Accepted [Main Server Suggestion] Town Name Temp Safeguard for ECC2.0

In Game Name:

Jdawger​

What part of EcoCityCraft is this suggestion for:

Main Server​

Short title for your suggestion:

Town Name Temp Safeguard for ECC2.0​

What are you suggesting:

When ECC 2.0 drops, have a month or two where people who previously owned a town with a specific name on the ECC 1.0 server(s) either:

- Have first priority for said town name in that month or two

OR

- If someone is applying for a town in ECC 2.0 that is named & owned by someone else on the original ECC 1.0 server, said original owner can deny the use of the name if they reply within 24h (similar to a town claim. And again, first month or two of ECC 2.0 only. After that, free game)

Will state that this is only for towns from the current main servers. Archive town names do not count in this suggestion.​

Why is this a good addition for EcoCityCraft?:

The only reason I am suggesting this is based off the fact we can apply for a town & transfer an old town into it IF WE PAY AN EXTRA FEE IN ADDITION TO THE TOWN APP PRICE.

Because of this very reason, let's say I want to import my old town of Cydonia from the current main server to ECC 2.0. Same build, same town name. Let's also say I grind for hours and hours, days, possibly weeks to get the money needed for the app and additional price to transfer my town (I use that town as the example because the town name is plastered all over the place). Let's say another user starts grinding for ranks a week later and makes the same base amount as me. He can just apply for a town and chooses "Cydonia" as the town name in a dramatically shorter amount of time; the only reason I wouldn't apply for the "Cydonia" name when I have enough for a town (and beat him to it) is because I was grinding extra ECD to transfer the original "Cydonia" ECC 1.0 town build to 2.0.

In my opinion, I shouldn't have to risk grinding extra hours, if not days (we don't know how much more expensive it is to transfer a town yet) to get both the build and the name when someone can just apply w/o a build for cheaper & faster. As Andrew stated, the reason this town build transfership is even happening is to make those who worked on builds on previous main servers have the ability to continue said builds and be happier with the unforeseen reset, so this perceived disadvantage for those who wish to do this seems like an unintended side effect for the perceived plan for transfering town builds.

Back in 2018, this wasn't that big of an issue because towns weren't being transferred, so everyone had near equal footing for creating a town with a specific name since there was no extra fee for a build attached.

I will also note quickly that this suggestion is based off the majority perception that in order to get the a previous build from ECC 1.0, you must apply for it along with the ECC 2.0 town at the same time. This suggestion would be worthless if players can apply for the protected area w/ town name, and have the ability to add the previous build with the fee after the fact.​

Other information:

Again, if there is a plan to safeguard town names already planned/being planned, then ignore this suggestion.​

Plugin or custom addition:

​

One suggestion per form:

I Understand.​

 

No, I get that, and I welcome that opportunity to change a town name for a build. I'm just saying the way it seems like this will go, it's not a matter of standard quickness. It is assumed based off all the discord talks Andrew had that you would need to apply for both the name and the build at the same time; if you apply for the name, you can't apply for the build as they need to be done at the same time (again, perceived based off the info he shared). A standard quick name grab would entail that the opportunity would cost the same price. It does in the traditional sense, but tack on the additional fee for the build that seems to need to be done at the same time as applying for the name/town area, it doesn't come down to speed.

All I am saying here is if the intention to make the builders happy with a reset that was not expected at all, they shouldn't have to have this fear that they could lose their town's name because they wanted to transfer the build. And also the suggestion to just have this be the thing for the first month or two because we need to open up names for everyone at some point if this suggestion gets accepted.

Again, if the actual plan consists of both the town creation and the build transfer being separate transactions/apps, then this suggestion is worthless since both those who want to continue their projects with the same town name, and those who just want a fresh town have equal opportunity and price at said name without risk to their intentions (as imo, those who want to transfer a build are at a severe disadvantage with the additional fee if the plan is actually what is stated previously.

Does that make more sense in terms of the reasoning of this suggestion?