Scout Archive

Personally I wish we had the ability to attack these things wherever we may find them.

Wow great idea!! Use our lots to make nature preserves!! That is great!

Kind of like what the Nature Conservancy does. They buy up land from people and leave it undeveloped.

Sounds like something to put in a wish list.

Of course this needs to wait until our major issues are solved.

Borak,

It's on the list, but you're right - we should wait a bit on this one.

Urban sprawl is bad now, but I really think it'll get 10 times worse when the creature mounts and vehicles get implemented. We should have this put in as part of the that update.

B

Great idea Berratus! This would gives something positive to do, instead of just complaining. I want to make it clear, I understand and share concerns about over-development. However, it would be bad to start a full campaign right now, especially because scout is one of the few professions that doesn't have major bugs or other large problems. Compared toDroid Engineers and Commandos, Scouts are working as intended.

I agree. I'm not trying to make a big ruckuss. Just forming a group to be ready when it happens. Get the ideas together. Raise awareness to the problem before it gets too big.

Player cities is going to be a major issue.

---

BorakThunderclaw wrote:

Player cities is going to be a major issue.

---

Actually, I think player cities are going to be more of a help than a hindrance.

First, there will probably be some in game mechanism that benefits city builds, like a reduction in maintenance costs, etc... This won't decrease the number of player structures, but this will probably make them more concentrated. Remember they planned it so there are far more buildable lots than player lots, even on a full server. The net effect will be higher population densities in small areas, but less average development on a planetary scale.

Second, one main problem is that large groups of buildings resemble tract housing or strip malls. Player cities will have metropolitan buildings that will vary the architecture and reducing this effect. Hopefully, player cities will also include options for parks and monuments, like the pre-built cities have. A well designed city can be an addition to the landscape rather than a detracting eyesore.

All,

The other good news about player cities is that our own Scout dev is also working on that project, so he's familiar with our concerns already.

B

Where do I sign?

This has been a thorn in my side for quite awhile. There is no "Wilderness" anymore. Harvesters, houses, PA's are all over the planet. The fact that I cannot walk 5 minutes out of any Nabooian city without running into someone's harvester, house, factory, or shop. Someone even built a house and several harvesters right next to the PvE battleground.

One way to fix all these houses springing up, is to allow tenants in the high rises within the cities. On Naboo, there are a large number of "eye candy" buildings that you can not enter. I say, let me rent the house as anapartment or condo for say, 1000 credits a week.

That last part is interesting Ronge_Ricin,I would reallyto have more of thebuildings "open" in a city. If that's not possible maybe we could get apartment buildingsimplemented in player cities.Perhaps evenrentable buildings could evenhave shops on the lowest levels with apartments up above.

With player cities I think we will end up with small areas of open space btw each city and those will most likely be littered with harvesters.

I betthey aren't figuring the no build areas in with the amount of slots available.

I see a ring of player cities surrounding the exiting cities until they each but up against each's no build zone.

Of course some planets will be more affected then others.

Houses are a status symbol most people are going to want one.

I realize we can't stop player cities but we can try to limit how much they can expand.

Guys,

One thing to keep in mind - player cities aren't going to result in masses of houses covering the entire landscape. You've still got the lot limits to deal with.

Adding player cities won't result in people getting more lots. So whatever issues we have with too many buildings are issues that exist regardless of when or where the player cities start up.

My comment about this getting worse when player cities are implemented is that people wanted to start one will have an easier way of moving their houses away from areas that currently have their own, not that everyone will start one.

B

BorakThunderclaw,I think you are being a tad too paranoid. Especially, with that " betthey aren't figuring the no build areas in with the amount of slots available." I wasn't in Beta, but I've been following the development boards since a few months after they were set up. Before Beta The Devs told us about the lot system and they told us that the limit for each player would be set to make sure we wouldn't get urban sprawl.

I'm not down playing the importance of stopping urban sprawl,please understand my background. I was part of the UO Beta test and played for almost three years after that. I say the Brittiania in that game go from a lush wild land to a medival metropolis. More importantly Raph Koster (Holocron)saw it to, this is a guy who during beta had aworking (ifsimplified)ecologysystem in UO. I think cares aboutthings like urban sprawl and will not repeat the same mistake he did in UO. Of course maybe I just am not pesimistic enough yet!

Also, I think harvesters are a different issue than houses and factories. The later tend to stay put, the former follow the resource concentrations. Harvesters are an eyesore but at least they are a temporary one, here. I'm more worried aboutthe obtrusiveness ofmore permanent structures. Potentially, a well designed player city system will allow the leadership of that city to zone what can be placed where. This would allow people to work with the landscape, making densely populated areas less offensive.

We can't stop people from wanting houses, factories, shops, and PA halls. In fact, I'm willing to bet most of us either want some sort of player built structure or use player built structures others own. What we need to do is focus on ways to keep large sections of the planets open, without taking away the ability for people to build elsewhere. Their have been two wonderful ideas (neither of them orginated by me) in this thread, rentable buildings and using lots for wilderness reserves.

It's too early to get discouraged.... Don't focus on the cup being half empty, there is no cup.

I am paranoid. I was trying to drawa diagram illustarting where I think the whole thing is going but it got to tedious.

I don't want a house and I don't use a house. I either log out in camp or log off in town.

I'd like to know a few things. How many players per galaxy? How manylots (not just buildable lots)on any given planet? Each player gets 10 lots, correct?

Now only a certain number of playerscan be on at one time BUT all they players structures will be on at the same time.

I'm all for using lots for nature preserves. Excellent idea. So, we can have Player Preserves.

Also, in favor of apartments, they'd give people a place to put stuff without cluttering up the landscape.

I wish I could insert an image here to illustrate my point because I'm not explaining it well enough.