Politician Archive
Thread: How do you remove unwanted houses from your city?
Then, plant an exotic garden directly in front of the offending houses...
Third, have 7 nubile virgins prancing around the garden in flesh wraps and exotic leotards. Master Dancers/Entertainers preferred for the light effects...
Final step. Have the mayor dance 7 times round the garden naked, and in the rain whilst chanting passages from the SWG Strategy guide...
The houses should go "poof" upon completion of the 7th circle.
If they don't, at least you would have put on a heck of a show for your residents, and convinced them of your commitment to your city...
In other words, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it if he keeps adding maintenance to the structures. And if he stops, you will still have to wait for them to decay.
Message Edited by Defconn on 03-24-2004 03:30 PM
Message Edited by Defconn on 03-24-2004 03:31 PM
Is that the inactive houses, or do you actually have a mayor that dances around gardens naked?...
I'm sorry, but I find it a joke that SOE introduces the very thing that will guarantee the death of most cities... 
Your problem maker then has the choice to pay the inflated maint(and greatly helping your income), redeed, or let them decay
I would warn your residents before doing this, otherwise you'll cause wanted buildings to poof, and get people chasing after you with pitchforks.
rsnyc wrote:
the problem is that all of you are looking at it from the mayor perspective only. im sure you all are great mayors and this is not intended as a flame, but as a city citizen the idea that a mayor could just get rid of my house on a whim is really scary. now you may want to limit it to non citizens but i would think even this is a bit too far. just my two credits here.
We realize this problem and there have been many solutions proposed to address just that problem. One of them would be not to have the player's belongings destroyed, but relegated to some kind of container like a safety deposit box where they can just go and pick up their belongings (sorry, I don't remember who first posted it or when). Or to give like 2 week timer in which the player has the ability to stop the demolition (perhaps not the best solution, but it would keep the mayor from destroying player houses "on a whim"), or even leave it to a citizen vote.
Believe me, we sympathize with the players that can't be here all the time, but this is a serious problem. Our cities are soon going to be choked to death by people who put lots of money into their maintainence and then cancelled their accounts (no, houses do not go away even if they belong to a dead account). There has to be some kind of acceptable solution to this.
rsnyc wrote:the problem is that all of you are looking at it from the mayor perspective only. im sure you all are great mayors and this is not intended as a flame, but as a city citizen the idea that a mayor could just get rid of my house on a whim is really scary. now you may want to limit it to non citizens but i would think even this is a bit too far. just my two credits here.
I assure you, just as I would never want such a thing to happen to me, neither would I ever just blow away a house at a whim. And I also don't quite agree with the demolition thing. A player's house and belongings is simply part of a database. So, just make it so that the relevant values are stored, with a clear procedure for retrieval.
No...a mayor should never be given the power to simply destroy a building (that is not a civic structure). But neither should these buildings be allowed to destroy a city.
I had 2 of the four houses blocked in with lampposts. You can't squeeze through or access the ramps. Have no idea what to do about the other two. In any case,this guyput these four houses as a method of griefing, when my city range was low. He had the nerve to call them "rebel hideouts" or something along those lines. Rather anoying. I had a defensive building plan in the works, but these four houses are just sort of...forcing me to make changes that I'd rather not do.
In any case, I blocked off 2 houses using lamp posts. I can't do that to the other two, as I hit a "limit". Can harvesters be used to block the ramps of the other two?
I'd rather not raise taxes (yet), would be quite a hassle making sure everyone is up to date and well refunded when it comes to the property tax.
Your options :
a) One way harvesters can be used would be to log in immediately after reset, when those houses have not yet spawned/been loaded...and plant a harvester then at the appropriate location. Mark the location first with a wp.
b) Another way, but this is irreversible, log in immediately after reset, when houses have not yet loaded, and plant an equivalent house on the exact footprint, but in the opposite direction. This will render both houses inaccessible. You may have time to put in some maintenance, to ensure your structure outlasts the offending houses. If you are caught inside when the houses respawn, I think there is a / command to kick you out of the house. Can't quite remember it at this time.
c) Take down temporarily 2 of your city decorations, and block the doors with lamp-posts.
Either way, you have to work immediately, as blocking 2 houses would give him a loud warning, and he may just put a year's maint in the other two.
My city has a similar problem...but not a case of greifing.
The area we moved to was inhabited by another city. They moved...and 3 people failed to pull their houses. They are just now a problem at Level 4....They are blocking our advancement on that one side...One has gone away, either the owner came and picked it up, or it finally just burned down or something. We aren't sure. The other 2, we have no idea how much maintenance is in there. We have been in contact with the previous tenants of the valley....but nothing has been done about the 2 remaining houses. That's ok...We have plenty of room...Just means a couple less houses until they run out of maintenance.
Defconn wrote:
No...harvesters have a footprint that cannot overlap that of the house...
Your options :
a) One way harvesters can be used would be to log in immediately after reset, when those houses have not yet spawned/been loaded...and plant a harvester then at the appropriate location. Mark the location first with a wp.
b) Another way, but this is irreversible, log in immediately after reset, when houses have not yet loaded, and plant an equivalent house on the exact footprint, but in the opposite direction. This will render both houses inaccessible. You may have time to put in some maintenance, to ensure your structure outlasts the offending houses. If you are caught inside when the houses respawn, I think there is a / command to kick you out of the house. Can't quite remember it at this time.
c) Take down temporarily 2 of your city decorations, and block the doors with lamp-posts.
Either way, you have to work immediately, as blocking 2 houses would give him a loud warning, and he may just put a year's maint in the other two.
Wow, that's an excellent "How To Grief with Exploits" guide.
You do realize that doing ANY of those things can and should get you totally banned, right?
There is no "an eye for an eye", especially when what people are doing is simply annoying you and not violating any game rule. They built up on clear land early - YOUR city changed to encompass them. In the case of the story above, you were building your city defensively, and they beat you to the punch with the offense - THEY GOT THERE FIRST. You had no claim to that land before your city earned the right to extend it's boundries.
Yes, you are a mayor, but you are still a player in SWG like everyone else. You are not above CSRs and the EULA - doing ANYTHING like what is listed above is clear and present griefing using exploits that are ban-able and have been documented as being ban-worthy offenses.
Yes, I know mayors take pride in their cities, but to listen to the glee in poofing houses and griefing people out of their city is getting a little out of hand.
I'm sorry to be so blunt, but when I hear people suggesting exploiting people out of the game like it's acceptable behavior I think everyone needs a bit of a reality check.
AO