Thoughts for next maps community...#2

[Danda]

Exactly! I remember when D101 was raided by a couple of jerks. I can recall exactly what Neotetro said, or most of it. He told us to ''not recruit anyone''. Basically, we didn't want anyone in our town that we didn't know. It really dropped our activity, and some members left. Hopefully something can be done to change this in the future.

Tbh the best way to solve the security issues is subregioning and/or giving mayors many cheap LWCs

 

[Fjordsen]

I think part of the reason that new players aren't seen a potential townys anymore is because of events during last map and this map. With the lack of security options for mayors accepting a new player into you town is a little risky as you're opening up the entire town to them. I can think of many occasions where people have screwed over their town members and stolen everything. While yes this is illegal and the users get punished for doing so but the town that was stolen from doesn't usually get their items back. I think that lack of trust is the main issue here.

I know this issue very well as I have been accepting most newbs applying for my town, just like how I would accept a Veteran. I show them trust, I learn them the ways of HC and then they rob the entire town and leaves. Either this or, I accept a person, I teach him, He suddenly leaves the town, he then proceedes to get a wizard from his new town in a Raider tunnel he built before he left and then marks inside.


But of course, most newbs either go inactive or stays with the town doing nothing wrong. It's just like 5% of all newbs that wants to cause mischief and betrays the town and therefore makes a bad reputation for the other newbies.

 

[MajorasMask]

@Kainzo Are mayor LWCs making a comeback?

 

[Fjordsen]

Tbh the best way to solve the security issues is subregioning and/or giving mayors many cheap LWCs

If Mayor would get cheap LWC's again, they could give LWC's to new townies and there would be no town theft. I'd really like Mayor/SiC LWC's to be granted back again.

 

[Danda]

If Mayor would get cheap LWC's again, they could give LWC's to new townies and there would be no town theft. I'd really like Mayor/SiC LWC's to be granted back again.

When I talk about cheap LWC there will still be a cap on how many LWC can be bought. For instance a Town requires 10 members so the Mayor would have a cap of 10 LWC one for each member. While yes things within the town would be more secure there would still be chests that aren't protected.

Though I personally believe that sub-regioning is the best solution.

 

[leftovers5]

This map was interesting to say the least. I recruited my share of newbs for Oblivion, and a good amount of vets as well, but most newbs played for 2 weeks then quit, or played for 2 weeks, stole from the town, then quit. I'd always be surprised by the thief, because generally I had gotten good vibes from them in the past, which always sort of made me disappointed that my good-newb-recruiting-radar had gone haywire. Then again, this map I recruited a bunch of new players that I'm so lucky/glad to have recruited, ie @pinpanxxi, @Canti, @Motav, and others.

 

[Fjordsen]

When I talk about cheap LWC there will still be a cap on how many LWC can be bought. For instance a Town requires 10 members so the Mayor would have a cap of 10 LWC one for each member. While yes things within the town would be more secure there would still be chests that aren't protected.

Though I personally believe that sub-regioning is the best solution.

In Zeal a Mayor had 22 or 23 LWC's for 200c. I was a Mayor back then, so I should know xD

 

[Danda]

In Zeal a Mayor had 22 or 23 LWC's for 200c. I was a Mayor back then, so I should know xD

I'm not saying that's how it was I'm saying that's how I think it should be.

 

[MajorasMask]

I think giving mayors LWCs, the number and cost depending on the size of the town, would be easier to do than using sub regions.

 

[Fjordsen]

Hmm, maybe 10 LWC's for the first level of town (Hamlet) and 15 for the next (Town) etc.

 

[MajorasMask]

Hamlet: 5 citizens required: 10 LWC's. 200c
Town: 10 citizens required: 20 LWC's. 150c
City: 15 citizens required: 30 LWC's. 125c
Capital: 20 citizens required: 40 LWC's. 100c

(The citizen requirements are taken from the wiki).

I'm looking at the idea that the number of LWCs you get is the number of citizens you need, just doubled. LWC's should be at around 200c-100c (depending on township level). Why? Take into account how much it costs to upgrade a town, aswell as the benefits you get from a town upgrade. Currently, you only get bigger regions. With this, you'll not only get more LWCs but cheaper ones too.

This'll promote the upgrading of towns, setting a new desire for mayors/SICs. Maybe this'll influence people to recruit more players, (potentially new players) to get a higher township status. Will this make communities bigger aswell? Yes. It'll also limit region abuse.

I think this would be a ''two birds, one stone'' moment.

 

[Danda]

I think giving mayors LWCs, the number and cost depending on the size of the town, would be easier to do than using sub regions.

Easier yes but better not so much.

 

[MajorasMask]

Easier yes but better not so much.

How would sub regions be better? Wouldn't that give people ultimate protection over their items? (A region within a region, owned by a select few). I thought that was for LWCs only.

 

[Danda]

How would sub regions be better? Wouldn't that give people ultimate protection over their items? (A region within a region, owned by a select few). I thought that was for LWCs only.

Yes and no. Sub regions allow for human error and just helps prevent something that is already illegal. Where as giving mayors many LWC creates ultimate protection with no way for anyone to get in unless the owner specifies that they can.

 

[MajorasMask]

Yes and no. Sub regions allow for human error and just helps prevent something that is already illegal. Where as giving mayors many LWC creates ultimate protection with no way for anyone to get in unless the owner specifies that they can.

I understand that LWCs can't protect everything, even if a mayor is given more, but they're just easier to use/code into the game, I guess. If sub regions could be made by mayors, with ease, then that would be great! Also, wouldn't it be possible to abuse regions more than LWCs? (Creating regions outside of a town maybe?).

 

[Danda]

I understand that LWCs can't protect everything, even if a mayor is given more, but they're just easier to use/code into the game, I guess. If sub regions could be made by mayors, with ease, then that would be great! Also, wouldn't it be possible to abuse regions more than LWCs? (Creating regions outside of a town maybe?).

Yes like I said it's vastly more difficult to implement than giving mayors LWC but in terms of a solution I feel it would be a better one. Though it may be too difficult to achieve in the way that we want and I would be satisfied with the LWC solution I do however feel that you're trying to give too many LWC away. But that's just my opinion.

 

[MajorasMask]

Yes like I said it's vastly more difficult to implement than giving mayors LWC but in terms of a solution I feel it would be a better one. Though it may be too difficult to achieve in the way that we want and I would be satisfied with the LWC solution I do however feel that you're trying to give too many LWC away. But that's just my opinion.

The number of LWCs a mayor is given, suggested by me, was nothing more than a suggestion. I wanted to show a pattern, the bigger the town, the more LWCs. The actual number that they'll get? Who knows? Hopefully enough to supply 1 for each citizen. As for sub regions, I too believe that they'll work better (infact, they'd completely eliminate region abuse for items). LWCs would just lower the severity of region abuse, allowing players to protect their rares first.

 

[Danda]

Who knows? Hopefully enough to supply 1 for each citizen.

Which is exactly what I suggested in my post

For instance a Town requires 10 members so the Mayor would have a cap of 10 LWC one for each member.

Though I suppose I could have been a bit clearer.

 

[leftovers5]

It's too hard to change people to hope for a better community next map unless the playerbase shifts, which it always could.

I've always felt bad about the lack of [Good] towns - people always seem to want to pass the burden of being "good" to someone else. I myself am guilty of that, which is why I've always been in neutral towns this map.

 

[cmckenica]

100 of them were probably killing @cmckenica

Love hurts <3