I'd support this change, but I have no idea wheether or not it makes sense considering how long this has been happening.

 

If this happens,
People will still work around it to get the town.

Your essentially forcing Residents who Rank up to not sell their town.
Which imo you cant do?

But i feel the rules around Town Warp and such could be relaxed a little so help encourgae people to buy other towns, as currently there isnt really a benefit of buying a town already made unless its fully setup

 

Exactly. I believe that this would be a block to the economy, especially as some people want to have Mayor so they are considered trustworthy, but don't want the stress of running a town.
-1.
Also, this rule would just be unenforceable.

 

True, this is a difficult issue:confused:

 

I don't think they should be prevented from doing it but the residents should understand what they're getting into.
It's not right to prevent mayors from purchasing the town from residents but its not fair for residents to have that taken from them.
Instead of making it against the rules you could always find another way to inform residents. Like, when applying for mayor it can say it in bold print.
Just an idea :p

 

The only way this would be workable would be preventing players below President from being able to sell towns (by removing Mayor access to /rg ao)

Any rule to this effect would be skirted around fairly easily or stupidly complicated.

 

But then mayors would have to get the 180k to make a friend a owner or get a co owner I agree -1

 

Personally I never understood why there wasn't a third option of ownership instead of the two current ones (member and mayor ). what if there was a third option of owner. While Mayors would keep their current abilities of lwc removals , evictions, etc. ; owners would be given the ability to change the any part of the town such as warps or flags. There for, anyone buying a town would be able to change the town however they see fit and this would still keep the spirit of the original rule intact, keeping a secondary mayor from messing up a town without permission.

 

If this were to be accepted then there needs to be another cheap alternative to buying towns. Any additional towns should cost no more than 140k, imo. Right now they're WAAAY too expensive. Almost nobody's willing to even pay 220k for a single town, let alone the 500 fucking k you get at town 7+. It's ridiculous. I purchased 3 residents Mayor simply because it wasn't feasible for me to pay up 1.2m for 3 towns when I could just pay 255k to buy 3 residents' towns. The reason residents get their towns bought is simply because of necessity. Additional towns are too expensive for a lot of people to afford.

 

Your heart seems to be in the right place here, but logically this idea of banning it altogether doesn't feel like the best idea for the community as a whole. For your reasoning here I would say that if this was considered then the best thing to do all around would be to make it required to use a contract which makes the resident aware of what they are giving up. It could be a standard prewritten contract which also could include areas that can be used for individual specifics. This way it's not disallowed and all residents, new and old, are very clear on what they are getting into.

 

-1, I went through this process and knew exactly what I was getting into and I had not been on the server for long. Taking this out would be a huge problem for many people. It cost way to much for additional towns. The way many people advertise residents figure out that they lose the town. I understand where you are coming from, but I don't see a easy way to do this and it would hurt many peoples plans for ECC.

 

But they can still get president for that kind of town. Getting rid of your mayor town is not as big a deal as your making it sound, because you can still get so many more towns as the first owner.

 

for ridiculous prices.