Politician Archive
Thread: Thanks to the Devs for the City Ban...
WunShot wrote:
You should be ashamed of yourself.
3. Ultimately, you banned someone for trying to hunt your husband, no matter what other excuses you made up.....How would you like someone to ban you from their city just because you created your own city? Because you banned a BH for doing what BH's do..what difference would that be?
If the BH was greifing your jedi....ok...but what you did i just plain wrong
The mayor has the right to cityban anyone they wish for any reason they wish.
Some player cities have rules about opposite factions. I know my city used to ban Imperials on sight. We still have certain guilds that we cityban if we see members around.
Are these things "just plain wrong?"
Ok, a few things.
/warn was taken out for several reasons. 1 of them being forced PvP on players who had no option or ability to prevent it. I went into a city to buy something from a merchant, thanks to lag I didn't know I was warned until after I was dead and the trade screen opened up. You may have no problem with forced PvP but others do and they have just as much say. 2 is the barring of POI's. You say there aren't any cities that envelope POI's? Well on my server there are several some of them being on or incredibly near a krayt spawn (meaning they walk around downtown) so attacking and participating in that content just became impossible thanks to forced PvP on top of difficult PvE just because the citizens chose to beat the system and setup shop in a limited locale. 3 and the truly main reason. If you didn't clone elsewhere and got warned in a player city youhad no means of leaving. You where going to clone inside it and then get clone camped until you where blackbarred, everything on you broken, and had an hour of your gametime wasted if not more since they can swap out who attacks and /warns.
Putting up a no-enter zone around towns is BS. I'm sorry but if you consider your town a gated community you've got another thing coming. Why do you deserve to have sole access to that piece of land and that others can't have access? Because you chose to foot the bill of your own free will? You have every right to make it difficult for a player of an opposing faction etc. and prevent them from using your facilities but to make it so they can't even walk around and get recon or do their missions is non-sensical. If that truly is the case then you better be prepared to not place any content in there that impacts others who have no access to it. And homes are far from any sort of comparison until you find one that takes up 635,850 square meters of space.
Finally, TH please explain to me why player city GCW content would have to be destroyable? The rebel bases we see in the movies where pretty permanent. When they built Echo base they didn't just put up pop tents in order to be able to move around in 10 seconds. And stormtrooper garrisons being temporary things wouldn't make sense. The Empire rules the galaxy they don't just visit it, those bunkers would be fortified and expected to stand for a thousand generations if need be. The only temporary/attackable things we'd need would be ones that already exist. Give turrets a smaller footprint, or no footprint like statuesbut with a 'no other turret here' radius. Allow for factional bans of shuttleport and cloner use instead of a by player basis. Let them all be deemed guilty and on a person by person basis pardon 'em. Etc.
PC'scould become great new battlefields since you guys finally gave up on those without the 'raze everything to the ground' aspect being intrinsically tied to it. If that where the case why can't I attack every part of the imperial prison on Dathomir or Lok's hidden stronghold?
PS Oh, and cityban =/= content ban. Back in my day if I wanted to see a krayt dragon I had to walk 5 kilometers uphill in sandstorms with the twin suns 4 inches from my neck without your fancy pants shuttleports. What's preventing you from struggling the same way I did those many months ago?
Jutewr wrote:
Sooooo......You don't like visitors, I take it?
LOL.
Actually I do like visitors, but I don't like troublemakers.
This is a "touchy" subject for me (as you can probably see) because what SoE is basicly saying is this:
- Player Cites are "public content" for all player, however we are going to make the players that created the "public content" pay excessive maintaince cost in order to create and maintain this content.
- SoE is going to restrict what you can and cannot do within you own city
- SoE considers it "griefing" if you restrict people from using something that a player created (not generated by SoE) but doesn't considering it greifing when a player that is not part of the player city comes and ruins the gaming experiance of those that are part of the city.
It a fundamental issue. SoE is so affraid of people dieing in the game and whinning about it, that they have gone to an extreme position that call almost everything "griefing". That is why you can a "combatant status" because it was "greifing" to kill someone that was your enemy because they didn't want to be killed. I can no longer /citywarn someone because they will complain about getting killed. Well, so what if you get killed. Clone up (remove the stupd decays) and what are you complaining about? Don't go back to that city.
WunShot wrote:
You should be ashamed of yourself.
1. Noone should have to face a ban because they don't want to talk to you.
Why not? They certainly didn't show any behaviour saying that you shouldn't ban him. Maybe if they had a chat she would have decided differently but as it stands he gave her no reason to not ban him.
2. "He was trying to get into our houses" - Houses can be set private, if your citys patrons do not want their houses to be entered, they can set them private. Noone should face a ban for trying to walk into a building
Why not? The land between buildings is public property, the homes themselves are not. Even if they are set to public it gives the message clearly to city officials that this guy is looking for something and it probably won't end well for our citizens.
3. Ultimately, you banned someone for trying to hunt your husband, no matter what other excuses you made up.....How would you like someone to ban you from their city just because you created your own city? Because you banned a BH for doing what BH's do..what difference would that be?
I've been banned from cities for even more frivilous things. In fact I was /warned from a city simply for being in it and a blue dot. They had no way of knowing my faction at the time but figured they'd kill me anyway. I was pissed because I was trading with one of their merchants and needed to get back in touch with him but not because they /warned me. I've been banned from cities by friends because I was overt then pardoned after the fighting was over. I've been banned for no reason what so ever and just shrug it off. Their perogative.
4. I hope you just realized you've put up a huge "COME KILL OUR JEDI" sign up on the forums for everyone on your server to see.
Your jedi being on the terminals is a bigger 'come kill me sign' I don't see the problem. Banning a person for trying to kill their citizen isn't going to get the entire galaxy to come down upon them, hell most would just tell the BH to grow up and quit their b*tching.
Yes im a BH....been bh for over a year. I rarely hunt Jedi..in fact, i've only hunted 5 jedi in my time as a BH...but i'd like not to be banned by some#$%^&#$ when i do.
I'd like to not be banned by people when I go in to kill their overts but that isn't gonna happen. People like their character being alive and will do what they can to keep that process going.
If the BH was greifing your jedi....ok...but what you did i just plain wrongTrying to kill him is griefing from a certain point of view, just as /banning people for no reason is
NihiMetal wrote:
Jutewr wrote:
Sooooo......You don't like visitors, I take it?
LOL.
Actually I do like visitors, but I don't like troublemakers.
This is a "touchy" subject for me (as you can probably see) because what SoE is basicly saying is this:
- Player Cites are "public content" for all player, however we are going to make the players that created the "public content" pay excessive maintaince cost in order to create and maintain this content.
- SoE is going to restrict what you can and cannot do within you own city
- SoE considers it "griefing" if you restrict people from using something that a player created (not generated by SoE) but doesn't considering it greifing when a player that is not part of the player city comes and ruins the gaming experiance of those that are part of the city.
It a fundamental issue. SoE is so affraid of people dieing in the game and whinning about it, that they have gone to an extreme position that call almost everything "griefing". That is why you can a "combatant status" because it was "greifing" to kill someone that was your enemy because they didn't want to be killed. I can no longer /citywarn someone because they will complain about getting killed. Well, so what if you get killed. Clone up (remove the stupd decays) and what are you complaining about? Don't go back to that city.
But, in typical fashion, the solution to the real problem is not to fix the problem buttreat the sympton (ie removing the turrets from PvP bases and removing /citywarn)
You do realize that isn't the reason turrets where removed....right? They where yanked because bugs allowed 12 shots a second fire rates, LOS issues to not exist at times and not damage at others, basically the system was FUBAR and rather than tack on fix after fix to patch it they just removed it from the game. I don't agree with that personally but the logic is sound.
And what is preventing you from enjoying your hard won and costly content as well? Just because John Doe gets to come into your city and have fun does this somehow mean that you can't? Or is it just lessened in your mind because it isn't exclusively fun for you?
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
Ok, a few things.
/warn was taken out for several reasons. 1 of them being forced PvP on players who had no option or ability to prevent it. I went into a city to buy something from a merchant, thanks to lag I didn't know I was warned until after I was dead and the trade screen opened up. You may have no problem with forced PvP but others do and they have just as much say. 2 is the barring of POI's. You say there aren't any cities that envelope POI's? Well on my server there are several some of them being on or incredibly near a krayt spawn (meaning they walk around downtown) so attacking and participating in that content just became impossible thanks to forced PvP on top of difficult PvE just because the citizens chose to beat the system and setup shop in a limited locale. 3 and the truly main reason. If you didn't clone elsewhere and got warned in a player city youhad no means of leaving. You where going to clone inside it and then get clone camped until you where blackbarred, everything on you broken, and had an hour of your gametime wasted if not more since they can swap out who attacks and /warns.
- I am tired of this whine about forced PvP. So what if you got killed. Get over it and don't go back to that city.
- As for the POI, I can understand that and that is why I think no Player City (or house for that matter) should be allowed to be place within 1,000m of a POI.
- So let me get this straight, because you choose not to clone I have to make my city public for you to use? How is it that the "easy" fix is not to give an option to clone at the nearist Player City and/or NPC city? Issue solved.
Putting up a no-enter zone around towns is BS. I'm sorry but if you consider your town a gated community you've got another thing coming. Why do you deserve to have sole access to that piece of land and that others can't have access? Because you chose to foot the bill of your own free will? You have every right to make it difficult for a player of an opposing faction etc. and prevent them from using your facilities but to make it so they can't even walk around and get recon or do their missions is non-sensical. If that truly is the case then you better be prepared to not place any content in there that impacts others who have no access to it. And homes are far from any sort of comparison until you find one that takes up 635,850 square meters of space.
- Because I am paying the Million dollars a week to maintain it! If player cities were free you would have a point, but they are not. They are player created and player maintained, that gives me the right!
- What "Content" are you being restricted from?
- Exactly what "content" do you think comes with a player city that cannot be found in a NPC city?
- That is why your arugement is just way off base. You are not being resticted from anything that you cannot get anywhere else. The only "content" that is REALLY being restricted are that of the players that created the city because they are being prohibitied from developing what they what to develop.
PS Oh, and cityban =/= content ban. Back in my day if I wanted to see a krayt dragon I had to walk 5 kilometers uphill in sandstorms with the twin suns 4 inches from my neck without your fancy pants shuttleports. What's preventing you from struggling the same way I did those many months ago?
- I agree (I think). The only way /city ban removed content is because CoE allows Player Cities to be be near POIs and this is a HUGE mistake. Not only because it trashes up the POI but because it limits the greatness that Player cities can be.
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
You do realize that isn't the reason turrets where removed....right? They where yanked because bugs allowed 12 shots a second fire rates, LOS issues to not exist at times and not damage at others, basically the system was FUBAR and rather than tack on fix after fix to patch it they just removed it from the game. I don't agree with that personally but the logic is sound.
You are not correct. They were removed because of the Combant whiners that were getting killed by them on SF bases.
If they were removed for the reason you stated, they would have also been removed from PvE bases.
And what is preventing you from enjoying your hard won and costly content as well? Just because John Doe gets to come into your city and have fun does this somehow mean that you can't? Or is it just lessened in your mind because it isn't exclusively fun for you?
- What resticts me is that we are trying to create an Imperial City. We are trying "Role Play" our city. This is impossible to do when rebels can run around your city freely spamming annoying messages,goofing off, refusing to leave, and just being a huge pain is the buttand there is nothing I can do about it.
- I'm sorry, but does it not seem crazy that Players are being asked to invest significant amounts of game money to create and maintain something so that OTHER peope can use it?
- If SoE thinks that cities should have certian things and stuff, the addit to the NPC cities
- IF you want to create a gather place of great "new" content for all to enjoy, then start you own city. But don't tell me that I have to give you whatever access and content you want at my expenses and time. That is what SoE is for, not me!
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 11:41 AM
NihiMetal wrote:
I'm sorry, but does it not seem crazy that Players are being asked to invest significant amounts of game money to create and maintain something so that OTHER peope can use it?
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
I'm sorry, but does it not seem crazy that Players are being asked to invest significant amounts of game money to create and maintain something so that OTHER peope can use it?
No, that's pretty much the purpose of player cities. Your city is not your private playground and other people will use it. This is something you accept when you create a player city.
If this is how you feel, are you advocating removing /cityban as griefing? After all, you haveevery right to use that shuttleport you didn't pay for. Should you no longerhave the right to BAN peoplefrom using your vendor? After all, I have a right to the "content" that is on it, venders are not your "private" playground to sell things to who you want, it should be accessable to all. Is it griefing if you charge prices that I cannot afford? Don't I have a right to all content without being griefed because I do not have deep pockets?
Alright. I guess I lose. This game is all about whatever you want without any restrictions. If you want access to something then you have a right to it, regardless of wheither or not it is yours. You want to be in the WAR without the risk of getting killed, we'll give you Combatant Status. If you want to go to a player city and do whatever you want there then you have that right.
Because your right to otherpeople'scontent (that you didn't create) is more important then the rightof the players that are providing that content and mor important then thier rightto have thier own content.
I think I get it now.
Message Edited by NihiMetal on 06-30-2005 11:56 AM
NihiMetal wrote:
- I am tired of this whine about forced PvP. So what if you got killed. Get over it and don't go back to that city.
Some of us don't like PvP, aren't interested in it, and don't want to get attacked while we go shopping. I don't think that's too much to ask. Why do you seem to think it's neccessary to force other people to PvP?
- As for the POI, I can understand that and that is why I think no Player City (or house for that matter) should be allowed to be place within 1,000m of a POI.
TH said that, if they could do that now, they would. He said that adding no-build zones requires the location to be empty, and that it is not feasible to force everyone already around a POI tomove.
- Because I am paying the Million dollars a week to maintain it! If player cities were free you would have a point, but they are not. They are player created and player maintained, that gives me the right!
I pay $15 a month to play this game. Does that give me the right to do whatever I want? After all, I'm paying for it!
- That is why your arugement is just way off base. You are not being resticted from anything that you cannot get anywhere else. The only "content" that is REALLY being restricted are that of the players that created the city because they are being prohibitied from developing what they what to develop.
As I said in my last post, I have yet to have such a situation happen to me. Our city's main restriction from "developing the way we want to develop" has been inactive player structures.
Bounty Hunters don't "fight fair"...I've seen them hunting Jedi in a group...I've seen them hunting a Jedi that was IN a group getting wailed on by NPCs and wait til the Jedi was downed by the mobs then step up and take a few swings then deliver a Death Blow. I don't think to City Ban one going into your City Hall is griefing the BH any more than Jedi hunting by BHs en-masse or while the Jedi is engaged with NPCs. It's not like you can keep the Jedi sealed in City Hall or the City itself and thus prevent the bounty from EVER being filled.
Personally, I applaud the action you took to save the Jedi...be he your husband or not. Any good City Official should protect their citizens by any means s/he can. This was a wonderful example of "using" the game, not exploiting it, in my humble opinion. I know it is a story I shall relay to my friends and guildies and I'm sure we will all garner several chuckles from it 
.
NihiMetal wrote:
If this is how you feel, are you advocating removing /cityban as griefing? After all, you haveevery right to use that shuttleport you didn't pay for. Should you no longerhave the right to BAN peoplefrom using your vendor? After all, I have a righ to the content that is on it, venders are not your "private" playground to sell things to who you want, it should be accessable to all. If it griefing id you charge prices that I cannot afford? Don't I have a right to all content without being griefed because I do not have deep pockets?
This game is all about whatever you want without any restrictions. If you want access to something then you have a right to it, regardless of wheither or not it is yours. You want to be in the WAR without the risk of getting killed, we'll give you Combatant Status. If you want to go to a player city and do whatever you want there then fine. Because your right to your content that you didn't create is more important then the rightof the players that are providing that content to have thier own content.
I think I get it now.
No, I can still walk to your city if I am /citybanned. Unless the mayor decides to cityban me, yes I do. It's not about who pays for it. My vendor is my personal property. Your city is not your property. It is owned by the citizens and you are their elected representative. Vendors are indeed my private playground. I can charge what I wish. It's not griefing to charge high prices because A) you can make money to pay for the item and B) you don't have to buy from me.
See above, the city is not your personal property.I don't play this game for the combat. Why should I have be involved in a war? As long as it's not griefing, sure. It seems to me that what you really want is your own game where you and your citizens can just live in your bubble without anyone else around. That's not SWG.
(Edited for typos. /sigh)
Message Edited by Jutewr on 06-30-2005 11:05 AM
Jutewr wrote:
NihiMetal wrote:
Some of us don't like PvP, aren't interested in it, and don't want to get attacked while we go shopping. I don't think that's too much to ask. Why do you seem to think it's neccessary to force other people to PvP?
- I agree, but if that is your position, then don't travel to cities that are declaired as Strongholds
- All we are asking for is the ability to declare our city as a "stronghold" that gives us the ability to /citywarn.
- Then, you know prior to going into that city that you are assuming that risk.
TH said that, if they could do that now, they would. He said that adding no-build zones requires the location to be empty, and that it is not feasible to force everyone already around a POI tomove.
- Well, so they know what to do they just don't want to do it. So instead they do a whole bunch of things that don't make sense because they don't want to take the time to do it right.
- Could they not give every house that is in the area a "rezoning" deed in thier inventory of the owner that allows them to place that deed in another location (away from the POI) and SoE move that house there.
I pay $15 a month to play this game. Does that give me the right to do whatever I want? After all, I'm paying for it!
- Yes, I pay $15 a month too. Why is it that your $15 gives you the right to intrude in my self created content but mine does not give me the right to restrict you from what I created?
As I said in my last post, I have yet to have such a situation happen to me. Our city's main restriction from "developing the way we want to develop" has been inactive player structures.
- That is great, I am glad you have not have a problem. AR=re you going to say that because something has not happen to you that it does not happen?
- I never got /citywarnedsodoes that mean that all those people claim they didlying about it?