Classic shard.

[Kotu Farland]

Just here to say again that the opinion of current subscribers should be pretty much ignored by EA.

This is a very good point.


The current subscriber base has been playing a trammelised abomination for 7 years +.


Anyone who would play UO for any length of time after AOS obviously has no interest in Risk vs Reward or any features of PRE-AOS UO.

Notice how the posters in this thread already want to customize a classic shard before it has even been created?
The whole point of a classic shard is no ridiculous customizations.


The only option for a classic shard is to take a day in time and use the exact code in place at that time.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

Ray_, your incompetent attempts at trolling are laughable at best. Why would their opinion not matter? What about current subscribers who want to return to the much more simpler time of t2a? What about the current subscribers who never experienced it on an EA server but have played free shards and know what they would change on a t2a server? By the tone of your posts you seem to be either a ganker who wants very little punishment for your profit generating activities....or you are a current subscriber who is scared of the thought of a classic server destroying your precious AoS style game-play. Either way you are doing more harm to the idea of a classic server than good with your imperious holier than thou statements.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I think the penalty's for PKing suggested within this thread are good, but looking at the points Antonio and Kavian are trying to make I wonder if just having stat loss would be enough? We all know what we'll be getting into and most of us have the experience to deal with it effectively.

I am back and forth on this myself. I feel that because of how things went the first time, that they will go that way again.

But I do understand this point. I started PoV in 1997 as an Anti-PK guild, so I was technically only ever truly "pk'ed" for about a month. The rest of the time, it was as you said...consensual PvP.

On a Classic Shard, I think by it's very nature, everyone would be consenting to PvP just by logging on to it.

That alone might be the death of it. It might also be exactly what it needs to make sure that PvP ALWAYS remains a part of it.

It's very hard to say because we saw how it went down in 2000...but then again, things have changed a great deal since then.


Odd...I think Ahu tried to tell us that on like page 3 or 4 ??

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I seem to notice Morgana doesn't want to reply to my post.

Why ask me to clarify my position if you have no interest in replying? rolleyes:

I replied to your post in another reply to someone else. Once again, I doubt you read it.

Yet I see you came along and dropped another general, sweeping insult...and now you will claim that you "didn't mean me" again...right?

Believe it or not...I am on your side. We want pretty much the same things. If you would actually read what I am typing, and try to understand the things I am saying instead of just broadly attacking everyone...you might get that.

 

[Cetric]

I am back and forth on this myself. I feel that because of how things went the first time, that they will go that way again.

But I do understand this point. I started PoV in 1997 as an Anti-PK guild, so I was technically only ever truly "pk'ed" for about a month. The rest of the time, it was as you said...consensual PvP.

On a Classic Shard, I think by it's very nature, everyone would be consenting to PvP just by logging on to it.

That alone might be the death of it. It might also be exactly what it needs to make sure that PvP ALWAYS remains a part of it.

It's very hard to say because we saw how it went down in 2000...but then again, things have changed a great deal since then.


Odd...I think Ahu tried to tell us that on like page 3 or 4 ??

True, everyone might be too "trammelified" for the shard to work as well as many want it to =(

 

[Kotu Farland]

Why would their opinion not matter?

For one, Any Players opinion should not matter.

A classic shard would need to be a specific point in time with no additional customization.


Two, Current players willfull pay to play a bastardised version of the game resembling nothing close to a classic shard.

Their opinions are biased towards the elements that ruined UO to begin with.

 

[Kotu Farland]

I replied to your post in another reply to someone else.

Your flat out lying.

Quote the post you made replying to mine.

I have read every post you made after I had made mine and I see no mention of my post at all.


You are lying.

 

[Kotu Farland]

I am on your side. We want pretty much the same things.

Not true in the slightest.

You want a customized sever with your own ideas and some classic elements.

I want an actual classic shard like we all played PRE-AOS be it UOR or T2A.

Your silly ideas of "Exile" and denial of statloss as a meaningful penalty show you clearly are not interested in an accurate classic server.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Anyone who would play UO for any length of time after AOS obviously has no interest in Risk vs Reward or any features of PRE-AOS UO.

This kind of statement is general, sweeping attack...and I take offense to it.

The only option for a classic shard is to take a day in time and use the exact code in place at that time.

Had you read the early parts of the thread, you would understand that the devs are claiming that the code is gone...so what you are asking for is impossible.

The best they can do is re-engineer the code to be as close as possible to the era...or to a single publish.

We also have been down that road as well in this thread. As soon as anyone names a specific date, or publish, someone else brings up a bug fix or feature that came slightly after that and the person naming the publish has to admit that the bug fix or feature is necessary.

I appreciate the fact that you have very strong opinions on this matter. We all do. But you are coming in to the discussion late, and it is an awful lot of material to go back and read...I understand that.

The point is, instead of coming in and leveling attacks and making arrogant comments at people here, perhaps it would be better to ask a few questions and try to understand what has already been said, what has already been discussed, and what has already be hashed out.

You seem to think that the rest of us here are all somehow your enemy. It is not so. If you want to find some real opposition to your ideas...go post the words Classic Shard in any post on the rest of UHall.

Then come back and you will understand that we are not against one another here, but in reality, we are all after the same things. We are just having a discussion about the thing we want...

...a Classis Shard.

 

[HD2300]

Just here to say again that the opinion of current subscribers should be pretty much ignored by EA.

EA wants old subscribers to return, not current ones to shift to a new shard. Old subscribers are the people that quit when Trammel and AOS came - mostly PvP/PK types. Look at freeshards. The biggest ones are invariably PvP/PK friendly. Their playerbase consists mostly of ex-subscribers. 2+2.

Sorry guys, but your opinions don't matter. You're already paying EA every month and if you've put up with these changes for this long, you'll probably keep paying.

Right now, my $10/month (or is it $15 now?) is more valuable than yours.

Valid in some respects.

However, from previous posts using numbers that others have quoted. 100,000 left before the trammel-fel split because of griefing. Of the 260,000 remaining at the trammel-fel split, 5-10% where PK/PvPers.

So which is larger? 20% of 26,000 PK/PvPers or 20% of the 334,000 non-PK/PvPers? Should EA listen to former PK/PvPers or former non-PK/PvPers?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Your flat out lying.

Quote the post you made replying to mine.

I have read every post you made after I had made mine and I see no mention of my post at all.


You are lying.

Dude...are you on something? Drunk maybe?

You do not have to choose Exile for your counts to come off...but you have to be in a dungeon...ANY dungeon. This prevents AKF macroing, UMing, or whatever you want to call it. This action (UMing) is against the rules anyway...even though it is not very well enforced (see this line Kotu Farland)

I even put YOUR NAME in the post.

Still want to claim you are reading everything??

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Not true in the slightest.

You want a customized sever with your own ideas and some classic elements.

I want an actual classic shard like we all played PRE-AOS be it UOR or T2A.

Which ones of these are "my ideas" and which ones are simply "classic elements"?

The Second Age era w/ necessary bug and glitch fixes
-Britannia and the Lost Lands
-Stat loss and long term murder counts for reds (stat loss on resurrection)
-T2A Item system (Vanq/Ruin magic weapons, Invul/hardening magic armor, magic wands staves, jewelery, boots, capes, etc.)
-T2A skill and stat caps (700.0 skill point pool, 225 stat point pool)
-T2A magic system
-Stat and skill controls (IE ability to set skills/stats to raise, lower and lock)
-Chaos and Order Guilds with proper fixes (lord/lady requisites removed)
-Guild Stones
-more Stackable items (IE Potions)
-**Crafting Upgrades (See below)
-T2A housing and rule sets
-Server Birth Rares

**Crafting upgrades are as follows:

-Tailors will be able to make bone armor as well as repair it along with leather armor

-Bow crafters will be able to repair bows

-Carpenters will be able to craft all staff weapons as well as clubs and repair them along with wooden shields

-potential addition of Ilshenar later on.


-No runic tools
-No BoDs
-No character transfers, to or from classic server(s)
-No ethereal mounts
-No power scrolls
-No AOS content, period
-No Trammel
-No Malas
-No Tokuno
-No Mondain's Legacy Content
-No Stygian Abyss Content
-No ELVES
-No Gargoyles
-No control slots for tamers or mages (still under discussion it will either be bonding with slots or unlimited slots)
-No repair contracts
-No bless deeds or blessed items
-No factions
-No custom housing


Also...you understand that UO:R is POST Trammel...right?

So let's be clear...you would be OK with Trammel...

...but not OK with a few extra penalties on PKs in a non-Trammel environment??

Is that right?

 

[Dakkon Blackblade]

I recall Cal saying somewhere when the possibility of a classic shard was brought up, that he and some members of the team had kicked some things around and established some core ideas, I would love to know those guys came up with even as just a starting point from a dev perspective.

I'm starting to wonder though if our at times passionate discussion has chased the devs away,then again last time I thought that,Cal dropped in like a ninja.

 

[Kotu Farland]

This kind of statement is general, sweeping attack...

Why would we listen to players who have willfully paid to play a game that in no way resembles classic UO?

Why not ask WOW players their opinion on a classic UO server?

Anyone who actually enjoyed the Risk vs Reward system of classic UO quit shortly after AOS. Anyone who stuck around for an extra SEVEN YEARS clearly has no interest in a true classic UO server.

Had you read the early parts of the thread, you would understand that the devs are claiming that the code is gone...so what you are asking for is impossible.

Thats not true. A freeshard as replicated an exact timeframe in T2A.

The dev team cannot complete a task an unpaid group of players accomplished with ease? Sounds like the dev team is too incompetent to even try to make a classic server let alone do it successfully.

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

Here's the problem with that:

History proves that won't work. PKs will do what they want to do.

And then you will end up with an entire shard that is like Fel. Empty except for a PvPers. The victims will leave, the PKs will leave again. And you will have a very lightly populated shard of nothing but PvPers.

What amazes me is that you stubbornly say the same thing over and over, without telling why i'm wrong. Don't talk about history because the environment in which the shard would be placed would be different, as i said. The Playerbase, THE CORE OF THE GAME is different.
IF you want to bring proposition, propose something FAISABLE.

- EXILING ( do you know how serious is the word EXILE) a player is not.
- Murderer counts going away in dungeon ARE NOT.

And, as someone before me said, no one wants a bastardized version of UO, they want THE T2A RULESET!
Players are now "prepared to that" , it was just too much ahead of time.
As i said people tried the "trammie" gameplay after the felucca gameplay and made a choice. some will stick with trammel, but some other will play THE OLD THING !!




are you guys contacting mythic through the site to make them on reading this topics/ considering the classic shard thing?
i did and i will do in the next day, we should begin to push the thing on

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

True, everyone might be too "trammelified" for the shard to work as well as many want it to =(

That is the flip side of the coin unfortunately.

On one hand...an all PvP, wide-open, few penalties for PK shard might do just fine...because the people that want to play on it understand what they are getting into.

On the other hand...a shard like that might just be a complete flop because no one wants to deal with the handful of PK throw backs that inhabit it, and there is nothing to offer anyone else.


It's a gamble.

 

[Ray_]

Ray_, your incompetent attempts at trolling are laughable at best. Why would their opinion not matter? What about current subscribers who want to return to the much more simpler time of t2a? What about the current subscribers who never experienced it on an EA server but have played free shards and know what they would change on a t2a server? By the tone of your posts you seem to be either a ganker who wants very little punishment for your profit generating activities....or you are a current subscriber who is scared of the thought of a classic server destroying your precious AoS style game-play. Either way you are doing more harm to the idea of a classic server than good with your imperious holier than thou statements.

They don't matter because EA is already getting their money. If they end up playing a classic shard, well...okay. It's a net loss for EA. EA needs former subscribers to play a classic shard much much much more than they need current subscribers.

EA should be sending out surveys and inviting former players to discuss the shard.

 

[Izzy MBC]

Anyone who stuck around for an extra SEVEN YEARS clearly has no interest in a true classic UO server.

I started not long before Trammel appeared, I'm still playing to date, yet I want a True Classic UO Server, or I'll settle for a variation thereof which leads to a more stable Server Population and overall better Community with higher moral. Either works for me.

I'm on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, and I want one.

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

Thats not true. A freeshard as replicated an exact timeframe in T2A.

They really did. And as i said, if THEY DID IT , why a proper team of DEV wouldn't do it properly ? It isn't a joke but i don't see it being so impossible after all

 

[Ray_]

Really? I hope for your sake that they don't ignore the opinions of people like me...because I pretty much want the same things you want...just with some minor changes.

So if they ignore me, that means...No Classic Shard?

Good plan. rolleyes:

Ignoring you doesn't mean doing the opposite of what you want.

 

[Coldren]

Why would we listen to players who have willfully paid to play a game that in no way resembles classic UO?

Because we are their paying customers now, putting food on their table, and didn't cut and run when Tram happened and you got beat down by real PK'ers and had no more sheep?

Why not ask WOW players their opinion on a classic UO server?

Because they used to play UO and they may want to get or keep their money?

Anyone who actually enjoyed the Risk vs Reward system of classic UO quit shortly after AOS. Anyone who stuck around for an extra SEVEN YEARS clearly has no interest in a true classic UO server.

I can't even respond to this without getting the thread locked..

Thats not true. A freeshard as replicated an exact timeframe in T2A.

Yours might be, but the vast, vast majority are NOT. I suggest you look a little more, because everyone one of them make "Changes". A shard that was an exact replica wouldn't ever need any upgrades or changes - Just a running box.

The dev team cannot complete a task an unpaid group of players accomplished with ease? Sounds like the dev team is too incompetent to even try to make a classic server let alone do it successfully.

You must not have a real job, or you'd realize how insipid that question is. And calling the Dev's incompetent doesn't persuade them to listen to true UO "Fans" like you, either.

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

They don't matter because EA is already getting their money. If they end up playing a classic shard, well...okay. It's a net loss for EA. EA needs former subscribers to play a classic shard much much much more than they need current subscribers.

EA should be sending out surveys and inviting former players to discuss the shard.

now that's a neat idea

 

[Dakkon Blackblade]

Why would we listen to players who have willfully paid to play a game that in no way resembles classic UO?

Why not ask WOW players their opinion on a classic UO server?

Anyone who actually enjoyed the Risk vs Reward system of classic UO quit shortly after AOS. Anyone who stuck around for an extra SEVEN YEARS clearly has no interest in a true classic UO server.

With respect Sir, where do you get off telling anyone else that their opinion doesn't matter? I kind of get the feeling that whose opinions matters is up to those guys, that you know, develop the game, call me crazy I know.

Also you can't say that people have no interest in classic UO just because they stuck around through the years, as there can still be parts of the game that old timers enjoy.

Thats not true. A freeshard as replicated an exact timeframe in T2A.

The dev team cannot complete a task an unpaid group of players accomplished with ease? Sounds like the dev team is too incompetent to even try to make a classic server let alone do it successfully.

You are way out of line, first you tell other people their opinions don't matter when you not in a position of authority like the rest of us, then you call the devs incompetent, I mean can we get some moderation in here seriously?

You don't know what the dev teams obstacles are, I believe it's been said they run things on different software than those who do emulation? Perhaps someone else more informed can pipe in on that.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Thats not true. A freeshard as replicated an exact timeframe in T2A.

The dev team cannot complete a task an unpaid group of players accomplished with ease? Sounds like the dev team is too incompetent to even try to make a classic server let alone do it successfully.

*sigh*

Again...we have been through this about 4-5 times now. Seriously...why don't you just read the thread?

Freeshards are not written on the same code as EA servers. They are not even similar. What you see in the client may look, play, and act exactly (or pretty close) like what you saw on EA shards back in the day. But the actual code is not even close to the same.

EA's shards are all writen in C++. They occupy multiple servers for each shard. The term 'server' when it comes to UO is a bit of a misnomer. Each shard is made up of several servers. That's why you have server boundaries.

None of the current UO shard emmulators out there have the ability to run across multi-server platforms. (at least the 2 most common ones...and definitely not the one used for the freeshard you are talking about).

These emmulators were reverse engineered from the client...and the one that runs the freeshard you are talking about is written in Microsoft's .Net framework, using C# scripts.

EA can't (actually, more likely WON'T) use these emulators to run their shards because (a) they probably don't have any .Net programers on staff (why would they?) and (b) they are not multi-server capable...and that's how the UO shards are set up.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

EA should be sending out surveys and inviting former players to discuss the shard.

This was suggested on what? Page 2 of the thread?


Did any of you new guys read anything before you jumped in?

I am not trying to be a b***h here...but don't you think someone already thought of that in the last 1600 posts or so?

 

[Ray_]

It's a good thing most businesses don't look at these things as one way streets, you can say they only care about new subscribers however what happens if you lose subscribers you already have? not good either huh? derp derp

Current subscribers are taken care of by the ongoing development of present-day UO.
Maybe it's a stretch, but I doubt many current subscribers would quit over the implementation of a classic shard.

Again you can't assume all the freesharders are pvp'ers and you cannot base a production shard on what x free shard, by the way I have seen some complaints on some of the more popular free shards about pks being an issue as well.

If they're not PvPers, then they're okay with playing in that ruleset, which makes them a target for EA as well. Point is that they LIKE those rulsets.

There will always be complainers. That why God created message boards.

Well just to be clear speaking only for me, they haven't been getting my 10 or whatever a month since ren came out,

Cool, then you are also a target for EA and your opinion should carry more weight than current subscribers.

you are also assuming that established players won't try the new shard, what's to stop them from inviting their friends who have maybe left the game to come back?

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm assuming that established players are content with the game as it is right now. I could be wrong, of course. If so, I'd ask why they've stuck around for the last...7? years since AOS.

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

something tells me you put me on ignore but i will answer this nonetheless . My point is that a team of Developers can pull this off, im sure of it

 

[Coldren]

This was suggested on what? Page 2 of the thread?


Did any of you new guys read anything before you jumped in?

I am not trying to be a b***h here...but don't you think someone already thought of that in the last 1600 posts or so?

No, no they didnt' Morgana.

Ray_ and Kotu are TRUE UO fans.. The ones that don't pay for the game, think anyone that currently or recently paid or plays should not have any say in what that want, and we're all idiots for continuing to play the game after AoS on anything but a freeshard...

rolleyes:

 

[Kotu Farland]

Because we are their paying customers now, putting food on their table

Id like you to name any timeframe post AOS where the subscriber population increased. Heres the answer, there is no such timeframe.

Why should we listen to a playerbase that is directly responsible for the decline of the game and have accomplished nothing but a reduction in subscriptions?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I think this thread has attracted a few trolls in disguise.

Something tells me that these low post count posters are more than they appear to be.

Petra, or any mod, if these posters are alt logins for others, could we see about getting them removed from the thread?

I am not saying that they all are...but it seems awfully strange that we have suddenly seen an influx of people making the exact same arguments that other posters made and were countered on earlier in the thread.

And most of them seem very angry for people that just learned about a topic...

 

[Ray_]

Valid in some respects.

However, from previous posts using numbers that others have quoted. 100,000 left before the trammel-fel split because of griefing. Of the 260,000 remaining at the trammel-fel split, 5-10% where PK/PvPers.

So which is larger? 20% of 26,000 PK/PvPers or 20% of the 334,000 non-PK/PvPers? Should EA listen to former PK/PvPers or former non-PK/PvPers?

Where are you getting those numbers? Can't really give an opinion until I know the sources.

 

[Kotu Farland]

Freeshards are not written on the same code as EA servers. They are not even similar.

What does this have to do with EA`s inability to recreate a point in time?

You said it yourself, Emulators and EA servers run on different code.

How did the free servers re-create en exact moment in time?

They used the mechanics of the era... not the code.

I think this thread has attracted a few trolls in disguise.

Ironic you say this when you clearly troll people without giving any thought to what a player said.

Why dont you bother to actually read the thread instead of posting meaningless replies?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

something tells me you put me on ignore but i will answer this nonetheless . My point is that a team of Developers can pull this off, im sure of it

1 - Never put anyone on ignore...that's like going to Trammel rolleyes:

2 - I agree, there is NO reason that the devs could not pull this off...

...but everyone that is new to the topic needs to know two important things:


- The devs claim that they no longer have the server code from back then, nor the server snapshots (the backups of the servers that were done periodically during game play).

- Emmulator code is not the same as EA shard code and can't be used for this project.


These are both things that were established early in the thread. I fully understand why you guys don't want to sit and read thousands of posts...but you have to understand that this is not a new issue, and some of these things have already been discussed.

I think I, and several others, need to have a little more patience with you guys because you were not in the thread when these things were discussed.

It would help if you guys would come off of the offensive long enough to realize that you are fighting the wrong people though.

 

[Dakkon Blackblade]

Current subscribers are taken care of by the ongoing development of present-day UO.
Maybe it's a stretch, but I doubt many current subscribers would quit over the implementation of a classic shard.

None of this means they don't get a say.

Cool, then you are also a target for EA and your opinion should carry more weight than current subscribers

No my opinion should carry more weight when I am actually contributing to the game, you have to undersand UO is a niche game, it cannot compete with newer games beyond that boundary. So every subscription counts I can almost guarantee you nobody is making huge projections on UO regardless of what they do with the game.

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm assuming that established players are content with the game as it is right now. I could be wrong, of course. If so, I'd ask why they've stuck around for the last...7? years since AOS.

Or maybe, just maybe they couldn't find what they wanted from any of the newer games that have come out since. Another possibility is their aging computers couldn't handle anything else.

Then again some people like the top down 2D client, and there aren't many of those floating around with the popularity of UO, which puts it in a niche that it has been taking advantage of for years.

See there can be many reasons why people would stay even if they didn't like everything in the game.

 

[HD2300]

Valid in some respects.

However, from previous posts using numbers that others have quoted. 100,000 left before the trammel-fel split because of griefing. Of the 260,000 remaining at the trammel-fel split, 5-10% where PK/PvPers.

So which is larger? 20% of 26,000 PK/PvPers or 20% of the 334,000 non-PK/PvPers? Should EA listen to former PK/PvPers or former non-PK/PvPers?

Where are you getting those numbers? Can't really give an opinion until I know the sources.

Like I said other people in this thread have quoted these numbers, and they have also provided sources.

 

[Ray_]

This was suggested on what? Page 2 of the thread?


Did any of you new guys read anything before you jumped in?

I am not trying to be a b***h here...but don't you think someone already thought of that in the last 1600 posts or so?

I'm sure someone did. I don't have time to read 1600 posts on message boards anymore

 

[Kotu Farland]

Id like to mention this one more time.

There should not be discussion on what mechanics should be in a particular timeframe.


The discussion should be on what timeframe people want to play on a classic server. The mechanics should be taken directly from a point in time in that era.


What has this thread turned into?

Silly custom ideas such as "exile" that have absolutely no place on a classic server.

 

[Ray_]

No, no they didnt' Morgana.

Ray_ and Kotu are TRUE UO fans.. The ones that don't pay for the game, think anyone that currently or recently paid or plays should not have any say in what that want, and we're all idiots for continuing to play the game after AoS on anything but a freeshard...

rolleyes:

I mean, you don't think EA is targeting former players for this proposed shard?

I didn't say anyone was an idiot, please don't put words in my mouth.

If you liked UO:R and AOS, that's awesome! That's your preference. Completely subjectively, I think the game was better in Dec '99 - but that's just my opinion! You might love the game as it right now, and that's perfectly fine with me. Doesn't make you an idiot, just means we have different tastes in online games.

 

[Ray_]

I think this thread has attracted a few trolls in disguise.

Something tells me that these low post count posters are more than they appear to be.

Petra, or any mod, if these posters are alt logins for others, could we see about getting them removed from the thread?

I am not saying that they all are...but it seems awfully strange that we have suddenly seen an influx of people making the exact same arguments that other posters made and were countered on earlier in the thread.

And most of them seem very angry for people that just learned about a topic...

Obviously you're referring partly to me in this post, so I'll respond about the alt login thing:
Yes, I have an alt login. Username is Ray. Haven't logged on in years. The email on file goes to an account I can't check anymore, so the lost password feature was unusable for me. Instead of trying to get an admin to reset it or something (if they even would), I just created a new login.

 

[HD2300]

What has this thread turned into?

Silly custom ideas such as "exile" that have absolutely no place on a classic server.

It is a variant of my main is a mage, and I insist that everytime I kill a tamer, its perma death for that tamer, and btw dragon breath is overpowered it should also be nerfed to do no damage to mages.

 

[Coldren]

Id like to mention this one more time.

There should not be discussion on what mechanics should be in a particular timeframe.


The discussion should be on what timeframe people want to play on a classic server. The mechanics should be taken directly from a point in time in that era.


What has this thread turned into?

Silly custom ideas such as "exile" that have absolutely no place on a classic server.

I'd like to mention THIS one more time, since you seem to chose to ignore it.

If you want the new shard to THRIVE, you have to address rampant PK'ing and how to allow it without prohibiting it. Otherwise, people will leave it... AGAIN.

Assuming they DID put it up just as you want it, HOW LONG would it last before it became another ghost shard, because what WILL happen is just what happened before Trammel:

A) People will get sick of being ganked by griefers and leave.
B) Griefers will get sick of getting their ass handed to them by real PK's instead of beating sheep and will leave.
C)PK'ers will have no one but other PK'ers, and you have modern day Fellucca without AoS itemization and changes.

Again, I'll say this since you do not seem to want to accept it. The ONLY thing I want to see considered and addressed from the standard T2A model is GRIEFERS AND RAMPANT PK'ING - The things that CAUSED Trammel in the first place.

We want EVERYTHING ELSE in the T2A model.

 

[Ray_]

Like I said other people in this thread have quoted these numbers, and they have also provided sources.

Oh, okay. Maybe one of them will see this and repost their sources.

I'm mostly thinking of the 100k number, since some of the others are from EA quarterly reports.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

What does this have to do with EA`s inability to recreate a point in time?

You said it yourself, Emulators and EA servers run on different code.

How did the free servers re-create en exact moment in time?

They used the mechanics of the era... not the code.

It doesn't. But that is not exactly what you said. Actually, the best approach for the devs would be to use the patch notes. You can read them here...

http://www.uoherald.com/news/?cat=pubNotes

...if interested.

The big problem, as it was explained to me, is that in order to create a classic shard that is 'exactly' like what was up at the time, the work load is going to be pretty severe because they are going to have to code the project from the ground up. That's not a very attractive proposition to coders. Most coders generally like to work using existing code, instead of trying to re-invent the wheel...because it is a lot of work. This is also not a "new" project, so getting the man hours devoted to it to do a from the ground up project is unlikely.

What is most likely to happen is that they will take the existing code, and actually attempt to "emulate" classic UO that way. (as in, they will hide the AoS properties, and tweak the items to try and make them more like they were in the old days, remove lands, remove creatures and items that didnt exist, etc.) This might make it rather difficult to go back and do an exact recreation on every single little aspect of the game.

Understand, that what some of us have been doing is trying to give the devs an idea of what we would like to see in a shard like this. Since it is not likely that they are going to be able to just simply pull old code out, which would probably be the easiest solution...making a lot of the discussion here completely moot...we have been working towards offering the devs ideas and a list of "must haves". This list has been stickied on the UHall main page. Those are the things that we, as a group, had more or less agreed upon.

I think if you look at them, you will agree, they are pretty close to T2A accurate.

Most of the other ideas here are just that...random ideas and suggestions that we are just debating if for no other reason than to keep the topic alive.

Trust me, if the devs could just throw an old T2A server back-up on to a rack of servers and press go, I think they would.

And I think most of us here would jump on the shard and never look back.

Ironic you say this when you clearly troll people without giving any thought to what a player said.

Why dont you bother to actually read the thread instead of posting meaningless replies?

I only attacked you because you attacked me.

You have a valid question above, and I am providing the best answer I can to you without being hostile. Can I expect the same treatment in return, or will you and I just keep acting like 13 year olds?

 

[Coldren]

I mean, you don't think EA is targeting former players for this proposed shard?

And you don't think EA is attempting to keep CURRENT players who want a classic shard?

I didn't say anyone was an idiot, please don't put words in my mouth.

No, you didn't, but Kotu did. Hence, why there were two names in the post.

If you liked UO:R and AOS, that's awesome! That's your preference. Completely subjectively, I think the game was better in Dec '99 - but that's just my opinion! You might love the game as it right now, and that's perfectly fine with me. Doesn't make you an idiot, just means we have different tastes in online games.

That's the point you are missing. I want the exact same thing you do, MINUS the rampant PK griefing that caused the Tram/Fel split to begin with.

I don't want PK'ing GONE. In fact, I WANT them there. I DON'T want griefers.

Killing me because I'm carrying ore or gear is one thing.. Killing noobs running out of a city repeatedly and calling them noob @*@tards and other choice phrases, while gaining absolutely nothing is quite another.

 

[Ray_]

I'd like to mention THIS one more time, since you seem to chose to ignore it.

If you want the new shard to THRIVE, you have to address rampant PK'ing and how to allow it without prohibiting it. Otherwise, people will leave it... AGAIN.

Assuming they DID put it up just as you want it, HOW LONG would it last before it became another ghost shard, because what WILL happen is just what happened before Trammel:

A) People will get sick of being ganked by griefers and leave.
B) Griefers will get sick of getting their ass handed to them by real PK's instead of beating sheep and will leave.
C)PK'ers will have no one but other PK'ers, and you have modern day Fellucca without AoS itemization and changes.

Again, I'll say this since you do not seem to want to accept it. The ONLY thing I want to see considered and addressed from the standard T2A model is GRIEFERS AND RAMPANT PK'ING - The things that CAUSED Trammel in the first place.

We want EVERYTHING ELSE in the T2A model.

Man, you're sort of ignoring one giant flaw in your argument (and so are most everyone else, so this isn't personal!):

The population on a classic shard WILL be different from the 1999 UO population.

You can't say that people will leave because of griefers and PKs because you don't know who will be on the shard in the first place. We can all guess, but I'd be pretty confident in saying that people that left in '98-'99 are pretty much with UO, period.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Obviously you're referring partly to me in this post, so I'll respond about the alt login thing:
Yes, I have an alt login. Username is Ray. Haven't logged on in years. The email on file goes to an account I can't check anymore, so the lost password feature was unusable for me. Instead of trying to get an admin to reset it or something (if they even would), I just created a new login.

If that is your only other log in, then you are not who I am refering to.

You new guys are not the first people to come into the thread with an attitude...and a lot of those people left.

One of the things that this thread was SUPPOSED to be was civil. Petra (the moderator) basically told us all to behave ourselves several times, and has threatened to lock the thread.

Forgive me if it seemed like I was attacking you. I think all of us have some pretty raw feelings about what Trammel did to our game.

I hate what they did to UO. I have kept playing it, and tried to enjoy it...but it has not been the same, not even close, since May 3, 2000 (the day before Trammel).

It upsets me to have people come into the thread, the ONLY thread we get, and tell me how because I have some ideas that I 'must not have been around back then' or how 'I must not want a classic shard'.

Truth is, I have been campaigning for a Classic Shard for years now.

And an awful lot of people that post on Stratics hate me because of it.

I don't mind. Sometimes the right thing to do is not the most popular thing to do.

 

[Kotu Farland]

I'd like to mention THIS one more time, since you seem to chose to ignore it.

If you want the new shard to THRIVE, you have to address rampant PK'ing and how to allow it without prohibiting it. Otherwise, people will leave it... AGAIN.

THEY DID ADDRESS RAMPANT PKINGS.

IT WAS CALLED STATLOSS

STATLOSS CAUSED YOU TO LOSE MONTHS AND MONTHS OF SKILLGAIN

OR

MONTHS OF IN GAME PLAY.

Stop acting like PK`s had not punishment on classic servers.


Why are you asking for a classic server if you have no intention of adding classic mechanics?

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

I think this thread has attracted a few trolls in disguise.

Something tells me that these low post count posters are more than they appear to be.

Petra, or any mod, if these posters are alt logins for others, could we see about getting them removed from the thread?

I am not saying that they all are...but it seems awfully strange that we have suddenly seen an influx of people making the exact same arguments that other posters made and were countered on earlier in the thread.

And most of them seem very angry for people that just learned about a topic...

You know who are these people? people like me that received a stratics mail about this thread, and that quit uo a long time ago enraged with the turns of the event (i personally pay the subscription every 3 months to refresh my house ) . People that want the old playstyle back, without compromises. It's no wonder that they aren't in line with your thought!

 

[Kotu Farland]

Actually, the best approach for the devs would be to use the patch notes. You can read them here...

http://www.uoherald.com/news/?cat=pubNotes

...if interested.

The big problem, as it was explained to me, is that in order to create a classic shard that is 'exactly' like what was up at the time, the work load is going to be pretty severe because they are going to have to code the project from the ground up.

Is their any other option than to recode the server from the ground up?

No there is not.

The only option for a classic server is to recreate an exact moment in time.


So wont dont we just focus on what exact moment in time we want to play in instead of bickering and throwing out asinine ideas like "exile"?

 

[Guido_LS]

This is a very good point.




Anyone who would play UO for any length of time after AOS obviously has no interest in Risk vs Reward or any features of PRE-AOS UO.

Those of us that have paid, and are still paying, for playing on an official EA server really don't want to pay for the development of a server for people like you, either...

or, let's turn this around -

Anyone who would play a freeshard for 7 years or so, and not support the upkeep of the existing game, as well as augment the salaries of the development teams, past and present, should have no voice now - all they cared about then was themselves, and it's obvious that all they care about now is themselves

Have a nice day... hope your own flames don't incinerate you...