Would You Support Temporary "Incentives" to Encourage Greater Activity on Smaller Shards?

[Tina Small]

I have an idea I'd like to kick around for some things the dev team might be able to do to help redistribute the population a bit and help bring back some activity to the very many "quiet" or "dead" shards in UO.

The basic idea is to make certain aspects of UO (I'll call them "factors" just for simplicity's sake) slightly more favorable for players on the shards that are in the small and middle ranges of the game's overall population. This would include doing things like slightly decreasing player-run vendor fees, npc vendor fees, Magincia bazaar fees, insurance costs, house placement and house customization costs, and trade agreement costs; and giving a small bump to things like luck and crafting/imbuing resource yields and drops.

How this would work is that at the beginning of each month, the above-listed "factors" would be readjusted based on each shard's total in the previous month of (a) net number of placed houses (i.e., number of houses existing at beginning of month plus new ones placed minus houses that dropped) AND (b) number of hours players were logged into the shard.

The 27 shards would be divided into four groups for purposes of adjusting the "factors" and each month the dev team would provide a monthly announcement to indicate the readjustments for each shard for the month so there's no mystery or guesswork by the players themselves about what is going on. This is how the four groups would be split up:

Group 1 - The largest shard. "Factors" on this shard would not see any kind of adjustment for the month.
Group 2 - The next 8 largest shards, which would each see their shard's "factors" adjusted by 10%.
Group 3. The middle 9 shards, which would each see their shard's "factors" adjusted by 25%.
Group 4. The smallest 9 shards, which would each see their shard's "factors" adjusted by 15%.

As an example, if a shard was determined to be in group 2 for the upcoming month based on its net number of placed houses the previous month and number of hours players were logged into the shard in the previous momth, the following expenses would be reduced for the month by 10%:

Player-run vendor fees
NPC vendor fees
Magincia bazaar fees
Insurance costs
House placement/customization costs
Trade agreement costs

At the same time, any player on a shard in group 2 would automatically get a 10% bump to their luck and a 10% bump in resource yields, e.g., things like leather, ingots, logs, bark, mining gems, granite, imbuing resources in treasure chests and in corpses, etc.

Similarly, a shard in group 3 would see the above expenses reduced for the month by 25% and luck and resource yields would go up by 25%.

A shard in group 4 would have adjustments of 15%, which isn't as much as the increase for group 3 basically to discourage antagonistic actions by people who may want to keep the really small shards "dead" to be able to get away with scripting and other kinds of cheating. In other words, everyone on a small shard would be reward in coming months if they made the shard a welcoming place for other players to relocate, stick around, and play a bit!

Again, the primary goal of these adjustments would be to try to encourage people to shift back to playing on smaller shards and getting their populations up to a point where there are enough people around to make it easier to do things in groups but not necessarily to the point where it's impossible to find a place to put a home and people who like a little bit more breathing room when they go hunting don't feel completely overwhelmed.

I'm not sure this is a good idea or not, but I thought I'd throw it out there just to see what people think of it. Maybe it's something the dev team might consider doing for even just 6 to 9 months just to see if it helps breathe some new life back into many of the shards with smaller, less active populations.

 

[Kolka]

I would be afraid that bumping up the yields like that wouldn't lead to increased players so much as increased farming. Already if you go to a shard like Balhae, it is nearly impossible to run into another player; but go to Blackthorne's Castle and you will always find three or four characters farming either Minax artifacts or the gold elementals.

 

[Assia Penryn]

Kudos for the original idea and taking the time to share it,... but I think this system would be abused.

If folks enjoy playing on a quieter shard, then they simply do. If you want more activity, go to a more populated shard. There shouldn't be a in-game system reward to promote either one (unless they are giving an incentive to those relocating in the instance of a shard being shut down).

 

[Gidge]

I totally have the ability to move to another shard either through laying out real life cash or working my butt of in game to start new chars. So does everyone else.

I suppose my question is Tina, strictly for knowledge sake, why are you pushing for people to shard hop? Is it because you do and would like to reap the benefits of such a program?


""Again, the primary goal of these adjustments would be to try to encourage people to shift back to playing on smaller shards and getting their populations up to a point where there are enough people around to make it easier to do things in groups but not necessarily to the point where it's impossible to find a place to put a home and people who like a little bit more breathing room when they go hunting don't feel completely overwhelmed.""

 

[Kolka]

I totally have the ability to move to another shard either through laying out real life cash or working my butt of in game to start new chars. So does everyone else.

I suppose my question is Tina, strictly for knowledge sake, why are you pushing for people to shard hop? Is it because you do and would like to reap the benefits of such a program?


""Again, the primary goal of these adjustments would be to try to encourage people to shift back to playing on smaller shards and getting their populations up to a point where there are enough people around to make it easier to do things in groups but not necessarily to the point where it's impossible to find a place to put a home and people who like a little bit more breathing room when they go hunting don't feel completely overwhelmed.""

I really don't see any way to personally gain from this. It is an interesting idea, and anything that increases the enjoyability (and therefore the longevity) of the game is worth looking at and discussing. I think its great that people like Tina are thinking about this and throwing ideas out there for discussion.

 

[Tina Small]

I totally have the ability to move to another shard either through laying out real life cash or working my butt of in game to start new chars. So does everyone else.

I suppose my question is Tina, strictly for knowledge sake, why are you pushing for people to shard hop? Is it because you do and would like to reap the benefits of such a program?


""Again, the primary goal of these adjustments would be to try to encourage people to shift back to playing on smaller shards and getting their populations up to a point where there are enough people around to make it easier to do things in groups but not necessarily to the point where it's impossible to find a place to put a home and people who like a little bit more breathing room when they go hunting don't feel completely overwhelmed.""

The reason I brought up this question is because of all the people who seem to have migrated to Atlantic because the shards where they used to play apparently became too quiet for them to continue playing there. I'd just like to see a lot of those people who pulled up stakes think about going back to their former shards instead of just "making do" with playing on an overly crowded shard like Atlantic. And if you'll notice, I suggested that this be a TEMPORARY program to promote a shift back to playing on smaller shards. And the way I presented it, the

I don't shard hop, but I do play on many shards. I know all about working my butt off in-game to start new characters as I've built up many, many characters from scratch on every shard in the game. I started doing that after the guild I belonged to on Baja basically fell apart when the Kingdom Reborn client was introduced. Had to find something to keep busy with and making characters far and wide and building customized houses on various shards (I love designing houses) was what I came up with.

I posted some details about my "developed characters" back in January in this thread: http://stratics.com/community/threads/lets-talk-about-multi-shard-madness.310838/ .

At this point, I have houses on Atlantic, Balhae, Formosa, Great Lakes, Hokuto, Lake Austin, Origin, Siege, Sonoma, and Yamato. The only place where I have any vendors is on Balhae, where I have a small shop selling cheap basic stuff for new/returning players, like 1k pieces of LRC, cheap imbued training jewelry, full spellbooks, empty rune books, and house add-on deeds. The most expensive stuff I have ever put on a vendor there was a fabled fishing net for 300k and right now the most expensive stuff I have on a vendor there is a clothing bless deed for 250k that's been sitting there for about a week and a bottle of PoF for 100k that's been sitting there for a week. Vendor fees are manageable, as a result. However, because of the small population on the shard, it's next to impossible for anyone who starts there new or comes back to find the kinds of items you would want to buy if you wanted to build and provide gear for a top-notch PvP or PvM character. And with it being a Korean shard, I don't know how many returning Korean players who might still have developed characters there would necessarily feel comfortable just giving up on the shard and migrating to Atlantic if they really wanted to make a go of it again in UO. I would think they might prefer to stay on Balhae or maybe Arirang if the economy was a lot healthier on both shards.

I guess this was a dumb suggestion. I just know that the population is not what it was several years ago and even on the Japanese shards that once seemed so bustling and full, things are dead quiet all over. You used to find a lot of people hanging out in Haven on almost all of the Japanese shards and now they are almost as dead as Haven is on all the other shards except Atlantic. And even on Atlantic, things are not as busy as they seem. I go fishing and I'm lucky to maybe once every two weeks run across another character fishing in Trammel, and most of the time they are unattended and if you try to stop and do something nice like offer them a fishing pole with spell channeling on it to replace their plan npc-purchased fishing pole, all that happens is they take off at an impossible speed as if their little boat had a motor on it or something. I can set up the craziest map I can possibly think of, going all over the seas, with 25-30 different destination points on it, and hand it to the pilot and the only shard where I ever run into ships and have to maneuver around them is on Atlantic. But again, it's the same ships, week after week, never moving and never occupied.

Oh well. I tried to make a suggestion. Sorry if I've offended you by making you think I have some evil, dastardly ulterior motives for doing it. I just want to see MORE PEOPLE PLAYING, and not just on Atlantic.

Edited to add: I started playing UO near the end of 2004. I still have several years to go before I can claim shard shields as vet rewards. I can't even remember the last time I paid for a transfer token. The last couple of years, I've been trying very hard to not spend anything extra on UO beyond monthly subscription fees because I just don't feel that the future is that bright and I'm not inclined to "invest" any more money into it than I really have to. I did upgrade to the King's Collection on one account this week so I could finally make and sell the new stuff on Balhae, but that's the only "upgrade" I've bought in several years since adding High Seas to a couple of accounts a few years ago. I've never bought one of the forged metal tools and I buy about one soulstone about every 9 months or so, if I'm lucky. I don't go to EM events, mostly because no one in the EM program seems to understand anything about people who live in the Mountain Time zone. As a result, I've never had any rares to speak of from that program and never had enough gold to buy them from someone else. And that's probably all for the good anyway.

 

[Smoot]

UOs biggest draw is houses, and also its biggest problem. If it wasnt for the housing issue shards would be merged down to 4-10. Other games commonly do this. They also sometimes give free transfers to low-pop servers.

I didnt vote but i would support a large incentive to playing a dead / low pop shard. Small incentive like minor discounts and stuff just wouldnt be enough.

Small "boosts" might be nice for the players who already play there, but i dont think they would draw anyone unless it was substantial.

Yes, i would farm loot on dead shards if i had a 10k luck bonus.

Theres already a bonus to empty shards. Its that their empty. No one to raid your spawn, no one to page on you if your an illegal scriptor. Its not ideal but the emptieness is in itself an icentive as it is.

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

How about just let the game die.

 

[Gidge]

I am well aware of your developed chars across all the shards.

I suppose my thought at the end would be this. Once you get everyone spread out across the shards and Atlantic is not so full temporarily.... what happens then?

You have people who love New York, New York and you have those that love Buford, Wyoming.

 

[Gidge]

I really don't see any way to personally gain from this. It is an interesting idea, and anything that increases the enjoyability (and therefore the longevity) of the game is worth looking at and discussing. I think its great that people like Tina are thinking about this and throwing ideas out there for discussion.

Well if someone has characters on all shards, just play on the shard that has the gain at the moment in time. I am not opposed to ideas. I know in my heart there is always some underlying factor in someones idea. There are in mine.

 

[Lord Nabin]

I like the creative outside the box thinking!

No to the idea

I think we all should be looking to friends and others to play uo and bring them to our own shards.

I only play uo but many of you play other games and could draw folks into your RP community and guild

 

[Lady Michelle]

How about just let the game die.

I thought ya liked the game you came back? So why would you want it to die? I'm not always happy with the game, but I would never want it to die.
Never mind read other thread saw you and luc leaving again.

 

[Tina Small]

UOs biggest draw is houses, and also its biggest problem. If it wasnt for the housing issue shards would be merged down to 4-10. Other games commonly do this. They also sometimes give free transfers to low-pop servers.

I didnt vote but i would support a large incentive to playing a dead / low pop shard. Small incentive like minor discounts and stuff just wouldnt be enough.

Small "boosts" might be nice for the players who already play there, but i dont think they would draw anyone unless it was substantial.

Yes, i would farm loot on dead shards if i had a 10k luck bonus.

Theres already a bonus to empty shards. Its that their empty. No one to raid your spawn, no one to page on you if your an illegal scriptor. Its not ideal but the emptieness is in itself an icentive as it is.

Well, what you say may be true for people who have played long enough to have shard shields to move all their farmed items somewhere else. But for people who don't have the shard shields and don't want to pay EA constantly for transfer tokens just to be able to purchase mid-to-high end items if they are just returning to UO, it makes the dead shards very unattractive. It's very hard to talk old friends into returning when you know their developed characters are on one of those "dead shards" and you know they're either a deco nut or someone who likes having top-of-the-line PvM or PvP gear and the only way they are going to be able to get it is to pay to transfer their gold to Atlantic, buy gold on Atlantic from a broker, go on a shopping spree and then pay EA for a transfer token to move it back to the dead shard, or just pay out the nose to move all their good characters to Atlantic and then pay out the nose to find a house there too. When you haven't played long enough to have shard shields yourself to ease the cost a bit, what the heck do you suggest to them other than what I just described, which is on top of them paying for upgrading their accounts and probably buying a few soulstones as well to shuffle skills around and come up with new skill templates? It's just absurd and it's why we have such a hard time hanging on to returning players.

 

[Ender]

I like the creative outside the box thinking!

No to the idea

I think we all should be looking to friends and others to play uo and bring them to our own shards.

I only play uo but many of you play other games and could draw folks into your RP community and guild

It's much easier said than done, I've asked people and have gotten "that's still around?" and "yeah I'm not paying that monthly fee" and "lol the graphics"

 

[Tina Small]

Well if someone has characters on all shards, just play on the shard that has the gain at the moment in time. I am not opposed to ideas. I know in my heart there is always some underlying factor in someones idea. There are in mine.

I give up. Petra, lock the damn thread before all the conspiracy theories get going. This was a waste of everyone's time. I've apparently got some secret agenda here that Gidge doesn't trust.

Just makes me want to throw up. So tired of this nonsense.

 

[Lord Nabin]

It's much easier said than done, I've asked people and have gotten "that's still around?" and "yeah I'm not paying that monthly fee" and "lol the graphics"

I understand. Just move on to the next group.

Personally the right people are the ones that want to hang out with you.

You should be more important than any other stupid excuse they .

 

[Cadderly]

Would completly support this if was changed promote moving from smaller shards to larger ones. Just having acouple medium sized shards in each time zone get nice liitle hand out to promote consolidation without forcing anybody to move wou.ld be great. I miss playing my home shard but player interaction is just to lacking. It sorta sucks when the most active shards are to far away to get a reliable connection. Which I would imagine affects more then just myself. I like the concept of your idea

 

[Ender]

Yeah I personally would rather have incentives for people to consolidate shards without being forced to move. And leave the incentives out of Atlantic obviously.

 

[Aiden O'Connor]

How about just let the game die.

Man, I wish every UO player had your outlook on how to help this game grow and prosper...

 

[Thrakkar]

@OP: People would exploit that. Farm/script on shards with high bonus and transfer the stuff to their "home" shard.

UOs biggest draw is houses, and also its biggest problem. If it wasnt for the housing issue shards would be merged down to 4-10. Other games commonly do this. They also sometimes give free transfers to low-pop servers.

There is an alternative to a shard merge: A "soft-merge", meaning that you just open up free char transfer between softmerged shards. Just like the option to copy your char to TC, you get options to move your char to any "connected" shard...

Theres already a bonus to empty shards. Its that their empty. No one to raid your spawn, no one to page on you if your an illegal scriptor. Its not ideal but the emptieness is in itself an icentive as it is.

From a certain point of view, maybe. But I can guarantee you, that not everybody shares that view.

 

[Lord Nabin]

I give up. Petra, lock the damn thread before all the conspiracy theories get going. This was a waste of everyone's time. I've apparently got some secret agenda here that Gidge doesn't trust.

Just makes me want to throw up. So tired of this nonsense.

Nah keep throwing out ideas.

I like it

 

[Viper09]

Indeed. Don't let the trolls destroy a good thread.

 

[Goodmann]

agreed

 

[The Zog historian]

I am well aware of your developed chars across all the shards.

I suppose my thought at the end would be this. Once you get everyone spread out across the shards and Atlantic is not so full temporarily.... what happens then?

You have people who love New York, New York and you have those that love Buford, Wyoming.

Some years ago I stopped in Buford and made it a point to pop in whenever I drove through again. The previous owner was nothing but amiable, and while he may not have the cuisine and service of Del Frisco's or Smith & Wollensky, it was still fun to chew the fat with him while wolfing down a couple of bison hot dogs. Some people are always dazzled by the lights of Broadway, and others become so accustomed to the big city that they think, "Oh, that's Sarah Jessica Parker, I didn't realize she was so short."

I don't know how much any incentives would have on smaller shards, but I certainly wouldn't oppose such things to equalize population and prices. I don't see a modest luck or resource boost as anything super-advantageous for those with shard shields, particularly considering it takes choosing one vet reward to get only "free" monthly transfer thereafter. And if it means someone harvests 10% ingots and hides to sell for a 5% higher price, it's to the benefit of resource buyers like me.

 

[Gidge]

I give up. Petra, lock the damn thread before all the conspiracy theories get going. This was a waste of everyone's time. I've apparently got some secret agenda here that Gidge doesn't trust.

Just makes me want to throw up. So tired of this nonsense.

Do not get my distrust wrong. Didn't mean to make you ill and I truly did not know you have had others here(on the forums) go after you on issues.

I do commend you on wanting to increase activity but unless you increase the population over all, even if people move based on the "factor" you cannot force someone to change templates to even out the lack of things that would still be needed(in a perfect world) It's a good start though!

I am a bigger picture kinda person and although it would be great for a short period of time. (two years out?) My concern would be again... what happens afterwards.

I read your post about creating incentive for people returning to join a smaller populated shard, which was not one of your original reasons, and my fear would be once they come back and have had that extra for a bit, what happens when it is gone.

Origin already has an incentive, they get everything two weeks before anyone else.

I am curious as to why they left in the first place.

school
marriage
kids
kid of someone who played and the parents shut down all the accounts.
no longer financially feasible

 

[Swt Lippy Hippy]

I give up. Petra, lock the damn thread before all the conspiracy theories get going. This was a waste of everyone's time. I've apparently got some secret agenda here that Gidge doesn't trust.

Just makes me want to throw up. So tired of this nonsense.

Ok I am just a peon adventure person here. But I just read the posts here and I think that if you ask for a poll and spit out a idea and if you do not like someones questions regarding your idea, why get so defensive about it? I think its a cool idea to try to help encourage more people on a shard less populated. But reading Gidges posts and the response to her is a bit extreme? Gidge seems very respectful and to see someone wanna hurl over a post like hers is kind of weird. lol But having ideas are great. Never stop coming up with ideas. Just because someone is asking questions about an idea... do not call them a troll or a conspirator... LOL I saw Gidge ask a question you did not answer. Something like, ok after the populations come, what happens then ? That is a good question. Try not to over react to someone. I kinda felt sorry for this Gidge and had to toss in my two cents here.

I Love the ideas for intensives but I also agree with the poster that said people will abuse to farm with.

I really hate it that people leave a shard to go to ATL I mean if its because there is pvp there and none around much on other shards that is their own decision. But no offense but the way I see it, is for the market so more people buy their goods. Its too bad there is not One free shard shield hop a month for every player and can pick one shard to go to and come back home. Just to explore or have a vendor some where else. Now that would be a nice idea ? Don't puke over my idea tho... Just thought of it now typing this.

I hope you feel better Tina.

Keep the ideas coming. Its nice to know that you have a passion for UO. I do know that others have passions in uo also. Different strokes for different folks. As long as the main goal is to be positive and try to keep the dupers out of the game and the good honest hard working players in it, that is all that matters.

Id like to see a different special fish that can only be caught on 'that' particular shard. That would be cool too!!! hehe

Peace and thanks for reading this.

 

[Val Van Wolf]

Since we are already allowed to have a house on Siege Perilous AND another shard, why can't everyone be allowed houses on any two shards, or even any three. That would certainly help populations even out a teeny bit. Would be even better if each account could have houses on even more shards as it was when the game began. I remember having five small 7X7 houses on Atlantic at that time and I ended up selling them all to Zamboni Driver of Tradespot for gold on Great Lakes which was my "main shard" at that time. At one time or another I have had homes on almost every shard. Thanks for suggesting this Tina and please stay happy and involved in your "famous" UO analyses.

 

[Kolka]

Since we are already allowed to have a house on Siege Perilous AND another shard, why can't everyone be allowed houses on any two shards, or even any three. That would certainly help populations even out a teeny bit. Would be even better if each account could have houses on even more shards as it was when the game began. I remember having five small 7X7 houses on Atlantic at that time and I ended up selling them all to Zamboni Driver of Tradespot for gold on Great Lakes which was my "main shard" at that time. At one time or another I have had homes on almost every shard. Thanks for suggesting this Tina and please stay happy and involved in your "famous" UO analyses.

I think housing is one of the most attractive aspects of UO, and I would love to have a house on every shard, but I would be concerned that this would result in more houses on the smaller servers, and not neccesarily more palyers. It would be interesting to see if the extra house on Seige has resulted in more active players or not.

 

[Assia Penryn]

I'd be okay if folks had a secondary house on another shard... if they had to refresh it regularly and not just forget about it.

 

[Siabra]

if you want more people - Play on another shard- it shouldn't be a " incentive to play"
The good thing about UO is you have lots of choices ..

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Condense the shards. If you lose a house, you lose a house. Deal with the issues of playing on a tiny shard...la

 

[The Zog historian]

Condense the shards. If you lose a house, you lose a house. Deal with the issues of playing on a tiny shard...la

Like a lot of canceled accounts that lead to the plug pulled on the game, that kind of "issues"?

 

[WarderDragon]

Hard part is the population is already spread too thin. Create incentives to spread them out more, and you run the risk of depopulating the few functionally large shards in lieu of creating a bunch of small, almost-dead-shards.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, but I think the overall game population needs to be addressed first.

 

[icm420]

Love the idea

The issue of Atlantic becoming the trade capital of uo needs to be addressed. I put items on vendors on Sonoma assuming I will never sell them but just to HAVE something available on the shard. I do not have an account old enough for the shard shields and it severely impacts trading and selling. Population dictates where the items are, that makes sense but there are several things about Atl that make it the way it is. First is the items from drops are increased in intensity and drop more frequently. I did just get a really strong legendary arti on sonoma but the majority of the items that are high end drop on atl. I will never be persuaded to think otherwise. The population for pvp is also much higher on Atl and that dictates the higher items going there due to the higher value for them. This results in more populationwhich results in more people going there to play. Great Lakes has a large population of players also and yet there drop rates and intensities seem much lower. I must admit I have not farmed Gl much lately but my previous experiences yielded low drop rates and low intensities. I do not use a luck suit on any server so that doesn't factor into my drops.
Point is why go to sonoma *insert x server* when you can be on atlantic and have tons of items to buy/sell/trade, lots of people to play with and on top of it the intensity and drops rates are higher. Factor in that it's the 'last' good pvp shard and it's no wonder why every other server is pretty much devoid of people. An incentive is a great idea, the shard merger won't happen anytime soon due to the housing issues, and as some have said not everyone wants to be on a high population server. I do not know if your ideas are the way to go but def, on the right track

 

[Viquire]

Interesting read, Tina. The notion of expanding and collapsing fees, based on population or activity, is particularly noteworthy. In light of the fact that a MyUO of a sort will presumably be looking at and possibly measuring some data with relation to activities, whenever it hits.

Just my two cents, I have always thought that guilds and communities were the stuff that lured folks in to stay. Find a way to incentivize that kind of activity, and you probably have reintroduced a long term plan for growth and success.

*edit* Okay, so it isn't brilliant. But, ego.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Like a lot of canceled accounts that lead to the plug pulled on the game, that kind of "issues"?

Same old cry baby threats as always. If you love the game, keep playing if not quit. There is no reason to keep the same number of shards that were created at the height of UO subscriptions. I'm sure a creative solution could be created without having too many whiners quit over spilt pixels...la

 

[The Zog historian]

Same old cry baby threats as always. If you love the game, keep playing if not quit. There is no reason to keep the same number of shards that were created at the height of UO subscriptions. I'm sure a creative solution could be created without having too many whiners quit over spilt pixels...la

There's nothing "cry baby" about it. As I've pointed out repeatedly, it's not a matter of "pixels." The flowing of electrons on servers' and clients' hard drives, CPUs and monitors is a representation of time that people have put in, and we don't want to lose them. You'd see this plain truth if you, well, still played the game instead of your blather about something you've acknowledged you haven't played in years. That's quite some "love" you have, hmm?

Talk is awfully cheap among those who no longer have a stake.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

You'd see this plain truth if you, well, still played the game instead of your blather about something you've acknowledged you haven't played in years. That's quite some "love" you have, hmm?

Talk is awfully cheap among those who no longer have a stake.

Maybe I haven't played in years, but that's related to another reason which deserves it's own thread. That being said...I did play long enough to understand what this suggestion would mean. Ultimately, there is a way the number of shard could be condensed without hurting a large group of players.

Yes, this would mean some in depth discussions with the stakeholders. Yes, not everyone would be happy, but...in the long run, condensing the shards would certainly help keep player morale up as opposed to continually logging into mostly empty shards or players continually migrating to the more populated ones...la

 

[Lady Michelle]

Tina idea is a good one, but I only play Great Lakes, and Siege so this won't work for me. I wish I did have time to play more shards. barely able to play the shards I play now.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I give up. Petra, lock the damn thread before all the conspiracy theories get going. This was a waste of everyone's time. I've apparently got some secret agenda here that Gidge doesn't trust.

Just makes me want to throw up. So tired of this nonsense.

I suspect that your 'underlying factor' is the same as mine when I was trying so hard to make up several years of neglect on the playguide site. To help players enjoy the game?
If it helps at all, some Atlantic players are moving out to other shards. There is quite a large group on a shard I sometimes play.

 

[Viquire]

I suspect that your 'underlying factor' is the same as mine when I was trying so hard to make up several years of neglect on the playguide site. To help players enjoy the game?
If it helps at all, some Atlantic players are moving out to other shards. There is quite a large group on a shard I sometimes play.

Did they all move as a group? If so, then its true. Communities can move people. The question then becomes, what are they moving them towards.

 

[Cyrah]

Moved to a small shard. Built a home, decorated it. Said hi to anything that moved and some stuff that didn't. Worked some skills, saw a person from another shard I knew who was working on a town. Was not part of said town. Tried to stay busy. Found some areas unique to said shard. Looked for idocs, none discovered. Tried to meet the Em, never did. I just ran out of stuff for me to do alone.

So maybe if there was something else? I do not know what would have worked. I left.

 

[The Zog historian]

Maybe I haven't played in years, but that's related to another reason which deserves it's own thread. That being said...I did play long enough to understand what this suggestion would mean. Ultimately, there is a way the number of shard could be condensed without hurting a large group of players.

You can "la" until Doomsday. It doesn't change the fact that enough would be hurt that they'd simply pull accounts, in a time when every bit of revenue is precious. That you haven't played in so long shows in your misguided notion that players wouldn't quit. With the reduced population, for one, so many have been able to get keeps and castles that they didn't have before. Players have been able to set up towns and get banners. And you think it's a good idea to do away with all those, to make another big debacle like the Trammel and Malas land rushes? What standing do you even have to think how players today would react?

But like I said, talk is awfully cheap from those who don't even play.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

And you think it's a good idea to do away with all those, to make another big debacle like the Trammel and Malas land rushes?

Please feel free to show us all where I ever suggested that. You do quite a bit of assuming and thinking you know me. Fine, dismiss the ideas of someone who doesn't have an active account...there are certainly more of us than active subscribers.

Nothing has changed in the gaming world over the years to make your assumption that just because I haven't played the game in some time makes my opinions less relevant...la

 

[The Zog historian]

Please feel free to show us all where I ever suggested that. You do quite a bit of assuming and thinking you know me.

I know you a lot more than you know me. A land rush is an inevitable consequence of a shard merger. How do you not see that?

Fine, dismiss the ideas of someone who doesn't have an active account...there are certainly more of us than active subscribers.

You're uninvolved and don't know what the game is currently like. You couldn't even tell us what Luna's bank is like on any shard, how active PvP is, or how full/empty player vendors are.

By your illogical notion that "there are certainly more of us," then the vast majority of the U.S. population can have a valid opinion on how to change Blizzard games. Are you like so many that just because you heard a few soundbites on the news, you think you're "informed," just like you think you know what's best for UO when you haven't played it in years?

Nothing has changed in the gaming world over the years to make your assumption that just because I haven't played the game in some time makes my opinions less relevant...la

Even if you were a current player, your opinion of making players lose houses and towns was already irrelevant. Shard merger suggestions have always, and properly, been denied by the Devs, because it's obvious to anyone with more than two functioning neural synapses that it will lead to closed accounts. I have one of the oldest houses in all the game — how in your suggestion of shard mergers can I keep it, or get an equivalent?

Don't just suggest things without considering the consequences thereof.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Don't just suggest things without considering the consequences thereof.

Don't assume the end of the world is nigh if shards are consolidated...la

 

[The Zog historian]

Don't assume the end of the world is nigh if shards are consolidated...la

There would be enough end of accounts that EA would finally say, "This game's no longer sufficiently profitable." This was true even when you played.

Unsurprisingly, no rebuttal to the rest of what I posted. Will you still maintain that just because there are more non-players than players, their opinion matters more?

 

[Obsidian]

I like Tina's concept. I would add increased drop chances on artifacts as well.

I think the real issue is we have one mega shard where the economy is thriving. Everything else is a satellite economy and is not self-sufficient. I don't see this changing. However, I do like and play the smaller shards. I like the quiet. I just wish the drop chances where higher so I could outfit my chars without outside intervention.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Will you still maintain that just because there are more non-players than players, their opinion matters more?

Not sure I ever made that presumption. I believe the point I was making was that just because we haven't played in some time that our opinions shouldn't be entirely discounted (as you have done completely). I know if the right changes (which would be determined when they happened) were made some of us opinionated former UO players would once again become opinionated current players (I hope at that time you would give our opinions a little more weight)...la

 

[The Zog historian]

Not sure I ever made that presumption.

You most certainly did. Now you're backtracking.

Please feel free to show us all where I ever suggested that. You do quite a bit of assuming and thinking you know me. Fine, dismiss the ideas of someone who doesn't have an active account...there are certainly more of us than active subscribers.

I believe the point I was making was that just because we haven't played in some time that our opinions shouldn't be entirely discounted (as you have done completely). I know if the right changes (which would be determined when they happened) were made some of us opinionated former UO players would once again become opinionated current players (I hope at that time you would give our opinions a little more weight)...la

And as I already said, your "opinion" could still be readily dismissed even if you did play. Shard mergers are not going to happen. People don't want to lose houses and most assuredly will start canceling accounts if they do. Why do you think it won't happen?