*cough* Just Atlantic and Great Lakes? I like my own shard, thank you.
-
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!
NEWS [UO.Com] Publish and Patch today (Read post #292 before posting))
Absolutely... ;-)Some folk do love to exaggerate. The game existed for years with no such thing as a shard transfer. Many people play quite happily on one shard without them. My characters don't go travelling.
What a total fail. Why even release these patch notes if you can't be bothered to talk with the player base....I can't believe I still pay for this.
This isn't the issue though. People who have payed for 14+ years have come to expect this feature in the game and without some reasonable discussion anyone should be able to see why subs are up in arms. Without these shields I can't see why one would purchase a secondary account using the secure transfer service, it certainly has to reduce the "value" of these older accounts to a degree.
Again it's just reinforcing the idea that the team doesn't feel they have anyone to answer to and nothing bad will result from any action they take. I guess the minions can just eat cake though, right?
10:30 in Fairfax, and still the silence is deafening...
I've heard said "It's not what's done, it was the way they did it.". I find this an excellent example. I don't think anyone can't tolerate a nerf for a good reason, but what was the good reason? We all want to see a better game, but what was the benefit here? When there's just silence, people start thinking... more EA greed? Fix a bug while punishing the innocent and winking at the exploiters? I had really hoped Broadsword would take a new direction, but it honestly appears as more of the same in regards to communication. It really takes very little time to communicate with the players. This being my only serious concern with this midnight patch. Mesanna has been a saint on so many fronts, I *know* she deeply cares about the game and the players. So I find this situation very curious. This is Broadsword's first major brouhaha so I highly doubt they will reverse themselves. However, the lack of communication we've had on this issue, and the game in general, I find disappointing and I feel there's little reason or excuse for it.
I have thought that was the case for a very long time, but they have usually managed to get away with treating us like this in the past - though it's hard to argue it has not been a contributing factor in the drop in numbers over the years.
Thing is the cumulative effect of fake 'consultations', ignoring of feedback, shoddy work and general contempt for us (despite the endless spin about how 'important' we are and how much they ''love' us) is wearing down any inclination to keep paying these awful people money. They have lived off the fact that the game and community was so good it kept me involved and prepared to keep paying them because on balance, they were not bad enough to make it an overall negative experience being their customer.
It's getting a closer call on that every time they make another stupid, poorly considered or outright secretive decision.
Last edited:
Problem is, its still the same team running the show, just different building they are based in. Those who we would wish to communicate with us have not changed and they have taken their stinking attitude towards communication with them to a new company.
I've honestly watched EA since day one. They are seriously despised by a vast amount of gamers, lol. My friends and I like calling them the evil empire, lol. I honestly think there is such a corporate structure at EA everyone there is afraid to say anything that might backfire on them in the least little way. EA certainly has no qualms about pulling the rug out from under their employees at the drop of a hat. It's the bottom line for EA and that's all they care about, but they do it in such a careless way. It's almost like they make money by accident. They NEVER learn from past mistakes. How many online games have they half heatedly published, released buggy and unfinished, then instead of sticking it out and actually developing it just shut it down? They grab the initial burst of money then say, "Good enough!" I think of Earth and Beyond, liked it, they blame low subscriptions and close it. Not that they released it unfinished and buggy with little content and did little to fix it. Same with Motor City Online, could have been an awesome game. Could have been a great game and it wasn't that people don't like racing games, I assure you. Going all the way back to when they bought Gamestorm and shut it down after briefly owning it and running it into the ground around 2001. I bet if a small development team could buy UO and get it out from under control of EA this could be a great game, in regards to subscriptions. I already think it's a great game, I've played them all. This one holds up. But as long as EA has their tentacles in it, I think this is what we're stuck with.
Well there still seems to be confusion if it's even character bound or account bound. I read it as character bound. They could at the very minimum take the time to perhaps write a paragraph and make it crystal clear. lol I think they've probably drafted 17 versions of what they want to say to us and are still afraid to hit the enter key, lol.
I agree with your main sentiment, but in this issue the responsibility falls directly on Broadsword's shoulders to communicate. Even if the reason for the change is due to EA wanting more transfer token sales. I think the go to excuse of "it's EA" gets used too often by many folks here - not you, I'm speaking in general - to avoid admitting that the current Game Dev's have poor communication in general on issues such as this one. I like the current Dev team quite a bit, but some folks have always got an excuse for them and believe they walk on water - nothing is ever the teams fault. They do a good job, but they fall short in a couple of key areas that could really use some improvement on their part, communication being one of them.
It's actually even more irritating when Broadsword shows us that they are able to have good interaction with the community on issues - see Kryonix's awesome interaction on VvV - but then it's radio silence on nerfs such as this one.
I follow you and don't totally disagree. But this Broadsword move was entirely a cost saving situation. Plus a nice side shift and song and dance as a bonus. "We at EA didn't fail, we trusted Broadsword and they dropped the ball!"
Whatever name you want it called this week it's still EA's baby. I personally don't believe for a second there isn't someone watching the numbers at EA each and every day with one finger on the button, lol. Yes it is still Broadswords responsibility to communicate to us, but it all filters down, and EA is at the peak of the pyramid. I don't doubt for a second who holds the puppet's strings.
I'm going to clarify that it IS character based, and not account based. I just did a transfer. It says that same char cannot transfer for another 20k (2 weeks) mins, but another char on that same acct can transfer in 1.4k (24 hours) mins.
I think you still left with a lot of cranky folks out there, and I don't think this thread is dead yet, lol. But that certainly would have helped keep the fire in check. As in the way it was presented to us originally.
The game also existed for more than two years "with no such thing" as skill locks, nearly five years "with no such thing" as stat locks, and so on. "Many people" were quite satisfied with old-fashioned, hand-operated washing machines, typically with no concept of what could be better, and for thousands of years before civilization "existed" for many thousands of years with all clothes being washed by hand.
Just because something didn't exist before does not mean people should be content to do without it. When something was given that many players enjoyed, then suddenly nerfed because of an exploit, players have every right to complain if the solution is short-sighted enough to hurt honest players more than the exploiters. If someone found a way to dupe thousands of Slithers, would the answer be to limit how often a player can fight Medusa?
Just pondering while I drink coffee and stall working on the house (RL house, btw). Seems who this would hit the hardest with the most damage would be the people who buy and sell gold and time codes. Anyone have a conspiracy theory on this? I could see this having a dramatic effect on them. *Sigh* Guess I'll go working on the house....
Seems who this would hit the hardest with the most damage would be the people who buy and sell gold and time codes. Anyone have a conspiracy theory on this? I could see this having a dramatic effect on them. *Sigh* Guess I'll go working on the house.... Sounds like u just basically gotta pick a char on each shard u travel too that will be your "able to travel" char. If u can just xfer to one shard and grab your dif char on that shard to carry on to next one in 25 hours like normal doesn't seem to huge a deal to me. Makes it rough for someone to take the best char they have to catch most events on most shards I guess but that doesn't bother me either. I take the time to train characters on the shards I enjoy playing for events or otherwise I see no prob with others having to do so. Ofc some wont wanna have to pick a char to leave somewhere for 2 weeks but there's always the non shield token to get around that right? That's how it sounds like it works to me atm..guess we shall see within the next day or so...I would support a vet reward trade in program to help make it right with those who now feel like they wasted perhaps many high end reward picks. Like u trade in a year 14 reward you can choose anything 14 year or under perhaps to replace it?
Hardest? Maybe so. Does it adversely affect almost everyone who has shard shields? Yep. Is is a suitable, appropriate, explained and well considered reaction to what might be (we can't be sure because as usual secrecy is paramount with anything at all to do with UO) a problem? No.....
If it is a serious issue, then they could have done it like this :
1 : Announce there is a discovered bug/fault/exploit involving shard shield transfers so we are temporarily stopping those while we sort it out - allow people ONE transfer since they can have characters stuck on a shard at the time of this action, and don't deserve any serious penalties for doing what was perfectly allowable a day earlier...
2 : Find the exact cause of the bug/fault/exploit and fix THAT, not nerf the legitimate use of an item by the majority of the people who use it. Tell people about progress on fixing it, explain how serious the fault is, and try get people on-side - most of us want a better, less exploited and properly run game so we will mostly understand, as long as the progress is FAST and not the "we are looking at this and will have an answer soon" that has been discredited so many times in the past bt being allowed to drag on for weeks.
Those need a genuine understanding of what communication with the playerbase means, and a commitment to doing it. So far it looks to be the usual state of the game - genuine fixes are too hard so we throw out a blanket 'fix' that does half the job whilst annoying people, and hope everybody forgets about it in a week or two..
Thank you for testing it.
I'm still upset by how this was handled and I am still upset about this change. This was extremely poorly handled.
So if this is character based, what does this accomplish other than being irritating? Anyone who is exploiting can still transfer every 25 hours with the inconvenience of having to move items from character X to Character Y. All it does is make your honest vets irritated and annoyed. I have seven characters on my main shard and I'm down to ONE account. So when I transfer characters... I will now have to move everything in my chars bank and backpack to a new character on every shard to get past this annoying timer? Really? So I get to jeopardize my items, gold etc or I can wait two weeks. What is the point of that? That isn't going to make me buy a transfer token from EA. It doesn't do ANYTHING other than make folks get more annoyed with this game.
If this about money, this is NOT the way to make that happen. I think it will have the opposite effect.
If this about an exploit, I can't see how this fixes anything as they can still transfer just as often. This hurts the vets who have BUILT characters on their home shards and no open slots.
If this about people hopping in on the EM Events, there are better ways to fix that than this nerf. Either a the EM pops a gate that checks how long the character has been on that shard and the destination is a place you can't recall into or open a gate. Have a one way gate out. OR make a basic land mass for these events that has the rule that characters must have been on the shard for X number of weeks. I've seen areas off-limits in the past outside of new characters and does a random inventory of players and boots those who aren't within the time parameters. You all have made amazing content and I know you could code a solution without punishing everyone.
My account is 203 months, that's roughly 16 years and 9 months.
I myself do not have any shard shields. But I do have freinds and guildies that do, that makes it very helpful to transfer a few items for me from here to there. I also know many people that only play 1-2 accounts that utilize these shields to explore and interact on other shards. TBH if we didnt have these shields Broadsword might as well do a shard merger because most shards are extremely dead and at least the shields help populate these shards. What I think is the bottom line is by the use of shard shields no one is buying the transfer tokens off the origin site which is hurting thier pocket books. But they may want to rethink this, is it worth the money they make off selling tokens to lose subscriptions? Well thats my 2 cents they should leave these shields as is and just fix the problem if there really is a problem but again i feel its that they are losing money.
Last edited:
Petra
The whole isue is you can at this time only move 1 character from the shields owning account at one time in a 25 hour period.
Bleak came on and made an ambiguous statement that others here I think misread asthe change will now let you move as many of your shields account characters at once but they cant return for 2 weeks.
This is one of many things the DEV need to come here and talk about on this. I was not wrong in the facts.
Many are not happy with this short notice, no viable reason for a wide scoping change.
I once did a move to a shard I needed lrc sets on for my characters there as I could not find a single piece to save my life! I deliverd them and set him up to return home with extra gifts from the shard that were taking up valuable lockdowns in my tiny homes on said shard.
But something happened in RL and i didnt get back to him right away.... over 2 months. By the time I needed him to do another move for equipment he was no where to be found... I forgot where I put him!!!!! I litteraly went from shard to shard looking for his tush,
So you see this is going to be for me close to that experence and I am not happy about it.
Bad enough I loose him on my own but to have UO help me..........geesh
I can understand if it is to stop the gold sellers...but the point will be moot when the gold on account goes in...
I can also see a change if a bug or dupe has come up and a change is needed to plug it ...but a 2 week wait???
I have a hell of a time with 25 hours at times when I am surfing the shards to do something and an lacking a part of what I need is sitting 5 shards up on the list and I want to get that part and then do it NOW... hehe
(Yes I bounce on many shards in a day. I have always multi tasked and its a habit I encourage in people)
The whole isue is you can at this time only move 1 character from the shields owning account at one time in a 25 hour period.
Bleak came on and made an ambiguous statement that others here I think misread asthe change will now let you move as many of your shields account characters at once but they cant return for 2 weeks.
This is one of many things the DEV need to come here and talk about on this. I was not wrong in the facts.
Many are not happy with this short notice, no viable reason for a wide scoping change.
I once did a move to a shard I needed lrc sets on for my characters there as I could not find a single piece to save my life! I deliverd them and set him up to return home with extra gifts from the shard that were taking up valuable lockdowns in my tiny homes on said shard.
But something happened in RL and i didnt get back to him right away.... over 2 months. By the time I needed him to do another move for equipment he was no where to be found... I forgot where I put him!!!!! I litteraly went from shard to shard looking for his tush,
So you see this is going to be for me close to that experence and I am not happy about it.
Bad enough I loose him on my own but to have UO help me..........geesh
I can understand if it is to stop the gold sellers...but the point will be moot when the gold on account goes in...
I can also see a change if a bug or dupe has come up and a change is needed to plug it ...but a 2 week wait???
I have a hell of a time with 25 hours at times when I am surfing the shards to do something and an lacking a part of what I need is sitting 5 shards up on the list and I want to get that part and then do it NOW... hehe
(Yes I bounce on many shards in a day. I have always multi tasked and its a habit I encourage in people)
I believe this is what happens when a staff of any business secludes themselves so much that they cant even remotely understand what its like to be a "normal" player.
Even some of our players have "inside" information that wasnt available to all of us.
This is also what happens when the majority of your staff plays the game freely and have friends in the game they "leak" information too.
I got more information out of players than the game itself. The inside "click" of UO reminds me of "high school" drama movie.
For future reference I think UO needs a public relations staff member. They have obviously lost their touch with the normal everyday player. Not to mention they need someone to take all the crap us players give the UO staff.
Even some of our players have "inside" information that wasnt available to all of us.
This is also what happens when the majority of your staff plays the game freely and have friends in the game they "leak" information too.
I got more information out of players than the game itself. The inside "click" of UO reminds me of "high school" drama movie.
For future reference I think UO needs a public relations staff member. They have obviously lost their touch with the normal everyday player. Not to mention they need someone to take all the crap us players give the UO staff.
For some of us, there are no characters to be moved around like that, just that last free character slot to receive a transfer character. On my secondary shard, I have all developed/semi-developed characters that are meant to stay there, and they are not chess pieces to be moved around, nor can any come to my main shard to be deleted. It's been suggested to circumvent the two-week limitation by bringing back a newbie character to delete after a week, which fails simply for its presumption that the destination shard has an expendable character that can be deleted.
And, of course, all this shuffling around means using more tokens — which hardly hurts the dupers.
I think we just need a simple explanation of why this was done.
A. This was done due to certain players exploiting the system - We then can be upset with those players and focus our annoyance there.
B. This was done because it was taking too much money away from the Origin store (which is so poorly done it makes itself lose money but that is another story) - We can then understand they needed the incom.
C. This was done because if it wasn't done there would be a way to exploit the new system. - At least we could see them being pro-active on taking care of a potential exploit, even if we don't agree with how it is done.
Unfortunately no explanation was given. Unfortunately a single poorly written "clarification" was given that had to be elaborated on by a player before we truly understood how this change worked.
I think the majority of the animosity is centered around the communication over this very monumental change that affects a lot of dedicated veteran players. (and this change as it is really doesn't bother how I use tokens as I usually x-fer with a newbie character. It just changes how I do my round robin).
A. This was done due to certain players exploiting the system - We then can be upset with those players and focus our annoyance there.
B. This was done because it was taking too much money away from the Origin store (which is so poorly done it makes itself lose money but that is another story) - We can then understand they needed the incom.
C. This was done because if it wasn't done there would be a way to exploit the new system. - At least we could see them being pro-active on taking care of a potential exploit, even if we don't agree with how it is done.
Unfortunately no explanation was given. Unfortunately a single poorly written "clarification" was given that had to be elaborated on by a player before we truly understood how this change worked.
I think the majority of the animosity is centered around the communication over this very monumental change that affects a lot of dedicated veteran players. (and this change as it is really doesn't bother how I use tokens as I usually x-fer with a newbie character. It just changes how I do my round robin).
There's just no good solution to this 'development' when you have a fully trained home shard with 7 chars. When you have shields / shards you plan to go to either to sell or buy, it makes sense to have 6 chars on that shard for gifts. One open slot for the Home shard char to jump to. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I've done very little training on my 'gift getters'. And my 14 home shard chars are all fully trained and useful / needed in the day to day home shard 'goings on'. That being said, I have NO intention of training these chars from other shards on my home shard. so in the Buy on One Shard / Sell on the Other scenario, every 2 weeks you'd be left with a fully trained / useful chars on others shards and 2 'Gift Getters' on the home shard. And it seems from what they have typed, others do more 'hopping' than that so multiple that ridicules situation even further. You can't tell me that cross shard commerce isn't good for the game as a whole, and this just isolates lesser played shards from that benefit. Thanks a bunch, shard transfer shields were for a long time so nice of you to give us as a vet reward.
And if you were'nt insulted enough by the lack of communication yesterday, it's now after lunch and still not a post...
I am 99.9% sure this was done because of an exploit. From what i learned the exploit allowed the character to get infinite number of tokens from the same shield by using the exploit, thus allowing xfers to be done daily.
The time limit doesn't bother me much, I rarely come and go in a short time frame any how. When I'm shopping I shop until I'm broke.
What I see here is that it is most likely to impact the lower population shards the most.
It is quite likely going to send more people to sites selling transfer tokens that are NOT owned by the game, unless you've found away to shut them down or stop
them from illegally creating or obtaining them.
There are players who refuse to pay cash for items, heck even their subscriptions to game come from selling gold.
I hope in the end all this was worth it in the greater scheme of things, but I some how doubt it.
What I see here is that it is most likely to impact the lower population shards the most.
It is quite likely going to send more people to sites selling transfer tokens that are NOT owned by the game, unless you've found away to shut them down or stop
them from illegally creating or obtaining them.
There are players who refuse to pay cash for items, heck even their subscriptions to game come from selling gold.
I hope in the end all this was worth it in the greater scheme of things, but I some how doubt it.
Because screw FIXING exploits!
There's a source I wouldn't trust for anything else, but this individual is believable as far as knowing the latest cheats and exploits. He was talking, shall I say, rather openly about why this was done, and that it was already going on for half a year.
This was discussed with friends last night. Some of us think that the reason behind it happening this way was that if they recoded it to fix the exploit it might break other parts of the code OR that there was just no way to recode it without having to do a total revamp. My guess on this whole matter is they are gonna let us vent it out for the next few days and we'll hear back at the first part of the week once cooler heads can prevail from this.
Ender, if you don't even know what the exploit was, how do you know if it wasn't fixed?
Well I'm sure it was "fixed" now until they manage to figure out how to actually fix it.
lol, you clearly have no clue what it even was.
Anyone remember when people were generating tons of Mythic Tokens? Since they weren't really dupes, they couldn't be tracked. Remember what had to be done?
You're right, I don't but the options for this are:
1. They changed this to bandaid fix the exploit
2. They changed this to make more money off character transfer tokens
And neither inspire any confidence in the devs.
1. Wrong
2. This is why Shard Shields never made sense. Why would a game that NEEDS revenue, suddenly hurt its own money generation?
Because it was throwing a bone to long-term players, while encouraging others to keep accounts open. Why does your question even need to be asked?
I blame the faulty coding not our fellow players.
The way this was handled makes me think that they know that even if they did fix whatever the exploit was, that there were other problems (maybe people have been duping not the tokens, but the shields themselves). Or that it could happen again, and this change was to limit that fact.
Riiiight
Makes perfect business sense!
Have an MMO that needs financial aid? Lets give one of your biggest store commodities to the people most likely to buy them in the first place for free!