katrinabixby1
Divisions Moderators 
Success is when preparation and opportunity meet!
Posts: 184
|
Post by katrinabixby1 on Mar 7, 2007 2:20:22 GMT -5
A suggestion was made by a member that Galaxy and Aeon be no Fly zones. This would mean members and visitors would have to use shuttles, planes, jet packs, hot air ballons, helicopers etc. to fly around in the sim.
The idea was to have more visable activity in the sim.
The poll is to get feed back from the membership on this idea. Like the "no weapons poll" here, members are recommending how the sim should operate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andromeda Quonset on Mar 9, 2007 14:23:46 GMT -5
With the way the poll is worded with double-negatives, it appears to me that the first 2 choices read the same, and that they both are stating that Galaxy and Aeon be made a no-fly zone.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakaar Menatep on Mar 9, 2007 17:31:59 GMT -5
i think you mean made a fly zone   |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel Aldrich on Mar 9, 2007 21:05:41 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with the wording, just some punctuation missing, that's all. Just need to read it as:
NO. Non-Fly: Only shuttles, planes etc. can fly
YES. Fly: Avatar and any vehicles can fly
The term used, 'non-fly' relates to a land owner facility that can be selected whereby Avatars cannot fly on their own. Areas with this selected usually have a red circle with a white down-pointing arrow symbol at the top of the screen where the more familiar 'no build' and 'no script' symbols are seen. If you fly into an area with this symbol displayed, you won't suddenly crash to the ground, but if you land, you won't be able to take off again. As there are no adjoining sims to Galaxy and Aeon, if both are 'no-fly' designated, no one should be able to fly without the use of some sort of craft or apparatus.
|
|
|
|
Post by antoniobergbahn on Mar 10, 2007 8:52:48 GMT -5
I find sims that are no fly zones very annoying. sometimes i just like to fly around and not have to worry about rezzing a ship or jetpack, and walking just takes too long. If you get a mass transit system in place then it might work but then again you're dealing with lag with that.
keep it the way it is!
|
|
jyrras
Divisions Moderators
Posts: 9
|
Post by jyrras on Mar 10, 2007 11:52:46 GMT -5
i dont like this idea of no-fly zones... it restricts movement or emergency getaways to much... it takes to long time to spawn a vehicle then enter it and start it if you get really mad at someone or you want to avoid griefers.. and the noflying dont help anyone it just makes it easier for griefers to attack...
|
|
|
|
Post by Takira Sukra on Mar 10, 2007 14:14:23 GMT -5
Jyrras, why would you need a emergency get away? If you needed one, you can always tp. Having fly enabled or disabled isn't going to prevent griefers in any form. It can be argued that having a fly zone will make it easier for griefers to pop in, grief and then fly to another part of the zone to grief and then security will end up playing a game of cat-and-mouse with the griefer.
Basically we should be concentrating if having a fly or no-fly zone creates a better immersion for all of us in the ST sims.
|
|
jyrras
Divisions Moderators
Posts: 9
|
Post by jyrras on Mar 10, 2007 17:55:10 GMT -5
consider this you are in a corner and need to get away fast and the tp grid is fubar for the 25th billion time, would you spend a hour just trying to tp away? i doubt it. or would you spend time spawning a vehicle? i doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zania Turner on Mar 10, 2007 19:26:21 GMT -5
I think it's best to keep the sim to where avatars are capable of flying without assistance. Thanks to the changes the Lindens made a year ago when it came to removing the stipend for basic users, not everyone can afford to get a flight script, jet pack, or other means to assist them when it comes to flight.
Also, by turning off the ability for avatars to fly, it would make proceeding to the roleplay area(s) and tactical area(s) for events a lot more cumbersome and would take considerably longer. That would mean that more time would need to be allotted in order to allow everyone to arrive for events before actually starting them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Talon Lardner on Mar 10, 2007 20:08:01 GMT -5
Flying is already restricted by the SL Engine to under 250 feet unless one uses an assisting device... Personally, I think it isn't worth it to restrict movement just so a few more people can see a fountain for the 20th time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Takira Sukra on Mar 10, 2007 20:32:55 GMT -5
consider this you are in a corner and need to get away fast and the tp grid is fubar for the 25th billion time, would you spend a hour just trying to tp away? i doubt it. or would you spend time spawning a vehicle? i doubt it. Click map at the bottom, click on the opposite corner and teleport. Easier than flying. |
|
|
|
Post by Takira Sukra on Mar 10, 2007 20:42:00 GMT -5
Also, by turning off the ability for avatars to fly, it would make proceeding to the roleplay area(s) and tactical area(s) for events a lot more cumbersome and would take considerably longer. That would mean that more time would need to be allotted in order to allow everyone to arrive for events before actually starting them. People show up late to RP events with flying enabled. So flying isn't reducing tardiness. All it takes is a simple request in chat to get a tp to the rp/tactical area and then you don't need to walk. |
|
|
|
Post by Zania Turner on Mar 11, 2007 19:31:28 GMT -5
People show up late to RP events with flying enabled. So flying isn't reducing tardiness. All it takes is a simple request in chat to get a tp to the rp/tactical area and then you don't need to walk. That may be true, but there's several things to consider: 1) Unless one person is assigned to oversee answering TP requests, there can be confusion over who is sending them out, or even assumptions that others sent one when in fact none had been sent at all. As such, a request can easily be missed and that person would have no other alternative but to get to the event location on their own. 2) Generally speaking, it's considered as inappropriate and disruptive for someone to send an IM to the group while an event is in progress. The main reason for that is due to the fact that it can distract those who are participating in that event. In that situation, most will generally take the extra effort to get there under their own power rather than trying to IM the group for a TP (once it's started). 3) Related to this, a person can't individually IM someone who's at the event (for a TP) as they generally don't know who is there and who isn't among all of those who are receiving the group chat. 4) If there's a TP put in the landing spot to the RP and/or tactical area(s), it actually increases lag. Normally, in the landing spot, we also have welcome kits and other things out, some with scripts, in addition to a few teleporters (to the station and to the skydiving platform). A person could TP to the landing spot, and then to those areas, but there's a chance they could also get bogged down by lag if there's a lot of scripts. Anyways, that's just my  |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel Aldrich on Mar 12, 2007 9:59:13 GMT -5
Personally I find it disruptive to see people flying past the window while a meeting is taking place. But a shuttle looks great  Ultimately, as a Star Trek themed sim I think the theme should prevail. The majority, if not all, of the people in Starfleet that we see in the episodes do not have the power of flight. This poll is the right way to go though. I'm happy to accept the majority decision. |
|
|
|
Post by Lt. Jin Tao on Mar 14, 2007 9:19:42 GMT -5
Hello all!
I would just like to say this....We should all remember that technology is the base of the ST universe, so to that end we have transporters that can take personnel to events in sim promptly. Why not include transporter hubs, eliminate flying then we can all dust off our favorite ships and show em off!
The AAC members should really be supportive of this plan, as we love to fly ships! So all AAC prsonnel please VOTE!
|
|
