Politician Archive

I cannot see why there is a cap (especially 10 per planet) for player cities.

It can't be due to space since there could be 100's of 'unofficial' cities and outposts as there already have been.

I really don't see the point of capping because cities would naturally cap themselves. Players would migrate to thebest cities, or the cities that had a more far tax systems, or for whatever other reason people change cities. What if the 10 cities on each planet have horrible leaders? Or players that don't want to expand or include others?

Seriously, there are a lot of people upset by this, and I think that an official statement (read: apology) from someonewith a red nameis in order.

If you intend to keep this cap (and I advise for the sake of the game that you completely lift it), then at least a long, well written explaination is in order.

I can't for the life of me understand the reasoning behind this...

***as a side note, yes I'm upset because I couldn't join the city that I wanted to since it didn't get founded. even the city did get started, and I got to join and enjoy a feature promised by the devs, I'd still think that this cap is ridiculous***

I don't think that their coverstory about the database problem being an issue cause all of the information is already in the databases anyway and raising the cap can't make the servers any more unstable than they already are (least bria anyway).

FROM THUNDERHEART:

Well, there are limits as to how much information any server can handle. Cities take up a lot of information / data. However, thats not to say that anything is "written in stone" either. If there is any additional balancing to be done, bring it up to myself or Plinka and we'll see what can be done. Lets not jump to conclusions though. Lets see how the Player Cities launch goes and we'll go from there.

Kurt "Thunderheart" Stangl
Assistant Community Relations Manager

If it was only server space, then they could have had Lot requirements for structures. That way, everyone could have there cities, there wouldn't be more buildings, just a re-allocations of them, and they could fix whatever they need to fix.

Seriously, there is NO GOOD REASON for this cap. I know that they're working hard on this and that, and there are more problems than they can deal with right now, but they could at least have had the foresight to see that this is a horrible horrible idea.

And if they lift the cap next patch, like in 4 weeks, then that means that all cities created will be outposts as opposed to the existing metropolis cities that will already exist. That's unbalanced and not at all thought out.

I really think that a Dev should respond to this immediately with an apology/explaination, and how they're going to fix this (because it most definately is a problem).

No kidding! Here's my problem with it too...

What about all of us that are at work when the patch is released? Guess what? No player city for us! Not even the slightest opportunity for one... that by itself, in my opiniontotally SUCKS!

I know the limits will be released in 2-3 week and more cities can be placed. My problem is on planets like Tatoonie. To me this is a barren wasteland. Seeing houses, guilhalls, and harvesters all over seems to just ruin the sense that its this barren rural planet.

The devs should regin in the development of planets a bit. have zones for buildings and zones that are wilderness. Seeing a house a few meters from Jabba's palace is just kinda weak, even though it does have a bit of a no build zone around it.

---

Kisedd wrote:

I know the limits will be released in 2-3 week and more cities can be placed. My problem is on planets like Tatoonie. To me this is a barren wasteland. Seeing houses, guilhalls, and harvesters all over seems to just ruin the sense that its this barren rural planet.

The devs should regin in the development of planets a bit. have zones for buildings and zones that are wilderness. Seeing a house a few meters from Jabba's palace is just kinda weak, even though it does have a bit of a no build zone around it.

---

That's what the 'no build zone' is for. Player Cities (and the caps thereof) have nothing to do with that. Players can build a collection of houses by Jabba's already and make an 'unofficial' city.

I remember WAY back when they first announced the delay of four major features: Vehicles/Mounts, Player Cities, Dark Jedi, and Player Generated Missions.

It was stated that their intention was that players would still get together and create their own 'unofficial cities' and that once the patch went live, those cities and new ones could make the official cities and get the perks of cities like a militia.

Well guess what? It didn't happen. A very very very very small percentage of players got to do this. I might not be so upset if they had said back then

"We're hoping that players will places houses near each other to form communities as 'unofficial cities' until player cities go live. Although it doesn't matter because only a very small percentage of them will actually become cities or outposts."

Then I would not have been excitied today. Getting a city would have been a neat perk. I'm not expecting a FCSC, but if I got one, I would be really happy. I didn't expect to get a beta tester position, but I did and I was really happy. I DID expect to get a player city and I DIDN'T, so I'm quite put off...

I need the devs to remove the cap, and apologize immediately (apology first, cap removal second).

Seriously, I've supported pretty much everything the devs have done up to now. I never felt that anything was a nerf, I knew that it was balancing. I hadn't whined about too much aside from fixing the <insert profession here> profession, and those were more "hey, you could add this!" posts than anything. This however, is wrong. Ethically wrong.

beyond ethically wrong, it is plain MORON to place such a cap. reason ? simple :

he/she who has enough money, or is an architect could found a city just in the 20-30 minutes of server reboot. how ? get novice politican for 15 skill points, get a deed go do it.

now what is the status ? is it hard to find 5 people to make it stay forever ? no it isnt. so tomorrow the cap will be going on. and there will be player cities having 5 to at most 15 citizens.what is the result ? the communities that long prepared, the pas, which have 40 or more stacked houses near each other, and already a small community had got NADA. NILCH ! ZERO !.

what if the people founded these 5-10 citizen cities decide NOT to expand ? what if i have already become a member of a 20-30 person community that wants to stay together and not move to another group's city and BEG for acknowledgement in the city ?

what is now gonna be, will the communities and pa s will try to take over towns by SOMEHOW deceiving the already present mayors or citizens to take them in and vote for their own mayor ?

this question is seriously started to bother me ;

are the developers of this game is deprived of COMMON SENSE ?

There was no way at all that this was a fair thing. I will list all the reasons that made it not fair, and why the Developers need to take action about this.

I would like to start saying that I have supported the Dev's on almost everything that has been done. Right up until now. I truly believe that they screwed the pooch on this one.

1. The cap was not officially announced other than in the forums.

2. There was no notification of when the patch would go live.

3. The server up time was not known.

4. This was very much leaned towards the west coast (maybe not intentionally) as the servers went live, but it was 3 hours later on the west coast than on the east coast (tarquinas went live at roughly 3pm EST which is 6pm PST), meaning that people who work on the west coast would be more likely to be home from work when the servers came up, whereas those of us on the east coast are still stuck at work for another 3 hours, and the caps were hit within 25 minutes.

5. The planets that would have been left available all require a hop to get anywhere else. (Rori you must go to Naboo first, then you can go elsewhere. Dantooine requires going to Corellia first, as with Talus. Lok can go to Corellia or Tat), which means more credits spent if you want your own player city.

6. This also requires the redeeding of all the houses, PA Halls, Factories, etc.. to pack them up to move, not to mention all the items inside the houses, factories, PA Halls. This costs money, and there are multiple trips to the planets to move all of your stuff, meaning even more money spent.

7. Money spent to purchase the City Halls at exorbenant prices is lost and those that didn't get a chance to place the city hall because of the caphave a useless deed.

8. Player cities were promised to everyone, not just the people who could be on the server at launch with a Master Architect ready to go and a politician camping a trainer so they could get trained then haul butt out to the Architect who could give them the City Hall then could have it placed. It was not promised as you will have to pack up and move your entire guild if you are not fast enough to get this done on the planet that you had initially intended.

It is kind of like having an AutoRace that will start at an undisclosed time someday betweenMonday and Thursday.

How it could have been done:

1. An announcement that was official, on the main page, or via in-game email, long before playercities were released, as in months, that way people would be able to place their guilds and prepare their cities in an educated manner in a place that wouldn't hit its cap in 25 minutes. That way they don't need topack up and move.

2. A specificday is announced when the patchwould go live.

3. After the patch goes live, have an announcement of when the schematic for a City Hall would be given out, so we know when to have ourArchitects ready to go and can plan it.

4. Make the schematic go in based on aspecific time that doens't fall into the bulk work hours for one geographic area, and not another.When theschematic is ready to go live, send an announcement saying that the servers are about to go down, and to restart their client. It will update the client, and when logged back on the schematic will be there.At that point it is at least a fair start with many fewer limitations.

It did nothappen this way, and a lot of people got raked over the coals on this one because ofextremely poor planning. This is anissue that needs to be addressedimmediately, as I fear there will be a tremendous outcry of this completely unfair, andmajor component stealing outrage.

Think about it, if there wasn't a cap, your map would be filled with cities, like every 2m or so. It wouldn't be cool. I dont blame the devs one bit

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=Development&message.id=829842#M829842

There's at least acknowledgement. Funny how they didn't start their own thread addressing this as they should have.

I still don't see an official apology, and the cap should be taken off WAY sooner than by December...

Get on it devs... I'm waiting.

You need at least 5 players to even have a city. It would all work itself out if they didn't put a cap on it. It'd be just like rl, you'd have a lot of small villages and less towns, and only a few big cities. There is no good reason for the cap other than possibly that their servers can't handle it.

---

fight4therebels wrote:
Think about it, if there wasn't a cap, your map would be filled with cities, like every 2m or so. It wouldn't be cool. I dont blame the devs one bit

---

That's just plain wrong. Things would naturally work themselves out. Cities would join or fight until there was a happy balance of cities.

The cap is coming off, just not soon enough