Politician Archive
Thread: Inactive Rule [petition]
Message Edited by acabada on 03-22-2004 07:24 AM
/sign
I personally am entirely happy with the rule - the sooner that cities packed with ghost citizens disappear that let new, genuine cities appear, the better.
We have 150 genuine citizens in my city - the rule will not affect us and I don't see why it should affect any other genuine city either.
If your city is not growing, then it should fall in rank as others outstrip its growth.
The problem with the inactive rule, is that it screws up (for lack of a better term) Today I logged in after our city updated and had about 6 emails notifying me that citizens had been removed. 3 I had expected. One was a bit of a suprise after having seen the person on in the last 3 weeks. One wasn't even a citizen anymore (had moved out about 2 months ago) and one was a very active player who is on daily restocking her busy tailor vendor.
Now I have more work as a mayor trying to keep track of who actually is active and who isn't so when I get those 'player removed' emails I can send in a bug report if it is an actual active player.
As a side note: Players that lose citizenship due to inactivity (accurate or not) do not receive an email notifying them that they are no longer a citizen. I forwarded the email to my very active tailor citizen so she could redeclare citizenship.
How exactally is it fair to cities with active player populations to lose rank because the game can't keep track of who is or isn't inactive?
Acere wrote:
The problem with the inactive rule, is that it screws up (for lack of a better term)
As a side note: Players that lose citizenship due to inactivity (accurate or not) do not receive an email notifying them that they are no longer a citizen. I forwarded the email to my very active tailor citizen so she could redeclare citizenship.
How exactally is it fair to cities with active player populations to lose rank because the game can't keep track of who is or isn't inactive?
Had the same experience. Lost 5 due to inactivity. Three I expected. One I didn't think would be declared inactive though I couldn't remember when I saw that person last and the other one I saw three weeks ago. I sent the person and email and they thought they were still a citizen.
I would like the ability to track my citizens when they were last on. EQ in the guild management tool that the ability to view when guild members had last logged on. I would like to have a tool like that. I think the 6 week inactivity rule is good, but would like a tool to allow us politicians to keep track of citizens.
If you had read my entire post you would have noticed I put in the sideline.
Message Edited by acabada on 03-22-2004 06:10 PM
I did read your post and I agreed that the 6 week inactivity rulewas good. I also offered an example of such a tool to determine when inactivity would occur, but I also stated there was a problem with the inactivity as did another. That problem is losing a citizen that was only inactive for 3 weeks and was made an non-resident. In a sense by agreeing, I signed your petition but added an idea of what that tool could be for mayors to keep track of active and inactive residents.
acabada wrote:
If you had read my entire post you would have noticed I put in the sideline.
"High ranking cities should be given an equal chance to compete as well by having ample time to replace inactive citizens before the next city update (that is when they would be informed by the game mechanics that such and such citizen is due for removal due to inactivity)."
Not to mention when I asked you to sign I informed you the sole stipulation to the petition was...
"Having said all that if you think the six week inactivity rule should stay (with some modification as stated above, a way to inform mayors their inactive citizens will soon be revoked) please sign this petition."
If you have a week or several days notice that you will be losing certain citizens to inactivity and you are unable to replace them then you should lose your city rank to a city that does have the appropriate number of active citizens.
Message Edited by acabada on 03-22-2004 06:10 PM
I have been a mayor on infinity for a long time now and as I had been going up the politician tree, I found it exciting every week to add new stuff to the city, we got a nice stream of new citizens. The city was growing well. We reached level 5 in no time and quickly became the player city to visit. Then the inactive people started dissapearing. citizenshop was revoked. the city lost 2000 credits a week from their tax. Yes we couldnt replace the the old citizens with new citizens because no one wanted to place a house 400m+ from the city center. So we were left with vacant houses cluttering up the good spots, paying a minimal maintenance rate of 10%. It has gotten very bad.
Top that up with being mayor by having absolutely nothing to do whatsoever. Master politician? whats the point, you get nothing for your city. I would of thought this would of been a top priority for the devs. A master skill with no "master" skills. What would it be like if all the other professions had nothing in their master box? Im sure there would be hell to pay. There are probably less mayors now than jedi, and giving the amount of dev time and attention that they give to jedi, I dont think we will be seing much anymmore.
I want these pesky houses to go. We have 100 citizens and 150 houses. thats 100k a week the city is loosing because their citizenship tax was removed but their space hogging house is still there.
I am about ready to give up being mayor as its more trouble than its worth, there is no fun factor any more. I only have to log on for 5 mins a day to be good mayor of the city. Basically to see if anything has happened.
Now I will have the task of trying to get the rest of the citizens to vote for a new mayor. I wonder how thats going to go when half of the citizens wont bother, and the other half will forget. So I will be stuck as the mayor forever.
IMO the rule of 6 weeks is good, the modifications are also not bad. But always when i see someone complaining about the 6 week inactive rule. It is either bugged, hope the devs will fix this very soon. And second everyone complains about the ghost houses.
There is at the moment no solution to the ghost houses, but when they can see how long someone is inactive they also should redeed the house automaticaly to free up the slot for another building for an active citizen. Or just give the mayors some sort of tool to destroy buildings and sending the deeds to a sort of vendor at the cityhall, where the owner can come and get it when they want.
I know i'm just started in this carreer, because a few reasons. I want more roleplay and think this profession is the best to get a lot. Second we wanted to move to our own town. We already have one ghost house, which was owned by a char that accidently was deleted. The new character has already taken up a new residense at the city. I'm just hoping she didn't pay much maintanance so the house will clear out soon to free up the lot.
)
6 weeks is good, and I don't mind it, but I WOULD like some sort of warning so I have a chance to shuffle some things around to make room for new houses.
A tool in the citizenship selection that gives a last on date would be nice. Allows a mayor to plan for anticipated losses or to contact citizens if they have that abilitiy.