• Hail Guest!
    We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
  • Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
  • Hail Guest!,
    Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
  • Hail Guest!
    Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!

90 Day stuff - M&G 02/08/16

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
At tonight's M&G I asked the core question that was at the heart of a now locked thread, I hope that me posting this info is not grounds for another locked thread with a large audience.

My goal was simply to see if Mesanna and the dev team agreed with one side of the argument or the other. As you can see, the opening question was met with responses that are unrelated and more to do with IDOC / unclaimed accounts. As you read through it however, it would seem that Mesanna does tend to side with those who "juggle" accounts currently as cheaters, though would like to not discuss it publicly, though she has stated solidly that "changing_the_90_day_is_not_something_we_are_going_to_do_anytime_soon".

So take this for what you will. Apologies if this is interpreted as opening up a "moderator" closed topic. Frankly, with the topic posed directly to the dev team, I cant see that it would be.

Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_hail_and_thank_you_for_literally_everything_in_game_:)
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_as_a_team,_you_have_inherited_a_situation_where
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_an_account_that_is_unpaid_for_90_days_can_still_hold_a_house.
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_As_the_current_team,_what_is_your_feeling_about_this?
Lady_Mesanna:_let_me_start_off_by_stating_this
Lady_Mesanna_says:_we_have_made_it_so_you_can_get_you_house_back_up_until_the_last_hour
Lady_Mesanna_says:_once_a_house_goes_OSI
Lady_Mesanna_says:_its_gone
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_fair_nuff
Lady_Mesanna_says:_those_houses_you_will_see_are_going_to_be_dropping
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_next_part,_same_question
Lady_Mesanna_says:_yes_we_still_have_bugged_houses_in_the_game
Lady -Mesanna:_and_we_are_putting_in_a__fix_for_those_also
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_do_you_share_the_same_feeling_as_some_of_our_stratics_friends...
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_charachterizing_people_who_use_this_as:
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_"the_same_type_that_park_in_handicap_parking_spots_and_steal_from_charities"
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_Ultimately,_what_is_your_view_on_this_rule_which_you_inherited?
Lady_Mesanna_says:_changing_the_90_day_is_not_something_we_are_going_to_do_anytime_soon
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_and_Is_this_under_review_by_your_team?
Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_would_much_rather_reward_the_players_that_pay_the_full_year_by_giving_xtra_vet_rewards
Lady_Mesanna_says:_or_something_to_that_effect
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_fair_nuff_- but_you_would_not_characterize_those_that_balance_accounts_with_90_day_payments
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_as_theives_or_sharity_stealers?
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_*charity
Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_dislike_it_yes
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_understood,_just_looking_for_some_perspective_to_share_with_the_community
Lady_Mesanna_says:_well_rewarding_the_players_that_are_not_cheating
Lady_Mesanna_says:_is_the_message_that_should_be_passed_along
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_so_then_re_they_cheating?
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_*are
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_in_your_eyes?
Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_am_not_going_to_get_into_this
Lady_Mesanna_says:_its_not_something_I_want_to_address_here
Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_am_sorry
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_get_yourselves_a_stance_on_it,_would_be_my_suggestion
Ghrom_the_Savage_says:_and_thank_you
 
Last edited:

Larisa

Publishing Manager, Stratics Leadership
Editor
Reporter
Moderator
Professional
Editor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
I will be posting the full transcript soon so no worries :) Currently in Editor-mode....lot of general chatter going on tonight! :)
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Thank you Larissa, mine is a mess! The content is good, but the 6 comm crystals and larger than usual audience made it a challenge.
 

Larisa

Publishing Manager, Stratics Leadership
Editor
Reporter
Moderator
Professional
Editor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
Ohh no kidding! The comms make it hard...and I was standing right next to them so I got things like:

Mesanna said:
Lady Mesanna said:
Lady Mesanna said:

UGH! lol....editing out triplicates of things is NOT FUN!!! Kicks Editor Staff Banner :)
 

FrejaSP

Queen of The Outlaws
Professional
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Campaign Patron
Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_would_much_rather_reward_the_players_that_pay_the_full_year_by_giving_xtra_vet_rewards
I would say, just set all secures and doors to house owner only, when house owner is not active, this way, the house stay but it can't be abused of owners other accounts.
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
i would just be happy with members of the community not being referred to as "the same type that park in handicap parking spots and steal from charities""

@TimberWolf and your lovely alt @Fridgster
 

MalagAste

Belaern d'Zhaunil
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Supporter
Ohh no kidding! The comms make it hard...and I was standing right next to them so I got things like:

Mesanna said:
Lady Mesanna said:
Lady Mesanna said:

UGH! lol....editing out triplicates of things is NOT FUN!!! Kicks Editor Staff Banner :)
I was getting annoyed with that so I moved to the East Side of the ropes and all the extra Com Crystal chatter was GONE.
 

MalagAste

Belaern d'Zhaunil
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Supporter
I would say, just set all secures and doors to house owner only, when house owner is not active, this way, the house stay but it can't be abused of owners other accounts.
This would be a fix I could live with. It keeps folk from losing the house if there is an issue but they want to keep the account for when they can come back... and not lose the house.... but at the same time not get the free use of the house in the months that it's not paid.

Would not affect me in the slightest since I pay for all mine every month... but still... I don't think it would make folk want to rage quit.
 

Merlin

The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
Please keep in mind:

This particular topic of discussion was allowed to be re-opened on the context that we have an answer from Mesanna on the issue.

However, let it be said early on: If this topic turns into trolling, mocking, luring others to respond to posts and quotes from the previously locked thread and so forth - we're going to close this down before we even let it get started.

Do not reignite the worst elements of the last thread on this topic which had to be locked down.
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
The worst elements of the last thread are the fuel for this one - Merlin. Let's be clear on this. My previous posts and quotes are the motivators for seeking this clarification. Reconcile that how you will, it is simply a fact.

Edited - * The fact that you don't want any of the arguments or accusations from the locked thread mentioned in this one speaks volumes of your position and stance. Elements of the "closed thread" are clearly visible in the communication with the dev team.*
 
Last edited:

Fridgster

Crazed Zealot
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
i would just be happy with members of the community not being referred to as "the same type that park in handicap parking spots and steal from charities""

@TimberWolf and your lovely alt @Fridgster
Um first i think i was here first so um timber would be my alt and since i DISAGREE with changing the 90 days I would say that would be a strange thing to do since timber wants it changed you a**clown. @WootSauce Try reading peoples posts before passing judgement.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
I had been discussing this issue with Broadsword for weeks. I was firmly convinced this exploit would be addressed from those conversations. I was mislead to believe to expect a 45 day cycle as opposed to 90. I did assume this would take some time so I pulled in my claws and did not expand my "campaign". I now clearly see it was another case of telling everyone whatever they want to hear, do nothing. I can't express how disappointed I am about the exploit continuing with open arms and much more disappointed in the sense of why bother to just flat out mislead me? I will continue with my efforts to get this problem addressed. What I won't be doing is continuing my discussion with Broadsword. I now find my dealing with them hasn't been reputable or honorable. Why put me through weeks of this? Is it so hard to say "We aren't going to address this, we don't care."? I have many other contacts and I certainly will be pursuing them with renewed vigor. I was delighted the OP brought this issue to light and the truth revealed. Embrace the exploiters and reward the noble? If you want to "treat" us with veteran rewards (which in other words is the *exact* current system as it stands) you should at least make rewards worth having. lol. How about rewarding us with 3 months free outta 4? That sounds absolutely fair to me. Well I learned a lot today and my last grip of faith in Broadsword is greatly diminished. It was never their opinion on this matter (what ever that really is) but flat of being "mislead" (the politest word I can come up with). This isn't over kids. @Mesanna @Kyronix Yeah I'm call ya out ;)
 
Last edited:

Hannes Erich

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Woot ( edit: as in @WootSauce ), I'm kinda in favor of the 90-day thing too (although in a previous thread, Merlin successfully whittled me down to a compromise that would lower it to 30 or 60 days specifically for castle and castle keep owners).

Having said that, I don't think you've been very quick on the uptake regarding Mesanna's comments.

It's clear she agrees with TimberWolf, Merlin (who is maybe too close to the issue to moderate it well), Captain Lucky, and so on. She said she was unhappy about the 90-day policy, and within context, she also referred to 90-day-shufflers as cheaters. She refused to elaborate further on her feelings, I'm guessing because she quickly realized she'd made a PR slip-up about an unchangeable policy (or at least an uneasily changed one), or because another dev wisely cautioned her in private about commenting further, or because a policy change is in the works that can't be elaborated on yet (see @Capt. Lucky's post above mine), etc. I wouldn't expect her to [be able to] make a clearer stance.

As surprised and disappointed as I am by Mesanna's remark, I'm not going to lie to myself about it by removing it from its context. I suspect she does feel like 90-day-shufflers are abusing the game, but her hands are tied on the matter somehow, forcing her to look at ways to reward account loyalty in lieu of punishing "cheaters".

Mesanna's remark belies the policy's history and semantics. The 90-day-policy hasn't changed while producers have come and gone. 90-day-shufflers have likely, magically been cheaters and then not-cheaters again, depending on the feelings of producers. Mesanna's remark complicates the matter--because while it would be irrational to create and maintain a policy that can only be used by cheaters, and then express disappointment when cheaters benefit from it--this would appear to be exactly what has transpired.

Sometimes when you beg for clarity, you're rewarded with clarity; other times, you get a bag stitched with a question mark that's filled with wet cats.

The task before us now is to argue among ourselves about what we've really been rewarded with (until the thread is locked with no real resolution).

:popcorn:
 
Last edited:

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Woot ( edit: as in @WootSauce ), I'm kinda in favor of the 90-day thing too (although in a previous thread, Merlin successfully whittled me down to a compromise that would lower it to 30 or 60 days specifically for castle and castle keep owners).

Having said that, I don't think you've been very quick on the uptake regarding Mesanna's comments.

It's clear she agrees with TimberWolf, Merlin (who is maybe too close to the issue to moderate it well), Captain Lucky, and so on. She said she was unhappy about the 90-day policy, and within context, she also referred to 90-day-shufflers as cheaters. She refused to elaborate further on her feelings, I'm guessing because she quickly realized she'd made a PR slip-up about an unchangeable policy (or at least an uneasily changed one), or because another dev wisely cautioned her in private about commenting further, or because a policy change is in the works that can't be elaborated on yet (see @Capt. Lucky's post above mine), etc. I wouldn't expect her to [be able to] make a clearer stance.

As surprised and disappointed as I am by Mesanna's remark, I'm not going to lie to myself about it by removing it from its context. I suspect she does feel like 90-day-shufflers are abusing the game, but her hands are tied on the matter somehow, forcing her to look at ways to reward account loyalty in lieu of punishing "cheaters".

Mesanna's remark belies the policy's history and semantics. The 90-day-policy hasn't changed while producers have come and gone. 90-day-shufflers have likely, magically been cheaters and then not-cheaters again, depending on the feelings of producers. Mesanna's remark complicates the matter--because while it would be irrational to create and maintain a policy that can only be used by cheaters, and then express disappointment when cheaters benefit from it--this would appear to be exactly what has transpired.

Sometimes when you beg for clarity, you're rewarded with clarity; other times, you get a bag stitched with a question mark that's filled with wet cats.

The task before us now is to argue among ourselves about what we've really been rewarded with (until the thread is locked with no real resolution).

:popcorn:
I'm so ready to start posting emails lol. I guess that isn't what would be something someone with integrity does. Maybe I can define integrity by example? ;) I doubt it will stick though. Extremely well said btw.
 

Hannes Erich

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
As a big fan of Broadsword I'm disappointed because of what side of the fence I'm on naturally, but thank you for the compliment.

FYI I think an email crusade would be premature, given the small likelihood that any producer would make a big policy announcement at an in-game thing. If you do ever get your way, it will take a lot of time, and then be put through some kind of marketing approval before it arrives via more formal channels. Since you don't have a job at EA or Broadsword, you're unlikely to be privy to it if-and-until then.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
As a big fan of Broadsword I'm disappointed because of what side of the fence I'm on naturally, but thank you for the compliment.

FYI I think an email crusade would be premature, given the small likelihood that any producer would make a big policy announcement at an in-game thing. If you do ever get your way, it will take a lot of time, and then be put through some kind of marketing approval before it arrives via more formal channels. Since you don't have a job at EA or Broadsword, you're unlikely to be privy to it if-and-until then.
Personally I'm just going by what she clearly stated. " Lady_Mesanna_says:_I_would_much_rather_reward_the_players_that_pay_the_full_year_by_giving_xtra_vet_rewards". I do what I gotta do :) Actually had I been dealt with honestly I would have been much less inclined to pursue it. But now I'm inspired :) I no longer expect anything productive from Broadsword. They're very good with technical issues, but policy issues and dealing with people, not so much.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
I feel pretty much betrayed atm. I'm done venting and I *appreciate* the opportunity to do so. But I strongly believe in correcting and addressing this issue and it's not something I feel I can let go of and ignore. I'll take a deep breath and mellow a bit ;) With me it's often not what one actually does but how they do it. I always say I'm not really upset, it may seem like it but I'm really not. I'll admit this time I was "upset". lol
 
Last edited:

Hannes Erich

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Well @Capt. Lucky, that's not the only thing she said in your favor. She also said changing the 90-day-policy was not something they would do anytime soon. In all my years parsing lead/producer-speak, I've learned to differentiate that slightly from more ominous statements such as "we have no plans to change that at this time". All things considered, her remark is just as likely to have been in your favor as in mine.

Either way, remember that whether you're campaigning in a forum thread or email, or any other channel, your individual vote will always only count as one individual vote. If you can get twelve to fifteen folks to campaign with you (as you seem to have done here), that's still not very many people. If you can convince somebody that your idea makes good fiscal sense, they may just send it up the chain. But temper your expectations and remember that none of us have the financial data needed to prove your assertions absolutely fiscally responsible. If several one-percenters out there own hundreds of accounts for realty or other purposes (as I suspect) and they shuffle, then Merlin could get a dozen CPA buddies to sign on your campaign and it wouldn't change any financial data that suggests shufflers are currently profitable.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Well @Capt. Lucky, that's not the only thing she said in your favor. She also said changing the 90-day-policy was not something they would do anytime soon. In all my years parsing lead/producer-speak, I've learned to differentiate that slightly from more ominous statements such as "we have no plans to change that at this time". All things considered, her remark is just as likely to have been in your favor as in mine.

Either way, remember that whether you're campaigning in a forum thread or email, or any other channel, your individual vote will always only count as one individual vote. If you can get twelve to fifteen folks to campaign with you (as you seem to have done here), that's still not very many people. If you can convince somebody that your idea makes good fiscal sense, they may just send it up the chain. But temper your expectations and remember that none of us have the financial data needed to prove your assertions absolutely fiscally responsible. If several one-percenters out there own hundreds of accounts for realty or other purposes and they shuffle, then Merlin could get a dozen CPA buddies to sign on your campaign and it wouldn't change any financial data that suggests shufflers are currently profitable.
I got this ;) I don't need a committee. An EA/BS "soon" could be years lol There is a positive note that it's clearly being thrown around the table. But that wasn't the response I expected. I didn't see that response as leaning in the direction I was led. I would have preferred a much more vague response on that one! Something like it's been discussed but we haven't reached any decisions at this time. Or something like if we did decide to do something with that it would take awhile to work out the details. Ya know, something like that. She appears to be leaning towards a bandage and not a cure. And really "extra veteran rewards" for continuous accounts is exactly the system we have currently. That doesn't impress me. Every time I have vet picks now I'm hard pressed to figure out anything I want. It usually boils down to picking whatever I think I can turn a quick buck on. Now shard shields I would love but I won't be seeing those for a couple years yet :( I think it's a far better reward to start doing the 90 day shuffle. Tired of being the sap. I gotta let this set for awhile. I certainly don't want to contact anyone in the mood I'm in today :p
 
Last edited:

Lorddog

Crazed Zealot
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Ghrom the Savage says: and thank you
Ghrom the Savage says: get yourselves a stance on it, would be my suggestion
Lady Mesanna says: I am sorry
Lady Mesanna says: its not something I want to address here
Lady Mesanna says: I am not going to get into this
Ghrom the Savage says: in your eyes?
Ghrom the Savage says: *are
Ghrom the Savage says: so then re they cheating?
Lady Mesanna says: is the message that should be passed along
Lady Mesanna says: well rewarding the players that are not cheating
Ghrom the Savage says: understood, just looking for some perspective to share with the community
Lady Mesanna says: I dislike it yes
Ghrom the Savage says: *charity
Ghrom the Savage says: as theives or sharity stealers?
Ghrom the Savage says: fair nuff - but you would not characterize those that balance accounts with 90 day payments
Lady Mesanna says: or something to that effect
Lady Mesanna says: I would much rather reward the players that pay the full year by giving xtra vet rewards
Ghrom the Savage says: and Is this under review by your team?
Lady Mesanna says: changing the 90 day is not something we are going to do anytime soon
Ghrom the Savage says: Ultimately, what is your view on this rule which you inherited?
Ghrom the Savage says: "the same type that park in handicap parking spots and steal from charities"
Ghrom the Savage says: charachterizing people who use this as:
Ghrom the Savage says: do you share the same feeling as some of our stratics friends...
Lady -Mesanna: and we are putting in a fix for those also
Lady Mesanna says: yes we still have bugged houses in the game
Ghrom the Savage says: next part, same question
Lady Mesanna says: those houses you will see are going to be dropping
Ghrom the Savage says: fair nuff
Lady Mesanna says: its gone
Lady Mesanna says: once a house goes OSI
Lady Mesanna says: we have made it so you can get you house back up until the last hour
Lady Mesanna: let me start off by stating this
Ghrom the Savage says: As the current team, what is your feeling about this?
Ghrom the Savage says: an account that is unpaid for 90 days can still hold a house.
Ghrom the Savage says: as a team, you have inherited a situation where
Ghrom the Savage says: hail and thank you for literally everything in game :)
 

Larisa

Publishing Manager, Stratics Leadership
Editor
Reporter
Moderator
Professional
Editor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
I'm going to play devil's advocate here for a minute and say the 90-day timer is a GOOD thing...in certain cases.

As with everything, and Mesanna herself said it last night, you can't please everyone.

For some, the 90-Day timer is a blessing. Unfortunately I will use myself as an example.

Long story short, I was THIS close to being evicted due to the total negligence of my childrens father, things eventually worked out, he's gone (Thank the stars) but I was left with minimal funds and 2 UO accounts that I cannot pay for...I can pay for ONE...for now...and my Luna House is on the account that is currently inactive.

Circumstances beyond my control left me little choice but to hold out on paying for my second account for a month or two until I have the funds to do so....am I cheating? Maybe....but I am very thankful that the 90-day timer is in place as all of my cherished event items and holiday gift boxes are in my Luna Home.

I am sure there are others like me who are in situations beyond their control that are thankful for the current system, maybe it's only a handful, but we are out there...so as I said before, if they change it, people like me would be forlorn, if they don't, other people will be angry....what are they to do? Please some, not all..is about the best that can be had in any situation.

I would, however, be perfectly happy with Freja's idea....if an account goes inactive, lock the house so that co-owners/friends cannot access it...that would save the home and not allow it to be used as *Free* storage..I think that is the best idea I have heard to date.
 

Uriah Heep

Grand Poobah
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Well there ya have it =). They programmed it, let's play it. Once every 90 days it is!

But I seriously think you are missing the point. The 90 day thing doesn't mean EA is getting cheated out of 8 paydays a year, what it DOES mean is that EA is getting 4 paydays a year they wouldnt get otherwise...
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Um first i think i was here first so um timber would be my alt and since i DISAGREE with changing the 90 days I would say that would be a strange thing to do since timber wants it changed you a**clown. @WootSauce Try reading peoples posts before passing judgement.
You are correct, and I am totally incorrect here. Your post in a previous thread where you copied a lot of Timberwolf's posts without quoting him threw me off. My apologies.
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Woot ( edit: as in @WootSauce ), I'm kinda in favor of the 90-day thing too (although in a previous thread, Merlin successfully whittled me down to a compromise that would lower it to 30 or 60 days specifically for castle and castle keep owners).

Having said that, I don't think you've been very quick on the uptake regarding Mesanna's comments.

It's clear she agrees with TimberWolf, Merlin (who is maybe too close to the issue to moderate it well), Captain Lucky, and so on. She said she was unhappy about the 90-day policy, and within context, she also referred to 90-day-shufflers as cheaters. She refused to elaborate further on her feelings, I'm guessing because she quickly realized she'd made a PR slip-up about an unchangeable policy (or at least an uneasily changed one), or because another dev wisely cautioned her in private about commenting further, or because a policy change is in the works that can't be elaborated on yet (see @Capt. Lucky's post above mine), etc. I wouldn't expect her to [be able to] make a clearer stance.

As surprised and disappointed as I am by Mesanna's remark, I'm not going to lie to myself about it by removing it from its context. I suspect she does feel like 90-day-shufflers are abusing the game, but her hands are tied on the matter somehow, forcing her to look at ways to reward account loyalty in lieu of punishing "cheaters".

Mesanna's remark belies the policy's history and semantics. The 90-day-policy hasn't changed while producers have come and gone. 90-day-shufflers have likely, magically been cheaters and then not-cheaters again, depending on the feelings of producers. Mesanna's remark complicates the matter--because while it would be irrational to create and maintain a policy that can only be used by cheaters, and then express disappointment when cheaters benefit from it--this would appear to be exactly what has transpired.

Sometimes when you beg for clarity, you're rewarded with clarity; other times, you get a bag stitched with a question mark that's filled with wet cats.

The task before us now is to argue among ourselves about what we've really been rewarded with (until the thread is locked with no real resolution).

:popcorn:
Hannes, your post is eloquent and well thought out as usual. To be clear, I do not and did not interpret Mesanna's comments as some sort of validation to my position and I agree with your post wholeheartedly.. To me, based on her comments, and then lack of willingness to comment (once asked directly) she clearly sees people who only sub their "extra" or even their "main" (if you can call an account that you can only play 90 days out of the year a main) accounts as "cheaters". I am guessing her masters see it differently, and one does have to tow the company line. With ten years + of practice, it's a complicated issue for certain.

That is part of why I made my last statement in the conversation with her "get yourselves a stance on it, would be my suggestion"
 

TimberWolf

Babbling Loonie
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
I have one account...this one. The stratics staff ( who can tell exactly how many active accounts you have) can confirm this if they so choose. I think that anyone who reviews last night's comments and think this is somehow a validation of the abuse is either delusional or so out of touch with reality that there is no sense continuing this discussion. Which is why I backed away from the conversation originally. I stand by everything I have said, and I could careless if that upsets someone. :)
 

Angel of Sonoma

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Supporter
I had been discussing this issue with Broadsword for weeks. I was firmly convinced this exploit would be addressed from those conversations. I was mislead to believe to expect a 45 day cycle as opposed to 90. I did assume this would take some time so I pulled in my claws and did not expand my "campaign". I now clearly see it was another case of telling everyone whatever they want to hear, do nothing. I can't express how disappointed I am about the exploit continuing with open arms and much more disappointed in the sense of why bother to just flat out mislead me? I will continue with my efforts to get this problem addressed. What I won't be doing is continuing my discussion with Broadsword. I now find my dealing with them hasn't been reputable or honorable. Why put me through weeks of this? Is it so hard to say "We aren't going to address this, we don't care."? I have many other contacts and I certainly will be pursuing them with renewed vigor. I was delighted the OP brought this issue to light and the truth revealed. Embrace the exploiters and reward the noble? If you want to "treat" us with veteran rewards (which in other words is the *exact* current system as it stands) you should at least make rewards worth having. lol. How about rewarding us with 3 months free outta 4? That sounds absolutely fair to me. Well I learned a lot today and my last grip of faith in Broadsword is greatly diminished. It was never their opinion on this matter (what ever that really is) but flat of being "mislead" (the politest word I can come up with). This isn't over kids. @Mesanna @Kyronix Yeah I'm call ya out ;)
you win some, you lose some. we're all old enough to know life is not always fair.

mesanna's approach is today's version of parenting.... reward the good behaviors.
 

WootSauce

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
I have one account...this one. The stratics staff ( who can tell exactly how many active accounts you have) can confirm this if they so choose. I think that anyone who reviews last night's comments and think this is somehow a validation of the abuse is either delusional or so out of touch with reality that there is no sense continuing this discussion. Which is why I backed away from the conversation originally. I stand by everything I have said, and I could careless if that upsets someone. :)
You are correct, and I am totally incorrect here on me equating you with Fridgster. He posted in a previous thread and copied a lot of your posts without quoting you, which threw me off. My apologies.

I agree that based on last night's convo Mesanna, in heart, likely sides with you and your views.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
you win some, you lose some. we're all old enough to know life is not always fair.

mesanna's approach is today's version of parenting.... reward the good behaviors.
Well it's not over till it's over. While I think this thread is relevant considering the new information, I think it's all been beat to death and I really don't see any further progress being made posting here about it. If there ever is any real progress when we post of the forums on anything ;) So I'll chill today, collect my thoughts and expand my campaign with EA tomorrow.
 

HoneythornGump

Lore Keeper
Stratics Veteran
If they make any changes, whatsoever (like making the house content inaccessible to other accounts, or shortening the time period), I'll be closing down those accounts permanently.
 

CovenantX

Crazed Zealot
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
I think it's funny that Mesanna said people that pay the full year would be rewarded with extra vet rewards... I'm pretty sure that's how it works now.

If you pay every 90 days, your account only ages 1/3rd the time someone who keeps their account(s) active thus they get 2/3rds less vet-rewards.
Unless she means by scaling up vet picks based on how many consecutive months the account has been paid ?

I guess we'll have to wait and see.
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
I think it's funny that Mesanna said people that pay the full year would be rewarded with extra vet rewards... I'm pretty sure that's how it works now.

If you pay every 90 days, your account only ages 1/3rd the time someone who keeps their account(s) active thus they get 2/3rds less vet-rewards.
Unless she means by scaling up vet picks based on how many consecutive months the account has been paid ?

I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Exactly. My thoughts exactly. Now what if there's a billing error and your account goes inactive for a day? I've had that happen cause my credit card didn't go through right. Nothing wrong with the card or billing info, it just kicks back for some unknown reason. It's happened to me a few times. That would tick me off if my consecutive reward run was broken and it wasn't my fault. How about we just hammer the folks abusing the system?
 

Uriah Heep

Grand Poobah
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Wow that would be a real bummer, except that your barely paying now lol. No big loss ;)
But: playing the 90 day game, 4 acccts x 4 payments a year = 16 payments per year x 12.99 = $207.

Not playing the 90 day game, o accts x 0 payments per year = $00.00

Cuz I'm not gonna pay $155 a year per account to have storages closets (which is what most of mine are :p)

Not threatening anything, not whining or complaining...it just doesn't make sense to me that they would want to close the part time accounts *shrugs*

Money is money
 

Capt. Lucky

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
But: playing the 90 day game, 4 acccts x 4 payments a year = 16 payments per year x 12.99 = $207.

Not playing the 90 day game, o accts x 0 payments per year = $00.00

Cuz I'm not gonna pay $155 a year per account to have storages closets (which is what most of mine are :p)

Not threatening anything, not whining or complaining...it just doesn't make sense to me that they would want to close the part time accounts *shrugs*

Money is money
Well it's one on and 3 off so that's 3 payments a year. More like 155 a year. So you have NO full time accounts? That's really messed up. Pay in advance and it's only 10 bucks a month. Plus regardless of what you say I don't believe you would quit UO. I gotta do what i gotta do and this isn't something that has been abused for WAY too long. So let's say you just can't give up UO, like most of us lol. That one full time account is 120 bucks a year. That almost breaks even with the $155. But it falls back to every 4 that quit we only need one to full up subscribe to break even and it puts an end to the exploit and the insult to the people paying to actually keep the lights on. I'm sorry it's not right to mooch off my dime.
 

Uriah Heep

Grand Poobah
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Nope, Uriah is a fulltime always paid account...the peripherals, not so much.
 

Uvtha

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Mesanna's remark belies the policy's history and semantics. The 90-day-policy hasn't changed while producers have come and gone. 90-day-shufflers have likely, magically been cheaters and then not-cheaters again, depending on the feelings of producers. Mesanna's remark complicates the matter--because while it would be irrational to create and maintain a policy that can only be used by cheaters, and then express disappointment when cheaters benefit from it--this would appear to be exactly what has transpired.
Seems to me that her comments probably indicate she would rather find incentive to get people to pay all 12 months rather than change the rule. I would wager that the odds of the rule changings are pretty low, because... money. Change it to a month, and you lose a lot of pay every third-month house holding accounts, if not the full time paid account that uses them.

It's just been incorporated into the game for far too long to change it without an uproar. In an era where the player base is so low it seems exceptionally unwise, especially when you consider how most shards that aren't Atlantic have housing space to spare.

You never know, but I think we can probably consider this issues closed from what she said. It's not going anywhere, certainly not anytime soon.
 

Corwyn

Lake Superior Tabloid Journalist
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
UNLEASHED
I've been thinking about quite a bit, and I still think that those paying for their accounts once every 90 days just to maintain housing is a bad thing for those looking for better housing spots, keeps or castles.

However...

As I run the math and think about it logically, it could very well be a fiscal mistake for EA to change the policy. How many of the accounts that do this only have one account? Chances are it's a small number. How many of these players have less than three accounts? Again, I'd bet the number is quite small. Since a few players here on the boards have discussed having seven accounts or more, I can well imagine that the people paying for accounts once every 90 days have several accounts being paid for, at least quarterly. I would doubt that EA would want to take the gamble that these accounts wouldn't just be closed down permanently. It hurts the bottom line.

Honestly, I'd rather keep UO running and playing with the house I do have than getting the house/keep/castle I've always wanted, only to have the game shut down a couple of months later.

So there you go. My opinion hasn't changed. I'm just accepting the way things are. It is, afterall, a business first.
 

Uvtha

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
I gotta do what i gotta do and this isn't something that has been abused for WAY too long.
I don't think you "gotta" do this. You want to. I mean do what you do man, but really, seems like a silly thing to get so worked up about. Clearly the people who have run the game over the last 15+ years don't care about it outside of a seemingly mild philosophical dislike (which is justified and understandable), I don't see why its such a good target for a crusade.

*shrug*
 

Spellbound

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Without a definitive stance by the powers that be, what incentive besides noble goodness prevents even more of us from joining the dark side and the 90 day merry-go-round? Wouldn't that be a huge financial loss if it is perceived that just like multi-boxing and scripting, go ahead and try it. No adverse consequences from your actions! What is the result to the bottom line if everyone except 15 and 16 year vets went to 90 day pay cycle? Maybe they would switch too since there are no new vet rewards exclusive to ancient accounts.

Take 10 full time paying accounts to 90 day...$1,200-$1,300 becomes $520. Give us a compelling reason not to!
 
Top