Politician Archive
Thread: Change to DestroyStructure City Hall
Page 1 of 1
SenDerlo
Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:36 pm
#1
Suggestion for changing the way City Halls are destroyed, to prevent griefing by Mayors:
(1) The option to destroy City Hall is only available while the Mayor is running unopposed. If there is another candidate for mayor, the option is not available.
(2) If a Mayor chooses to destroy city hall, an email is sent to all the citizens, announcing that at the next city update, the city will be destroyed. If anyone then chooses to run against the mayor, it automatically voids the destruction attempt.
(1) The option to destroy City Hall is only available while the Mayor is running unopposed. If there is another candidate for mayor, the option is not available.
(2) If a Mayor chooses to destroy city hall, an email is sent to all the citizens, announcing that at the next city update, the city will be destroyed. If anyone then chooses to run against the mayor, it automatically voids the destruction attempt.
Jaspor
Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:52 pm
#2
Some way of preventingthe destruction of City Halls by a malicious Mayorhas been discussed in the past. Though no clue when we'll see anything like that.
The main problem I see with your solution is a bit of "reverse griefing". If a city as a whole decides to relocate or disband or something, and all the citizens DO agree to this, one single malicious person can disrupt this by simply registering to run for election. Now the city can NEVER move as long as this person registers for the election every week. (Don't underestimate the persistence of people out to ruin your fun. 
)
)I think the best solution would probably be a vote by the citizens to destroy it, though this probably isn't the easiest implementations and is still open to potential abuse.
Fleura_MD
Tue Aug 24, 2004 8:21 pm
#3
Jaspor wrote:
The main problem I see with your solution is a bit of "reverse griefing". If a city as a whole decides to relocate or disband or something, and all the citizens DO agree to this, one single malicious person can disrupt this by simply registering to run for election. Now the city can NEVER move as long as this person registers for the election every week. (Don't underestimate the persistence of people out to ruin your fun.
I agree that does create another problem.
I think that the solution would be to have a seperate voting terminal for the destuction of the city hall. That way the person that is running/challenging has to get the citizens to change their vote for both the mayor and for "not to destroy."
PreLaunch
Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:58 am
#4
Hi Jaspor,
If the city decides to move and one guy runs for office to stop them thats not a grief.
Everyone can still move their houses to the new location and the currrent mayor can still epty out city hall of cash and items. The only thing that would remain is the hall itself and the 1 citizen that tried to grief the city. You need 10 citizens to run a city hall so in 7 days the griefer will be left on his own anyway. No City and no hall.
Dont forget when you destroy city hall you dont get the deed back so leaving it behind is not an issue.
Message Edited by PreLaunch on 08-25-2004 04:59 AM
ManicMarauder
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:03 am
#5
First I should say I’m NOT a politician, but I do appreciate what you do for us 
At any rate, I'd have to agree with the delay on destroying the hall. How about something similar to above, but using a majority vote system instead of a unanimous vote system? That way even if you have a couple holdouts you can still outvote them. Also, the option to destroy the city hall shouldn't be voteable until the mayor allows it to be. This way it goes both ways. You want to get rid of the mayor and/or the city you have to vote them out first. The mayor wants to get rid of the city, the majority of the population has to agree before it happens. Just an idea, have fun with it.
At any rate, I'd have to agree with the delay on destroying the hall. How about something similar to above, but using a majority vote system instead of a unanimous vote system? That way even if you have a couple holdouts you can still outvote them. Also, the option to destroy the city hall shouldn't be voteable until the mayor allows it to be. This way it goes both ways. You want to get rid of the mayor and/or the city you have to vote them out first. The mayor wants to get rid of the city, the majority of the population has to agree before it happens. Just an idea, have fun with it.
Chibi-Bar
Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:47 am
#6
personally I think the city hall cannot be destroy at all.... EXCEPT!
1. ran out of citizen (less than 10 auto destruct in 7 days)
2. ran out of maintence (decay till 0) which BTW takes 5 weeks
Jaspor
Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:10 am
#7
PreLaunch wrote:
Hi Jaspor,
If the city decides to move and one guy runs for office to stop them thats not a grief.
Everyone can still move their houses to the new location and the currrent mayor can still epty out city hall of cash and items. The only thing that would remain is the hall itself and the 1 citizen that tried to grief the city. You need 10 citizens to run a city hall so in 7 days the griefer will be left on his own anyway. No City and no hall.
Dont forget when you destroy city hall you dont get the deed back so leaving it behind is not an issue.
Message Edited by PreLaunch on 08-25-2004 04:59 AM
Hrmmmm.. True enough.
But consider the value of the actual slot within the Planetary City Cap that CIty Hall is taking up. If a town wants to relocate on their own planet (a risky venture), in order to pull it off they'll need some good organization, timing, and know exactly when the City Hall is being destroyed. If someone keeps running for office, it prevents this. Maybe "griefing" isn't the right word, but it'd still be annoying as heck.
Page 1 of 1