Couldn't say it better myself! well done, i applaud you

 

Ok but if you were me.....People might say "Save up and become a president" Well i make my money off of voting and my hotel and stores. But now it will only be Voting and hotel because i have to close my store....now I can be a president at all......do u see why this is unfair to me.....and other people....things were fine the way they were and nobody cared until this came along! Eco City Craft is supposed to be a happy place to make friends and now look at all of us (Including me) were splitting in half. So if we put everything back the way it was, then we can all be friends

Like if you agree we should not be fighting!:mad:

Do Winner if you agree with all of it!:)

 

The biggest difference between those "Other" top 10 servers of their genre and ours is the fact that we're an Economy server. We would not have gotten to where we are today without LWCs, and Andrew knows that. Being able to keep your things safe is a staple of an economy. Why do you think banks have Vaults?

 

Ur not understanding-alot of my money is made from my store-I need locks for that-if I wanted to become president I would but I need money first and guess where I get it from!?

 

....Why did you quote me when what i said has nothing to do with you...

 

Looks like the general public is against this lwc limit reduction. I'm still new on this server and I have already seen andrew take open polls in general chat about features on this server for example the removal of the live map to reduce lag, so is it possible for andrew to listen to us on this matter? I am against the reduction of lwc limits to this extent. I would have been able to understand if he had reduced the resident limit from 200 to 150 or even 100 but to reduce it to a mere 50 is absurd and before anyone tells me that if I don't like this server I should leave, I want to say it is because I like this server that I am putting my opinion out there and if you do not like players speaking there mind why would you give us so much autonomy over what we speak about in the forums?

 

Because ur disagreeing with me and i disagree back!

 

Normally i try not to get wound up in server affairs, and if a good solid reason was provided why this has happened, i probably would go on playing, and try to get around it.

But all i see, i shoving unlimited locks donation down our throats. Instead of making more money, your going to make less. Players are going to leave, good players, long time players, heavy donators. When i first found this server i knew, THIS IS THE PLACE!
But now..,

If you provide a good reason why, I'm sure 75% of these complainers (probably means me too) are going to turn around, and walk away knowing it isn't some bad reason (example, trying to get us to spend money). But right now, all i see is a bad idea with no reasoning.

If i saw a post saying ECC needed more money to maintain server, I'd find that a lot better then removing locking ability.

Mattybillo made a good point with his post, but the fact is, I'm sure there are tons and tons and ton and tons (need i go on?) of ways to lower lag. For example, recently i noticed server went to a 300 player, instead of the normal 200-215
I bet if you made a pie chart, the in-game players cause most of the lag.

I've seen server player prices and i can say they aren't pretty, but i think i speak for most all when i say we would rather have our locks instead of our 300 player limit.

Thank you for letting me express my opinion.
-Jason1964


Edit: Also, lowering limits will promote rule breaking. For example one of the rules is not to have duplicate accounts. This lowering will promote the use of duplicate accounts for getting more locks ( someone goes on duplicate account and does /cmodify (my normal account) to anything i need locked)

 

I'm actually completely confused why the LWC changed in the first place

Is there any reason for the change?
Is it to make the game harder? Is it to get people to buy the donation feature? Is it to have people buy LWC locks from other player? Is it to get more money? I don't know

I am absoulutley not accusing but if its to make people buy the donation feature than thats pretty unethical.

What is the motive behind the sharp drop in LWC limits?

If change is not needed dont do it.

Thank you

 

As far as we know, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that these lwc limits have dropped so far. Not even Jetscat knows the reason, so it must be rather important.

 

i love hearing terms like butt hurt from ppl this doesnt affect, makes me feel even better about the whole thing. you have no right to begin to tell me how to play nor would i begin to do the same to you. my point is im currently sitting at 175/50 locks and believe it or not there really isnt a single one of those that i can take away without risking my own or my towns stuff, and before you point out the fact that im not a mayor and don't own a town, i stated earlier i was co mayor of a town. my point is give us some warning so we can make arrangements, give a reason so we don't think its just to push the unlim lwc donate feature, and listen to what we are saying now that these things havent happened, thats the key to any good server, to give the ppl what they want to the best of your ability and overall i think you have but the ball was dropped in this case, andrewkm im not attacking you as a person, nor anyone involved in the operation of this server, i dont know any of you so i wouldn't do that, i think you do a great job running this server overall, i just dont like how this was handled in general.

 

I am completely for this suggestion. I have a town of my own, and need all the LWC possible. In fact, I was already considering buying the Unlimited LWC Donation Feature. (And trust me this does not mean that it doesn't pertain to me, because it does.) I was at my limits before with 300/300 locks before. Lets just say my storage room is extremely large, and I like things to be symmetrical. ESPECIALLY my builds.

Now that I see my locks are /300/200, there is litteraly no way to get out of the red without completely tearing down my Vault and then about 20 more chests. If there was a known reason for it that I was aware of, and it made sense to me, then I would have some leniency. But since there isn't ATM then I feel they should be changed back to where they stood before. It also wouldn't hurt to raise them.

But keep in mind that is just my opinion, don't get Butthurt.

And to mattybillo1, the server is already running on one of the greatest firmwares in the country, we just loss our livemap due to lag. Im sure that the amount of lag has drastically improved due to this, and so losing our LWC's to this reason would not be logical.

 

Absolutely 100% agree that this should be fixed. I mean really? The lwc limits for mayor is cut in half from 300 to 150? How on earth is a mayor supposed to run an efficient town with 150 locks?? And yes, some of you will just say "If you dont like it, donate for unlimited lwc". Do you honestly think that you should have to donate real money to be able to have fun on the server? I see absolutely no positive effects of lowering the lwc limits, as it already causing chaos throughout the server (mostly from mayors+) because of this: Many people had alot of locks already, such as I had 250 locks out of 300. After this, I am 100 locks over the limit. Now, I have to destroy 100 of my locks just to be able to break even with the limit.

 

I do not know any reason for a drop in lwc. The thing is, it is hard enough to keep lwc extra for me to lock anything at 200 lwc's. Now I have to live off of 50 lwc? The only reason I even have extra lwc is because I was trying to lower it for a project I have started on the server. I now cannot even finish this project now since I have 141 extra lwc over my limit. I have been playing on this server for 11 months or so now and I have a lot of stuff that I keep. This cannot be held in only 50 chests. I also feel very pushed to buy unlimited lwc now, this is one of those donations I have wanted for a long time but now there is a 0% chance for me to buy this donation because of this push.

 

I understand that this server is, the way it is, in part to the use of lwc's. My main point is that most of the people who are complaining just seem ungrateful for the things andrewkm does to ensure this server is great. Not to mention, until a reason is posted, most people are just flapping their gums and repeating the exact same thing the person said before them for no reason.

 

I am over the limit by 76 locks, and there's no way I'm removing all those locks. I think reducing the LWC's was a terrible thing to do. Now I'm pretty much screwed with my locks and I honestly don't how much more I'll be able to play here because I wont be able to store my stuff. And I've been here for over 9 months and have never seen something as ridiculous as this. I mean, what will I do when I need more storage? I don't just have $15 laying around to allow me to have fun on this server. I'm not spending that money for something that I had but was taken away from me. So no, I'm not buying Unlimited LWC's, especially because of this. I think this change is ridiculous, like really guys, come on... This is literally ruining my fun on this server...

 

Andrewkm has his reasons to lower them. Just let him do, what he needs to do.

 

Although I do not have many locks, I feel that this change will drastically affect those with many towns. Signs, chests, valuable blocks; they are a lot of things to be locked. I am not sure of the reason for this change, but if it is as people say, that this is a way of getting people to donate for unlimited lwc, than that is just unacceptable. I do hope that andrew fixes this problem soon.

 

I'm sure there is a valid reason the limits were lowered. From what I have seen Andrew does what is necessary to keep the server running well. Just because we don't know the reason doesn't mean there wasn't one.

That being said, I would be very interested to know why the change was made. It may help people understand, accept it and make adjustments to the situation.