-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
[NETWORK] Ultima Online - Classic PvP server is back online!
- Thread starter watchertoo
- Start date
- Watchers 15
- Status
These swords need to go, and of course imbuing... What's so hard about imbuing a suit? That's not hard........ This isn't even remotely close to classic UO. Whatever happened to hunting.. Now you can just unravel and imbue a suit, on this so called "Classic Shard"
I found a flaw and im not surprised... The server states, "there are no item insurance or blessings". With that being said, the virtue suit is obtainable. So if someone gets the full suit, they'll have a blessed all 70's suit.. FIX IT DEVS!!
I found a flaw and im not surprised... The server states, "there are no item insurance or blessings". With that being said, the virtue suit is obtainable. So if someone gets the full suit, they'll have a blessed all 70's suit.. FIX IT DEVS!!
I know this has already been said but I just wanted to re-state it again, Classic is Pre-Aos.
I am unbelievably happy that the Devs are contemplating creating a classic shard and trust that they are sensible enough to know that SOTD is not a realistic gauge of how many people would play such a shard.
I think the only thing it will demonstrate is how many of the current player base would play on such a shard, whereas we all know the big subscription incentives would come from the thousands of old timers coming back to play UO as it was meant to be.
There is a clear market for the shard, the plethora of successful free shards prove this. The one advantage an EA shard would have is it would unite the community, which at the moment is fragmented and spread out over various free servers.
Speaking personally, I wouldn't hesitate in reactivating all my previous accounts to play on a EA classic shard, as opposed to a free shard. As I know this is the best chance I would have of bumping into old friends and reliving the good old days amongst a vibrant and diverse community.
I am unbelievably happy that the Devs are contemplating creating a classic shard and trust that they are sensible enough to know that SOTD is not a realistic gauge of how many people would play such a shard.
I think the only thing it will demonstrate is how many of the current player base would play on such a shard, whereas we all know the big subscription incentives would come from the thousands of old timers coming back to play UO as it was meant to be.
There is a clear market for the shard, the plethora of successful free shards prove this. The one advantage an EA shard would have is it would unite the community, which at the moment is fragmented and spread out over various free servers.
Speaking personally, I wouldn't hesitate in reactivating all my previous accounts to play on a EA classic shard, as opposed to a free shard. As I know this is the best chance I would have of bumping into old friends and reliving the good old days amongst a vibrant and diverse community.
E
Evlar
Guest
If it is not already obvious, they are going to rebadge Siege.
rebadge - (Business / Marketing) to relaunch (a product) under a new name, brand, or logo
99.9% Siege with a couple of minor changes such as x10 skill gain instead of ROT or make it night all the time, that you can code in 10 minutes. They are testing now its viability [of a rebadged Siege shard].
It is false or deceptive advertising to market it as a "Classic pvp" or "old school" shard.
My opinion now is that we already have Siege, and everyone knows how well that is going. So if this new Siege shard is going to succeed, it needs insurance.
Any shard running the AOS code, current production or all fel pvp needs insurance. say they make a normal production shard that is all fel ruleset it would need insurance to succeed. with out insurance the AOS item curve is to great. Take siege for example currently there is nowhere near the playerbase there was prior to aos, as the aos item curve ruined siege in the long run. Today's ability's and spells are far too great in power vs a person in 40's -60's resists, with out insurance the balance is ruined between the haves and have nots in a pvp setting. The reason siege is failing today is for that reason, its not rot. I and many of my friends quit siege in 05 for these very reasons.
Its pretty much either
no AOS and no insurance, since you dont need insurance
or AOS items and insurance
or AOS items and the items drop/cost like pancakes/peanuts. e.g. Faction Ornys cost 1 silver
People have spoken. They dont want hardcore and greatest risk vs reward. That is what Siege is now... hardcore, the greatest risk vs reward. It has been rejected, otherwise it would be more populated than Atlantic now.
I dont believe EA should go the route of no AOS no insurance. That is what the 3 classic freeshards do now [note there is only 3 Classic shards with a pop over 50], and it would be pointless for EA to compete because against them because not only are they simply awesome, but they are FREE. And the 3 classic freeshards only have combined maybe 3000 people. The time spent to get an EA shard T2A accurate, would mean a lot of time not spent to retain existing/gain PvE subscribers. If they spend time building a T2A accurate shard, they will lose more PvE subscribers than the new Classic subs.
F2P with frequent (every 3 months) boosters and a cash shop would the better option. Get a mass of F2P people in, and a % of them will get into PvP.
C
copycon
Guest
Insurance is a ridiculous concept for UO and should never have been introduced. But, the fact is that it was, so we'll leave it at that.
Personally, I hope that any "all fel ruleset" shard does away with every ridiculous piece of equipment that would warrant being insured/blessed to begin with and provides players a simple equipment/damage/resist formula to follow again. This would reintroduce balance to the play field and eliminate the mindset of players valuing their equipment above all else. That's just my opinion though.
No, what UO needs if it's going anywhere at all to be honest, is a way to deal with cheating. As in for real..!
C
copycon
Guest
This might be completely off point, but what cheating exists today that is severe enough to be a factor for this argument?
I'm not saying you are wrong, I just don't know and I'm curious.
B
Babble
Guest
It is hard to judge the potential of an pre AOS shard on the amount of freeshards out there. They have a few thousand players despite that they are not allowed to make profit or advertise properly. So now only the Hardcore of the old UO players play there.
I agree though that UO for the easier way should open some servers as f2p and ten judge how the acceptance of such a shard would be.
First they need a working item shop and about 2-3 weeks time to adjust the code of the servers. Proper itemtracking would help too as paying for items and then having ea's tracking systems and bugs losing them is also not really that comfortable for a f2p shard.
C
copycon
Guest
I think what a lot of people aren't understanding is the level of impact "free-to-play" would have on UO. Not only is it a HUGE risk, but it would be the first IP that EA owns that would be as such (that I'm aware of?) and on top of that they are not prepared to support it with their staffing situation.
An EA classic shard would still be a significant risk, but it would not stray away from the basic elements of running the business while "free-to-play" would turn the entire business model upside down. It should also not be compared to the "classic shard" or the "free shard" crowd because they are completely different elements and interests. In my opinion, a classic shard would still be viewed by EA as any other shard but with a few fundamental differences mainly being the ruleset.
B
Babble
Guest
You are a bit optimistic that EA even considers UO in their calculations.
By the same time next ear EA wishes to have more than million new subscription for their new game and UO will be nothing compared to that.
I think EA already has f2p games just no mmo yet. There is a shooter (Battlefield Heroes) out there and the ultima facebook game or so is also f2p, so they try the market.
In EA terms a classic shard is useless and they are better off milking the rest out of the customer base.
I see no realy risks with UO at the moment, as some people have heard of it but most never tried it. It is a dated game with a dwindling customer base for a full subscription price.
And I still advise EA to keep their hands of a classic shard as they just cannot properly handle it.
By the same time next ear EA wishes to have more than million new subscription for their new game and UO will be nothing compared to that.
I think EA already has f2p games just no mmo yet. There is a shooter (Battlefield Heroes) out there and the ultima facebook game or so is also f2p, so they try the market.
In EA terms a classic shard is useless and they are better off milking the rest out of the customer base.
I see no realy risks with UO at the moment, as some people have heard of it but most never tried it. It is a dated game with a dwindling customer base for a full subscription price.
And I still advise EA to keep their hands of a classic shard as they just cannot properly handle it.
C
copycon
Guest
I may be optimistic and you seem to be very pessimistic, so we may have something to discuss. LOLYou are a bit optimistic that EA even considers UO in their calculations.
By the same time next ear EA wishes to have more than million new subscription for their new game and UO will be nothing compared to that.
I think EA already has f2p games just no mmo yet. There is a shooter (Battlefield Heroes) out there and the ultima facebook game or so is also f2p, so they try the market.
In EA terms a classic shard is useless and they are better off milking the rest out of the customer base.
I see no realy risks with UO at the moment, as some people have heard of it but most never tried it. It is a dated game with a dwindling customer base for a full subscription price.
And I still advise EA to keep their hands of a classic shard as they just cannot properly handle it.
I do believe that EA is considering UO less and less on the profitability scale because of the dwindling subscriber numbers, and that is unfortunate. I also believe that the people who are responsible for supporting UO want to keep their jobs, so they are going to do everything necessary to prevent the powers that be from turning a blind eye, so I think this is why we're still here.
As far as saying that EA "can't handle" a classic shard, that is just a ridiculous statement to make. A blanket statement like that just proves that you really haven't given it much thought and that you think anything that may not agree with your ideas will not work. Please look at the problem from an outsiders perspective. It has been proven that there is a large demand for a classic shard, and if there is an effort to provide non-paying customers what they want, it will work.
B
Babble
Guest
Overall the possibilities to make profitable mmos is geting tougher.
Champins Online is the next that announced to go f2p and others just announce that they will start as f2p games.
So these are the games people will try first, not a game with a 14 day trial, buggy webshop and outdated graphics with an opportunity then to pay a full fee after the trial.
Mythic just covered their arses by supporting UO, because if they had cancelled 1 of their 3 mmos what would be left now?
As for EA being able to support a Classic shard?
Have you seen how they treated Siege?
A shard with a different rule system and they were often incapable to even give it a little love.
And the problem is there is no REAL demand for a classic UO shard.
We are all a bunch of longtime gamers who can remember a different ruleset.
The Millions out there waiting for games don't even know UO, nor do they care.
And EA is about the Millions not the peanuts.
Champins Online is the next that announced to go f2p and others just announce that they will start as f2p games.
So these are the games people will try first, not a game with a 14 day trial, buggy webshop and outdated graphics with an opportunity then to pay a full fee after the trial.
Mythic just covered their arses by supporting UO, because if they had cancelled 1 of their 3 mmos what would be left now?
As for EA being able to support a Classic shard?
Have you seen how they treated Siege?
A shard with a different rule system and they were often incapable to even give it a little love.
And the problem is there is no REAL demand for a classic UO shard.
We are all a bunch of longtime gamers who can remember a different ruleset.
The Millions out there waiting for games don't even know UO, nor do they care.
And EA is about the Millions not the peanuts.
V
Vyal
Guest
You have no idea what your talking about...
C
copycon
Guest
You should not lump Siege together with the classic shard discussion.Mythic just covered their arses by supporting UO, because if they had cancelled 1 of their 3 mmos what would be left now?
As for EA being able to support a Classic shard?
Have you seen how they treated Siege?
A shard with a different rule system and they were often incapable to even give it a little love.
And the problem is there is no REAL demand for a classic UO shard.
We are all a bunch of longtime gamers who can remember a different ruleset.
The Millions out there waiting for games don't even know UO, nor do they care.
And EA is about the Millions not the peanuts.
There were many things that have caused Siege to become what it is today. I will admit that the Siege ruleset was a huge part of what has caused it to ultimately fail, but Siege was made with the intention of appealing to "hardcore" players. Today, players simply do not want to spend the amount of time that is needed to develop a character on Siege; especially given its current state (empty) and the rules that apply, which as I understand have some amount of post-AoS butchery involved. I think those are the bigger reasons why it failed moreso than the simple "fel only" concept.
Furthermore, a classic shard will appeal to a much wider audience, and while some of those will be the same "hardcore" players that left Siege in the first place, there is an even bigger audience waiting for a "true" classic shard experience.
If you want to think that a classic shard has no "REAL" demand, I implore you to look a little closer.
B
Babble
Guest
I never have
Does not stop me, though.. well mostly.. sometimes... what did you say again?
B
Babble
Guest
Mentioning Siege was more how they managed to handle a seperate ruleset.
Advantage of a Classic set might be, they add it once and then only bugfix it, still I am not convinced.
The wider audience of classic supportes is on boards and who knows how many would come back to play UO?
Enough for 1 shard? I guess so, but would that be enough for EA?
Mythic I think never even managed to get their DAoC classic server up.
I think I looked a bit closer, not sure if it is close enough for you though.
And if you could point me to a european roleplay shard I would be grateful. Most shards are US based and time difference is ....
Advantage of a Classic set might be, they add it once and then only bugfix it, still I am not convinced.
The wider audience of classic supportes is on boards and who knows how many would come back to play UO?
Enough for 1 shard? I guess so, but would that be enough for EA?
Mythic I think never even managed to get their DAoC classic server up.
I think I looked a bit closer, not sure if it is close enough for you though.
And if you could point me to a european roleplay shard I would be grateful. Most shards are US based and time difference is ....
C
copycon
Guest
No one truly knows exact numbers, but the demand is there. The "if you build it, they will come" analogy definitely applies.
DAoC is a very different beast with a different timeline and different motivations, so I won't try to analyze that in contrast to UO.
Here you go:I think I looked a bit closer, not sure if it is close enough for you though.
And if you could point me to a european roleplay shard I would be grateful. Most shards are US based and time difference is ....
Let me google that for you
Let me google that for you
Let me google that for you
Message boards all over the internet are riddled with posts about the topic. A handful of free shards have been designed and released with the specific intention to provide the experience and are still maintaining popularity. Heck, even Mortal Online with all of its hype before release was being marketed to thousands of people with UO as one of its primary design inspirations.
V
Vyal
Guest
Not sure if this will get removed but there is a certain free shard thats classic and has more players then ATL GL and LS combined on at any given time so. The only reason they play is because it's classic so why not take a server and host a classic shard? If they can host this server im sure they can do that and I will bet tons and tons of people would return and play.
O
olduofan
Guest
PVPers will be the death of UO
I wish we could get a pre pub 16 not this chit
and wtf is up with the no night sight black ahhh maybe they never played back in 99 but you could still see in dungeons with out nite site back then now even in my house I cant see
ohh i forgot it was because of the elfs know asked for so they screwed humans over way to go keep doing things that know one wants and you wounder why the numbers keep falling each month LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYER BASE PRESENT AND PAST
I wish we could get a pre pub 16 not this chit
and wtf is up with the no night sight black ahhh maybe they never played back in 99 but you could still see in dungeons with out nite site back then now even in my house I cant see
ohh i forgot it was because of the elfs know asked for so they screwed humans over way to go keep doing things that know one wants and you wounder why the numbers keep falling each month LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYER BASE PRESENT AND PAST
Here is the reasoning not to do it is...
There are 3 free classic shards with reasonable populations. There may be others but they have < 50 people. Lets put the number at around 3000 playing classic free shards now. You could argue that it is even less because the freeshards let you run multiple clients concurrently.
So how many of these 3000 can EA get... to go from FREE to pay $13/month? I'd say not many unless EA goes Free 2 Play with the Classic shard. But if they do go F2P, the money that EA would make would be peanuts and not make the venture profitable.
Lets say by some miracle, all 3000 decide to pay $13/month instead of not pay at all... which isnt going to happen. Now to get the Classic shard to be T2A accurate, a lot of other UO content development will just not happen. Guaranteed if nothing happens for 12 months for production shards whilst they make a T2A Classic shard, way more than 3000 subscribers will leave in that time.
So if EA picks up 3000 subscribers from the freeshards, but loses 5000 existing subscribers, overall it will lose a net amount of 2000 subscribers, which means UO is less profitable.
There are 3 free classic shards with reasonable populations. There may be others but they have < 50 people. Lets put the number at around 3000 playing classic free shards now. You could argue that it is even less because the freeshards let you run multiple clients concurrently.
So how many of these 3000 can EA get... to go from FREE to pay $13/month? I'd say not many unless EA goes Free 2 Play with the Classic shard. But if they do go F2P, the money that EA would make would be peanuts and not make the venture profitable.
Lets say by some miracle, all 3000 decide to pay $13/month instead of not pay at all... which isnt going to happen. Now to get the Classic shard to be T2A accurate, a lot of other UO content development will just not happen. Guaranteed if nothing happens for 12 months for production shards whilst they make a T2A Classic shard, way more than 3000 subscribers will leave in that time.
So if EA picks up 3000 subscribers from the freeshards, but loses 5000 existing subscribers, overall it will lose a net amount of 2000 subscribers, which means UO is less profitable.
C
copycon
Guest
I was waiting for someone like you to respond...
Secondly, regarding the "F2P' point and quoting my earlier comment:
How does this argument hold any water? FYI, there are free shards that provide the experience from every era including the current, and there are still people that pay EA money to provide UO as a service. Most people have a natural inclination to feel like they get what they pay for, and that is why people will pay EA to provide a "superior" experience over anything that a free shard can provide to them. Also, free shards are not appealing to people who do not "trust" the people responsible and this is a bigger audience than you might think.
Secondly, regarding the "F2P' point and quoting my earlier comment:
None of us know the real amount of time that will be needed to do this. You need to understand that EA will not forego development efforts of existing shard content to work on a classic shard. The classic shard will become a bullet point on a long list of items, and will be worked on as time allows just like every other existing project.
Again, these are imaginary numbers and you are predicting doomsday before it happens. Anyone who thinks that existing subscribers will suddenly disappear if development of a classic shard is announced needs to take a step back and think about it logically.
B
Babble
Guest
But for developers shadowbane then, darkfall and mortal online now are the measurements they take. None of those supported a decent online community. And a topic for another thread would be why pure pvp shards are just doomed to fail.No one truly knows exact numbers, but the demand is there. The "if you build it, they will come" analogy definitely applies.
DAoC is a very different beast with a different timeline and different motivations, so I won't try to analyze that in contrast to UO.
Here you go:
Let me google that for you
Let me google that for you
Let me google that for you
Message boards all over the internet are riddled with posts about the topic. A handful of free shards have been designed and released with the specific intention to provide the experience and are still maintaining popularity. Heck, even Mortal Online with all of its hype before release was being marketed to thousands of people with UO as one of its primary design inspirations.
As for the links I have probably accounts on some of those hits and I will probably check out the new one they made with a new map.
C
Cal_Mythic
Guest
Hi, not certain if anyone is going to read this or if you would like to continue the arguments. But, the interaction here has been interesting to watch.
Shard of the Dead is an old play area that we resurrected for Halloween. The gameplay is experimental. This is not an intro to a Classic Server.
Recently, someone asked when Test Centers were going to be fun again. So we put Shard of the Dead together for Halloween.
The ideas come from a few styles that devs have played with over the years. We intend to change the play over time. The good thing about the shard is we can change anything anytime until we find the right mix of ideas.
We may try color wars again ... or a few other things.
We are leaving it up to watch what happens, and to add and take away things.
A warning: don't believe anything but the publish notes. The Shard of the Dead is nothing more than what the pub notes say.
Yes, Curse.com got a sneak peek. He actually added some ideas, and he did it constructively.
Again Shard of the Dead is a play area and not intended to be anything more than that.
We have not had a place to just try out things in a while.
Shard of the Dead is an old play area that we resurrected for Halloween. The gameplay is experimental. This is not an intro to a Classic Server.
Recently, someone asked when Test Centers were going to be fun again. So we put Shard of the Dead together for Halloween.
The ideas come from a few styles that devs have played with over the years. We intend to change the play over time. The good thing about the shard is we can change anything anytime until we find the right mix of ideas.
We may try color wars again ... or a few other things.
We are leaving it up to watch what happens, and to add and take away things.
A warning: don't believe anything but the publish notes. The Shard of the Dead is nothing more than what the pub notes say.
Yes, Curse.com got a sneak peek. He actually added some ideas, and he did it constructively.
Again Shard of the Dead is a play area and not intended to be anything more than that.
We have not had a place to just try out things in a while.
C
copycon
Guest
Thanks for the clarification. I think all of the conflicting information has been misleading until now and has obviously turned this into another Classic Server debate which is how I got here.
B
Babble
Guest
Wasn't it always a classic shard debate?Thanks for the clarification. I think all of the conflicting information has been misleading until now and has obviously turned this into another Classic Server debate which is how I got here.
We all quickly agreed the shard is not classic and Calvin comfirmed it.
What we will never be able to know is with what amount of players will ea be happy to make a classic shard?
Does it need to be one full shard or 3 to make it happen?
Or is it a lost dream as some developers are/were convinced that UO has only one way to go and that is forward.
So, now that Cal Crowner has cleared that up, its the Stratics employee who branded it all 'Classic' and 'Old School' going to step forward and apologise for his/her ignorance and incompetence in misleading half the UO Stratics community?
B
Babble
Guest
Pfff, gave me a good excuse to post
Wait why do I need an excuse?
Wait why do I need an excuse?
V
Vyal
Guest
It would be nice if this was a play area but people can't do jack on this shard...
Are the devs off today or whats the deal? We just have to deal with ten million red healers? Cal?!
I just don't understand why the morons get a response from the producer of UO over moronic comments but we can't get a response about the millions of healers.
Are the devs off today or whats the deal? We just have to deal with ten million red healers? Cal?!
I just don't understand why the morons get a response from the producer of UO over moronic comments but we can't get a response about the millions of healers.
So from what I've been gathering from reading through everything is that all the arguments stem from a non-EA/Mythic reporter mis-labeling this as a classic pvp server. Think people need to be more careful when reporting as most of the arguments in this thread are all over the whole "classic" label here.
V
Vaelix
Guest
Its kinda entertaining to see how much Attention these threads got when we believed this was some kinda of "Classic UO" Experiment though, only to be turned around and forgotten now (Most likely)
Thanks for warning me, I almost reactivated my UO accounts thinking I could support a CLASSIC server with OLD SCHOOL stuff on it.
To me it's a sincere insult to siege, false advertisement aside.
But I understand you all... hmm exept HD with his famous numbers, fayled with his incomprehensible garble, dakkon you do repeat yourself alot and the rest you know who you are so don't do it again.
But thanks Cal, at least we know we cannot count on any classic server for years.
Great...
yea... mystisicm more...
Whose idea of fun was this? To me, this is more of a sick joke than a fun gaming experience. "Hey, here's an idea, why don't we bring back some of the old rulesets but include a bunch of the new stuff that annoys people who have been asking for the old stuff. Oh, and let's bring back traditional glass swords because that will be funny when people are one hit killing each other on the battlefield." It seems like these "ideas of fun" don't stem from what the player base is actually asking for. Whatever happened to the REAL fun test servers like Test Abyss and Santa's Slay (I hope there is someone else out there who knows what I'm referring to). THOSE were the fun test shards, SOTD is just garbage.
Even when it's only a temp server, I believe it could be worth to keep it up.
It sure need a few fix, this glass sword have to go and even when life as red should be hard, red healers need to leave them in peace.
What I love most is the one facet only thing. There may need to be a limit in size of houses, something like 64 to 100 square tiles should max.
I think you should have focus on open PvP and fun. Try not to do same mistake as earlier in UO and try to protect blue to much. Find a balance with around 10-15 % reds and alot of blues outside town doing farming, garthering, tresure hunting and fighting PK's.
I do believe, that we with imbuing do have a chance for a good PvP shard, just keep Faction arties of the shard. Let the crafters make the armor and let them get some bonus from crafting in town crafting shops.
I would like to limit how many crafting add ons there can be in player houses or make it so there is no private houses and add ons only can be placed if doors and teleporters are public and only on first floor. Safe second floor should be ok
I teally would love to see a permenent PvP test shard and hope this will be a success and will end up with some permenent PvP shards.
I don't believe in a classic shard but I do belive in a PvP shard with only one facet.
I was repeating myself in the hopes that people would get that this was not representative of Classic, then I just hit a point where I was like whatever Cal will show up eventually and put an end to this and sure enough he did.
I would also urge those who post announcements on stratics to be careful of how you title those posts, some people read them the wrong way and start a firestorm out of basically nothing.
B
Baaka Gaijin
Guest
I really thought about coming back for this and if it was done right, who knows. I played on pacific for 3 years from end of 98 to mid 2002, and that was the best gaming experience of my life.
I would like to see how they do at implementing something like this. I disagree with some of their choices already but I guess that is just the way it goes. I dont think anything will be able to bring back the magic of UO close to its initial release. For now I am playing on the runuo free shard, Revelation. I like the idea of UO "After" a great cataclysm. The have made it new whilst bringing back the old and that works for me.
I will be watching this classic shard for sure though.
I would like to see how they do at implementing something like this. I disagree with some of their choices already but I guess that is just the way it goes. I dont think anything will be able to bring back the magic of UO close to its initial release. For now I am playing on the runuo free shard, Revelation. I like the idea of UO "After" a great cataclysm. The have made it new whilst bringing back the old and that works for me.
I will be watching this classic shard for sure though.
V
Vyal
Guest
Leave the shard up for good but get rid of the stupid swords please.
No swords please....
I am not crying because I get killed with them or anything but just remove them and leave the shard up just add some sorta dif thing or something like the ability to tame undead I dunno.
I hate killing people now cause there is no real fights I just go grab a sword and one shot someone cause I dont trust them not to have a sword.....
No swords please....
I am not crying because I get killed with them or anything but just remove them and leave the shard up just add some sorta dif thing or something like the ability to tame undead I dunno.
I hate killing people now cause there is no real fights I just go grab a sword and one shot someone cause I dont trust them not to have a sword.....
This isn't technically true as the large majority of people I know who played back in the day and are playing f2p classic shards, all had multiple UO accounts. Speaking for myself I had 3 active accounts on UO from 1998 till just after AOS and if EA were to create a classic shard I'd reactivate all 3 in an instant.
G
Gandie
Guest
Thanks for that Cal. However you still made me re-activate my account, and the shard is still fun, just get rid of all the healers and the glass swords!
And HD, where the hell do you get all those numbers from? Let me guess?.....
And HD, where the hell do you get all those numbers from? Let me guess?.....
C
copycon
Guest
I don't think that establishing a community was the intention, but I do agree that it is a wasted opportunity.
If the goal is to judge the viability of a "classic PvP" aka "classic" shard then I don't think this is an accurate platform to do so by any means. But, if the goal was to make another test center to allow devs to play around, then mission accomplished...
Who knows, if enough like it, maybe they will keep it up. If it can draw back alot former PvP players, why would EA say no thanks to the extra money?
About community, what do you mean with no possibility, is it because it will go down in 2 months or because it is a no trammel shard? Some of the strongest community was born long before we got trammel ruleset.
Cal, if you make it Abyss Shard style (i.e. -- the color wars) with Capture the Flag, which I mentioned a while ago on this board....it will be well worth it.
I have read some SOTD threads, but haven't found an info weather I can safely place a house without loosing the other house on the prod shard on that account.
Does anyone know if we can safely place a house ?
Does anyone know if we can safely place a house ?
- Status