Skill home hours in EA Land

[bigcuban]

Okay you guys I was wondering something about the skill home hours in EA Land.... I currently live in one of the top homes in EA Land based on hours... my question is once the merge happens... the skillhomes in AV and lets say BF and stuff when they merge... will the top skill homes from lets say AV will they come with the same amount of hours they had in AV or will they have to work themselves up on the list like the homes that are already in EA Land?

 

[Guest]

Unless something gets changed, when AV merges, your houses will not show on the list. You will have to work them back up to show at all. You will need 3 people on your lot for it to even show open at first. People will not find your lot because they will, for the most part, only be looking at the EA Land (same as TC3) map.

This is the way it worked when TC merged. They have not changed it so far, so the default city you see when logging in is the new city map. Sadly, most don't know or think to zoom out to where they can actually see all houses open and our homes are seldom visited.

The bigger map, showing all the different cities, should be the default.

The list should be changed to show all open houses instead of a top 100. There is no longer visitor bonus so why bother counting visitor hours? And why should any place be #1 on the list just because they can hide a bunch of non roomies there all day, everyday?

 

[Guest]

What happened to the top 100 lists being a thing of the past.....I thought this was one of the things people were most stoked about. The fact that there wasn't and was not going to be a top 100 list based on hours in the new city. I remember a big discussion on it, because one side was so excited about it, while others were upset because that is there 'challenge' in the game. I know the list was done away with in TC3, and when it was reported as a bug people started saying that it wasn't a bug and that that was the way it was gonna be. Are we gonna have a top 100 list in EA Land now? If we do, I'd be willing to be alot of simoleans that this will put the kibosh on the crusade to start charging for stuff.....because people will be after the almighty top spot, and offering things free when other people were charging has always been the way to get it.

 

[imported_SimTripps]

<blockquote><hr>

The bigger map, showing all the different cities, should be the default.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good idea, Cntry - this should be what people see when they first log on... Not the current EA Land beta (TC3) map, but the global one. Maybe that's the eventual plan...

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

because people will be after the almighty top spot, and offering things free when other people were charging has always been the way to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, for a long time now, it's been nothing to do with charging v not charging ... it's more to do with how much you're paying people to sit on your lot to artificially make it look like there is something there worth actually visiting.

Payouts. Bleurgh.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

because people will be after the almighty top spot, and offering things free when other people were charging has always been the way to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, for a long time now, it's been nothing to do with charging v not charging ... it's more to do with how much you're paying people to sit on your lot to artificially make it look like there is something there worth actually visiting.

Payouts. Bleurgh.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Touche'. Same difference......either way you're either paying people to be there, or paying FOR them being there. Wouldn't bother me so much if there was a way to prevent people from circumventing the timeout feature. EA knows how people are doing it, you'd think it wouldn't be that hard for them to make it so at least they had to find a new way to do it....talking at least about the ones that are doing it without 3rd party assistance....I don't think there will ever be a way to completely stop the ones that do have the programs. *sigh*

 

[bigcuban]

It sounds to me like you all are making it seem like all top homes do this? If you are please remember not everyone is guilty of things although yes I am sure there are plenty of homes like that trust me I remember from when I lived in BF there was one home SOOO GUILTY of it all and it drove me nuts.... but please remember some of us actually work our butts off to give a good experience to the guest... like the house I live in we are demanded to have serenade and cooking so that you guys have a good experience and we are also friendly we want you leaving our lot saying Oh wow those people were really nice.... not you leaving saying oh man that place sucked.... we also have been able to afford things other people cant at the moment because we are a close knit group of roomies that we gave home owner every cent we have so she can do what she needs to for the house... and going to work and making money and giving it to her so you all have a great experience in the home... so please dont forget all homes are not always guilty of cheating or paying people to stay in their home.. Dont forget we dont get sim bonuses anymore to be #1 so we are truly there just because we want our guest to be happy... we put in more money than we receive for being a top home now unlike before

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

It sounds to me like you all are making it seem like all top homes do this? If you are please remember not everyone is guilty of things although yes I am sure there are plenty of homes like that trust me I remember from when I lived in BF there was one home SOOO GUILTY of it all and it drove me nuts.... but please remember some of us actually work our butts off to give a good experience to the guest... like the house I live in we are demanded to have serenade and cooking so that you guys have a good experience and we are also friendly we want you leaving our lot saying Oh wow those people were really nice.... not you leaving saying oh man that place sucked.... we also have been able to afford things other people cant at the moment because we are a close knit group of roomies that we gave home owner every cent we have so she can do what she needs to for the house... and going to work and making money and giving it to her so you all have a great experience in the home... so please dont forget all homes are not always guilty of cheating or paying people to stay in their home.. Dont forget we dont get sim bonuses anymore to be #1 so we are truly there just because we want our guest to be happy... we put in more money than we receive for being a top home now unlike before

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, bigcuban. There *are* those houses like yours that are doing it because they WANT to host, but sadly...very sadly....your house is the exception these days rather than the rule. Because of that, its easy for those of us who've been around the length of the game's existence to forget the exceptions and dwell on what has become the norm. No, we weren't saying YOUR lot is #1 because they do this.....at least I know I wasn't and I don't think AJ was. I was just saying that I'm afraid if visitor hours are counted again that this will start happening, and those who ARE doing this will beat the honestly superior houses like yours out of their top spots just because they have multiple sims to sit there afk, or like AJ said they actually pay people to sit on their lots rather than just providing their ammenities for free....not so much for the bonus since you don't get that anymore, but for the 'prestige' of having their house be #1. Nothing wrong with wanting fame and prestige, I just wish sims actually had to EARN that fame and prestige by offering things free and actually being the best hosts, rather than just by how long their place is open or how long they can talk AFK sims into being there if they are not their own sims.

 

[Guest]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply all do it, but some definitely do. I just think it would be more fair for all if they took away the top lists. Some people get very discouraged when no one ever visits their lot. They do not have extra accounts or enough friends in game to make that lot get on the list, or to move up the list. The list should work like a directory, there should be no #1.

 

[imported_Phoenix_Rising]

<blockquote><hr>

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply all do it, but some definitely do. I just think it would be more fair for all if they took away the top lists. Some people get very discouraged when no one ever visits their lot. They do not have extra accounts or enough friends in game to make that lot get on the list, or to move up the list. The list should work like a directory, there should be no #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was also talk about making all lots accessible even when a roomie/owner wasn't online. Of course, the owner could set permissions to "lock" his or her house and not have others visit it while they are offline. In my opinion, this would be a great idea - people can be where they want, when they want, and it's not just because a house happens to be open, but because they CHOOSE to be there.

I agree, however, that they need to make the far-zoom the default view. This definitely needs to happen before the merges take place, and I can't imagine it being that difficult.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply all do it, but some definitely do. I just think it would be more fair for all if they took away the top lists. Some people get very discouraged when no one ever visits their lot. They do not have extra accounts or enough friends in game to make that lot get on the list, or to move up the list. The list should work like a directory, there should be no #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was also talk about making all lots accessible even when a roomie/owner wasn't online. Of course, the owner could set permissions to "lock" his or her house and not have others visit it while they are offline. In my opinion, this would be a great idea - people can be where they want, when they want, and it's not just because a house happens to be open, but because they CHOOSE to be there.

I agree, however, that they need to make the far-zoom the default view. This definitely needs to happen before the merges take place, and I can't imagine it being that difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would definitely be a good idea, and rather than owners be able to lock people completely off their property, I'd rather them be able to set permissions on specific doors, excluding the front and back entrance doors, making certain areas unreachable by anybody when a roomie or the owner wasn't home. We already have code in place for permissions, so I see this as an easier thing to code. My question would be though, what about the issue of food? There'd have to be some kind of ever full buffet table (thinking like the pet feeders) or something like that, since only roomies or the owner of a house can cook or set a regular buffet, or at the very least the regular buffet tables would have to be set so that anybody on a lot could set it. The price of going to someone's house when none of the roomies were home would be that you were exiled to eating barfet (can you tell I don't like them? LOL) which some players would happily do for the benefit of being able to play where they wanted to play, when they wanted to play. This way, even if there were hours that only a few players played, they'd always have somewhere to go (thinking about our international players that play at 'oddball' hours for the majority who are in the US).

This idea definitely should be formally introduced on the Wiki, IMHO

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply all do it, but some definitely do. I just think it would be more fair for all if they took away the top lists. Some people get very discouraged when no one ever visits their lot. They do not have extra accounts or enough friends in game to make that lot get on the list, or to move up the list. The list should work like a directory, there should be no #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

At first, I agreed with this too....but I didn't realize how many people *do* make getting to the #1 spot their goal in-game, and if that goal is taken away, I'm afraid alot will quit since they see that as really the only worthwhile goal left in game to really have once you've accumulated all the wealth and skill you'll ever need in one sim life. I just think VH needs to be reworked so that other things besides *just* the length of time a property is open is taken into consideration.....like the quality of a person's visit while they are there too. The system needs to be reworked, not totally done away with, IMHO.

 

[legscroft]

<blockquote><hr>

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply all do it, but some definitely do. I just think it would be more fair for all if they took away the top lists. Some people get very discouraged when no one ever visits their lot. They do not have extra accounts or enough friends in game to make that lot get on the list, or to move up the list. The list should work like a directory, there should be no #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

 

[bigcuban]

You see I dont like this idea like you all said then who would do the cooking second of all im thinking what if a trouble maker comes into the house there wont be a roomie or owner there to kick them... 3rd of all talk about AFKness that would be biggest case of AFKness if an owner and roomie dont have to be there people sometimes may not talk at all or not be greeted and the game would become just a place you sit and do nothing rather than chat with one another

 

[imported_Phoenix_Rising]

<blockquote><hr>

My question would be though, what about the issue of food?

[/ QUOTE ]

An ever-full fridge or buffet would even be a very useful item if they made it craft-able, like the ever-full pet feeder. If not that, then sims could purchase a plate of food, and the money would automatically be deposited in the buffet owner's pocketbook.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

My question would be though, what about the issue of food?

[/ QUOTE ]

An ever-full fridge or buffet would even be a very useful item if they made it craft-able, like the ever-full pet feeder. If not that, then sims could purchase a plate of food, and the money would automatically be deposited in the buffet owner's pocketbook.

[/ QUOTE ]

!!! I did not even think of the possibility of this being a craftable item. People have been asking for more crafting possibilities anyway! Great idea! *thumbs up*! I do think that the owner of the object should be able to set the price of the food that comes out of it at zero if they so choose though, also. As long as the owner of the object had that option, I'd fully support this idea! You oughtta post this on the Wiki Phoenix....it's such a good one I don't want you to lose credit for having been the one that thought of it.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

what if a trouble maker comes into the house there wont be a roomie or owner there to kick them

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if there was a troublemaker, there's always the ignore feature.....and I remember back in the early days of Club Pogo it used to be that if a certain number of people (it was a high number, considering 60 people can be in a game room at once) put a person on ignore or 'mute' as it is called there, the player is automatically booted from the room, or in the case of TSO, it would be the lot. Whether further action is taken against them, I'm not sure, but even if all that happened was an autoboot/ban, I think that would solve this problem. There might also be a way that they could institute GMs with sims that would have the power, if paged, to come and boot someone off a property. GMs could be selected from founders that had never had action taken against their account as far as suspensions or perma-bans against their IPs, for instance.

 

[mike1977]

I think just putting the sim on ignore would be enough, and adding to ban list to your property.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I think just putting the sim on ignore would be enough, and adding to ban list to your property.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but we're talking about if nobody is there to add them to the property ban list, a way to get them off the property and dealt with by EA. Naturally a person would add them to their own ban list, but that wouldn't get the player out of the face of everybody else for the moment. If they are only mildly annoying and not a real troublemaker, then your method would probably be sufficient

 

[Guest]

Your solution is too drastic and time/resource consuming.

If the owner isn't there to put the troublemaker on the ban list, then the patrons could simply leave.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Your solution is too drastic and time/resource consuming.

If the owner isn't there to put the troublemaker on the ban list, then the patrons could simply leave.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there some reason you had to create an alt identity to post this? LOL

Anyway, yeah the patrons could simply leave but then that would do away with the need for the idea we're all talking about, which since you probably haven't read the preceeding posts, is to have lots be able to be open even when there's no roomie/owner online to open it. I leave it up to the devs to decide which ideas are and are not too time/resource consuming for them to implement

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Your solution is too drastic and time/resource consuming.

If the owner isn't there to put the troublemaker on the ban list, then the patrons could simply leave.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there some reason you had to create an alt identity to post this? LOL

Anyway, yeah the patrons could simply leave but then that would do away with the need for the idea we're all talking about, which since you probably haven't read the preceeding posts, is to have lots be able to be open even when there's no roomie/owner online to open it. I leave it up to the devs to decide which ideas are and are not too time/resource consuming for them to implement

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha ha. I totally overlooked the fact that you as a moderator had the ability to tell who is and isn't using an alternate account.

I read the post, and I know exactly what this thread is about. I don't agree with the concept of it, to be honest with you.

You're suggesting a GM to come to a house at all hours whenever there's a trouble maker present and the house owner is not. How is this even close to feasible when it takes the current GM (there may only be one) a couple of days to respond to a report.

And like everyone else on this board, I'll feel free to add constructive criticism to any post I deem fit.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

You're suggesting a GM to come to a house at all hours whenever there's a trouble maker present and the house owner is not. How is this even close to feasible when it takes the current GM (there may only be one) a couple of days to respond to a report.

[/ QUOTE ]

We do not have GMs currently in game, we have developers, and there's definitely more than one. Secondly, the GMs I propose would be voluntary just like GMs of most games are, and the mods here are....so I fail to see how this would be resource consuming when people are volunteering their time to do it. As for responding to a report, that's irrelevant, since it's not GMs that currently do that, its outsourced people who barely even speak English, much less play the game, as the GMs that I'm suggesting would be pooled from PLAYERS. It's quite obvious that you've never played any other MMORPG besides TSO, if you even do play TSO, or you'd know what I was talking about.

Constructive criticism I have no problem with, when that is what it is. When it's not, yes I do.

 

[NightFlyer]

Actually we do have GMs in the game. We just share them with other games.

I don't especially like this idea of lots open with no one home either. I see no need to devote any resources to this with so many onther things (like bugs) still needing attention.

Make the top 100 list just lots online and at the top of the list in order of how long they have been continuously online, dropping to the bottom if they close and come back online.

This seems like a simple solution.