What I dislike about Felucca/Siege/Classic Shard - in a Nutshell

[hawkeye_pike]

Hi all,

I am no fan of the Trammel/Felucca split. I don't like an MMORPG where you can play in a "safe zone" without risk, cause it removes the MM and RP from the online game. It turns the game into an unrealistic single-player SIMS game.

Now that Classic Shard is being discussed so passionately and controversely, and we have a shard called Siege Perilous that is less successful than many had hoped, and Felucca is mostly deserted either, I thought a lot about the reasons behind that. I wondered why I don't like either of these concepts, and I found the answer:

When I play a game, I want to have a challenge, yes. Siege, Classic Shard, Felucca - they sure are challenging. But what I don't want is the game becoming work. I want to relax and have fun, but I don't want to work my arse off to succeed in a game.

Siege Perilous is pure work. I played there long enough to know that. The reasons for this are the slow skill gain, the high vendor prices, only one character, the lack of insurance. Since you can and will be murdered almost anywhere in the game, you have the pressure to advance as much as possible. Since advancing is so hard, it takes too much time and effort ("work") to get to a point where you can enjoy the game. And then you still have to "work" to replace anything that was looted from you. Having only one character in such a world (I basically like the concept of having only one character) makes it even harder, especially with such a small community.

Classic Shard will most likely have the old PvP ruleset. I played UO since the first day of its release. I know all the flaws of the old ruleset. Any ruleset that allows mass-murdering and player griefing to such an extent is unattractive to me, and probably to most of the other players. You are forced to be able to survive, because you cannot prevent being murdered and looted wherever you are. We had that system during the Old Days, and it failed. Most players felt victimized and were extremely frustrated. The only ones who liked that systems were the "wolves", i.e. the criminals, and they wish back the old days. But I wonder how much fun will it be to play on a shard with only wolves and no sheep?

What I would like is a system where the player himself can control the risk of being victimized to a certain extent. A system that allows criminal activity, but punishes those who exaggerate and go on mindless killing/looting sprees. A system where not only power gamers can be criminals, but where you have to be clever and sneaky in order to commit a crime and get away with it. A system where players can minimize the risk (but can't completely switch it off) by planning their adventures thoroughly. A more "intelligent" system.

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.

 

[Konge]

IBTL

 

[Lord Frodo]

IBTL

LOL Me too

 

[Unsatisfied]

Proper stat loss was a working system untill they removed it. That is when Pliny became rampart.

 

[Mairut]

I've read your website and the ideas that you've outlined there concerning this, and I like them a lot. I think the only thing I really disagreed with was the length of time one would spend in jail for committing crimes... if they ever decided to make a system like that, I would hope that they would shorten the time (at every level) a tiny bit.

It would certainly make my thefts more exciting.

I can't think of a reason not to at least give some of those things a try, considering that we have test shard. Unfortunately test is for testing against bugs in future updates, and not about testing a new system entirely... they already have the systems set up when it gets to test. That, and the work involved on the devs' part in getting something like that set up... it could turn out to be a lot of work for nothing (if they ever did).

It's nice to think about though.

 

[Kat]

Hi all,

I am no fan of the Trammel/Felucca split. I don't like an MMORPG where you can play in a "safe zone" without risk, cause it removes the MM and RP from the online game. It turns the game into an unrealistic single-player SIMS game.

Now that Classic Shard is being discussed so passionately and controversely, and we have a shard called Siege Perilous that is less successful than many had hoped, and Felucca is mostly deserted either, I thought a lot about the reasons behind that. I wondered why I don't like either of these concepts, and I found the answer:

When I play a game, I want to have a challenge, yes. Siege, Classic Shard, Felucca - they sure are challenging. But what I don't want is the game becoming work. I want to relax and have fun, but I don't want to work my arse off to succeed in a game.

Siege Perilous is pure work. I played there long enough to know that. The reasons for this are the slow skill gain, the high vendor prices, only one character, the lack of insurance. Since you can and will be murdered almost anywhere in the game, you have the pressure to advance as much as possible. Since advancing is so hard, it takes too much time and effort ("work") to get to a point where you can enjoy the game. And then you still have to "work" to replace anything that was looted from you. Having only one character in such a world (I basically like the concept of having only one character) makes it even harder, especially with such a small community.

Classic Shard will most likely have the old PvP ruleset. I played UO since the first day of its release. I know all the flaws of the old ruleset. Any ruleset that allows mass-murdering and player griefing to such an extent is unattractive to me, and probably to most of the other players. You are forced to be able to survive, because you cannot prevent being murdered and looted wherever you are. We had that system during the Old Days, and it failed. Most players felt victimized and were extremely frustrated. The only ones who liked that systems were the "wolves", i.e. the criminals, and they wish back the old days. But I wonder how much fun will it be to play on a shard with only wolves and no sheep?

What I would like is a system where the player himself can control the risk of being victimized to a certain extent. A system that allows criminal activity, but punishes those who exaggerate and go on mindless killing/looting sprees. A system where not only power gamers can be criminals, but where you have to be clever and sneaky in order to commit a crime and get away with it. A system where players can minimize the risk (but can't completely switch it off) by planning their adventures thoroughly. A more "intelligent" system.

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.

Hiya...

I can't really speak to much else other than to some changes we are pushing for on Siege, which I think might be of interest to players who are wanting something different than the standard Tram/Fel Split ruleset.

Our community recently went on a fact-finding mission to find out what was preventing other players from trying or playing Siege, beyond the obvious small player base we have. We also did a little fact-finding within our community to determine which changes might be palatable to the current Siege playerbase. Its painfully clear to us that while the concept of Siege was a good one, it is no longer viable in todays state of the game.

Below you will find a link to an email which was sent to the Dev Team on behalf of the shard, which is requesting quite a few changes.

http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?t=190091

If you'll read through it, you will notice that quite a few of the reasons you list for not playing siege, are covered. IE... Faster skill gain, additional RoT tweaks, 2nd character slot, bank storage and possibly the allowance of a 2nd [grandfathered, so to speak] house on SP.

Another problem we have on Siege since we do not have insurance [which we still do not want] is the ability to equip in todays game, at a reasonable cost. We accept that "items" are here to stay, but when you look at the cost to equip... and we're not talking top tier suits, are running in the 200k-500k range to make suits and/or buyback certain faction gear items. Some run higher end suits that can get into the 2 mil range as well, but as you can see the cost to re-equip even a modest suit is staggering and not conducive to fun pvp or any other fun if you intend on decently equipping as a pvmer. Having to spend that much per death isn't fun and when you compare that cost to the cost Tram/Fel shard players spend per death on insurance fees... well, I think you see what I mean.

As a solution to this we are asking for the reintroduction of cursed arties and higher drop rates of other major/minor/replica's and Doom arties. There is a much higher risk to farming on Siege, so we feel the risk vs reward value should be upped a bit, which will in turn, bring the cost to equip down to a more reasonable level.

In any case, its an entirely different ballgame on Siege, but I think we're on to some things that can help bring the ability to equip into balance for all players, instead of those who have seemingly endless amounts of gold. Hopefully the devs will agree and give our shard some long overdue attention. Just wanted to throw this out for your consideration, since you hit on some of the current issues with Siege.

 

[Longest Journey]

Hi all,

I am no fan of the Trammel/Felucca split. I don't like an MMORPG where you can play in a "safe zone" without risk, cause it removes the MM and RP from the online game. It turns the game into an unrealistic single-player SIMS game.

Now that Classic Shard is being discussed so passionately and controversely, and we have a shard called Siege Perilous that is less successful than many had hoped, and Felucca is mostly deserted either, I thought a lot about the reasons behind that. I wondered why I don't like either of these concepts, and I found the answer:

When I play a game, I want to have a challenge, yes. Siege, Classic Shard, Felucca - they sure are challenging. But what I don't want is the game becoming work. I want to relax and have fun, but I don't want to work my arse off to succeed in a game.

And you already have what you want on your AOS servers. Since you have what you want, stop bashing classic servers. You dont have to play them, so you can stick with your easy mode gaming.

Seige......you can bash that all you want. It was a mistake from the start and a slap in the face to people who wanted classic servers after Reniassance.

Siege Perilous is pure work. I played there long enough to know that. The reasons for this are the slow skill gain, the high vendor prices, only one character, the lack of insurance. Since you can and will be murdered almost anywhere in the game, you have the pressure to advance as much as possible. Since advancing is so hard, it takes too much time and effort ("work") to get to a point where you can enjoy the game. And then you still have to "work" to replace anything that was looted from you. Having only one character in such a world (I basically like the concept of having only one character) makes it even harder, especially with such a small community.

Seige was a mistake, plain and simple.

Classic Shard will most likely have the old PvP ruleset. I played UO since the first day of its release. I know all the flaws of the old ruleset. Any ruleset that allows mass-murdering and player griefing to such an extent is unattractive to me, and probably to most of the other players. You are forced to be able to survive, because you cannot prevent being murdered and looted wherever you are. We had that system during the Old Days, and it failed. Most players felt victimized and were extremely frustrated. The only ones who liked that systems were the "wolves", i.e. the criminals, and they wish back the old days. But I wonder how much fun will it be to play on a shard with only wolves and no sheep?

Well, first of all, I have to say, Im offended by this paragraph. I wasnt a criminal, nor a PK, and I was no sheep and I was sure as hell no ones prey. That is a slap in the face to every player who wanst a red. You clearly have no respect for the old days or those who played them.

Second, there were ways to prevent yourself from being killed. It wasnt as soon as a red showed up everyone in the area died. Some people would fight back, others would travel in groups, some would recall, and others would hide and evade their attackers. You speak of a game that makes you rely on your own cunning and wit, yet you slander the old days which did just that. The system was intelligent back then, however, the random variables brought in with open PvP meant that you could plan your adventure to your hearts content, but there was always the chance of someone showing up and attacking you.

Thirdly, mass-murdering? How dare you slander the old days like that. Let me tell you something, there were more people hunting and killing reds than anything else. We just didnt stand around and LET those SOB's kill us. We fought back! When a red crossed my path, I fought tooth and nail. Sometimes I won, sometimes I lost, and same went for A LOT of other players.

But to say it was mass-muder makes it sound like people were completely powerless and just stood around like scared little children. And that, that is an unexcuseble insult. The only people who even DARE to say it was mass-murder back then are the spinless cowards who couldnt handle getting killed or the spiteful little creatons who got their mouthes hacked off when they couldnt back up their trash talk.

Fourthly, all wolves? Only criminals liked the old system? Again more insults and slander. I for one am sick of seeing propaganda like this from people who have no idea how the game play was back then. If things were so bad, how come I and thousands of other players were able to GM out multiple characters across multiple servers, make decent sums of gold, and get houses? We certainly werent all reds. So how did we do it? hmmmm....gee.... I guess its because things werent all that bad. I guess we learned how to play the game and didnt go running to a GM every time we got killed or cried on the forums.

And, no, it wasnt most players who felt victimized or frustrated, it was a small select few who got a bug up their butt when they got PK'd. People like that are the ones you see today on games like Modern Warfare screaming into their head set every time they get head shoted. The vast majority of players back then were okay with the system. They learned how to stay alive and how to thrive.

Tch, if you did play back then, Im more than willing to bet you were one of the whiners.

What I would like is a system where the player himself can control the risk of being victimized to a certain extent. A system that allows criminal activity, but punishes those who exaggerate and go on mindless killing/looting sprees. A system where not only power gamers can be criminals, but where you have to be clever and sneaky in order to commit a crime and get away with it. A system where players can minimize the risk (but can't completely switch it off) by planning their adventures thoroughly. A more "intelligent" system.

Bascially, you want a scripted experience that lets you know exactly whats going to happen before it happens.

I believe thats called "World of Warcraft"

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.

Of course you dont want to work to achieve anything. You, like all mainstream gamers, want instant gratification as you are led from one theme park attraction to another with little or not effort.

It seems to me that you just want a system where you are in total control of everyone and everything that happens to you and you dont have to work for anything. I believe there is such a "GAME" out there, its called World of Warcraft.

The people who want classic servers dont want a GAME, we want a WORLD, and in the world, things are unpredictable and out of your control. The only thing you have providence over is where youre going. What happens when you get there is up to fate. And THAT is the greatest challenge of all.

 

[Serafi]

Hi all,

I am no fan of the Trammel/Felucca split. I don't like an MMORPG where you can play in a "safe zone" without risk, cause it removes the MM and RP from the online game. It turns the game into an unrealistic single-player SIMS game.

I might be one of the few that think that the Tram/Fel split is the best of both worlds. That this solution is far better than a pure pvp shard as you have in other games, where you segregate the playstyles in servers. I like the fact that players don`t have to switch shards to pvp, but that they are on the same shard as me. It opens up the world, adds choices - also for a trammelite like me.

I am on the opposite end - I value the choice far more and that choice has to be mine to make, not the gamesystem. I think UO now has that choice, and far more than any other MMO I have tried.

 

[Daelomin]

Biggest problem with UO today - the way I see it...

1. Insurance
2. Removal of statloss

Why...

1. No insurance brought something to UO that cant be experienced in any other game. The feeling of danger and thrill due to the fact that you could loose your gear at any time. No insurance also brought balance to PvP. Same goes for bonded pets.

2. The removal of statloss sounded good on paper when it was introduced. However, it was the main reason the population declined in felucca. Factions was no longer interesting as you could get all benefits from being a red with no penalty at all.

What I want to say is that statloss and no insurance made the game balanced and thrilling.
I also agree that things needed to be added to the game... the gameplay before AOS had to be enhanced with new features, goals etc - just not changing the good balanced mechanics that was all ready in game.

 

[Unsatisfied]

Biggest problem with UO today - the way I see it...

1. Insurance
2. Removal of statloss

Why...

1. No insurance brought something to UO that cant be experienced in any other game. The feeling of danger and thrill due to the fact that you could loose your gear at any time. No insurance also brought balance to PvP. Same goes for bonded pets.

2. The removal of statloss sounded good on paper when it was introduced. However, it was the main reason the population declined in felucca. Factions was no longer interesting as you could get all benefits from being a red with no penalty at all.

What I want to say is that statloss and no insurance made the game balanced and thrilling.
I also agree that things needed to be added to the game... the gameplay before AOS had to be enhanced with new features, goals etc - just not changing the good balanced mechanics that was all ready in game.

Stat loss and no insurance is little good with Tramel still existing.

 

[Berethrain]

Eh, really anyone who would want a classic shard should be satifisfied if they'd simply tweak Siege a little.

 

[the 4th man]

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.
__________________
Sounds like a lazy mans motto. But, I agree with some of what you have to say here.

Seige......you give people player versus player and what happens?? They complain. This takes too long, this cost too much, yadda, yadda, yadda......hey, don't buy the junk and put the vendor out of business. If your population is that small, have all 12 of you get together and go on strike.

Classic, it failed. I say it over and over. If they didn't bring in Trammel, UO, would have eventually sank.... Again, a dozen players cannot speak for thousands. You can try, but it won't mean jack.

Hawks right, when all you have is a bunch of coniving morons screwing up someones time they have to play UO, your classic shard will another Seige......then there will be a jillion posts on how to bring players to join the 12 who wanted it in the 1st place.

Then, we'll get the name calling, adults acting worse than their kids,because others don't want to be victimized on same "throwback" shard.....Am I seeing middle life crisis here or what??

That's it, a mid-life crisis shard

much later.

 

[Berethrain]

Classic, it failed. I say it over and over. If they didn't bring in Trammel, UO, would have eventually sank.... Again, a dozen players cannot speak for thousands. You can try, but it won't mean jack.

Well in terms of the economy of siege, it would be less since you can only have one char and since it is siege its most likely to more pvp skills than anything. So unless you have multiple accounts it's not likely to have a crafter or other char that would stimulate it.

 

[Lord Chaos]

The feeling of danger and thrill due to the fact that you could loose your gear at any time.

*your connection is lost*

log in

OooOo ooOoOo

Oh, that was so much thrill and excitement. *Rollseyes*

 

[Daelomin]

Eh, really anyone who would want a classic shard should be satifisfied if they'd simply tweak Siege a little.

Siege is not an option for european player like myself... if an European Siege was created I would try it...

 

[Chad Sexington]

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.

Of course you dont want to work to achieve anything. You, like all mainstream gamers, want instant gratification as you are led from one theme park attraction to another with little or not effort.

It seems to me that you just want a system where you are in total control of everyone and everything that happens to you and you dont have to work for anything. I believe there is such a "GAME" out there, its called World of Warcraft.

The people who want classic servers dont want a GAME, we want a WORLD, and in the world, things are unpredictable and out of your control. The only thing you have providence over is where youre going. What happens when you get there is up to fate. And THAT is the greatest challenge of all.

I think you misunderstand.

He was saying he didn't want the game to feel like a chore. He was pointing out the flaw in grinding as part of game design, nothing more.

 

[HaHa]

Siege is not an option for european player like myself... if an European Siege was created I would try it...

What about the players we have from England, Sweden, and Netherlands? They are do/have done quite well on the shard.

 

[Daelomin]

What about the players we have from England, Sweden, and Netherlands? They are do/have done quite well on the shard.

Where do you think most of them will play if a Europe Siege shard was created...? Off course some europeans play siege - as there is no alternative here...

 

[Kiminality]

And you already have what you want on your AOS servers. Since you have what you want, stop bashing classic servers. You dont have to play them, so you can stick with your easy mode gaming.

I sure people will lay off bashing the classic ideals when you guys stop bashing current UO.
So, basically, never going to happen.

Seige was a mistake, plain and simple.

We could say the same about the idea of a classic shard - alternate ruleset to appeal to a niche, with the added detail that "classic" UO got phased out, which is an honour Siege hasn't had, so... Y'know
But, then you'd take a dive and cry "troll"

Well, first of all, I have to say, Im offended by this paragraph. I wasnt a criminal, nor a PK, and I was no sheep and I was sure as hell no ones prey. That is a slap in the face to every player who wanst a red. You clearly have no respect for the old days or those who played them.

You can be offended all you want, but the wolf/sheep analogy is a long-standing one, supported (if not established) by Raph Koster.

Second, there were ways to prevent yourself from being killed. It wasnt as soon as a red showed up everyone in the area died. Some people would fight back, others would travel in groups, some would recall, and others would hide and evade their attackers. You speak of a game that makes you rely on your own cunning and wit, yet you slander the old days which did just that. The system was intelligent back then, however, the random variables brought in with open PvP meant that you could plan your adventure to your hearts content, but there was always the chance of someone showing up and attacking you.

Yes, there were ways to prevent yourself getting killed, if you had an interest in PvP competition. This is what you seem to fail to grasp - a significant portion of the playerbase wanted to be able to play the somewhat unique game without other players effectively having access to an "off switch" to their enjoyment.
If it's something you enjoyed, it's easy to not see the other sides of it, but they were there.

Thirdly, mass-murdering? How dare you slander the old days like that. Let me tell you something, there were more people hunting and killing reds than anything else. We just didnt stand around and LET those SOB's kill us. We fought back! When a red crossed my path, I fought tooth and nail. Sometimes I won, sometimes I lost, and same went for A LOT of other players.

Again, you enjoyed PvP.
You argue against an aspect of the game you have had no experience of - being force into a playstyle you varyingly dislike. Although, in a way, you could liken it to having to play your much-despised AoS rules.

But to say it was mass-muder makes it sound like people were completely powerless and just stood around like scared little children. And that, that is an unexcuseble insult. The only people who even DARE to say it was mass-murder back then are the spinless cowards who couldnt handle getting killed or the spiteful little creatons who got their mouthes hacked off when they couldnt back up their trash talk.

I have nothing flattering to say in regards to that, but I wanted to quote it anyway.

Tch, if you did play back then, Im more than willing to bet you were one of the whiners.

Ah, screw it... I'm bored of saying the same things in response to carbon-copy arguments.
You're just going to ignore the inconvenient logic, then probably try and insult me.
In anticipation of that, I'll reply now: How dare you!

 

[Berethrain]

Siege is not an option for european player like myself... if an European Siege was created I would try it...

Why? Connection? What about Mugen or w/e its called?

 

[Voodoo990]

Totally agree with Kiminality

Closed beta testing is when I started playing this game and quit after about two years due to all the griefing, thieves at vesper bank, people griefing you as you recall back to your house, and lets not forget all the house break-in exploits, those were a fun. I don't get this "things were better in the good old days" they kind of sucked for me, the game IMHO (with all the current flaws) is much better today then 8 years ago.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Here are a few points for people like Hawkeye Pike that hasn't bothered to read all of the Classic Shard thread, or have failed to understand what most of us are asking for:

- We are asking for a Fel only (original) ruleset.

- We are asking for mechanisms to be incorporated into the shard to curb rampant PKing.

- We are not asking for Siege. Siege has AoS.

- We are asking for a non-AoS shard.

- We are NOT asking for anyone that doesn't want to play on a Classic Shard to be forced to do so...nor are we asking for any current shards to be changed at all.

There are a large number of current UO players that believe that it had to be one way or the other...either a Tram/Fel split, or 100% wide open no consequnece PvP.

That is simply not true. At the time the split occured, the dev team at the time had numerous ideas that would have possibly curbed random PKing to a point that it would have simply been a rarity. Those ideas were never tried. Instead, the devs took the quick and easy way out with Trammel.

What most of us Classic Shard'ers want, is a chance to see what the OTHER path would have yielded, because we have seen what the path UO went down yielded, and we do not care for it.

 

[Der Rock]

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.
__________________
Sounds like a lazy mans motto. But, I agree with some of what you have to say here.

Seige......you give people player versus player and what happens?? They complain. This takes too long, this cost too much, yadda, yadda, yadda......hey, don't buy the junk and put the vendor out of business. If your population is that small, have all 12 of you get together and go on strike.

Classic, it failed. I say it over and over. If they didn't bring in Trammel, UO, would have eventually sank.... Again, a dozen players cannot speak for thousands. You can try, but it won't mean jack.

Hawks right, when all you have is a bunch of coniving morons screwing up someones time they have to play UO, your classic shard will another Seige......then there will be a jillion posts on how to bring players to join the 12 who wanted it in the 1st place.

Then, we'll get the name calling, adults acting worse than their kids,because others don't want to be victimized on same "throwback" shard.....Am I seeing middle life crisis here or what??

That's it, a mid-life crisis shard

much later.

you are so damn right.....
all know this, and still this "classic..clasic ..more drama " crap

 

[Der Rock]

Here are a few points for people like Hawkeye Pike that hasn't bothered to read all of the Classic Shard thread, or have failed to understand what most of us are asking for:

- We are asking for a Fel only (original) ruleset.

- We are asking for mechanisms to be incorporated into the shard to curb rampant PKing.

- We are not asking for Siege. Siege has AoS.

- We are asking for a non-AoS shard.

- We are NOT asking for anyone that doesn't want to play on a Classic Shard to be forced to do so...nor are we asking for any current shards to be changed at all.

There are a large number of current UO players that believe that it had to be one way or the other...either a Tram/Fel split, or 100% wide open no consequnece PvP.

That is simply not true. At the time the split occured, the dev team at the time had numerous ideas that would have possibly curbed random PKing to a point that it would have simply been a rarity. Those ideas were never tried. Instead, the devs took the quick and easy way out with Trammel.

What most of us Classic Shard'ers want, is a chance to see what the OTHER path would have yielded, because we have seen what the path UO went down yielded, and we do not care for it.

all this "classic" begging all the years handicaped uo to be the lead mmo today...
"classics" hurt the game !!!!!!!!!!!!

why dont play all those "classics" not one of those other successfull "classic" games outthere??
a game where all things exist what those 1000 000 classics like ????????

 

[CroakerTnT]

Today, while farming in the abyss (on siege), I was jumped by one of our faction enemies. He almost killed me (I'm a disco tamer), but I got my dragon onto him which distracted him long enough for me to run. I got away by flying over the lava pits (he wasn't a bat) and then gating out asap.

I was hot! But I was also excited. My heart was pounding like I'd had 10 cups of coffee more than my already astronomical tolerance limit. I haven't had that much danger/excitement in a very long time.

That excitement/danger/risk is what I enjoy and is why I prefer to play in fel or siege. You simply can't get that in trammel. No monster generates sufficient risk, and at worst, you have to rez a few times to get your stuff back - that which is uninsured, that is.

That said, I can see why some people don't want that. That's what trammel is for.

I also don't support a classic shard, because that would remove too many of the cool additions.

My $0.02.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

all this "classic" begging all the years handicaped uo to be the lead mmo today...
"classics" hurt the game !!!!!!!!!!!!

why dont play all those "classics" not one of those other successfull "classic" games outthere??
a game where all things exist what those 1000 000 classics like ????????

Can you repeat that in English please?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I also don't support a classic shard, because that would remove too many of the cool additions.

My $0.02.

Remove "cool additions" from what?

No one would be asking you to give up any "cool additions"...your shard would be exactly like it is now.

So what is your complaint again?

 

[Babble]

Custom housing is a good addition.
Some balanced weapon specials could also be kept.

Enhancements in cooking, plants, crafting could also be kept.
Is why a T2a shard is not so easy to nail down and even more difficult how future development of such a shard would/should go.

For statloss for reds why not use a staggared system.
5 killings 10% statloss on death (short or longtime counts to be decided)
10 killings 20% statloss on death
and so on...but not lower than 50 skillpoints a skill

 

[Daelomin]

Siege is not an option for european player like myself... if an European Siege was created I would try it...

Why? Connection? What about Mugen or w/e its called?

Try PvP on the Europe shard and you will know...

In Europe with a good ISP you may quite easily get down to 10-20 ms ping towards Europe server... Perhaps 120 ms is achievable towards any server in the US. Saying ping or jitter does not matter much is just ignorant...

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

For statloss for reds why not use a staggared system.
5 killings 10% statloss on death (short or longtime counts to be decided)
10 killings 20% statloss on death
and so on...but not lower than 50 skillpoints a skill

I think for most of us, the idea is to start with the system not being quite that harsh, and then adding in harsher penalties as necessary. This was the primary failing of the devs back when UO:R was being considered.

Instead of trying something like you mention here, they just said 'oh well, what we have now is not working...so just shut it off'. That's the same thing as if I went to the hospital with pain in my right leg, and they tried giving me antibotics...once that didn't work...they sawed off my leg!! Why not check to see if a bone is fractured? There are so many things that could be wrong...but instead of testing and trying treatments...amputation!

Imagine if everything worked the way the devs treated the PK problem in UO:

My car won't start...try jumping the battery...no go, car is towed to the junkyard.

I am cooking a meal...try the meal, needs something...I add salt...still not right...meal goes into the trash.

Sports team doesn't win their first game of the season...one person is changed in the lineup...don't win their second game...franchise is closed down.

See what I mean?

 

[Tanivar]

I think for most of us, the idea is to start with the system not being quite that harsh, and then adding in harsher penalties as necessary. This was the primary failing of the devs back when UO:R was being considered.

Instead of trying something like you mention here, they just said 'oh well, what we have now is not working...so just shut it off'. That's the same thing as if I went to the hospital with pain in my right leg, and they tried giving me antibotics...once that didn't work...they sawed off my leg!! Why not check to see if a bone is fractured? There are so many things that could be wrong...but instead of testing and trying treatments...amputation!

Imagine if everything worked the way the devs treated the PK problem in UO:

My car won't start...try jumping the battery...no go, car is towed to the junkyard.

I am cooking a meal...try the meal, needs something...I add salt...still not right...meal goes into the trash.

Sports team doesn't win their first game of the season...one person is changed in the lineup...don't win their second game...franchise is closed down.

See what I mean?

The thing was, Uo was losing paying customers due to the PKing in their game. They needed a quick sure fix to the problem to avoid losing more monthly fees. Taking months to try things, things that 'might' work, would have risked losing so many game accounts that the game was no longer profitable and would have to be writen off as a bad investment and shut down.

Trying a Classic Shard now wouldn't be nearly as bad a situation. A bad PK problem would just send most players back to their normal shard. A few might quit for a while but would probably wander back eventually. EA's bottom line wouldn't be hurt the way it was back when there was no aternative but leaving the game for another companies game.

Unless there is a way to restrain PKing to the point non-PKers can have fun on the Classic Shard, making a Classic Shard would be a waste of time. The PKers will just drive out the non-PKers, then leave themselves, as they did 10 years ago, because there are no prey to get their jollies with.

 

[Raconteur]

your connection is lost*

log in

OooOo ooOoOo

Oh, that was so much thrill and excitement. *Rollseyes*

This....

So true!

 

[Bc-]

Siege was far from a mistake, and anyone who thinks that never played it in the beginning. I was there for SP Test, I was there after the wipe to start back up again.

I played SP for years and had an absolute blast there. It attracted so many different types of players, from tamers to PKs to antis to role players, it was amazing. SP had such a great community during its pinnacle.

For anyone who wants a history lesson of SP and why it was so awesome, go read Glendor of BLD's picture page. He kept track of the main story line of SP from its inception. From the formation of many guilds, to some PK guilds renouncing their ways, guilds that controlled what dungeons, the formation of the Pink Alliance.. incredible stuff to experience and I am so glad I was a part of it.

http://www.pusateri.org/blood/pictures.htm

This is one story in particular that I think is great, it is right after the Pink Alliance formed out of various anti and re formed PK guilds to do battle with the two major PK forces on the server. A three way battle that lasted all night and had us all over the shard.

http://www.pusateri.org/blood/pictures/tak1.html


I would love to see that same community again on a Classic Shard, and I know a lot of people think the COOLD DOOOOODS are coming out for this shard, and they will I am sure. But I think you will be surprised at the level of maturity this shard will generate, just like SP did.

 

[Megilhir]

And you already have what you want on your AOS servers. Since you have what you want, stop bashing classic servers. You dont have to play them, so you can stick with your easy mode gaming.

Seige was a mistake, plain and simple.

Well, first of all, I have to say, Im offended by this paragraph. I wasnt a criminal, nor a PK, and I was no sheep and I was sure as hell no ones prey. That is a slap in the face to every player who wanst a red. You clearly have no respect for the old days or those who played them.

Second, there were ways to prevent yourself from being killed. It wasnt as soon as a red showed up everyone in the area died. Some people would fight back, others would travel in groups, some would recall, and others would hide and evade their attackers. You speak of a game that makes you rely on your own cunning and wit, yet you slander the old days which did just that. The system was intelligent back then, however, the random variables brought in with open PvP meant that you could plan your adventure to your hearts content, but there was always the chance of someone showing up and attacking you.

Thirdly, mass-murdering? How dare you slander the old days like that. Let me tell you something, there were more people hunting and killing reds than anything else. We just didnt stand around and LET those SOB's kill us. We fought back! When a red crossed my path, I fought tooth and nail. Sometimes I won, sometimes I lost, and same went for A LOT of other players.

But to say it was mass-muder makes it sound like people were completely powerless and just stood around like scared little children. And that, that is an unexcuseble insult. The only people who even DARE to say it was mass-murder back then are the spinless cowards who couldnt handle getting killed or the spiteful little creatons who got their mouthes hacked off when they couldnt back up their trash talk.

Fourthly, all wolves? Only criminals liked the old system? Again more insults and slander. I for one am sick of seeing propaganda like this from people who have no idea how the game play was back then. If things were so bad, how come I and thousands of other players were able to GM out multiple characters across multiple servers, make decent sums of gold, and get houses? We certainly werent all reds. So how did we do it? hmmmm....gee.... I guess its because things werent all that bad. I guess we learned how to play the game and didnt go running to a GM every time we got killed or cried on the forums.

And, no, it wasnt most players who felt victimized or frustrated, it was a small select few who got a bug up their butt when they got PK'd. People like that are the ones you see today on games like Modern Warfare screaming into their head set every time they get head shoted. The vast majority of players back then were okay with the system. They learned how to stay alive and how to thrive.

Tch, if you did play back then, Im more than willing to bet you were one of the whiners.

Of course you dont want to work to achieve anything. You, like all mainstream gamers, want instant gratification as you are led from one theme park attraction to another with little or not effort.

It seems to me that you just want a system where you are in total control of everyone and everything that happens to you and you dont have to work for anything. I believe there is such a "GAME" out there, its called World of Warcraft.

The people who want classic servers dont want a GAME, we want a WORLD, and in the world, things are unpredictable and out of your control. The only thing you have providence over is where youre going. What happens when you get there is up to fate. And THAT is the greatest challenge of all.

You are rude and incorrect.

I do not often agree with Pike, in fact I more often than not DISAGREE with him.

On this one however I concur.

Your ad hominen attacks are a poor attempt at deflection of the real issues. UO kinda sucked in a lot of ways in the "Good old days". Seriously, if a tiny minority of people are all about resetting to PRE-XXX (Time Frame) Rule set why should UO listen?

I, for one like, Trammel. I despise griefing and herd ganking. While I agree there were PKs who were excellent Roleplayers the more common occurance was...

"Mine...mine...mine..."
--Enter x number of reds--
"Corp Por - Corp Por - Corp por"
Loot - **** - spit - LOL - ROFL- Gank....

Fun game huh?

Don't try to BS someone who has been there since 1998.

I have seen the changes, Good- Bad- WTH?

UO needs to revert some aspects and move away from the Gear heavy environment, this I agree. But repercussion free gank-a-saurousness is simply ignorant and will lose UO even more $$$.

As an aside, UO was for a long while the only MMO that let you craft your own path and not lock you into a template (well in theory). A new game has been released recently, Fallen Earth. It allows the same idea but is set in a post nuc exchange world of the future.

UO (or who ever owns the rights this month) needs to wake up and get some visionary people in there AND do what they envision.

And am I just such a visionary? You bet your bippy. But UO can't/won't match my salary so there you have it.

Anyway. Throttle back the personal attacks and your arguements will have more impact.

 

[Bc-]

I find it funny that someone who has an obvious greif quote in their sig would talk about the lameness of being ganked by PK's.

How it worked out in the old days is that if you were good at the game you got to be in a PK guild, if you sucked you were sheep and called yourself an anti.

Wolves ate the sheep, and now you have this terrabad game that is gear dependent.

What had a more healthy player base, current UO or T2A UO?

Case rested.

 

[SoulStealer A.O]

Siege wasn't a mistake. It was a hell of a lot of fun for us folks who enjoyed hardcore UO. Not sure what it has become but for the most of us who played when it was first released, it was a blast. It wasn't for everyone.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

How it worked out in the old days is that if you were good at the game you got to be in a PK guild, if you sucked you were sheep and called yourself an anti.

Unless you were PoV...then you pwned AoD in the Conscript War, and kicked CC out of Covetous on a weekly basis.

 

[Jhym]

The underlying problem Morgana, is not the idea itself.

It's the resources to MAKE the idea.

They don't have the resources to do this. They already have issues with Seige/Mugen when they do new content/patches, can you IMAGINE how much trouble they'll have with a completely different ruleset?

The pancakes that goes on in the Seige forums when ANYTHING goes wrong is amazing. One would think they are personally paying for 99% of UO. Not to knock them completely, I understand where they're coming from, but I have to say if I was a developer/producer looking at our current setup with the shards, I would ABSOLUTELY NOT want another shard ruleset to have to support on the servers.

I can fully understand everyone wanting to have some magical wonderland that gives them everything they want -- but it can't happen through testing shards (who wants to spend months building characters to then lose the whole mess because that ruleset didn't work?)

So, if I were to say anything about the idea, I'd say why not concentrate on adjusting the Felucca ruleset to make it what you supposedly want?

If you want it to be a "classic" pre-trammel ruleset, fine, explain what that is in the current rules and what would be required to change to make it that way for Felucca.

Arguing for multiple rulesets means wasted developer time on multiple code bases, lots of effort and resources for arguably little return on their part.

Cost effectiveness -- 0. Thus, it can't happen as a separate ruleset. As a consequence, building out the current Felucca rulesets is your only path realistically.

If some don't like the AoS based stuff, then argue that Felucca ruleset should mask all of the item properties as soon as you enter the facet. If some don't like how pvp is going now, argue for improved stat-loss and skill adjustments to make it worth your while to fight and back end help for anti's. If some just don't like the trammel rulesets because all the sheep never come to Felucca, well, guess you're out of luck there.


I just don't like the continued argument that adding such a server will just magically make everyone so happy and rainbows and puppies will rain upon the developers.

Now if ALL of the people arguing for such a thing were to step up and say 100% that they would BUY a token to use such a shard (say 29.95?) then go for it. Let's see if that covers their startup costs and ongoing development, I suspect it won't.

 

[tenduil]

So it sounds like is that current EA players are scared of losing Dev time to another shard?
It seems like it all boils down to that.

Stop trying to convince others that Siege or current system is just as good. It won't work. Classic shard players are not in all the current threads bashing anything but rather talking in the CLASSIC thread about the ways to create a classic shard.

A classic shard would require little updates, fixes, work from the Dev team once it was put up. Residual income from the classic players though would go into the same income pool as the rest of the servers and in the end help everyone. Is this so hard to figure out?

If yes then ok. Just from now on when you post about a Classic shard please preface your post with: "My true concern is developer time and money when it comes to adding a new shard"

 

[Coldren]

I suppose I'll throw my hat into the ring..

As stated before, the request for a Classic Shard is about more than just FFA PvP - It's about reverting to an entire era, pre-Aos. A simpler time, with simpler rules, and a higher density. I would imagine that every land after the Second Age lands would be removed, including Ish, Malas, and the Abyss, and in such conditions and a smaller land mass, player density would undoubtedly increase. When players bump into each other, it makes it feel more like a world. You can go for incredible lengths of time now and never see another soul in UO, unless you go to very specific hubs such as Luna or New Haven. This makes the world feel empty and lifeless.

Second, in regards to FFA PvP - I was never a wolf. More often than not, I was a sheep, because I'm just not very good at PvP. I tried to fight back, and sometimes I got lucky. But for the most part, I play a crafter archtype. I mine, I lumberjack, I fish.. The story Richard Garriott loved to regal about the Warrior who tries to give weapons and armor to a Fisherman? I'd be the Fisherman, not the Warrior. I got killed by reds in the exact same horrific manner that has been previously stated in this thread - Repeatedly, and I have to agree with Longest Journey, it was because usually I wasn't being smart about it. No one is denying that for many, this was not enjoyable experience. I lost a lot, both in time and resources.

But for some of us, those of us for whom overcoming the PK's, knowing you outwitted them and made your mining run, killed your monsters and collected your gold, or raised your skill - There was a very DEEP and very gratifying sense of accomplishment. You weren't outsmarting NPC's with the right skills and a specific set of repeatable tactics - You were outsmarting people who didn't care what you were trying to do or not do. You knew things were bad out there, but you overcame it. This sense of accomplishment, especially when shared with others such as guild members or random strangers who helped you, was a bonding one that helped those of us who were not socially inept form social relations that have lasted even to this day.

In today's UO, this feeling or sense of accomplishment for most of us who were around in the old days simply isn't there. I have very recently reached GM status with Spellweaving, Spirit Speak, Necromancy, Carpentry, and Tinkering.. Note, not 120, as I'm not rich enough for the scrolls where applicable.. But with every single "ding" of 100, the feeling was exactly the same - Meh. What should I do next? But back in 1999, when I reached GM Blacksmithing, Swords, Tactics, Healing, and Archery... Each and every time, I was on cloud nine - You could have pulled me off the ceiling with a rake. I was invincible. I could fight dragons in a very difficult and challenging solo fight (No Vanq weapons here.. Force was my normal), or much easier with a partner. If I could accomplish a dragon kill a day it was something to look forward to, because it was a fight, and it was something that back then, few could do, ESPECIALLY without Magery. That sense of accomplishment and empowering has long since left UO for most of us.. But then again, there are exceptions, I'm sure.. I haven't soloed a Dark Father or Parax as I've seen in the Youtube videos, so I guess maybe that might be something worthwhile. Maybe I'll work towards that..

Third, Siege shouldn't even be included. There is such a vast difference between Siege and a classic shard, it's astounding that these two terms were even uttered in the same breath.

Finally, Dev Team resources. This is an understandable concern. They can barely pump content out for Prodo shards, and the new EC is sorely neglected. I would however argue, that might not be as bad an issue as many may think. The whole point of the classic shard is to REVERT, not to ADVANCE the game on one server. Pick your era, criteria, throw up the server, and leave it alone. If you see that more people are going to this server over a long period of time than to Prod or Siege shards, then you have a reason to put more resources into that system to make changes.. If it doesn't prove to fare any better than any other shard, well.. Just leave it alone. Those who wanted their classic shard will have gotten exactly what they want, no more resources will be wasted (And I, as a DBA and software developer have a VERY big concern about a company that doesn't keep backups of each major revision to a system.. Which would make this little more difficult than a system restore..), the debate will finally be settled, and UO can move on.

I see no downside for the request for a classic shard from any objective standpoint. But that may be just me.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

The underlying problem Morgana, is not the idea itself.

It's the resources to MAKE the idea.

They don't have the resources to do this. They already have issues with Seige/Mugen when they do new content/patches, can you IMAGINE how much trouble they'll have with a completely different ruleset?

The pancakes that goes on in the Seige forums when ANYTHING goes wrong is amazing. One would think they are personally paying for 99% of UO. Not to knock them completely, I understand where they're coming from, but I have to say if I was a developer/producer looking at our current setup with the shards, I would ABSOLUTELY NOT want another shard ruleset to have to support on the servers.

I can fully understand everyone wanting to have some magical wonderland that gives them everything they want -- but it can't happen through testing shards (who wants to spend months building characters to then lose the whole mess because that ruleset didn't work?)

So, if I were to say anything about the idea, I'd say why not concentrate on adjusting the Felucca ruleset to make it what you supposedly want?

If you want it to be a "classic" pre-trammel ruleset, fine, explain what that is in the current rules and what would be required to change to make it that way for Felucca.

Arguing for multiple rulesets means wasted developer time on multiple code bases, lots of effort and resources for arguably little return on their part.

Cost effectiveness -- 0. Thus, it can't happen as a separate ruleset. As a consequence, building out the current Felucca rulesets is your only path realistically.

If some don't like the AoS based stuff, then argue that Felucca ruleset should mask all of the item properties as soon as you enter the facet. If some don't like how pvp is going now, argue for improved stat-loss and skill adjustments to make it worth your while to fight and back end help for anti's. If some just don't like the trammel rulesets because all the sheep never come to Felucca, well, guess you're out of luck there.


I just don't like the continued argument that adding such a server will just magically make everyone so happy and rainbows and puppies will rain upon the developers.

Now if ALL of the people arguing for such a thing were to step up and say 100% that they would BUY a token to use such a shard (say 29.95?) then go for it. Let's see if that covers their startup costs and ongoing development, I suspect it won't.

I have pretty much retired from this debate...and I have said all of this at least a hundred times now...so much so that I am sure everyone is tired of hearing me say it. But...one last time:

- Siege is a totally different ruleset than either Classic or Modern UO. It is not the same, never will be.

- Fel/Tram is only really half of the issue for me. AoS is just as much of a problem. So you can't just "adjust" the Fel ruleset to solve the issue. Besides, it is the very nature of a split world that makes most us unhappy...so if we were going to "adjust" a ruleset...it would have to be to remove Trammel entirely. That's not going to fly, so why even bother suggesting it?

And you can take the rest of your condescending remarks and stick 'em up your neon clad behind. rolleyes:

 

[SoulStealer A.O]

It's becomming quite clear to me most of the people posting on the way PKing was and Siege probably never played either. I wasn't a PK, I never had any real problems with them on Atlantic, Napa or Chessy.

Also for those who did play and 10 years later if you cant figure out that when you see red names, teleport, cast wall of stone behind you and recall, then it's a little more then the idea of a classic rulset that is your problem and the idea shouldn't suffer because you don't know how to escape a gank ;p

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It's becomming quite clear to me most of the people posting on the way PKing was and Siege probably never played either. I wasn't a PK, I never had any real problems with them on Atlantic, Napa or Chessy.

Also for those who did play and 10 years later if you cant figure out that when you see red names, teleport, cast wall of stone behind you and recall, then it's a little more then the idea of a classic rulset shouldn't suffer because you don't know how to escape a gank ;p

I think you are wasting your breath SoulStealer A.O

You will never convince nor convert the current UO player-base. They want risk-free game play...and if you incorporate anything like open PvP back into the game, even on a shard they won't even play, they will complain and threaten to quit...just like the first time.

If there will ever be a Classic Shard, it will be in spite of the AoS/Trammel fans...it will not include them. That is why they are against it so vehemently. If it exists, it is threat to them...and that equates to risk...which we know they will never accept.

 

[SoulStealer A.O]

You're probably right. Hopefully it all works out and EA lets us have some fun and takes the risk of putting up the shard. They can always merge shards if people find a lot of the current playerbase wants to play a classic server too. If they don't I'm sure Azaroth will do another one and revive it for a year or two with a solid playerbase.

The beauty about UO is that it was once a true sandbox game and not item based with all these restrictions.

 

[Dakkon Blackblade]

UO has gone in a sad direction for a long time, it has basically been a joke because it is being outdone by other games that it has tried to follow, almost painful to watch at times actually.

It's like someone made a parody of wow and scaled the graphics back to the 90s and was all like LOLOLOLOLOLOL imagine if our game was like this !!!111!!111!

The one thing UO had going for it was it's dynamic social interaction, it's been gone for a long time, so it basically has nothing unique left to offer, you can say the character building but don't worry that will be taken care of in time, you watch it will end up just like all those other games, you will get slapped into a template and maybe the game will even auto pick your skills for you so you don't have to worry about "speccing wrong"

Then again I'm probably an idiot and we should just continue with a new 2.5 enchanced, redrawn, easy to use, intuitive magic super client, (which basically means we added a hotbar and crappy WORSE art than the 2D client). "Wait until those guys at blizzard see what we have cooked up for them mwahahahahaha!"

 

[Mitzlplik_SP]

Basically: A system where I don't have to "work" in order to succeed, where success depends on my own cleverness and knowledge, and less on items and safe zones.

LOL, the name of that mythical place you want is TRAM. Stay there and forget the rest exists. Seriously popps.