I believe Morgana has changed her stance on Siege since that post from months ago.
What is my stance on Siege?
Well, honestly, my stance on Siege is very much the same as it is on the rest of the current shards. I do not care for the direction it was taken in by previous Dev teams. This is not a smear of Siege itself, but UO as a whole. The Devs of the past tried to make UO into a Diablo 2 clone, and in so doing, they utterly ruined a game that I loved. Siege at least never knew the taint of Trammel.
What would I do with Siege? Again, it boils down to UO, not Siege. But knowing that the majority of the current player base enjoys the current post-AoS model, I would probably not do anything with Siege. My desire to see a Classic Shard, as an
alternative to the current game has no more, and no less, to do with Siege as it does other shards. People that have accused me of wanting to see Siege changed or shut down are intentionally misrepresenting what I am saying. The
only thing that I have said to that effect is the exact same thing I have said about the other shards...and that is:
If the will of the players dictates change, then change should come.
If a Classic Shard is launched, and it becomes more popular than the other shards...then perhaps the current dev team needs to take a look at why that is the case. Do I think that will be the case...no, probably not. But in the end, it should all be about choice...and it should all be about what you, me, them, everyone, every paying customer of UO wants...not just the majority.
Siege has never been about satisfying the majority, and as long as there are players on that shard, I will fight tooth and nail to make sure that thier choices are not taken away from them the way it was from classic UO fans.