Politician Archive
Thread: Vote for the removal of /citywarn
ChoNaguriai wrote:
Now we are getting into changing the game philosophy. The devs set this up as a game where PvP was optional. /Citywarn is allowing militia to create "battlefields" on terrain where there were none before. It is forcing neutrals to either PvP or go around every factioned city they come across. Now, I am not a Neutral... I am an Imperial and our city has a faction base. But to force the game design into PvP for those who do not consent goes against the design of SWG.
It seems as if the devs are sustaining this privelege of the "neutral". So the militia's frustrationwith the removal of /citywarn stems from the fact that they really want this to be a world where consent is taken away from the neutral. And the dev's vision of a neutral's rights is that the neutral canstand/walk/run wherever they wish in this game. That is their vision, so that is the framework that I am debating within.
What are you talking about? If the militia could just attack the player with no warning, I'd agree with you. But they can't. There's a timer (set to 2 minutes on TC before they removed the functionality) that allows you to leave. I still can't be forced into nonconsentual PvP. If you're warned, you're perfectly capable of leaving. If you don't leave before the timer runs out, you're consenting to be attacked. End of story.
Falin
Olepi wrote:
Lord Maxx,
maybe on Chilastra you live in ademocratic society where anything goes.. In Bria you set foot in my city you're in MY CITY. I run mycity like i run my Business, It's mine i built it i will do what i want with it, my citizens know this and they love me for it.
Zesa
Oh, look! We have a self-admitted dictator. I applaud that you at least admit it. 
That is brave.
However, "Consensual PvP" overrides roleplay in the case of SWG. In another game, your philosophy might work.
Barfalomue wrote:
As I said, /citywarn is just fine the way it started...however...the fact that you can only clone at that cloning center if you are closest to it, that is the bad part. Just allow people to clone at either the closest NPC City or the closest Player City.
~Aspi on Tempest. Banzai Brothers Online~
Exactly correct, and this problem is completely snuffed out by another change on TC that had nothing to do with removing /citywarn. So there was no need to remove it.
Falin
Dont forget option 4.) those who want to live in peace and harmony and frollick with the durnies in the midsummer sun.
speaking of which how about cool Winter weather or something...unless your in austrailia...make a ingame toilet that flushes with the swirl going backwards
This subject has obviously taxed my Friday afternoon patience I truly hope the devs come up with a nice solution for the militias...
Nope Emperor Lepi still alive Ive seen the griefing in action though...its not a nice thing when amilita just attacks citizens of the city because they want to...really need to vote that mayor out.
We know your a dictator but since all your citizens are probably your guild buddies or friends no worries for your little city right? Do you let anyone move in? do you have a good business district?
I'm talking about the devs' original vision (and apparently continuing vision) that a Neutral can walk wherever they choose, as long as it's a public place. Your request is that they remove player cities from being public places. That goes aganist Holocron and the others' plans. Like it or not, this is SWG.
FalinMor wrote:
What are you talking about? If the militia could just attack the player with no warning, I'd agree with you. But they can't. There's a timer (set to 2 minutes on TC before they removed the functionality) that allows you to leave. I still can't be forced into nonconsentual PvP. If you're warned, you're perfectly capable of leaving. If you don't leave before the timer runs out, you're consenting to be attacked. End of story.
ChoNaguriai wrote:
I'm talking about the devs' original vision (and apparently continuing vision) that a Neutral can walk wherever they choose, as long as it's a public place. Your request is that they remove player cities from being public places. That goes aganist Holocron and the others' plans. Like it or not, this is SWG.
FalinMor wrote:
What are you talking about? If the militia could just attack the player with no warning, I'd agree with you. But they can't. There's a timer (set to 2 minutes on TC before they removed the functionality) that allows you to leave. I still can't be forced into nonconsentual PvP. If you're warned, you're perfectly capable of leaving. If you don't leave before the timer runs out, you're consenting to be attacked. End of story.
Untrue. Like it or not, since the beginning the Devs have always said that player cities will be given the ability to remove people from the city that they don't want there. They never even implied that neutral players would be exempt from this. This was always their intention, and the only reason they've removed it is because a select few people were abusing it and they wanted to take the easy way to fix the problem.
Falin
aldure wrote:
Then city ban him...
And they are not exploiters of the system, they are "roleplaying"
Can't the city residents roleplay the militia to its fullest power if the 'roleplayer' is roleplaying the griefer who's seeking attention?
ChoNaguriai wrote:
You want police? Call the stormtroopers. Go overt.
Going overt is going to do nothing against a covert/neutral griefer.
OKOKOK...NEUTRALS! lol...I am Rebel & I don't like PVP. I joined Rebel because I like to use the Faction pets to help me hunt. I like doing the faction missions. I like the Dead Eye/Alderon missions & the stories attached to them. It was very pleasing to find my way to the hidden Rebel Base on Corellia and meet The Princess for the first time and doing missions for her. It is part of the game to be on one side or the other. That is what the entire movie set was about. I don't understand how people can not choose one side or the other. Just because you do doesn't mean you want to PvP. You say you are neutral & like to roleplay? Who in the movies were truely neutral? They were under some sort of command. Whether it be Imperial, Rebel, Jabba, Trade Federation and hell, the slaves even had to answer to someone. What roleplaying are you taking part of by being Neutral? None that I see? The majority of neutrals I run across are either newbies or entertainers...but don't tell me those musicians in the cantinain the movie got freaked out and stopped playing for nothing. LOL...they didn't want their butts to get whooped either.
Being a neutral means you stay out of harms way, if you don't want to get attacked, why would you try to go there? Do you see the Durni go toward the Grand Wrixes? LOL...no cause they know they will get eaten... Besides this, you have 100's of 1000's of acres to roam in this game, why would you go where you are not wanted?
~Aspi on Tempest. Banzai Brothers Online~
ChoNaguriai wrote:
Now we are getting into changing the game philosophy. The devs set this up as a game where PvP was optional. /Citywarn is allowing militia to create "battlefields" on terrain where there were none before. It is forcing neutrals to either PvP or go around every factioned city they come across. Now, I am not a Neutral... I am an Imperial and our city has a faction base. But to force the game design into PvP for those who do not consent goes against the design of SWG.
It seems as if the devs are sustaining this privelege of the "neutral". So the militia's frustrationwith the removal of /citywarn stems from the fact that they really want this to be a world where consent is taken away from the neutral. And the dev's vision of a neutral's rights is that the neutral canstand/walk/run wherever they wish in this game. That is their vision, so that is the framework that I am debating within.
I understand that a nuetral should not have to worry about PVP when they have no choice. However, if a neutral came into Kintan and harassed the entertainers, even if I broke protocal, andcitywarned immediatly, they still have a choice. I am not forcing them into anything. Thay can stay, or they can leave. They did however force me and those of my community into something we had no choice in. Being Neutral does not give anyone the right to be this way and not have any harm done to them. Reporting them is pointless, the problem is there at that moment, not 2 days later whenthe CSR reads the report.
If you took the shuttle to Kintan. If you did something that resulted in my giving you a citywarn. The moment the message appears on your screen, you have a choice.You have received a duel challange with a 30 second timer! You can accept the challenge and stay to fight, or you can decline the challenge and leave.
Either way, my job is done, and the citizens are no longer subject to the violation you caused. Why should the rights of a few neutrals to stand/walk/run everywhere they please with no consequenses overpower the rights of the many Imperial/Neutral/Rebel citizens in Kintan?
Where is the consent taken away from the Neutral here? The choice is theirs, and will always remain theirs.
Captain Anika Mon'Sulu, Kintan City Police Department (KC-PD) - Kintan City Naboo, Radiant
brave, nothing.
Everyone in my city knows i am a dictator, i have never hidden that fact.
Actually democracy in the true sense is a failed historical fact. The government system of this game is not set up for a democracy. it is not possible a true democracy is based upon 2 ruling heads each with the ability to veto the other. this game does not set the pace for a Dual leadership.
Consensual PVP sure thingi'll be glad to accept that as well.
Zesa