Changes to the # of CO-Owners

[TheDrAJ]

This was a responce from the latest questions and answers post

"Mesanna: Everyone will be happy to hear (or I hope they will be) that we as a team have talked about it and want to make a change to the housing co owners. Instead of 10 co owners we want to change it to 10 accounts which is 70 players total. "

This will not help the Siege players at all. Any chance for a solution that would help us also?

 

[Joey Porter]

This will make one person very very happy. Cannot remember there name but they have been petitioning for this.

 

[Amber Witch]

This will make one person very very happy. Cannot remember there name but they have been petitioning for this.

Oh you exaggerate so!

 

[Lady Storm]

This is a good thing ...(yes i know thats martha stewarts line) but it fits!
For those of us who need that many co's. As for Siege, well Siege is a special land and might take a different aproach to tackle that one. Give the Lady some slack kiddo, I am quite sure she wont over look Siege and Mugen.

 

[Silly Seadog]

Arrrr, can we be co-owned to more than one house?

 

[Petra Fyde]

Arrrr, can we be co-owned to more than one house?

Yes, that change was put in some time ago.

 

[claudia-fjp]

This will not help the Siege players at all. Any chance for a solution that would help us also?

Because the problem wasn't with Siege, it's with the normal servers. If we have 10 other accounts as it is now we can only coown the characters from 1 of them. On Siege you can coown ALL the characters from 10 accounts. You have 1/7th the characters so no change is needed for you. If someone on Siege has 70 accounts they want to coown to be equal then the help they need doesn't lie with EA.

 

[weins201]

Because the problem wasn't with Siege, it's with the normal servers. If we have 10 other accounts as it is now we can only coown the characters from 1 of them. On Siege you can coown ALL the characters from 10 accounts. You have 1/7th the characters so no change is needed for you. If someone on Siege has 70 accounts they want to coown to be equal then the help they need doesn't lie with EA.

LoL, Gamers Annomous But i have somone already telling me 10 accounts isnt enought, Ohh boy hee heee, no names but a bar is his signature

 

[TheDrAJ]

Because the problem wasn't with Siege, it's with the normal servers. If we have 10 other accounts as it is now we can only coown the characters from 1 of them. On Siege you can coown ALL the characters from 10 accounts. You have 1/7th the characters so no change is needed for you. If someone on Siege has 70 accounts they want to coown to be equal then the help they need doesn't lie with EA.

But it is a problem on siege with large guilds.

 

[claudia-fjp]

But it is a problem on siege with large guilds.

Really? Is that TRULY the issue? Isn't "large guilds on Siege" an oxymoron? Do you really have to let your whole guild have the ability to secure containers in your house instead of just using Friending and access levels?

On Siege I once had a friend coowned. He sold his account forgetting to mention it to me and I was looted of millions circa 2001. So COOWNING your entire "large" Siege guild probably isn't the best idea. Think of it as saving you from having to post about being robbed blind at a future date. You can have plenty of FRIENDS though.

 

[TheDrAJ]

Really? Is that TRULY the issue? Isn't "large guilds on Siege" an oxymoron? Do you really have to let your whole guild have the ability to secure containers in your house instead of just using Friending and access levels?

On Siege I once had a friend coowned. He sold his account forgetting to mention it to me and I was looted of millions circa 2001. So COOWNING your entire "large" Siege guild probably isn't the best idea. Think of it as saving you from having to post about being robbed blind at a future date. You can have plenty of FRIENDS though.

Well i see your point but still would like to be able to co own more than 10 to certain houses.

 

[MalagAste]

Really? Is that TRULY the issue? Isn't "large guilds on Siege" an oxymoron? Do you really have to let your whole guild have the ability to secure containers in your house instead of just using Friending and access levels?

On Siege I once had a friend coowned. He sold his account forgetting to mention it to me and I was looted of millions circa 2001. So COOWNING your entire "large" Siege guild probably isn't the best idea. Think of it as saving you from having to post about being robbed blind at a future date. You can have plenty of FRIENDS though.

This happened to me on GL. *sighs*.... And sadly whoever it was stole the only copy of the Legendary Llama part 2 in existence so I was never able to put on the play. What I wouldn't give for that book.... sadly it's likely been dropped in the trash years ago.

Ah well.


As for what Mesanna said I've been begging for this for years so I can hardly wait... She knows I bring it up at least once a month or so. Now if they finally do add it so I can have 70 per house I'll have to find a new pet project to harp on every month.

 

[Tazar]

LoL, Gamers Annomous But i have somone already telling me 10 accounts isnt enought, Ohh boy hee heee, no names but a bar is his signature

*sighs* Couldn't we go to 100 characters? It's a nice round number compared to 70...

 

[Flutter]

*sighs* Couldn't we go to 100 characters? It's a nice round number compared to 70...

I don't understand the question.
If it goes by account that means all the characters on the account are co-owned by default (like bans work). Is this correct?
Why is there a limit at all? If I want to co-own everyone on the damn shard to my house why prevent that? It's my problem if I get robbed or want to delete someone and have to go through 5k pages of names to find them...
I mean, if you're going to go in and change something like this anyway, why leave the limit?

 

[Tazar]

I don't understand the question.
If it goes by account that means all the characters on the account are co-owned by default (like bans work). Is this correct?

No... sadly it does not work that way. Characters are co-owned one by one rather than by account. I wish it were otherwise as it would make setting up cross-co-owns a lot easier.

Why is there a limit at all? If I want to co-own everyone on the damn shard to my house why prevent that? It's my problem if I get robbed or want to delete someone and have to go through 5k pages of names to find them...
I mean, if you're going to go in and change something like this anyway, why leave the limit?

Agreed. Back when the KR client was in use - there seemed to be no limit to the number of co-owners or friends. I really do not see the reason for a limit. If they feel that co-owners really should be limited - then I would suggest a new class for "accounts on the same master account" making them all automatically owners or able to be assigned owner status.

 

[Flutter]

No... sadly it does not work that way. Characters are co-owned one by one rather than by account. I wish it were otherwise as it would make setting up cross-co-owns a lot easier.


.

Then they aren't really changing anything??

 

[Lord Frodo]

No... sadly it does not work that way. Characters are co-owned one by one rather than by account. I wish it were otherwise as it would make setting up cross-co-owns a lot easier.

Mesanna: Everyone will be happy to hear (or I hope they will be) that we as a team have talked about it and want to make a change to the housing co owners. Instead of 10 co owners we want to change it to 10 accounts which is 70 players total.

It sounds like to me that they are going to change it to account not char. IE Take and Co-Own ONE char on a account and all chars on that account are now Co-Owned.

 

[Flutter]

It sounds like to me that they are going to change it to account not char. IE Take and Co-Own ONE char on a account and all chars on that account are now Co-Owned.

That's what I thought too. Others seem to be reading it differently. I wonder what interpretation is correct.

 

[claudia-fjp]

Why is there a limit at all? If I want to co-own everyone on the damn shard to my house why prevent that? It's my problem if I get robbed or want to delete someone and have to go through 5k pages of names to find them...
I mean, if you're going to go in and change something like this anyway, why leave the limit?

Keep in mind all of that data would have to be stored and tracked. I imagine it wouldn't be very healthy for the server or client to have 5k pages of coowners. Hell I can't even do a full run around the whole server without the client crashing from loading too much house data as it is.

 

[Lord Frodo]

That's what I thought too. Others seem to be reading it differently. I wonder what interpretation is correct.

If you look at what Messana said it gives you up to 70 players total, that is assuming all 10 of your accounts have 7 chars each. I I do not see any other way to read it.

 

[MalagAste]

I don't care either way.... I can't wait!

 

[Tzadkiel]

This was a responce from the latest questions and answers post

"Mesanna: Everyone will be happy to hear (or I hope they will be) that we as a team have talked about it and want to make a change to the housing co owners. Instead of 10 co owners we want to change it to 10 accounts which is 70 players total. "

This will not help the Siege players at all. Any chance for a solution that would help us also?

This makes me happy! Not that it is all about me.....Seige kinda took it on the chin though it appears.

 

[MissEcho]

Keep in mind all of that data would have to be stored and tracked. I imagine it wouldn't be very healthy for the server or client to have 5k pages of coowners. Hell I can't even do a full run around the whole server without the client crashing from loading too much house data as it is.

Actually it wouldn't put ONE extra bit of data on the server. Right now, those not co-owned are friended or accessed in another way, the only change to the data is which LIST the name appears on. I see no reason for the 70 limit on it either, seems a bit silly to have a limit. No idea how many 'friends' a house can have as never actually tried to 'max' it, but still why not 125 like other things or just no limit accept for the discretion of the house owner.

Still this is something I have also been asking for since around 2003-4 and it is good to finally see it happen.

 

[Flutter]

If you look at what Messana said it gives you up to 70 players total, that is assuming all 10 of your accounts have 7 chars each. I I do not see any other way to read it.

"Up to" is key. It sounds more like 10 accounts, not 70 characters. That is, if you don't want all your characters on account B co-owned to house A you still can't get your husband's account on there if you already have 10 accounts friended, even if you haven't hit 70 characters on your list.

 

[Flutter]

Keep in mind all of that data would have to be stored and tracked. I imagine it wouldn't be very healthy for the server or client to have 5k pages of coowners. Hell I can't even do a full run around the whole server without the client crashing from loading too much house data as it is.

That sounds like a "user" error to me. IE: your computer can't take the load.
There are lots of game that hold a lot more data than UO.

 

[Flutter]

Just want to go on record here, I'm not knocking the change. I am one of the people who need it.
What I don't understand is the limitations. Just like the limitations on pet stalls. I guess the game just needs to be updated to accept things like this. It just bugs me that they went in to fix it and they still set a limit of 10 accounts.

 

[claudia-fjp]

That sounds like a "user" error to me. IE: your computer can't take the load.
There are lots of game that hold a lot more data than UO.

My computer runs WoW and SWOTOR at the same time with no problem... It's a problem with the UO client, most likely a memory leak.