Kind of curious about this anyone got the answer?

[Selurnoraa]

Sorry if this is a taboo subject for stratics forums or if its been answered before.

Every so often books will appear around luna advertising websites selling gold / uo items for real money. But they all have one thing in common and I was just curious if there is a reason for it. None of these site's offer any kind of service to Siege Perilous. Why don't they? Do they just believe its not worth their effort or is it simply impossible and if so why?

 

[Phangs_of_Phage]

Its not as profitable. If it is being farmed legit or AFK the risk is to great on siege. If its being duped there is a much higher payout on regular shards. I have seen some that sell on siege though.

 

[LordDrago]

Cost vs. benefit (profit).

Same reason there is no Disneyland Anchorage.

 

[Dol'Gorath]

Seiege is an island pretty much. You can't transfer gold or items on or off siege so theres little to no point in dealing with the shard.

 

[cazador]

Siege is shard for people that have worked from the ground up..no gold buying no mass amounts of armor and stuff it's too bad the community isn't embracing it enough I loved seize when I played it..but now it's like playing a single player game so my thief just sits there

Completely off topic..apologies lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sativa green]

there are a few people who offer gold transferring to siege actually. i moved 200m to siege so i could buy soulstones.

 

[Uvtha]

Sorry if this is a taboo subject for stratics forums or if its been answered before.

Every so often books will appear around luna advertising websites selling gold / uo items for real money. But they all have one thing in common and I was just curious if there is a reason for it. None of these site's offer any kind of service to Siege Perilous. Why don't they? Do they just believe its not worth their effort or is it simply impossible and if so why?

Like they said, can't script farm, and can't transfer. There used to be plenty of gold sellers, but the population but the population is just low. I imagine the only way its profitable anywhere is thanks to shard transfers since you can just hoard gold up and send it to where you want to sell it. No risk of getting stuck in a dead market.

 

[popps]

Siege is shard for people that have worked from the ground up..no gold buying no mass amounts of armor and stuff it's too bad the community isn't embracing it enough I loved seize when I played it..but now it's like playing a single player game so my thief just sits there

Completely off topic..apologies lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I think would do a big good to Siege is allowing at least Veteran players to own a second home on that shard on top of the one they have on any other commercial shard.

Quite a few players are deterred from playing on Siege because they do not want to loose their current home on some other shard because of the 1 house per account limit.

Sure, it is possible to get some room sharing current Siege houses as a coowner or friend but it is not the same thing as having one's own home.....

 

[chise2]

What I think would do a big good to Siege is allowing at least Veteran players to own a second home on that shard on top of the one they have on any other commercial shard.

Quite a few players are deterred from playing on Siege because they do not want to loose their current home on some other shard because of the 1 house per account limit.

Sure, it is possible to get some room sharing current Siege houses as a coowner or friend but it is not the same thing as having one's own home.....

Yeah I think that would bring quite a few people to the shard. Though I do think it would be wise to limit the size of the house. So we donlt end up with people just placing large plots then deciding to leave shortly after. Maybe limit it to the first page of the houseplacement tool? And yeah limit it to vet players of a certain year but donlt make it too restrictive in that regard either.

 

[Lightfoot]

That's a really nice idea!
Being a co-owner doesn't work. But I bet being able to have an extra house on Siege would really help the population.

Could we have some veteran Siege players comment on this idea? I sure there must be problems with this, but for the life of me I can't see what they are.

What I think would do a big good to Siege is allowing at least Veteran players to own a second home on that shard on top of the one they have on any other commercial shard.

Quite a few players are deterred from playing on Siege because they do not want to loose their current home on some other shard because of the 1 house per account limit.

Sure, it is possible to get some room sharing current Siege houses as a coowner or friend but it is not the same thing as having one's own home.....

 

[cazador]

Tbh you could let ppl build 5 houses the issue is they are so attached to their insurance and blessings..just can't hang >


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ludes]

That's a really nice idea!
Being a co-owner doesn't work. But I bet being able to have an extra house on Siege would really help the population.

Could we have some veteran Siege players comment on this idea? I sure there must be problems with this, but for the life of me I can't see what they are.

I don't see any problem with it myself.. there seems to be plenty of room.

It would be kinda a slap in the face for those of us that keep a separate account paid up so we can have a house on Siege.
I know if they did do it they'd lose quite a few subscriptions.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I don't see any problem with it myself.. there seems to be plenty of room.

It would be kinda a slap in the face for those of us that keep a separate account paid up so we can have a house on Siege.
I know if they did do it they'd lose quite a few subscriptions.

Not so sure on that. Siege players tend to have more accounts so that they can have more than one character rather than to have an extra house.
Having the ability to place a house might encourage more to come and try it. But those houses need to be removed if the player decides Siege isn't for them and goes back to prodo. The shard doesn't need a shed load of empty, abandoned houses.

 

[Tina Small]

Not so sure on that. Siege players tend to have more accounts so that they can have more than one character rather than to have an extra house.
Having the ability to place a house might encourage more to come and try it. But those houses need to be removed if the player decides Siege isn't for them and goes back to prodo. The shard doesn't need a shed load of empty, abandoned houses.

Agreed 100%. Also, keep in mind that if you decide to stop playing on Siege, you only have one character per account, so stuffing your valuables in the bank is not quite as convenient or easy as it is in other shards. So, the tendency for most players might be to just leave a house up because it's too much bother to try to stash things in the bank and then drop the house. That being the case, I lean more towards making people pay for their houses on Siege, just like they do everywhere else, to avoid a shard full of abandoned houses. On some shards, maybe that isn't such a big issue. But on a shard where non-mages have to run everywhere, it could eventually be a huge problem that keeps people from creating those types of characters as their sole character on an account.

 

[Rumpy]

None of the people offer items on Siege. Its a common place. Ever since I played there 8 years ago, it was never something offered.

When gold was $5-$10 a million on Prodo Shards, Gold was selling for $50 a mil on Siege.

Over 6-7 years ago, I use to sell gold, accounts, powerscrolls, and whatever other items I had and didn't need for cash. I made quite a bit of cash. All of our items and gold is earned here. No x-fer from other shards and we have not had to deal with scripters and duping. Remember when you could make maps and sell them to the mapmakers for good gold? You can't sell items to NPCs on Siege. Every bit of gold that exists on Siege has been farmed from monsters or spawns. Think on that one for a little bit..

 

[Tina Small]

Every bit of gold that exists on Siege has been farmed from monsters or spawns. Think on that one for a little bit..

Some of it also came from doing BODs or completing quests.

 

[Rumpy]

Some of it also came from doing BODs or completing quests.

A very minimal amount......

 

[Lightfoot]

Not so sure on that. Siege players tend to have more accounts so that they can have more than one character rather than to have an extra house.
Having the ability to place a house might encourage more to come and try it. But those houses need to be removed if the player decides Siege isn't for them and goes back to prodo. The shard doesn't need a shed load of empty, abandoned houses.

I agree. How about having to renew houses again on Siege. What if you had to do it every six weeks or so? Would that work for the current population? Or is it too much of a hassle?

 

[chise2]

Not so sure on that. Siege players tend to have more accounts so that they can have more than one character rather than to have an extra house.
Having the ability to place a house might encourage more to come and try it. But those houses need to be removed if the player decides Siege isn't for them and goes back to prodo. The shard doesn't need a shed load of empty, abandoned houses.

Yeah and that is a big reason why I suggested if they do this that it should be limited in what size the person can put down. So we donlt end up with a bunch of large empty houses taking up a bunch of room that could be used for players that actually play there.

 

[Obsidian]

Tbh you could let ppl build 5 houses the issue is they are so attached to their insurance and blessings..just can't hang >


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This was my experience. I was kindly offered accomodations for the six months or so when I tried out Siege. I thought my trepidation was all about a house there. I soon realized I am addicted to insurance for my high priced suits. I chose not to adapt and use fully replacable gear and just went back to the regular prodo shards where I can still play in fel but atleast won't lose my hard earned wares. At least that was my personal experience. So though housing for vet accounts sounds nice, there is more to it than that to increase the number of players on Siege. I suspect you would end up with a ton of houses placed, taking up prime real-estate and then many will sit dormant. If there is a second house option for Siege, I think there needs to be a size limit (10x10 or smaller) and it needs to have regular decay which is refreshed by opening your door.

 

[cazador]

This was my experience. I was kindly offered accomodations for the six months or so when I tried out Siege. I thought my trepidation was all about a house there. I soon realized I am addicted to insurance for my high priced suits. I chose not to adapt and use fully replacable gear and just went back to the regular prodo shards where I can still play in fel but atleast won't lose my hard earned wares. At least that was my personal experience. So though housing for vet accounts sounds nice, there is more to it than that to increase the number of players on Siege. I suspect you would end up with a ton of houses placed, taking up prime real-estate and then many will sit dormant. If there is a second house option for Siege, I think there needs to be a size limit (10x10 or smaller) and it needs to have regular decay which is refreshed by opening your door.

just make a super fast decay like every month..and after a month the house doesn't fall it becomes free to own first person to walk in owns the house and everything in it...lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk