Politician Archive

Subject: In reference to neutral cities being able to tef/kill wanted city visitors.

---

Roleplaying perspective

Ibelieve that the premise of this game is that the Empire controls and governs the known universe. This means the Emperorlays claim to all cities and planets.

A neutral city (as you describe them) wants to be self-governed. They want thier own laws. They want to operate according to thier own beliefs and values... They don't want to be governed by any outside body... like the empire. This is why we're fighting the civil war. Wefight the empire so that we can be free, self governed, and honor our own values or beliefs.

To me, it sounds likeNeutral Citieswant to be free of Imperial governing without fighting for it. "I'm neutral! I get to govern myself!" The emperor would get a chuckle out of that.

Neutral cities become occupied in times of war. Put up resistance, and you become the enemy.

---

Non-roleplaying gameplaying perspective

Neutral city is a city that doesn't want the gcw or any pvp silliness to take place in thier town.It doesn't want offensive shouts, emotes or trashtalk.No blaster fire and mutated pets trampling through town aspeople aretalking to thier friends. No immature or disrespectful gameplay to be conducted withinits borders.

I am all for this, it's been promised to players that they can remain clear of pvp and build communities they believe in.

Neutral players shouldn't be able to kill other players (they have voluntarily removed themselves from this).

The other tools presented here (#1 cityignoreand #2 storepet) combined with the other abilities a town has will beenough for a neutral cityto deal with unwanted players.

You don't think that muffling/muting/ignoring a player, denying him service to the facilities, not allowing him to conduct his business, to heal will be enough? Just muting one of these undesired players would usually be enough.

A silent player that can mearly walks around is nothing more than an npc. (Where can I get some of these for my town?!)

If they pvp in town... deny them speach, cloning, travel. One of them will die and be sent away. The other will have nothing left to shoot and be flacid and ineffectual.

The more you fight them the more they'll get into it. The more you give them, the longer they'll stay. Take everything away from them... ignore them. They'll leave.

You don't have to deal with unwanted players violently.

I saw your response to the /grantzoningrights issue. We need that at the top. If that isn't fixed before these issues, than many of us STILL won't have a militia to use these new things.

1. Vocal and emote griefers. The Politician players propose a /cityignore feature. Such a feature would allow a militia member tomake it impossible for the target to use spatial communication or emote spam within the city limits.

-------I like this idea a lot.

2. Pets as grief objects. Pets with harassing names, pets that block access to terminals, pets with earth-shaking effects, pets with extra large sizes placed in inconvenient locations, all should be removeable by militia when left unattended by their owners, whether placed back into the owner's datapad or pushed outside of city limits.

-------This might be hard to do, the devs response on the shaking WILL BE that you can turn it off in your options. The harassing messages need to stop, I suggest reporting the owners. A tool to kick pets back would be a weapon in battle, one that I would love to have, if they will give it to me.

3. Covert Factional oppoonents. Allow militia members to act as covert detectors.

-------Faction Detector Militia. Awesome. It only fixes part of the issue though. I want this, for sure. However, if the militia are not overt, the only thing they can do as a response, is /cityban. With speeders out that is like saying "leave me alone bully". I want to be able to defend, so my proposed idea, one that seems to have been ignored. -----Give a master politician the ability of their faction recruiter, to be able to allow people of their faction to Declare. Another alternative, is adding a faction recruiter to the trainer list... Seems like a simple thing to me.

Rufnik, Warmaster

City of Amber

Bria

I don't know if this was mentioned already, or if the devs said this isn't possible due to technical reasons, but I really think the /cityban command should prevent banned players from shuttling INTO a city, and not just back out. As it stands, all /cityban does to attacking players is prevent them from using the cloning facility. They're not going to be worried about the inability to shuttle out, since they're probably expecting their ride into that city to be a one-way trip. With the 60 second covert timer after loading, turrets are worthless to protect shuttleports (most covert scanners can't reach the shuttleport ramp, at least not on Corellia). That leaves only minefields for their defense, which aren't much of a defense. Shuttleports are a huge liability in defense, right now, because the /cityban feature is ineffectual.

So, what about this:

1. Miltia (including neutral players) may /warn overt faction members.

2. Overt faction Militia may act as covert detectors of opposing militia

I like both of these ideas, and would love to see them in game. You know my viewpoint though, if the militia isn't fixed first, by changing /grant to only those members the mayor choses, then the militia is still so limited that it is almost useless. I vote FIX IT FIRST

Mayor Rufnik

City of Amber, Corellia

Bria