Politician Archive
Thread: Politician and Player City Issues/Wish List (updated 9.3.2005)
drachenfire wrote:
thegreyman wrote:
Noaso wrote:
I think Player City caps should be left where they are. Once the character purge goes into effect, those suffering due to the cap will find that either the problem will rectified itself OR they need to a) deal b) consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities.
Eminent Domain.
Oh come on...who does it hurt to get rid of city growth caps? Besides, of course, mayors who fear better cities arising unhindered and who rely on this cap to maintain their prominence.
Your post describes what is commonly called 'the drawbridge mentality'. I was here first, so consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities. Whats wrong with perpetuating smaller cities?
Removing city growth caps harms absolutely no one, but will definitely improve the quality of gaming for those citizens who have been waiting for level three for 18 months or more.
18 months.../shudder...
I agree with thegrayman. Once you place a city you should be able to gradulate to the highest level allow, planetary rank-caps for cities should be eliminated. There are many absentee politicans who do not actively recruit for their community. They get to their eschelon they wish and count on not having the player pack-up/purge to artifically bulster their communities.
And... there is NOTHING wrong with many smaller cities if that is what the community wishes . If that mayor in the larger community is not offering the kind of community they want they should have the ability to choose another community or found one somewhere.
CAN you imagive rank-caps on earth? No more metropolises becase New York and Tokyo and Lodon have already reached the planet cap? Pish posh.
All cities should be able to gradulate in accordance solely on their residence base.
Well we also come back from the dead in this game... I would have to agree with Noaso. If they keep inactive accts purged/packed up. then no there isnt a problem with planet caps. Then you have active large cities, if not, then you have a series of lot traded hulk of urban sprawl that is just takingup space and needs to be dealt with yet again. If they monitor acct's as they should getting your city to metropolis on what ever lanet you deem habitable shouldnt be an issue
Dv8Mutt wrote:
drachenfire wrote:
thegreyman wrote:
Noaso wrote:
I think Player City caps should be left where they are. Once the character purge goes into effect, those suffering due to the cap will find that either the problem will rectified itself OR they need to a) deal b) consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities.
Eminent Domain.
Oh come on...who does it hurt to get rid of city growth caps? Besides, of course, mayors who fear better cities arising unhindered and who rely on this cap to maintain their prominence.
Your post describes what is commonly called 'the drawbridge mentality'. I was here first, so consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities. Whats wrong with perpetuating smaller cities?
Removing city growth caps harms absolutely no one, but will definitely improve the quality of gaming for those citizens who have been waiting for level three for 18 months or more.
18 months.../shudder...
I agree with thegrayman. Once you place a city you should be able to gradulate to the highest level allow, planetary rank-caps for cities should be eliminated. There are many absentee politicans who do not actively recruit for their community. They get to their eschelon they wish and count on not having the player pack-up/purge to artifically bulster their communities.
And... there is NOTHING wrong with many smaller cities if that is what the community wishes . If that mayor in the larger community is not offering the kind of community they want they should have the ability to choose another community or found one somewhere.
CAN you imagive rank-caps on earth? No more metropolises becase New York and Tokyo and Lodon have already reached the planet cap? Pish posh.
All cities should be able to gradulate in accordance solely on their residence base.
Well we also come back from the dead in this game... I would have to agree with Noaso. If they keep inactive accts purged/packed up. then no there isnt a problem with planet caps. Then you have active large cities, if not, then you have a series of lot traded hulk of urban sprawl that is just takingup space and needs to be dealt with yet again. If they monitor acct's as they should getting your city to metropolis on what ever lanet you deem habitable shouldnt be an issue
Adding to the wishlist for Lord_Rainious:
I think a great idea would have a marker available to only Mayors. What would happen is, when they accessed CTRL+M inside city limits, a highlighted circle would also be visible designating the city limits.
Khristen wrote:
Players would like to have better tools for city planning available using in-game tools.
- It is very difficult to create a precise city plan and maintain that plan in the current system. Politicians would like the ability to designate certain areas of the city (residential, business, certain types of structures) as well as better tools for actually creating the design.
drachenfire wrote:
1) So when a city is founded a total area of 450 meters is set aside for all furture development, no one else could place a building here, but any pre-founded houses would be grandfathered in as they are now. The mayor and citizens can place buildings anywhere in this circumference of future growth, but the mayor could only count the residents in the 150/ 200/ 300/ 400/ 450 meters as residents as they are now.
This releaves the mayor and the community from worring about hostile take overs by those that agressively place their residents just outside a current border and awaiting an expansion, then once included vote out the founding mayor.
This also releaves much potiential grief by anyone who unwittenly placed say... 300 meters away and didnt realize a city was behind that hill there let alone will expand to include him. Remember the buildings pre-existing would still be grandfathered.. this is 'reservation is for any future developement.
2) City Wars. As a city is realy a super-guild or sorts, why not allow them to guild war each other? Basically, the mayor could assign citizens as 'militia' whos ONLY ability would be to pvp rival cities militiamen. Using the terminal at the city hall, the mayor would assign militia membership to a member and he would be what was called 'overt' to rival cities. This only would effect him, and he could resign militia status by /removemilitia. Any citizen not wishing to ever be a militiaperson would toggle a no militia button on his character sheet.
3) This would mean the powers once assigned under militia would now go to another city position called city administrator. The administrator will be able to ban and grant zoning rights, and represent the mayor. Administrators could have admin rights inside city halls.
4) Get rid of the concept of planet specific buildings and instead allow all floor plans to be built on all planets.. only the exterior facade defaults to the planet norm. This instantly gives building varity and greater choice to the community, and gives players more freedom of moment. This would be accompanied with a new ability using the house terminal to toggle the interior to any style a home-owner desires: Classical Naboo, Tatooine Adobe, Contemporary Corellian, Mostafar Sophistication. Additionally, both these choices would not take much to impliment, just some touch up by the art team.
5) An ability to generate city them parks and missions, allow the mayor to place a Events Coordiantor. The mayor should be able to create a story line and theme park for his own city, I know actors were abused, but there should be some way to make this not so.
6) mayors shoudnt be able to destroy city halls on their own, once placed the city hall belongs to the city.
7) mayors should be able to resign at any time and an immediate election should be held within a week of this.
8) A city council position should be created so that poliicans can either run for mayor -or- city councilor, but not both. The experience for running for office, even if not elected, should be increased. Simularly, a new city position of city councilor. This would be largely ceremonial without much real powers, but would allow a politican gain expierence if he is elected into this position.
9) NPC's giving missions in cities
10) street lights on buildings placed in cities, the specific style chosen by a toggled drop down list in city hall. The lights would be placed just by being in the city.
I know this is ten and not five, sorry
Message Edited by drachenfire on 10-06-2005 10:01 AM
Some things I want to see are:
More power to mayors....
- the ability to packup condemned structures to the players data pad
- the ability to postion the houses of new citizens, for them without the need of lots on the mayors side.
- asmaller footprint for the medium naboo house (yes...I know...)
- the ability to do / have someone do something about personae non grata.
Oh I forgot...
a mayor should have the ability
- to find out who the owner of a structure in his city is.
- change the names of structures in his city as customer service is of no help with naming issues.
That's a little dangerous, isn't it? I, for one, wouldn't like to come home to see that my mayor changed the name of my house.
Nibo wrote:
- change the names of structures in his city as customer service is of no help with naming issues.
Nibo wrote:
Oh I forgot...
a mayor should have the ability
- to find out who the owner of a structure in his city is.
- change the names of structures in his city as customer service is of no help with naming issues.
I agree one thousand fold:
My issue is this:
Since the CU upgrade I have had a resident in my city use his house sign to routinly curse out the upgrade and the devs by posting "May all SOE suffer butt leakage for the combat downgrade". Now, it runs in cycles, ever 2 weeks he posts this horid sign on his house in the middle of the city, I send a ticket they remove and he reposts.
One month stretch I had the csr's say they have no control over personal house names! lol. That was funny.
I have less faith in SOE and the CSR's to police people like this then I do the upright community mayors who post in these forums.
You see, SOE has little care for this individual who harrasses my community because he is a paying customer (dispite promising to cxl his account). So SOE and Galaxies tolerates his right to a grief free gaming expierence over my communities gaming expierence.
This is rountine, so yes, mayors should be able to evict persons from a city and change an inapproperitely named building. Or have a more responsive CSR team.
MiraLuka3 wrote:
That's a little dangerous, isn't it? I, for one, wouldn't like to come home to see that my mayor changed the name of my house.
Nibo wrote:
- change the names of structures in his city as customer service is of no help with naming issues.
It is a little dangerous, but on the other hand, I wouldn't want to live in a city with a mayor, who isn't above griefing. Mayors are electable, and no one is forced to live in a particular city (especialy with the packup). Personaly I think there would be less damage done, then it is now, withthose wonderful "SOE sucks" signs and all that jazz.
A word of note about this....in order for this to be a valid item for a "wish list", there need to be checks in place to prevent griefing. A suggestion is to have it work in the same manner that purged structures will (roll-up and placed in bank).
I dont think #7 on the list is even worth talking about because it would be too much of a coding effort for SOE to setup the proper check and balances to protect against Mayors who abuse their power.
Really all that needs to be done if for abandoned buildings to poof like they were orginally intended to. (and perhaps to autopack up when the account is closed)
As far as troublesome citizens..well the Mayor milita invited them in did they not? I am a FIRM believer in an ounce of prevention is worth 10 pounds of cure. Strict zoning laws and a militia who enforces them are a must.
There is no reason at all for SOE to code fixes that player can implement themselves using mechanisms already in the game.
That is.
1. Restict who can be militia tightly
2. Milita should watch as the new citizen drops their house and guide them to proper locations
3. Go even further and require milita to drop then transfer the new house.
4. Revoke zoning rights immediatly after the new house is placed.
Make these rules CRYSTAL CLEAR to potential citizens.
To many city messes are really due to the fact that the MAYOR got sloppy and cared more about recruitment than planning.
Take the time and recruit the right kind of citizens and only recruit militia you can trust. You are the Mayor, you dont have to allow anyone else to be militia (but it sure helps if you have a few loyal followers who can back you up)
Again, #7 imho will not every happen because that would directly run afoul of SOE business goals of retaining subsctibers, and subcribers get pissed off when other players can go around making their house dissapear. The sheer amount of coding alone to make this idea work guarantees it will never make it into the game. Checks and balances that work and dont mess things up are HARD things to code and take a long time to accomplish.
If buildings in this game are going to vanish delibately, w/o owner consent, it will be only because SOE decides to do the purge and for no other reason. End of story.