Classic shard.

[Derrick83]

Um...you misquoted me. You might want to correct that. I didn't post what you quoted...Phantus did.

Weird, I just hit the quote button at the bottom of his post. I didnt change anything that I remember in the quote so I am not sure why it popped up with your name.. sry..

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Oh please, that is like saying an afk bank sitter is breaking some rules.

You guys understand these are not my rules...right?? I am just quoting from EA's RoC.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

"Those players" are asking for something that doesn't currently exist

Everything that has been created since T2A was something that didn't exist, and was created for Trammel players.

would require a large amount of resources, both human and monetary

Please show me the numbers you have to back this up.

As I stated above, the developers are on staff...so they are getting the same pay regardless of what they work on.

If you have some kind of cost estimate, please...by all means, produce it.

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.

Once again, you seek to set up a false dichotomy. No one is suggesting that the Trammel playstyle should be removed from the game. Simply that other playstyles exist, and that these players are paying customers as well...and therefore deserve development time and resources as well.

 

[Cetric]

"Massive development costs" you say?

If you have hard numbers to back this up...please post them.

Keep in mind, the current development team are staff developers. They are going to make the same salaries regardless if they are coding a classic shard, fixing bugs, adding more items to the game, or just sitting around the office playing on Stratics.

Assuming the server itself cannot be piggy-backed on to an existing rack, the cost for a rack of servers wouldn't be nearly as astronomical as you would like people to believe ($5000-6000). Assuming EA is hosting these shards on a 2nd part farm, the cost per month for the hosting and bandwidth isn't actually that bad either (less than $1000 per month).

If you consider 2500 paying subscribers @ $12.99 per month... that's roughly $3250 per month, in a year, you are looking at $39,000 in otherwise unclaimed revenue.

Keep in mind, this is working off of the numbers you posted.

Speaking of the developers time, don't yout hink they should utilize that time towards 3rd party detection and cheating prior to any talk of a classic shard? Wouldn't a classic shard be that much sweeter without scripting resources and skills, or speed hacking, and the like?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I know most people dont like PK's, but if you want a true classic shard, PKs (not griefers necessarily) are a part of the PvP, RP or whatever.. they are a part of the history. We dont want to scare them away by the penalties outweighing the benefits. Again.. this time around the mindset of the inhabitants are different, so, some things may need to be changed or tweaked.

I agree. I have suggested several alternatives that I believe would actually benefit PKs while discouraging UMing...but I think most people that want to be PKs just glanced at the idea, didn't really bother to understand it, thought the same thing you have posted here...that I somehow what to rid the game of PKs...and just discounted it.

I do not want to see a Classic Shard that does not have PKs.

I do want to see a Classic Shard in which any penalties against PKs that are incorporated into the ruleset are actually enforced.

This is the idea of balance. If there are not penalties, or they are not enforced, then the shard will be nothing but a PK shard. If the penalties are too harsh (see current shards) the shard will be nothing but PvMers.

There is a middle ground in there somewhere, just neither side likes the idea because both sides need to 'win'.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Speaking of the developers time, don't yout hink they should utilize that time towards 3rd party detection and cheating prior to any talk of a classic shard? Wouldn't a classic shard be that much sweeter without scripting resources and skills, or speed hacking, and the like?

As I understood it from the newsletter they published (it appeared on Stratics)...the plan was to address 3rd party programs, hacks and cheating, and then work on (possibly) a Classic Shard.

Did I miss something, or was that not what was published?

 

[Derrick83]

"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.

Well I would not say "carrying" UO. More like dragging it. This game is not a fraction of what it used to be. The truth is that 10 years ago internet access and the amount of people playing games were significantly less. To have that amount of subscribers at that point is almost like the 10 million ones WOW has now in respect to the %% of people playing games vs the amount of those people playing UO.

Also, we dont know what the shard would be like. Maybe it would be significantly more than 2500 people. Hell, reprint the original box, put a cloth map in it with a UO pin and you will get 50$ out of me for a box to come back for sure.

Also, I am a programmer too(as many others are) and its a LOT easier to "//" something out or delete existing code than it is to create it and make it work. It would be a lot easier to remove the ability to go to the new lands from the moongates and take out a few things than it would be to add them in the first place. Backtracking the rules to meet the T2A age would take maybe a couple of weeks be 1 programmer working a 40 hour week. Bug fixing for the missing code may take a while to clean up but thats normal.

Your talking a double standard. You keep saying that its not efficient to make an investment into a shard with different rules that you dont know if people will play and its cheaper to just keep existing palyers etc... but yet Seige was exactly that. A risk. It was the same thing.. a new shard, new servers, new programming for different rules and the people who STILL inhabit that shard are fighting for it with their lives.. those are dedicated players who actually play this game and so the risk paid off. Now you have another, even larger group wanting the same thing for a classic shard. If it worked for Seige, why wouldn't it pay off for a classic shard?

 

[Evlar]

Speaking of the developers time, don't you think they should utilize that time towards 3rd party detection and cheating prior to any talk of a classic shard? Wouldn't a classic shard be that much sweeter without scripting resources and skills, or speed hacking, and the like?

I don't believe that anyone will argue against those things Cetric, in the slightest.

The developers have pretty much stated what their priorities are. Even though we're hungry for the classic style gaming we enjoy, the issue you've raised, is one that's central to everyone's enjoyment of UO.

The "cheating" issue is one that's annoyed genuine players for as long as I can remember playing UO. It's an issue that should have taken "priority" a lot sooner than it has done. To me, it's a shame that an issue so important, has been overlooked in favour of work on new clients, new expansions, etc. Perhaps more so a case of not seeing the wood for the trees, when it comes to reasons why people have left UO.

So no, I don't see classic shards as being more important than any anti-cheating efforts. So long as some time in the non too distant future, the resources are there and viable enough to work on a classic server setup, then I'm happy.

It's worth pointing out though, that Cal has mentioned a business plan to submit to EA regarding classic servers. The impression we get, is that it's something that has been done in the past and they're looking to repeat in the future. I think the developers are serious about the idea. It all boils down to if EA are happy with the "bottom-line" the developers can present them with.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

Speaking of the developers time, don't yout hink they should utilize that time towards 3rd party detection and cheating prior to any talk of a classic shard? Wouldn't a classic shard be that much sweeter without scripting resources and skills, or speed hacking, and the like?

As much as I hate to say it, nothing the developers can do will stop hacking scripting or botting. Blizzard, which makes thousands of times more revenue off of WoW than EA ever will off of UO can not even stop hacking scripting and botting on their servers, and they have a whole team who's only purpose is to try and stop it. They even have their vaunted Warden program to sniff out hacks and bots that gives out more false positives than it does actual hits. (I am a victim of a Warden false positive) The people who code those programs will always be one step ahead of the developers of this game and so it becomes an endless rush to beat the next greatest hack...and no new content for the AoS addicts is being developed, and no classic shard is being developed for those of us who want that. In the end the developers would end up just chasing their tail and the game would die.

 

[Cetric]

As much as I hate to say it, nothing the developers can do will stop hacking scripting or botting. Blizzard, which makes thousands of times more revenue off of WoW than EA ever will off of UO can not even stop hacking scripting and botting on their servers, and they have a whole team who's only purpose is to try and stop it. They even have their vaunted Warden program to sniff out hacks and bots that gives out more false positives than it does actual hits. (I am a victim of a Warden false positive) The people who code those programs will always be one step ahead of the developers of this game and so it becomes an endless rush to beat the next greatest hack...and no new content for the AoS addicts is being developed, and no classic shard is being developed for those of us who want that. In the end the developers would end up just chasing their tail and the game would die.

tbh i could care less i suppose if they couldn't crack down on scirpting and botting,e tc. As long as they do something to take care of speed.

 

[Cetric]

I do hope everyone realizes, that just because the shard exists, it does not mean that people will play in it like they used to. people are used to not having to find a blacksmith to repair their armor, the sense of community, and things like that. I would hope this would be restored to something like this, but it isn't a guarantee.

Just wanted to bring this up again... in case anyone missed it...

 

[Llewen]

tbh i could care less i suppose if they couldn't crack down on scirpting and botting,e tc. As long as they do something to take care of speed.

I've had this discussion a number of times and posted a thread about it. In my opinion the real problem with cheating in pvp isn't speeding, it is scripting. In the six months since I returned to UO I have yet to see anyone (0, nada, zilch) that moved faster than I do unless I was clearly lagging, and I don't have a particularly high end machine, and I know that I don't use speed hacks of any kind.

 

[Derrick83]

Just wanted to bring this up again... in case anyone missed it...

True but one thing you underestimate is the time period itself.

No soul stones. HARD skill gain. No easy smelting packs etc...

To GM smithy would be done primarily by hand. The effort to mine the 200-500k(or more in this era) ingots it will take to GM smith/tailoring etc...

Not everyone will have a full account of maxed out characters. Now adays you can 7x GM a char in a few days. Get a friend to give you a MR/LRC suit.. or a high PHY suit with 30 SSI weaopn etc.. easy easy compared to this era.. it takes time and effort here so people may not want to take the time it takes to work those extra skills up when they are so hard to do.

 

[Cogniac]

If you consider 2500 paying subscribers @ $12.99 per month... that's roughly $3250 per month, in a year, you are looking at $39,000 in otherwise unclaimed revenue.

That is some interesting math, there. You are literally off by a factor of 10.

 

[phantus]

I don't believe this should be too hard to understand. Siege will die if a classic shard is introduced. A large number of Siege players(past and present) will move to a classic shard making it's numbers even smaller. There will still be a presence there but it's my opinion that after a classic shard is introduced there will not be enough players left there to continue it's operation. I'm more than willing to say I could be wrong but I do not believe I am.

I see your point, however I believe that makes you look selfish.

I do not mean to attack, I am making a observation. If you say that "A large number of Siege players(past and present) will move to a classic shard " then you believe that group of people does not really want to play seige.. they really want to play a classic shard but seige is as close as they have. You seem to like seige and thus I assume you are in the minority that would prefer Seige over a classic shard.

If the numbers leaving seige are so large to devastate the shard (50%+) then that means that most of the Seige shard would rather be playing a classic shard and thus they will enjoy the time they spend in this game even more. Saying that bringing out a classic shard would devastate Seige, while sad, is just a testament to how many people do want this classic shard. Most of the people playing seige dont REALLY want to be playing it, they WANT to be playing a classic shard but Seige is all they have.

To be fair I only play Siege when bored on production shards. I have a fully developed character there and generally enjoy playing there. I don't consider myself a Siege player however.

Siege has had a low population and like all the other shards it has been slowly dimishing over time. There are many old Siege players that used to post and play that I would have never thought would leave, but they did. There are plenty that played Siege for the ruleset. The wild west as it were. These players will be enticed if a classic shard is available. There are also a good number of core Siege players that will never leave until they shut the server off. This is to be expected.

The thing that makes a difference is the old players. What happens when old Siege players return to play on the classic shard? All it would take is a handful of old vets to come back and reform old guilds to start the dominoes falling.

Then there is the EA part of this. I don't believe the equipment costs in today VM environments are any factor in this. The $$ is in the development. Let's assume Cal convinces the powers that be to create this server. Now let's assume it's a success and it has a healthy population. Would anyone care to boast that Siege has a healthy population? How is Cal going to aquisition yet another development team to work on this new venture and still justify work on Siege? There was a time when Siege was in peril because of it's population. That was during Binky's reign. I don't recall how or why that changed but if it happened then(when Siege had a higher population than now) what makes anyone think it won't happen again.

For anyone to say a classic server would not cause Siege harm is wishful thinking. This is again my opinion but it's not something I'm just throwing out there with no logic to back up. It's a real threat whether some want to believe it or not. Cal might be able to put an end to this debate but he could only do so if a classic server is not a threat to Siege. If it is he can't say that because it would just begin the exodus.

Having said that I'm done with this particular derailment as it really doesn't conform with the threads intent.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

That is some interesting math, there. You are literally off by a factor of 10.

Yep...that was a blonde moment

2500 x $12.99 = $32,475 per month, per year that's $389,700.

 

[Cetric]

I've had this discussion a number of times and posted a thread about it. In my opinion the real problem with cheating in pvp isn't speeding, it is scripting. In the six months since I returned to UO I have yet to see anyone (0, nada, zilch) that moved faster than I do unless I was clearly lagging, and I don't have a particularly high end machine, and I know that I don't use speed hacks of any kind.

I can guarantee to you, it is real my friend. But for the scripting, if you can show me any script that makes you better than other pvpers, you will have my vote on that. But i've never seen a script that is better than the real thing in pvp.

 

[FlaminWarlordGL]

I think that a pre-powerscroll UO:R server would be the most balanced. I'm surprised this wasn't listed in the poll. T2A would be fun, but a lot of game mechanics would have to be changed to make it successful (i.e - not being able to control 35 dragons).


It's encouraging how many people are in favor of making a classic server, especially when 90% of the target market aren't Stratics readers anymore. A link to the poll has started floating around on some free server forums. Those communities are where most "classic" server customers will come from, and there would have to be a big effort to reach them if they are serious about this.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Siege has had a low population and like all the other shards it has been slowly dimishing over time. There are many old Siege players that used to post and play that I would have never thought would leave, but they did. There are plenty that played Siege for the ruleset. The wild west as it were. These players will be enticed if a classic shard is available. There are also a good number of core Siege players that will never leave until they shut the server off. This is to be expected.

The thing that makes a difference is the old players. What happens when old Siege players return to play on the classic shard? All it would take is a handful of old vets to come back and reform old guilds to start the dominoes falling.

Then there is the EA part of this. I don't believe the equipment costs in today VM environments are any factor in this. The $$ is in the development. Let's assume Cal convinces the powers that be to create this server. Now let's assume it's a success and it has a healthy population. Would anyone care to boast that Siege has a healthy population? How is Cal going to aquisition yet another development team to work on this new venture and still justify work on Siege? There was a time when Siege was in peril because of it's population. That was during Binky's reign. I don't recall how or why that changed but if it happened then(when Siege had a higher population than now) what makes anyone think it won't happen again.

For anyone to say a classic server would not cause Siege harm is wishful thinking. This is again my opinion but it's not something I'm just throwing out there with no logic to back up. It's a real threat whether some want to believe it or not. Cal might be able to put an end to this debate but he could only do so if a classic server is not a threat to Siege. If it is he can't say that because it would just begin the exodus.

Having said that I'm done with this particular derailment as it really doesn't conform with the threads intent.

I think you are probably right...some players are going to leave Siege. Then again, some players are going to leave every shard if a Classic Shard is created.

But why is that a bad thing? If it is will of the customers...I think they should be allowed to play where they wish to play. Holding players hostage on certain shards because other players on those shards will have less people to play with seems rather unfair to me. If the Siege players wish to move to the Classic ruleset...I say let them. It was the poor decisions concerning the direction of Siege that the developers took that instilled that desire to begin with. The same thing can be said for the other shards. I am one of those people. I have played Atlantic since the 1st day it was running. Over the years, I have gotten less and less interested in the game under the Post-Trammel/Post-AoS rulesets. I am not alone in this.

So the real question on the table is, why is it a good business model for EA/Mythic to lose subscribers, like myself...others that have already quit but would come back, and people that haven't quite gotten to the point that I have...just so some of the players on the existing shard can have higher populations on their shards? Unfortunately...that does include Siege.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It's encouraging how many people are in favor of making a classic server, especially when 90% of the target market aren't Stratics readers anymore. A link to the poll has started floating around on some free server forums. Those communities are where most "classic" server customers will come from, and there would have to be a big effort to reach them if they are serious about this.

Well, those of us that are supporters of the idea can do our part by spreading the word ourselves. Many involved in this thread, in this movement, have already begun telling friends, changing the signatures on this forum and others...and some of us are working to take it a step further. I don't know if I can openly point to it, but if you take a look at my signature...you might get an idea of what is being done to help to spread the word.

 

[Guido_LS]

does anyone have links to official statements from ea or devs about a classic shard or is it just rumors?

From about 15 pages back...

Here's what you're asking for

The thread has taken a life of its own, and things get buried after a while...

 

[Shakkar]

I think that a pre-powerscroll UO:R server would be the most balanced. I'm surprised this wasn't listed in the poll. T2A would be fun, but a lot of game mechanics would have to be changed to make it successful (i.e - not being able to control 35 dragons).


It's encouraging how many people are in favor of making a classic server, especially when 90% of the target market aren't Stratics readers anymore. A link to the poll has started floating around on some free server forums. Those communities are where most "classic" server customers will come from, and there would have to be a big effort to reach them if they are serious about this.

Yes I agree and believe it will take a campaign of advertising by EA to bring this Idea to its full potential. Using in game people to spread word of mouth will be cheaper of course. However it will not be affective enough to bring the numbers to UO that are needed to populate this new server. Am I relenting on my position. No not at all. but for practical purposes The Word of mouth advertising we have relied on for so long is stretched a bit thin currently.If This is to be a success we need some advertising. Mainstream Advertising. I believe the " You build it they will come" era is quite over and to prove the point look at each shards dwindling populations.So in closing If we are gonna do this lets do it right and advertise For optimum results . thks.

 

[Connor_Graham]

If it worked for Seige, why wouldn't it pay off for a classic shard?

It didn't work for Siege. It's an empty shard.

 

[FlaminWarlordGL]

Well, those of us that are supporters of the idea can do our part by spreading the word ourselves. Many involved in this thread, in this movement, have already begun telling friends, changing the signatures on this forum and others...and some of us are working to take it a step further. I don't know if I can openly point to it, but if you take a look at my signature...you might get an idea of what is being done to help to spread the word.

Well done

Yes I agree and believe it will take a campaign of advertising by EA to bring this Idea to its full potential. Using in game people to spread word of mouth will be cheaper of course. However it will not be affective enough to bring the numbers to UO that are needed to populate this new server. Am I relenting on my position. No not at all. but for practical purposes The Word of mouth advertising we have relied on for so long is stretched a bit thin currently.If This is to be a success we need some advertising. Mainstream Advertising. I believe the " You build it they will come" era is quite over and to prove the point look at each shards dwindling populations.So in closing If we are gonna do this lets do it right and advertise For optimum results . thks.

Exactly. If this was 5 years ago things would be a lot different, but most people who would have been interested have given up on the idea of EA making a classic server. This poll didn't find it's way onto our forums until a couple days ago, whereas a few years ago someone would have spotted it within hours.

Luckily most free server admins are not opposed to advertising an EA classic server, because they themselves are interested in it.

 

[Evlar]

I don't know if I can openly point to it, but if you take a look at my signature...you might get an idea of what is being done to help to spread the word.

Just registered

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Just registered

Awesome! We are not set up fully yet, but bear with us, it'll probably be another day or so before everything is live.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It didn't work for Siege. It's an empty shard.

If Siege is empty, then why all the concern over it emptying out if a Classic Shard is created??

Seems this particular talking point (it will kill Siege) can only work one way or the other...not both.

 

[Connor_Graham]

If Siege is empty, then why all the concern over it emptying out if a Classic Shard is created??

Because the shard is low populated and small migration of players at once could end up in a domino effect, with more players leaving after things start to seem empty to them, then more leaving because those left, etc. It could easily end any reason to keep Siege open and continue to put Dev time toward a different ruleset.

 

[Evlar]

Awesome! We are not set up fully yet, but bear with us, it'll probably be another day or so before everything is live.

Get cracking then!

 

[Derrick83]

I can guarantee to you, it is real my friend. But for the scripting, if you can show me any script that makes you better than other pvpers, you will have my vote on that. But i've never seen a script that is better than the real thing in pvp.

Hrm.. I cant use the name of the program.. but I will say C.E. surly makes a difference. I know this because just about ever PvPr has to use it(or else a year or 2 ago when I was still into heavy pvp you did). Why? Because everyone else did. I like to think of myself as a decent PvPr as I have done it for a long time. I came back after a year or so break.. I got back into it.. I had a good suit and weapons etc... but I couldn't kill anyone.. ANYONE.. everyone was outrunning me.. a LOT.. I couldn't ever make distance for heals/bandaids etc. Now I am not saying I think I should have been able to kill EVERYONE, but I was a 80%+ win rate when I left and after a few months off was a 0% win rate and was significantly slower(without lagging) than everyone else. I rejoined my old guild after a day or 2 anwhen I finally saw some of my old friends and thats when I found out WHY I was losing.. so I had to conform, not to become better than everyone, but simply to compete with everyone. After that I was back to my 80% win rate as it should be.

I am not saying it made ME a better PvPr but it SURE gave everyone else that was using it a HUGE advantage over anyone that wasn't.

Like Syndrome from "The Incredibles" said "When everyone is super, no one is!" If everyone else is using a cheat and no one is getting baned, if you want to compete you have to do it too. It sucks but if you don't(or didn't at that point.. atleast on my server) then the game is not fun because you can clearly see EVERY other person has an advantage over you.

Either make cheats illegal, or let everyone cheat. If you cant stop them, legalize them and contain. Like UOA. For a while UOA was considered a 3rd party program, but then because EVERYONE used it, they figured it was easier to adopt it than to try to fight it(I know it was also allowed because it did not allow duping etc.. it only enhanced game functions like switching weapons etc).

Dont get me wrong. I do NOT like cheating, but I will not sit aside and lose to cheaters either. It was 1 or 2 people then thats one thing, but 90% of the population is another. What do you do?

 

[Cetric]

Hrm.. I cant use the name of the program.. but I will say C.E. surly makes a difference. I know this because just about ever PvPr has to use it(or else a year or 2 ago when I was still into heavy pvp you did). Why? Because everyone else did. I like to think of myself as a decent PvPr as I have done it for a long time. I came back after a year or so break.. I got back into it.. I had a good suit and weapons etc... but I couldn't kill anyone.. ANYONE.. everyone was outrunning me.. a LOT.. I couldn't ever make distance for heals/bandaids etc. Now I am not saying I think I should have been able to kill EVERYONE, but I was a 80%+ win rate when I left and after a few months off was a 0% win rate and was significantly slower(without lagging) than everyone else. I rejoined my old guild after a day or 2 anwhen I finally saw some of my old friends and thats when I found out WHY I was losing.. so I had to conform, not to become better than everyone, but simply to compete with everyone. After that I was back to my 80% win rate as it should be.

I am not saying it made ME a better PvPr but it SURE gave everyone else that was using it a HUGE advantage over anyone that wasn't.

Like Syndrome from "The Incredibles" said "When everyone is super, no one is!" If everyone else is using a cheat and no one is getting baned, if you want to compete you have to do it too. It sucks but if you don't(or didn't at that point.. atleast on my server) then the game is not fun because you can clearly see EVERY other person has an advantage over you.

Either make cheats illegal, or let everyone cheat. If you cant stop them, legalize them and contain. Like UOA. For a while UOA was considered a 3rd party program, but then because EVERYONE used it, they figured it was easier to adopt it than to try to fight it(I know it was also allowed because it did not allow duping etc.. it only enhanced game functions like switching weapons etc).

Dont get me wrong. I do NOT like cheating, but I will not sit aside and lose to cheaters either. It was 1 or 2 people then thats one thing, but 90% of the population is another. What do you do?

Sadly i cannot say i blame you in any way shape or form. I think its funny there are people out there that still think that program is a myth, or that it doesn't do anything. I haven't been able to play a dexer since this became widespread, because i just couldnt stay within a tile of a person. its more tolerable on a mage, but it sitll sucks tbh =/

 

[Derrick83]

I don't know if I can openly point to it, but if you take a look at my signature...you might get an idea of what is being done to help to spread the word.

Just registered

Wow me too. Just registered. I had looked at that link off Morganas sig the other day and it just said "Site under construction" and though it was someone just created the logo and really never programmed the site yet. Glad to know its real. Awesome!

 

[Derrick83]

Sadly i cannot say i blame you in any way shape or form. I think its funny there are people out there that still think that program is a myth, or that it doesn't do anything. I haven't been able to play a dexer since this became widespread, because i just couldnt stay within a tile of a person. its more tolerable on a mage, but it sitll sucks tbh =/

Yeah.. glad you understand. I feel crappy for having to admit that I use it, but again, if no one else used it, I wouldn't have a need to use it. Its like baseball or other sports where people use steroids. Everyone uses them.. and that makes them super athletes. Then you say "well crap, just to not get cut and compete I have to do it too or I won't even be in the same league" so they take em too.. then they get caught and everyones like "OHHH what a bad person you are." Its not their fault, its the system.

 

[Cetric]

Yeah.. glad you understand. I feel crappy for having to admit that I use it, but again, if no one else used it, I wouldn't have a need to use it. Its like baseball or other sports where people use steroids. Everyone uses them.. and that makes them super athletes. Then you say "well crap, just to not get cut and compete I have to do it too or I won't even be in the same league" so they take em too.. then they get caught and everyones like "OHHH what a bad person you are." Its not their fault, its the system.

Well hopefully, someone can do something about it soon =/

 

[HD2300]

"Massive development costs" you say?

If you have hard numbers to back this up...please post them.

Keep in mind, the current development team are staff developers. They are going to make the same salaries regardless if they are coding a classic shard, fixing bugs, adding more items to the game, or just sitting around the office playing on Stratics.

Assuming the server itself cannot be piggy-backed on to an existing rack, the cost for a rack of servers wouldn't be nearly as astronomical as you would like people to believe ($5000-6000). Assuming EA is hosting these shards on a 2nd part farm, the cost per month for the hosting and bandwidth isn't actually that bad either (less than $1000 per month).

If you consider 2500 paying subscribers @ $12.99 per month... that's roughly $3250 per month, in a year, you are looking at $39,000 in otherwise unclaimed revenue.

Keep in mind, this is working off of the numbers you posted.

You repeatedly say post the numbers. I already have and believe it will take 2 years of development to reach the maintenance stage. Please go ahead and scope out the project and post your business case/numbers. I am sure it would be easy for a VP of IT.

Like I have posted previously, you may gain 2500 Classic shard subscribers, but while devs are focusing only on the Classic shard and there is no new content for long periods, just like with the KR client, you will lose more than 2500 existing subscribers. If they lose 5000 subscribers, EA will be minus the massive development costs and also -$390 000/yr. If they lose 7500 subscribers, EA will be minus the massive development costs and also -$0.8M/yr.

Why do you think that even though the "bean counters" have looked at the numbers several times already, a Classic shard project has never gone ahead?

 

[spade gt]

I don't believe this should be too hard to understand. Siege will die if a classic shard is introduced. A large number of Siege players(past and present) will move to a classic shard making it's numbers even smaller. There will still be a presence there but it's my opinion that after a classic shard is introduced there will not be enough players left there to continue it's operation. I'm more than willing to say I could be wrong but I do not believe I am.

If Siege is empty, then why all the concern over it emptying out if a Classic Shard is created??

Because the shard is low populated and small migration of players at once could end up in a domino effect, with more players leaving after things start to seem empty to them, then more leaving because those left, etc. It could easily end any reason to keep Siege open and continue to put Dev time toward a different ruleset.

I don't really understand what Phantus and Connor are trying to gain here. You guys are coming to a thread (mostly) full of classic server supporters and trying to convince us that what we want is bad because it will supposedly hurt an existing server that is already on its deathbed. I've been hoping for an EA-run classic server since 2003 - why in the world should I care what happens to Siege?

If you're not trying to convince us supporters to change our minds, then you must be continually posting here because you're hoping EA reads your comments and believes that you know the financial ins and outs of the MMO development business better than they do. If the latter is true, I would hope that you realize they have people on staff whose job it is to make these determinations themselves. A couple of "Stratics Legends" prophesying the death of Siege due to creation of a classic server will not suddenly change the minds of EA's financial guys. Especially when said comments take place in a thread filled with many more people begging for a classic server.

I'm not attacking you guys, and I'm not saying you aren't allowed to post here or anything like that. I'm just confused as to the purpose of your repeated posts trying to convince pro-classic folks why they shouldn't want a classic server. It's like going into a Democrat rally and telling them, "Don't vote Democratic, guys - if you do, it will kill the Repubs' chance of winning!"

You're preaching to the wrong crowd. I would think it more beneficial for your cause if you post that stuff in a Siege forum and encourage the few players to continue playing there even if a classic server is created.

 

[AesSedai]

...
... Why do you think that even though the "bean counters" have looked at the numbers several times already, a Classic shard project has never gone ahead?

- That should be the primary focus if truly wanting to see results. Frank-tards and whether to pet control slot or not to custom house, should not be coming to question... at least it would be, were I vying for a new classic shard. Make them peanuts count; make them worth the toss of the dice ~ gamble...

 

[Kaivan]

You repeatedly say post the numbers. I already have and believe it will take 2 years of development to reach the maintenance stage. Please go ahead and scope out the project and post your business case/numbers. I am sure it would be easy for a VP of IT.

Ok, I'll play your game.

Here's my analysis using your own text and my own numbers.

--------

Lets crunch the numbers. At the Tram-Fel split there were 260,000 subscribers. Estimates put the number of PvPers at 90-95%.

So lets just assume that Classic shard will target 130,000 PvPers.

Interest is only in additional profit, that is, new subscribers to UO.

Lets assume based on the fact that freeshards offer exactly the same product but for free and that there are other alternatives such as Darkfall and possibly soon Mortal Online, we get 100% initial interest. That is 130,000 new subscribers. Assuming there will be a 50% gain rate after 6 months, this means 195,000 ongoing new subscribers.

So are 195,000 new ongoing subscribers worth 6 months of development, minor bug fixing + balancing and ongoing bug fixing + content development? Will 195,000 new subscribers, offset the high risk of subscribers on production shards leaving when there is no new content during much of this 6 month period?

--------

See? Isn't it fun when you use arbitrary numbers? By my calculations, you could lose every single UO player that is currently playing and still make out like a bandit. The fact is, of course, that either argument contains arbitrary values and can't be argued without some backing (none of which can be discussed here with any real relevance).

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Please go ahead and scope out the project and post your business case/numbers. I am sure it would be easy for a VP of IT.

Unlike yourself, I am freely willing to admit that I do not have enough information to make predictions like this.

First of all, I have no idea the scope of the current projects that the individual developers and QA personnel are assigned to. Secondly, I have no information regarding the exact size of the coding staff that Mythic has on the project. I do know for a fact that the matter has been discussed, so the development team, and the executive producer, seem to believe it is at least plausible. Thirdly, and I think this is the most important missing variable in the equation that you claim to have solved...I have no way to know what the production status of this product would be. Do they actually have old server backups that they can work from...they have said no, but that was someone that is gone if I am not mistaken. Can they do this by simply modifying existing server code...basically 'tricking' the client into behaving like Classic UO? Or will this be a start from scratch and code if from the ground up project?

If it is the latter, I have publicly stated...in this thread in fact, that this project is likely to never happen. Then again, that would be entirely dependent upon how much the parent company, EA, is willing to buy into the idea.

So...I have no way to know for sure how long it will take...but I think that any person that considers all of the variables in this scenario will admit that there is absolutely no way in the world that you can know any better than I do...regardless of my employment status.

Like I have posted previously, you may gain 2500 Classic shard subscribers, but while devs are focusing only on the Classic shard and there is no new content for long periods, just like with the KR client, you will lose more than 2500 existing subscribers. If they lose 5000 subscribers, EA will be minus the massive development costs and also -$390 000/yr. If they lose 7500 subscribers, EA will be minus the massive development costs and also -$0.8M/yr.

Pure, 100% speculation...and, it's speculation based off of an ill conceived assumption.

Why do you think that even though the "bean counters" have looked at the numbers several times already, a Classic shard project has never gone ahead?

Honestly? I think the reason that a Classic Shard has never been put into production is because Mythic and EA have thought that the current course of action was the right one...which obviously, at least someone at Mythic, is doubting right now.

Let me turn that question around on you...

Why would anyone from Mythic mention, not once...but twice, a Classic Shard if there was zero interest on their part to create one?

 

[HD2300]

...
... Why do you think that even though the "bean counters" have looked at the numbers several times already, a Classic shard project has never gone ahead?

- That should be the primary focus if truly wanting to see results... Make them peanuts count; make them worth the toss of the dice ~ gamble...

this.

Want a Classic shard? Show EA the money.

The BSers will keep on BSing, but there are some Classics fans posting here that could do it.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

this.

Want a Classic shard? Show EA the money.

The BSers will keep on BSing, but there are some Classics fans posting here that could do it.

You mean beyond the money some of us have been paying to them for 13 years?

 

[fantasy10k]

I heard that they were already finished with all the basic, that this was planned a long time ago. If this is true we can expect a classic shard soon.

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

the truth shall come out of the mouth of the kids...

it's... the prophecy....

BRITANNIA HAVE DISOWNED THE COMPANIONS !!!

 

[Ray_]

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.

It's okay, I understand having strong feelings about UO. I've suspended/banned from more UO message boards than I care to think about, and never for stupid things like racism or ****** or anything. Sometimes it was trolling, but most of the time was simply my past passion for UO getting the better of me.

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'.

I don't think I've said either of those, and if I did I apologize.

It is pretty clear to me that you weren't in the PvP scene...and that's totally okay by me, it's one of the awesome things about old UO - lots of different types of people all playing together in a great big melting pot. I'm not insinuating that you never PvP'd or didn't enjoy it or anything of that nature, and I'm not saying that you're less of a player/person because of your PvP status or level of involvement or what have you. Just clearing up what my thoughts are in case I misspoke earlier - don't remember either way, but just in case

I also freely admit that what's "pretty clear" to be could quite possibly be completely wrong

 

[Unsatisfied]

the truth shall come out of the mouth of the kids...

it's... the prophecy....

BRITANNIA HAVE DISOWNED THE COMPANIONS !!!

I like people who make me feel normal

 

[Ray_]

That's absolutely right. The population WILL be different..

But to counter that point, what is different about the population NOW that would somehow make it better?

Is it true that all those people who are playing these shards for free are going to JUMP at the opportunity to pay 15 a month to do the same thing on an EA serve?

Are people of the WoW Generation (tm) who had never played an MMO before, but have a very real sense of entitlement, going to embrace FFA PvP full loot and ganking without consequence or penalty to those doing it?

Is it going to be only adults, with no desire to re-enact such childish behavior?

In the modern graphical age, are MMO players clamering to play a sprite-based game with graphics from 1998? (Or worse, if you consider EC)?

I am honestly curious here - What has changed in FAVOR of a classic shard, other than nostalgia?

No idea on the freeshard population making a jump. I'd hazard a yes, if only because the freeshard experience is lacking. Stuff like not knowing if the shard will be down for a week because the owner is on vacation, or the owners/GMs giving their friends gear/money/characters, or players being able to buy skillballs or whatever. I'd also venture that people playing classic UO aren't 15 year old kids anymore and are able to pay for UO when and if they want.

I'd be very surprised if a classic shard attracted more than a handful of people that have never played UO before.

What's changed is that players will know what they are getting into and the population will be people that WANT to play in that environment, instead of having no idea what a PK even WAS and UO simply being the only game in town. Does that make sense?

Which is why, I'll state again, "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it". I'm going to put it in my sig, actually..

History has already shown that the population went UP after Trammel. It has been stated before (God help me, can't find the article now) by former and current developers that prior to Trammel, UO was hemorrhaging players.

I can only make assumptions based on what has already happened. You can't assume it's going to be any different, because you have even less data to support that it will be any different. I, at least, am drawing conclusions based on things that already HAVE happened.

Why is it that you believe that if you set up the exact same conditions as before trammel, that THIS time, you're going to get a different outcome?

Very simple man, it's because the playerbase will be different than it was in 1997-2000. Again, people will know what they're getting into. We're not talking about a new game being developed, we're talking about recreating an old game for the people who liked playing the old game. People that didn't play and like the old UO won't even show up. That population of players that wanted Trammel to be created will not be on the shard, so there will not be a reason for Trammel to be created.
For your scenario to work out, people that didn't like open PvP back then would have to join the shard en masse and start to complain about open PvP. Do you really see that happening?

Why is it that you believe that if you set up the exact same conditions as before trammel, that THIS time, you're going to get a different outcome?

Because, as I outlined above, it will NOT be the exact same conditions. The server rules may be the exact same, but the player population will be COMPLETELY different this time around.

Can you honestly say you believe the same EXACT population that was around in 1999 will be around for a classic shard?

It's ludicrous to believe that the majority of players on a new classic shard would be in favor of Trammel. It just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Ray_]

Then why in the blue hells should we pay attention to anyone from that era that has quit, and now wants to come back and re-create the EXACT SAME FAILURE?

It was only a failure for some people - the people that wanted Trammel. For the population that was happy with how UO was pre-UO:R, the game was awesome.
Guess who a classic shard would target? Hint: it's not the people that wanted Trammel.

By your logic, opening a classic server would be pointless - everyone from the classic days is through with UO - your words... so why would they, or you, care if there were some slight alterations from an exact time frame?

Those aren't my words at all. I and they care because they liked UO how it was.

That was a really poor post, dude.
I'd encourage you to put a little bit more effort in, like actually getting a quote correct when trying to use my own words against me.

 

[Ray_]

Ok, I have been keeping track of this thread, but I haven't read everyone's posts thoroughly, and generally when people start getting nasty, I lose interest. So if I just repeat what others have said, please accept my apologies ahead of time, and I will be re-emphasizing something I have already posted.

It seems to me that there is a fundamentally flawed assumption at the base of all this discussion about pk'ing. It appears to me that people in this thread actually think that a classic shard, or shards, are going to replace, and/or do away with the game that is played on the regular production shards. This is not going to happen folks.

It seems to me that you all are trying to think of ways to protect the "sheep" that are going to flock to the classic shard. In my opinion, this is not going to happen. A classic shard is going to be frequented primarily by people who have good memories of the "old days" in UO, and some of the curious, or those that get talked in to checking it out by friends.

The sheep that played UO in the old days, those tens of thousands of victims who gladly flocked to Trammel when it opened, are never going to make a classic shard their home, and for the most part they don't even exist anymore. You don't need to worry about trying to protect them, because they aren't going to make an appearance. You need to worry more about keeping your classic shard true to the era that so many have fond memories of.

If you start messing around with pvp switches, excessive penalties for pk'ing, and/or specialized pvp zones, you are going to destroy the very thing that will attract your target audience. Let me repeat myself. You don't need to worry about protecting the sheep, because there aren't going to be any sheep on a "classic" shard, any more than there are sheep on Siege Perilous.

There are so many options for the sheep out there that simply weren't there in the early years of UO's life. And I expect most of them are far more attractive to sheep than a "classic" era UO shard. All kinds of MMO's with pvp switches, dedicated arenas for pvp, servers with pvp rule sets, and servers without them.

I was a communications major in university, and one of the things that gets drummed into you in communications studies is that you need to understand your target audience. That is something that all of you advocating for a classic shard need to take to heart. Your target audience isn't the sheep.

Your target audience is people who have good memories of the pre-Trammel days in UO, their friends and a few that will have their curiosity piqued by what they have read of the old days in UO. Unlike the old days in UO most of these people are people who have likely been playing MMO's for at least ten years. These people are gamers that love pvp, or at the very least a world built around pvp, and who are far more sophisticated when it comes to their knowlege of computers, and MMO's than we all were back in those days. And they all have strong opinions.

These are likely people who were power gamers back in those days, but who now have a decade of experience to add on top of that. They all have computers and connections that are much more powerful and faster than what was available back then. These are not sheep, and they don't need to be protected from the big bad pk wolves.

Ugh, wish I would have read this before posting my reply above.

Exactly what I was trying say, but much better put!

 

[Ray_]

Also, this is the publish that added the special attacks:



I have seen a lot of people talking about how they miss these. I do to. With a 1998 T2A shard, we would not have those.

No, no, no! No special hits!

The UO:R changes to combat were horrendously damaging to PvP and were complained about in PvP circles more than Trammel.

 

[Ray_]

*Bunch of patch notes*

I may be sounded like a broken record here, but oh well:

Dec 1999/Jan 2000 should be the target date for a classic shard.

Combat was balanced, most of the bad/broken T2A stuff was fixed, and most good additions (like runebooks (but non-blessed!) and kegs) were in.

T2A launch would be a mistake, I think. Dec '99/Jan '00 was as perfect as UO got.