Surely you jest. Your Large Brick house can not compare to the pure pwn of the Villa. It's not huge, but it's not small either. Perfect for a husband and wife duo.
Unfortunately I was trolled into such a "debate" the other day, even though my comments were entirely relevant to the topic within it. The problem isn't with the classic shard concept in itself, but that sadly, certain users are either completely blinkered, or are simply unable to constructively contribute/counter, thus get shirty.
), for the sake of a few narrow minded individuals. They've got their big bag of sweets and simply get upset because we're asking for one. *Rant Over* I love that expression...shirty!
I agree with this. Start with the original houses + the UO:R houses, and then see how it goes. If enough players ask for custom, then add it later.
Me too...
Isn't that what the glacial staves were? Looked like them to me...or at the very least a fluorescent light on steroids.
Just wait until the next expansion!!
How dare you compare John Riccitiello, CEO of the great EA kingdom to the Guardian....The guardian is much more clever than he is. The Guardian would have given us Classic Shards by now so that we would be corrupted by their influence. Kinda like the pillars in assension.
Fair enough.
They may not all be neon, but if you want item threads...
Where do you get these delusions?
Each time that UO loses subscribers that possibility becomes more likely. The obvious way to prevent that is to attempt to gain subscribers for UO, which is not occurring with the current system.
Funny you should mention that. The first time I quit UO, it was right after LBR.Me too...
This is Lord Blackthorne
WTH is this supposed to be?
That is not Lord Blackthorne.
Robots and androids don't belong in Ultima Online.
Classic stuff. Gotta love Monty Python.
This seems to be just fine IMO. Macroing while asleep seemed to me to be 'part of the game' when it was T2A time. Overnight hiding. Overnight sparring. It seemed that it was one thing people did. I saw it all the time. If they want to sit overnight and do that. I don't see a big deal.
http://support.ea.com/cgi-bin/ea.cf...&p_accessibility=&p_page=&p_lva=347&nextlink=
If my memory serves me right, I think the actual enforcement of the Unattended Macroing paragraph in the RoC was never really enforced until after a very vocal majority started complaining that PK's were not really being punished because they could just UM the counts away before they rezzed. Which I aggree with in theory. I'm a firm believer in counts only dropping off while you're alive, which makes UMing a little bit harder, as Meteor Storm and Earthquake could easily kill you while you were in your house in T2A.
This is not a troll-
This is a legitimate point that was brought up that was easier to insult and pass off as a troll than to actually respond to. It's also the biggest reason players such as myself are against yet another shard being brought into being.Connor_Graham said:
That's exactly why it didn't work as a "punishment". Perception. It did keep that character from PKing for the duration. But it wasn't enough punishment to be perceived as working. And it didn't help that some well known PKers boasted that they weren't being hurt by it. And some of them were continuing to PK with another character.
Me? Angry about macroing??
For just that particular month??
so there is no being jumped when coming home anymore.
I civilly disagree.
As has been stated before. Your subscription payments are worth no more or less than anyone else's. There are players that pay their subscriptions, dutifully, every month that want something different than you do. Why then, should those players be denied...especially given the amount of resources that have been allocated for the last 10 years towards your prefered style of play? If you will count them...you will find 24 running shards that are geared toward your particular prefered style of play. There are also 2 that cater towards a different style of play called Siege and Mugen...neither cater to the Classic UO fan any longer thanks to the introduction of AoS and post-AoS additions.
I'll just repeat what was in a post of my that was deleted, I agree with phantus on this one. I think a classic shard would destroy Siege Perilous and Mugen, but there is no accounting for the stubbornness of a human when they decide to hang on to something. It just seems to me that a classic shard is really what most people that are playing SP are looking for. But maybe I'm wrong.
I see your point, however I believe that makes you look selfish.
Never really needed to UM Macro counts. Just hanging out dead at an active gate while dead was god enough to keep the client connected.
Um...you misquoted me. You might want to correct that. I didn't post what you quoted...Phantus did.
Hanging out dead at an active gate is just as against the rules as UMing if you are doing it AFK.
I think the Stat loss should be upon rezzing. That how it was because once a PK died they did not lose stats, it was if they rezzed. Thats why they macrod as a ghost. I do not think that as severe of penalties should be given these days. Mainly because their will be much more actual PvP involved than before and so reds WILL die a lot more. I do not know how to balance the system, but in a shard where a lot of the population will want to PvP, if you die as a red and have to "find a way" to kill counts just so they can rezz and and play then it really will discourage people from playing reds.
Oh please, that is like saying an afk bank sitter is breaking some rules. alot of people sit in luna, just to work off counts on blues.
"Those players" are asking for something that doesn't currently exist, would require a large amount of resources, both human and monetary, and would be based on a time frame of the game in which the creation of Tram was required to stop the exodus of players leaving for the alternative. These are resources that could be used to improve the playstyle that's been carrying UO for the past 10 years. It seems to me that the one that's proven successful is the one that should be stuck with instead of one that's already proven itself to be a failure in the grand scheme.
"Massive development costs" you say?
