- Awards
- 1
This is one of the reasons I
you!
-
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!
you!More golem commentary:
On TC1, I was able to create another golem using a second gadgetry table and a different character on the same account in a house where I made another golem earlier today with a different gadgetry table.
This latest golem from a gadgetry table was made with 0 tinkering skill and had these stats: 122 hits/75 stamina/136 mana; 53% physical, 65% fire, 21% cold, 90% poison, 43% energy; 13-24 base damage; 100 wrestling, 100 tactics, 190 resisting spells.
I used the same character that made the above golem with the table to make a golem the "old-fashioned" way with 100 tinkering skill, a clockwork assembly, power crystal, gears, and ingots. I was also able to put it in the stable while the first table-created golem was stabled. Its stats, for comparison purposes, are: 399 hits/79 stamina/108 mana; 35% physical, 59% fire, 10% cold, 85% poison, 33% energy; 13-24 base damage; 80.4 wrestling, 95.1 tactics, 192.7 resisting spells. I had no character nearby to transfer this crafted golem to, but at least was able to get the targeting cursor up after selecting Transfer from the context menu.
I believe the lowest tinkering skill you can have to make a golem is 60. So, just out of curiosity, I crafted one from a clockwork assembly at 60 tinkering skill. It has these stats: 76 hits, 91 stamina, 113 mana; 46% physical, 54% fire, 25% cold, 80% poison, 35% energy; 13-24 base damage; and 0 wrestling, 0 tactics, and 0 resisting spells. (Yeah, you read that right....0 skills.)
Screen shot of the two different golems so you can see the differences in color between one created from a clockwork assembly and one created from a gadgetry table:
On TC1, I was able to create another golem using a second gadgetry table and a different character on the same account in a house where I made another golem earlier today with a different gadgetry table.
This latest golem from a gadgetry table was made with 0 tinkering skill and had these stats: 122 hits/75 stamina/136 mana; 53% physical, 65% fire, 21% cold, 90% poison, 43% energy; 13-24 base damage; 100 wrestling, 100 tactics, 190 resisting spells.
I used the same character that made the above golem with the table to make a golem the "old-fashioned" way with 100 tinkering skill, a clockwork assembly, power crystal, gears, and ingots. I was also able to put it in the stable while the first table-created golem was stabled. Its stats, for comparison purposes, are: 399 hits/79 stamina/108 mana; 35% physical, 59% fire, 10% cold, 85% poison, 33% energy; 13-24 base damage; 80.4 wrestling, 95.1 tactics, 192.7 resisting spells. I had no character nearby to transfer this crafted golem to, but at least was able to get the targeting cursor up after selecting Transfer from the context menu.
I believe the lowest tinkering skill you can have to make a golem is 60. So, just out of curiosity, I crafted one from a clockwork assembly at 60 tinkering skill. It has these stats: 76 hits, 91 stamina, 113 mana; 46% physical, 54% fire, 25% cold, 80% poison, 35% energy; 13-24 base damage; and 0 wrestling, 0 tactics, and 0 resisting spells. (Yeah, you read that right....0 skills.)
Screen shot of the two different golems so you can see the differences in color between one created from a clockwork assembly and one created from a gadgetry table:
- Awards
- 1
I bathe in mashed potatos all the time.
Also to be fair water is life for humans, so it doesn't seem so strange for a vampire to bathe in blood. Might make thier skin heal up or something. I for one miss the days when vampires were monsters, not emo models.
Would be interesting to find out. Or it might be like the albino squirrel I have. When I tried to transfer it to a Magincia pet vendor, it did not show up among my stabled pets as available for transfer.
Not quite. The difference is that going red on one character had severe penalties and restrictions for all other characters. The voting change simply means only one character can partake of the benefit. The rest are not impacted.
The problem is as QMSoar said: a large guild can control too much with ease. He didn't even mention the cross-shard logrolling that occurred since the first election, which will still remain a problem. Had I my way, and I've posted this, it would be one vote per account across all shards.
That said, to reiterate his point: what do you propose? Or, and I'm asking this sincerely, do you perhaps think it's not an issue that a large guild can take six, often more seats?
I'm sorry but this does diddly squat... What it does is ruin the experiance.... I can still go and buy votes from other people on other shards... doesn't that defeat the entire purpose??????
Dumb. Fixes nothing.
Got a stall in Magincia and set it up with an animal broker. As Old Gypsy suggested, the golem from the gadgetry table doesn't even show up when you try to select which pets to transfer to the animal broker from your stable.
Edited to add: I checked another character on the same account that I have on TC1 that is holding two golems I crafted earlier today from power assemblies and they did show up as available to transfer from the stable to the animal broker.
Last edited:
Completely false the idea that the largest guild can control six towns on the shard. I don't know what shard you play, but people are evidently very poor at coordinating. I saw several different groups battling on Atlantic, and Great Lakes where several of my friends won, they managed to beat out two of the largest guilds in several of the towns. They did this because they and their friends were more committed to the game and coordination. If anything, this only increases the power of the largest guilds because they now have more people to spread across several towns, while small groups will be forced to focus on one or two towns to counteract their superior voting power. Why? Because it rewards laziness and deters activity/coordination. It's easy to get someone to vote on one guy in a city you specifically need to. It takes dedication to the game and organization to do that across six to seven characters per person among many friends.
Really, the only thing that needed to be done was to increase the reputation level needed for those to vote. This would deter everyone but the most dedicated from amassing such large amounts of guildie or cross shard votes. Instead, we've gotten a heavy handed response which I guarantee you is going to wreck the Great Lakes council, which is actually doing its job of listening to player concerns, creating player events for all play styles: rp, non-rp, pvm, and pvp, all the while abiding by the Blackthorn Council rp rules. Your going to end up with a lot of no-shows, uninterested, or title only seeking players. I know they say they can replace Governors, but do any of us really believe they are going to risk losing someone's subscription over them just being interested in the title?
What I guess just stuns me is this is what got first priority for work on this system this time around... why? Cause evidently some sort of shadiness happened in one city on Atlantic? The real issue that needed to be resolved with this patch was raising funds for the town treasury, such as maybe charging 50K each use of the trade deal or something like 200k for a week's use. Why was this not the issue that was addressed?
Last edited:
Actually, if you look at the math, a guild can control six towns if it has a mere plurality. Maybe things are different on Atlantic, but on smaller shards (go look at my profile picture), it's been the same old players who have chosen their towns since the first elections. And again, if you look at the math, the reduction in votes suddenly levels the playing field: on a server with a dominant guild, they no longer have guaranteed votes for six cities. They'll have to plan carefully what cities they'll put votes in. Do they immediately distribute votes evenly? Do they wait until the last day, hour or minute, risking an "October surprise" of opponents suddenly bringing in just enough votes? With watching, the large guild can still dominate a few cities . They just can't automatically throw all their votes to have six.
"Dedication" and "organization" by themselves mean nothing, you should realize. They apply just as much to cross-shard logrolling, just as in real life they apply to groups that engage in voter fraud.
Minimum reputation would have to be high, and/or require zero hate from any other city, to prevent easy loyalty switching. For a mere 4000 boards, I just changed one character's citizenship to use a different trade deal. Will voting require a minimum of "Adored," or perhaps higher loyalty will have heavier weight? Yet that will put power in the hands of the wealthiest players, and dupers.
Why would this "wreck" your "council," because now the governors will be easier to challenge, and others might actually get a turn? Changing of the guard is a good thing, and if I had my way, a governor couldn't serve two terms consecutively (even with a vacancy requiring a candidate be chosen). There's a saying in real life that politicians should be changed as often as diapers, and for the same reason. In UO, I say: why not get fresh blood each time.
Notwithstanding that it's not the kind of player we like to see in the game, I highly doubt that a non-participating governor is going to cancel an account just over being replaced. How often would such a person get into office? There are 27 production shards. If two cities on every shard get a governor who does nothing (highly improbable), and each has two accounts, that's 432 accounts per year. A lot more players than that quit for non-election reasons.
It's not just one isolated incident. Since the first election, I've personally seen the solicitation for votes in exchange for a reciprocal vote from another character. Others have witnessed such quid pro quo across shards.
We did have a fix for town treasuries that I thought was satisfactory to most everybody. I don't recall any criticisms of it since Publish 83 was announced, not just when it went live. Is there a reason you think that town treasuries need to be beefed up? A gold sink?
I like the way the new Dungeon is designed. You can find a area that suits you to fight monsters that give you crests. The secret passage with earth elementals its not bad for new characters. Of course for the town area's we will still make regular events on Drachenfels for all who are not skilled enough to do them alone. Besides i believe that strenght for us is when we work together. That removes also the problem that there is nothing to get ressurected.
My stack of golden ingots going to get a boost!
My stack of golden ingots going to get a boost!
My stack of golden ingots going to get a boost!
Oooooooooooh, new stealables?
Not that I seen so far. But Golden elmentals to kill.
Frarc,
I said Hi to you yesterday in the dungeon, but I guess you were snoozing. Where is the secret passage for the earth elementals?
Katrena
I said Hi to you yesterday in the dungeon, but I guess you were snoozing. Where is the secret passage for the earth elementals?
Katrena
I think his beef is that right now citizens have no incentive to contribute to the treasury in exchange for the trade deal bonus. The onus for keeping the deals afloat is entirely on the governors, and perception seems to be that if they don't keep them going out of their own pockets then "they suck."
Why not add in the nominal fee for using the bonus (thus keeping that system from solely suckling at a governor's teat) and thus benefiting the system instead of adding the vote restriction in an already guaranteed to fail attempt to avoid vote trading. People will STILL vote trade and since votes were cut across the board, it will have virtually the same impact in the normally contested cities.
Fortunately, since the governors have zero extra power to do anything "exciting," zero ability to make lasting changes their cities (read the EM primers for more), and are essentially forced to RP, even fewer people will be interested in running.
I must logged off near the entrance then, sorry. The secret passage is in the prison with brigands; Not realy a "secret" passage, can see the whole in the wall.
Top Left
Dungeon Map
Last edited:
The only Thing i would like to see changed is that Captains give out more then 1 crest . Maybe 3 or 5. Like it is now, players going to kill the spawn around them and leave the Captains alone. 1 makes them not interesting to kill. 3 or more would change that. If you can solo one alone, you do deserve all 3 crests in my eyes. (Trust me, most i can't do alone)
I agree very much here. If you are a citizen and want to use the buff you should have to pay for the privilege.
Now this is the kind of post that I love seeing.
Instead of putting down a couple of lines complaining and and outlining the problem yet again, it does actually offer some things that people can think on.
To answer your request to add my own ideas, instead of repeating myself it would be best to refer to my thread on this topic about a month ago on these forums, made following what I witnessed during the last Atlantic election. - Linky -
My suggestion then was pretty close to what was included in this patch, but of course with the addition that the restriction should have been one vote across all shards to prevent cross shard vote recruitment. The lack of this won't hurt places like Atlantic, but its going to hurt the smaller shards as the population of the big ones floods their stone tallies.
But thank you to the Devs for making the changes they have in this patch.
If you don't think most of the groups out there vying for the governorship positions aren't already applying such strategies of stringing out votes, trying to bully an opponent out with a strong early surge, or holding out hoping to eek out on the last day, then you are way behind on what is going on. That has been going on since the first election, both Skara Brae and Yew came down to the very last minute on Great Lakes. In the second election, Britain, Trinsic, and Vesper came down to the last minute.
I am very well aware of the math that if you went by everything, (and lets stick to small numbers for simple purposes) a guild with say 40 players essentially has essentially 240 voting power that can be spread at best to 40 per city. However, you missed my point that this is rewarding laziness versus the motivated and coordinated. That guild probably isn't filled with 40 die-hard players, lets say there is probably a core 10, and from there it spreads to different levels of activity. So we know they have a base voting power of 60, limited to 10 per city. From there, that voting power grows at diminishing levels. Someone that only logs on for a few hours a week on weeknights isn't going to spend a lot of time making sure all of their characters have voted for a certain person in a city. Even further, they sure aren't going to go make six characters on several other shards and run them to the city stone to vote.
Now lets talk about the opposing small group of 15 players. We know they have a voting power of 90 across 15 cities. All fifteen of them are dedicated, so now they are likely winning several of the peripheral, less interesting cities such as Vesper, Moonglow, and Jhelom. The more popular cities of Yew, Britain, and Skara Brae are usually out of reach, but they get a break. Because they are so organized, they are able to coordinate with their friends on other shards, who are also small and pretty organized. With this, they are able to compete for cities they should have no chance at if we went by the basic idea you use as your premise. The system as it is rewards the dedicated and organized. Was the voting maybe geared to the over-coordinated? Yes, some, and is why I argue that increasing the amount of rep needed to vote would be enough for a first phase tested deterrent. Just the first level would cause enough of a time sink to deter anyone but the most determined cross shard voters.
Dedication and organization of course would mean nothing by themselves, they take players. That is why they are used usually to describe people. A type of people that usually are a benefit for the gaming community.
Not sure what you are attempting to accomplish by bringing in an unsubstantiated argument from real life. I know people like to talk about voter fraud as if it is as common as moon rising each night, but there has been no proof that it has even happened. Most of the Attorney General's when defending new Voter ID laws have admitted they can not point to a proven instance of voter fraud to back their argument for its need. So off topic...
I think having to raise reputation is more of a annoying time sink than you do. I'm not inclined to lie, I play Atlantic, Great Lakes, and sometimes Chessy or LS to pvm. Great Lakes has been my main shard since returning with guildmates. Playing other shards allowed me to trade votes because i saw the offers in chat. Since I've done it, I can tell you it is a pain in the butt to do. Having to raise their rep and organize getting the 4000 boards to each character would be discouraging. I would probably still do it, but I know of several that would discourage enough.
Limiting it to one per shard only rewards the wealthiest players and dupers. Trinsic came down to the wire on Great Lakes because Ching a Ling was offering one million gold per vote. I'm willing to bet he paid out close to 75 million, on my low end guess. With only one vote per shard, it would be even harder to counteract a person trying to buy an election.
First, for the sake of having reasonable discussion/argument, can we not resort to putting words in the other's mouth? I did not say it was "my" council. I have several friends who managed to win seats on Great Lakes, but I also have two that won on Atlantic.
Now, my reasoning on why it would wreck the Great Lakes council are pretty simple. Several of the current city governors are from smaller guilds on the shard that banded together. I'm willing to bet they probably got twenty or so players from other shards to help. With the new system, the largest guilds will be able to easily swipe all but maybe one or two cities. These smaller guilds now are going to have to choose between each other who gets sacrificed so they can fend off and maintain control of hopefully those two. Who has been rewarded? Large guilds. Who has been punished? Small guilds.
Having it your way with term limits would be the death of this system. Most shards can't even fill every city. On Great Lakes, we had two cities where they were completely unopposed. The only shard this would ever work on, would be Atlantic. You can't build a game solely for one shard.
Personally, I think it's pretty easy to counteract with work and dedication. I think this could have been handled better by slowly phasing in deterrence and seeing if they work before going so heavy handed.
You must have missed the two or three threads that popped up after that patch that were filled with governors complaining about mostly having to pay the trade deal entirely out of their own pocket. There are examples in some cities of large donations and events to fund them, but most cities can't find a governor that will run such events or fund the trade deals entirely by themselves. Most suggested a fee for use that would go into the treasury would be great and act as another effective gold sink.
Last edited:
I thought about that, but then I thought "you can't rez in the old dungeons either, and it's no further to run when dead than from Shame lower levels. At least when you get above ground you know where the healer can be found, they're not 'wandering' and they're not likely to have a reaper or gargoyle nearby waiting to rez-kill you".
Looking at your map it looks like all the towns are connected in the new dungeon? Do bards work in the new dungeon?
I added a picture showing the passage to the earth elemental area to the guide I did.
I also used 'ctrl/shift' as I walked around, the only things that came up were the mobs and the doors
There is one chest spawning in the maze room. I went back to open it last night. Contents 650gp and 2 magic items, in other words a normal dungeon chest like those found in the older dungeons.
I like the news! Only thing I dont understand: What people need golems for. Trained all my combat skills versus monsters - up to 120. Golems are so.... booooring. They dont drop resources, they dont give rewards
But the bath is lovely!!! I will use it for the appartment of my necromancer... with bones all around it. and blood, of course... gore as gore can be...
But the bath is lovely!!! I will use it for the appartment of my necromancer... with bones all around it. and blood, of course... gore as gore can be...
you could rez rez in the old dungeons,despise had an ankh rez spot by the lizardmen,destard had a spot as well in back. not sure if they are still there.
Either would method of taxation would be fine, but even on my small home shard, I haven't heard complaints since Publish 85 about raising funds or any free riders. The only reason to require individual payment would be to eliminate the latter problem, which is so insignificant that there's been no peep about it on UHall in a long time. There are just a couple of trade deals worth the small gold sink, anyway, so it's not a lot of gold we're talking about.
Please re-read what I wrote about strategies. An early surge means votes taken away from other cities, and how does any guild know that their opponents can't overpower that? They can no longer count on x members having x votes in six cities. They'll have to distribute carefully. If they wait until the last minute, opponents can too.
Actually, it is one-character-one-vote that is "rewarding laziness." A dominant guild simply picks which six cities to throw votes in, and you can't address that simple fact. You can talk about how many "die-hard players" a guild has, but that applies proportionally to everyone else. We aren't talking, or at least I am not, about a dominant guild in terms of total players, but a dominant guild in terms of how many active players compared to others.
If a guild has 100 unique members, but only 10 active players participating in elections, and at least 11 other players oppose their candidates in union, then the former is hardly "dominant."
That is assuming, however, that the other 11 players have a single mind to get a different candidate in. That would require extreme organization, whereas the large guild under the present system simply throws all its guaranteed votes into six cities. It's easy for a GM to announce over ICQ or on private forums that all members need to cast votes in these six cities, and much harder for non-guilded, non-allied challengers to get that kind of support. Meanwhile all it would take to doom challengers' efforts is a small split.
I am talking about people. Again, dedication and organization mean nothing. There can be just as much of those, courage and great leadership on a side of evil. In UO, griefers, scripters and dupers can be the most organized players you've ever met.
You need to read around. You apparently haven't heard of certain convictions, like that of Melowese Richardson, Butch Morgan and Dustin Blythe. You missed the notorious video clip of the guy who said he was so excited about voting, he was going to go back and do it again. Perhaps you've never heard the old saw popularized in Chicago, "Vote early and vote often."
Personally I find that unethical, but whatever floats your boat. And don't you see that requiring minimum loyalty would cut down drastically on this vote trading? Then we'd know the people doing it with ease are likely dupers.
In fact, one vote per shard, and especially one vote per account, would greatly cut down on that. That guy could no longer count on people holding one character's vote in reserve. They'll have their own friends, allies or favorites to support.
I've never heard of anyone buying votes like that. How long has he been doing that, and what's his source of income? That sounds like a player who should be specifically checked for duping, and if these activities are provable, he should be removed as governor. It's completely unethical.
You got your knickers in a twist too readily. I said "your" in second person plural, as in Great Lake's council, not yours personally.
When you type out "from other shards," did it not occur to you that one-shard-one-vote would fix this?
Under one-shard-one-vote, if there are 35 active players out of a shard's 100 active players, and they support one candidate, their candidate should win. That's the whole point of an election. Your -- meaning Great Lakes' -- council will have to work that much harder to retain the offices. Too bad incumbency won't be the surety it once was!
As it stands right now, 35 active out of 100 active means they automatically have 35 votes across six cities. Under the new rules, they can throw all 35 into one city and still not be assured of a win, and that's a good thing.
Actually, the real reason many go unopposed is that would-be challengers saw what happened in the first election and no longer bother. It's the same reason that with Congress overall having a very low approval rating, individual incumbents tend to win. It's extremely hard to mount a challenge against someone well-entrenched, and in UO the entrenchment happened just with the first round of elections.
Then how can opponents do this "work and dedication," when even you have mentioned (seeing nothing wrong with it) doing cross-shard trading?
Read again the math QMSair and I presented. One-shard-one-vote will cut down on overwhelming dominance of a large guild, making its votes count no more than anyone else's. One-account-one-vote takes care of it completely.
I did see the proposals for individuals paying fees, which received very little notice. It's a minor gold sink and still doesn't affect dupers.
As far as any governors complaining after taxation was removed, show me. I can only surmise they were in fact so few and of such little insignificance that they received even less notice than the proposal of individual payments.
It's not a myth or something only done in medival times, people still do it. Also oatmeal.... and cereal. Yes people are weird.
- Awards
- 1
Well people also get into tubs of mud and whatnot. But as a regular bathing practice people did not bathe in the milk of any animal. Cleopatra did in fact use milk on her face though, she believed it made her skin younger.
They booted politics from Stratics. It's about time they do it for UO too.
It is 24 million gold a term for a governor if nobody else contributes, that's not an insignificant amount unless you farm gold 24/7 or sell event items. Personally, I don't plan on turning UO into a job so others can get a free stat boost. None of the other governors should be expected to foot the bill on their own, but most are taking the burden in silence.
With governors also expected to run events, events in which there is little participation unless you give away millions, this system quickly becomes a gold sink JUST for the governor. 24 million is a lot of gold.
I messed around a little this evening with one of the golems from the gadgetry table. It was one that I created with a character that had GM tinkering skill so the golem would have the best possible stats. (Note that anatomy skill on these is 0 when they are created and raises as they fight stuff. I assume it caps out at 100.) I tried it against a high plains boura, toxic sliths, giant rats, regular sliths, silver serpents, lowland bouras, ruddy bouras, and korpre. It performed very poorly against the high plains boura. It did okay against one toxic slith at a time, but two at a time was going to be its downfall. It had no problem with the korpre. It handled two regular sliths at a time okay and did all right against one silver serpent at a time. A lowland boura was a very tough match, a ruddy boura slightly less so. Anatomy skill was at approximately 24.0 after fighting the above collection of monsters.
As you cannot heal the golems with magery, veterinary, or healing skill, you must have tinkering skill and carry ingots and tinker tools to keep up their health. If your character making the repairs has GM tinkering skill, each repair costs 10 iron ingots and restores about 85-90 hit points. You must wait about a minute between each repair. Waiting for hit points to regenerate on their own is not really a viable tactic when using these, as hit point regeneration occurs very, very slowly. Another downside to using them is that you must use gate spell to take them anywhere, unless you're willing to walk them to wherever you're going.
All in all, I suppose these enhanced golems may be useful for some "light" hunting by a character with high tinkering skill that has very limited offensive capabilities, which could certainly be true of some crafter characters with crowded templates. However, I don't think you would get much use out of one created with no or low tinkering skill.
On a positive note, I guess, I did not notice any instances of damage taken by the golem being passed through to its owner or any mana draining from the golem's owner while the golem was being damaged or dishing out damage (see CovenantX's report from Friday in this same thread).
As you cannot heal the golems with magery, veterinary, or healing skill, you must have tinkering skill and carry ingots and tinker tools to keep up their health. If your character making the repairs has GM tinkering skill, each repair costs 10 iron ingots and restores about 85-90 hit points. You must wait about a minute between each repair. Waiting for hit points to regenerate on their own is not really a viable tactic when using these, as hit point regeneration occurs very, very slowly. Another downside to using them is that you must use gate spell to take them anywhere, unless you're willing to walk them to wherever you're going.
All in all, I suppose these enhanced golems may be useful for some "light" hunting by a character with high tinkering skill that has very limited offensive capabilities, which could certainly be true of some crafter characters with crowded templates. However, I don't think you would get much use out of one created with no or low tinkering skill.
On a positive note, I guess, I did not notice any instances of damage taken by the golem being passed through to its owner or any mana draining from the golem's owner while the golem was being damaged or dishing out damage (see CovenantX's report from Friday in this same thread).
A governor resorting to paying the entire bill is something I don't understand. I know one who seems infinitely wealthy, and another who never struck me as having the means but told me that 2 million weekly is not a problem. But why?
That right there relegates the new golems as a curiosity for me, not something I'd use seriously. Considering the relatively low resists and the expense of ingots, why not have a standard healing delay?
If there isn't an active trade deal at all times, "citizen approval" plummets. The citizens don't care that the vast majority of those utilizing the deals contribute nothing, they just want the buffs. Since the governors can't actually DO anything, this is the only measure of their service most people bother to see.
Some governors are rich, some (though I doubt this) might be the dupers you think are abundant, others don't think the system was meant to encourage giving the citizens a free ride. 24 mil a term = 104 mil a calendar year. Unless we want to mimic the real world and have UO politics become the playground of the super rich, this needs fixed.
If there is a flat, unalterable "tax" to use the trade deals this issue vanishes. 100K a week to get the buff means just 20 people could fund it. Since citizenship has no requirements, the buffs shouldn't be free.
As a corollary with real life, supporters are illogical to start disapproving of someone they want to provide services when the supporters are unwilling to pay taxes for such services. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised it manifests itself in the game too. Now, this "approval" is something I haven't seen, since the elections on my home shard are about popularity and friendships/alliances, not who will guarantee trade deals or can be expected to promote good events.
I couldn't tell you if dupers are "abundant" by a standard definition, or how much impact they have on elections, but I do know they're around. (For example, someone in general chat said he bought gold from a certain site that turned out to be duped.) Now, requiring payment could be tied to loyalty decay, such as staying at Renowned requiring weekly taxes.
I liked what you said about "the real world" because yeah its a game you would like to think that anyone could run. in the real world a guy making minimum wage running for govener (let alone winning)? no chance. it would be nice to think it would be possible in a video game tho.
Personally i dont think 2mil a week is alot for an established player at this point in the game. Its a fortune for a beginner tho.
Just make the trade deal free. i dont see the need for it to cost anything. im not even going to say you should have to pay to use it. because the assassins town would be rich while some of them flat broke.
Now im not a fan of politics in uo. but want a gold sink that would actually work? first vote is free. each additional vote 50mil. some people would do. some guilds would probably require their memebers to do it even.
You keep using past tense. I'm not talking about someone dead for 2000 years. People do it today. Regularly, and the bath isn't 100% milk, its diluted and mostly water. The milk is an additive since an all milk bath would cost over $100 to fill a tub. If it wasn't a thing Amazon wouldn't carry a bunch of the products, and I'm fairly certain they don't stock them for Cleopatra.
They're still there, though the Destard one is mostly camped by water eles happily waiting to res-kill you.
It's Shame I usually end up walking out of, and it's a very long way to run!
Devs, Can we get Bards useful in the Dungeon...Allowing the Captains to be discorded and the mobs provokable...
It would go along way in taking the Captains down a notch for smaller groups
Bards have been really been getting screwed lately...regulated to inspire and invigorate, while their best supporting talents are blocked.
It would go along way in taking the Captains down a notch for smaller groups
Bards have been really been getting screwed lately...regulated to inspire and invigorate, while their best supporting talents are blocked.
+1Bil
Historians in England have it on record of it.. with Elizabeth I , and there is debaitable record of such baths by Cathrine of Russia too bathing in milk. It was said that water smelt and taste bad and made many sick.... its why most of Europe of that age including children drank watered wine or beer.
Petra, if you please could you put light to this...
Petra, if you please could you put light to this...
*sighs* ****ing vampires.
One of the historical bases for the vampire legend was a Princess who believed that bathing in blood kept her young.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Báthory
(Yes, it's the Wikipedia. Yes I've seen the same **** in other sources and am using this link as a convenience.)
Also: We drink water. We also bathe in water.
Not to mention the long link between vampires and sexual perversions.
So on the bathing in blood thing: If vampires existed they doubtlessly would do such a thing. Now, please, can we at least ****ing argue on something substantive.
How did this even start?
****ing vampires.
-Galen's player
One of the historical bases for the vampire legend was a Princess who believed that bathing in blood kept her young.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Báthory
(Yes, it's the Wikipedia. Yes I've seen the same **** in other sources and am using this link as a convenience.)
Also: We drink water. We also bathe in water.
Not to mention the long link between vampires and sexual perversions.
So on the bathing in blood thing: If vampires existed they doubtlessly would do such a thing. Now, please, can we at least ****ing argue on something substantive.
How did this even start?
****ing vampires.
-Galen's player
Before we move on would Lady Storm like to comment on the above statement....
Last edited:
I killed one alone after an hour and got 2 artis but it was at the area where all the Captains are. The Captains that spawned on the way there only gave 1 arti for some reason.
I tried it a second time at the area where all the captains are but it's almost impossible to solo any of the mess at the end.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting results Tina.
You got 2 because you got 1 drop from the captain and 1 drop from building points from killing invasion creatures (captains count in this as well).
As S_S said, one is the drop that any captain is guaranteed to give, and the other comes from killing any invasion creature. Kyronix explained that a player starts with a very small chance to get a drop just for killing one, and the more that are killed, the higher your chances become. If luck is against you, eventually you'll hit a 100% chance anyway. Once you get a drop, your odds reset to the lowest.