that Jizzz - The Green Fizz - Player Cantina Snacks&Drinks

- Tatooine - -3230 -6150 - Gorath Galaxy

Avallach
Fri Jan 23, 2004 8:04 am
#44

Just a small correction there....it's six weeks, not months.

Thank you for your time and attention. ;-)



------------------------
-Charin Ianaro, Aventine Neighborhood, Temenos, Naboo

"I was born to laugh--I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love--I'm going to learn to love without fear."
-Karin Bergquist/Linford Detweiler (www.overtherhine.com)
SunLao
Fri Jan 23, 2004 8:33 am
#45

Not going to read this whole thread, I get the gist, and had the same reactions you guys had. Just want to add to the vote count if anyone's keeping score.



  • Good idea for the game and the health of the Player City system.

  • Bad idea to have it be 3 weeks, a longer term is needed.

With things like this, it begins to look like plain and utter coercion to log in and play the game. It used to be that way with the 7 day vendor sale limit. Merchants dropped like flies because to actually play the class, they could take no vacations. The sale time limit is now 30 days, and that's manageable and understandable.




"Wait for the Combat Balance."- random red name since Nov. 2003
Diogenes Noslen - The Meatshield Mayor!
- Shooting pistols in SWG since June 26 27, 2003 -

House Paladin
Laeren
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:04 am
#46

Bad idea - this is SOE trying to dictate where and when on their servers you need to log in. Perhaps I'm off trying to be Jedi on another server, perhaps I'm playing a legitimate alt on the same server. Whichever the case, it's my right to not have to log into a particular server/character at any point.


I think a lot of this idea is supported by minor cities which didn't make the various planetary caps. They're trying to snipe at the major cities in any way they can, and so this idea rings a big bell with them, in the hopes that somehow, someway they'll take down one of the first and larger cities so they can shove their own into the slot.


No, this is a terrible idea.





Aes Sedai Industries
::::
Swarriorx Irow: Mayor of Rauha (Naboo), Starsider (www.rauha.com)
::::::Laeren Misha: Teras Kasi Master, Master Rifleman, Master Journalist, Master Interior Decorator
:::::::::Apprentice Filmmaker
Visit my movie page: Triquetra Pictures AIM: LegalMinn
slugeater
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:09 am
#47

Six weeks is better, but it doesn't solve the core of the problem. That solution will not harm the guys who do cross server trades. It will just cost them a few minutes to log their slotbot. It will harm the casuals and the guys who don't play regularly.


And as said above, I'd apply that three/six week solution to the **edit** harvester moguls who have 100 lots and are plain circumventing a game limit.





Sluggy Devlya
Master Smuggler-Politician
Avian City-Talus-Chilastra

Best way to deal with the tall guys is to give them incentives to lick the ground. And dont look down on me that way youre not THAT taller.

Hunden
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:36 am
#48

ok.. just to add to the confusion... because someone answered my question on another thread i can throw something else in the pot.


the url in the first post of this thread is to the patch notes for test center as posted by the test center corespondant... there it currently says 6 weeks.


now the "in testing" page says 3 weeks


http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/recent_test_updates.jsp?page=In%20Testing


so which is correct? this is an important question, because while 99% of people are against a 3 week thing, i think that less people will be against a 6 week time frame..


i am against it still with any time frame at all... but we need to get the facts straight before we can say too much.. until we know for sure, i recomend that anyone that reads this comments on what they think of both time frames seperately... eg, 3 weeks are too short, but 6 weeks is fine, or both are too short, make it 3 months, or no time frame at all....


hund



1st holo: BH - done... finaly.
2nd holo - commando - done
3rd holo - BE
Antonious
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:39 am
#49

THIS SUX!


My PA is a small group of casual players, some play only once every 4-5 weeks, others have jobs offshore where they can't login but once every 8 weeks and then they play for a month straight before starting teh cycle again. This will ruin not only my city but those players gaming experience. BIG FAT BOO on this.


Fidgiter
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:44 am
#50

The need to deal with Ghost Citizens does exist but this isn’t the way to deal with it. What I am looking to do is understand what makes a Citizen a Ghost and what does not. Based on that I’ll conclude with how I think the better way to approach it would be.


What is a Ghost Citizen? It is someone that comes to a server for the exclusive purpose of declaring citizenship in a player city.


What are the symptoms of a Ghost Citizen?


They have an “Active” character on another Galaxy yet retain a residence in a city despite being on infrequently. A typical “Ghost” is created, gets a residence in a city, and never returns.


What is an “Active” character? It is the character on an active account with the largest amount of game play. If I have played 750 hours on Galaxy A and 5 hours on Galaxy B then the character on Galaxy A is “Active” and the character on Galaxy B is a “Ghost”. A player can only have one “Active” character at a time.

What is wrong with the approach they are taking? Let’s go through a few scenarios


I play on Galaxy A for months, get frustrated and annoyed and decide to play a different game for a while (Or is sick, has a business trip, family emergency, etc). Since my account is already paid for and I have hopes that the game will improve I pay up my maintenance and take a leave of absence from the game. It would be unfair to punish everyone else for my absence.


I play on Galaxy A for months, get frustrated and annoyed and decide to play on a different galaxy for a while. I was an imperial human and want to try out the game play of a zabrak rebel. It would be unfair to negate months of play for three weeks away trying a game play option I couldn’t get without deleting the character on Galaxy A.


I play on Galaxy A for months and create a character on Galaxy B to declare a residence and never look back. It would be totally justified that the character on Galaxy B would loose residence if they haven’t been on in three weeks.


The alternative is to refine the definition of a Ghost. I’ll try to keep this in English =>P


If a resident of a structure hasn’t played for three weeks determine the status of that character in context of the player account. If the resident character has less played time than any other character on that account it would loose residence otherwise it would retain it.


The Quick Fix approach that SOE so often uses causes a great deal of churn in the player community. This is just another Slap & Dash Bandage to solve a problem without taking the time to implement a fair or just solution.


Mayor Feliz Gizmacher, Founder of Dune Retreat



Mayor Feliz, RSO Commanding Officer
FidgitCo Construction, Droid and Starships
Furnishing the Galaxy since September 2003
Dune Retreat Mall, Tatooine
Rywo
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:49 am
#51

Ok... now this idea from the devs is actually making me angry. I'm the Mayor of a 100+ person town on Sunrunner. It was orginally formed by my clan which numbers over 100 players in SWG alone. We also have 3 other groups living in our city currently.

Now the problem comes in. A good portion of the citizens from my clan also play other online games. They will come play SWG for like a month or so, then wander off to another division in our clan for a month or so. Having this stuff added, would most likely kill our city, as I can never keep track of exactly how many people are taking a leave of absence from time to time. Let me also state, that we don't have _any_ houses in the city that were gained by cross-server trading. Every house in the city belongs to a legitimate person from one of the four PAs, or independant merchants that have come to set up shop.

So, why should my hard work in building a metropolis be ruined just because a handful of my citizens decide to go play another game for a month? Their accounts are still active... Sony, you are still receiving your money. The maintenance in the houses are paid... we're removing creds from the system. And we are not a 'private' city. I spend a good portion of my time inviting people to come use the city, and making them feel welcome when they do arrive (unless they are overt imperials). Therefore, we're also adding to the immersion and community feeling of the game.

Please DEVS... find another way to solve your cross-server trading problems other than hurting a profession that already lacks in just about EVERY area.



***********************************************************************
Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?
***********************************************************************
Abido
Fri Jan 23, 2004 9:56 am
#52

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!


All those BOT towns are now in trouble, and our active city of 76 residents can have a chance to get a shuttle? WOOT!


I see NOTHING wrong with this. Our town has maybe 4 bots, thats it. Folks that have quit.


I see nothing wrong with this change, sorry. Server swap something else. Its garbage that active cities have to sit idle for....paid bot houses in other cities? Pfft. Complain if this hurts you, fine. But for the sake of all others that are actually playing the game like it was supposed to, take this on the chin. You shouldn't be considered a larger city based on bots.


Have you used bots in your city, and are therefore complaining? I have no clue. I DO KNOW, that your concern over your "one guy taking breaks, making your city suffer" is a joke of a concern...........compared to the actually City balance system and the game that is Politician of running a town successfully, and earning a shuttleport properly.


This is what my town looks like:







This is a town with bots:


Whatever.






Abido Spin- Colonel
Eclipse Politician/Pistoleer- Techno Union
Winner of the "Grumpy Award" 2003
Grand Moff of Techno City 6300 -3600 Naboo.
For screenies of Techno City and the The Seven Wonders of Abido
Page 4 of 11