NEWS [UO.Com] Publish 97 to Origin, Izumo, & Baja

[Uvtha]

That is what happens when people don't read! Why argue it? Cause they gave you more - you complain, they gave you again - you complain and again and again......

They didn't GIVE us any. They gave us the option to buy more, which is ******** IMO.

No, you don't have 500+ weapons for your sampire. You play with 20max. And you play with 1-2 and carry 10+ more only if you are lazy enough not to leave them. You don't need all of them for particular boss/target! And AGAIN your sampire can't go everywhere with 1 weapon like a tamer can!

1) I absolutly have more weapons on my warrior than my tamer has stable slots. I have different weapons for the rare times I pvp, I have super slayer sets of multiple weapons of each melee type for different situations, specific slayer sets for several slayer types, plus different sets of spawn weapons. I easily have over 50 weapons, and that's probably on the low end.
2) If I WANTED I could have like 2000 weapons. Now a normal person may not want that many, but what possible difference could it make to you if I had a castle literally full of customized weapons of every type? None.
3) Just because YOU play a certain way that doesn't mean that way is "right". People should be allowed to do what they want to do, so long as it doesn't ruin **** for everyone else.

You are proving my point mate. It does not matter how much they give you - you will always complain it is not enough. Always!!!
You want to own every creature with every color with bests stats. Several lifetimes won't be enough to find and train them. Even if you satisfy with medium stat YOUR lifetime won't be enough. And your last words on this world will be "they should have given us mor...."!

First of all, give me a break. Stable slots right now are very low when you consider that there are over 100 tamable pets, vanity pets, event pets, pack animals, various colors, varieties, RP options, on and on, and now customization, 22 stable slots are laughably low for someone who mains a tamer. If they just has boosted it up to 42, I would have been pretty satisfied because while 100 would be more ideal, it would have at least have showed that they care, the fact I have to buy 7 stable boost codes instead really pisses me off.

Second of all you are using the slippery slope argument here. If people ever ask for more, then they will never be satisfied. We both know that's a nonsensical argument. I think that the vast majority of people would be more than happy with 100. Really all people have wanted is a reasonable amount. 20 in the current environment is not reasonable. It's also not reasonable in a subscription based game to add a game change that activly encourages taming more pets to rather than adjust the stable cap to match the new content, instead force people to pay MORE money to get to a more reasonable number. That is some predatory f2p **** right there. "Hey check out this cool new system! Wanna try it out?? Of course you do! That will be $1.99. " ********.

Finally, and i have to ask this question again, and again, and again of people who are critical of people who want more stable slots, because no one has an answer other than "they just shouldn't get what they want": What difference does it make? If we has literally unlimited stable slots, what negative impact could there possibly be? Why do you care if someone wants to tame 100 cows? It has nothing to do with you, or how you play the game.

 

[kazeandi]

This is such an unneeded and misguided discussion.

The reason stable limits exist don't matter anymore in 2017. Might as well remove them. I suspect they'd rather exploit them tho and all the loving support from the defending faction here on the forum makes them all warm and fuzzy inside while they design the cash shop item for it.

This community sure has a tendency to backstab each other, instead of supporting their fellow players.

 

[S_S]

that is so strange, i distinctly remember them saying they didn't work.
gah, do i try to search for some obscure post from over the last twelve years to refute those publish notes......

alas, i think i will let this one go.

i was just gonna head to bed and thought.... lets go test this.
so i went and i healed my pet 20 times with normal bandaids, tracked the amount healed.
then i took out all the normal bandaids and put in enhanced, did another 2o heals.
numbers are exactly the same.
tamer has only 100 vet and 120 lore so the enhanced bandaids should have pushed me up to the 110 vet level yet no difference in amount healed is noted.

so, while they are maybe saying it works, im definitely not seeing it in the numbers.

Have you eaten a 110 vet scroll? If not, it will show no difference.

 

[Keith of Sonoma]

We are going live everywhere on the 27th! WOOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Drowy]

Hopefully also for european shards on the 27th european time.

 

[cobb]

lot of whining here because you won't get 9909382349080982230 stable slots?

 

[RockoNV]

There should be a reasonable number. Whatever the number is, in a subscription based game, I should never have to pay for extra slots as an add on item.

 

[Pawain]

Okay sorry it's a max of 42 stable slots..still...tell me do you have one of each of those animals listed above? How many pets do you have RIGHT NOW....and how many more are you planning to get??

Honestly..I LOVE my tamer but 42 is INSANE.....anyway just my opinion...can't please everyone....if they gave you 100000000000000000000000000000000 slots you still wouldn't be happy so I'll just take my 42 and play the game I love with the pets I love and call it a day

My stable has been full for years. Right now I have filled up a pet vendor in Magincia with pets waiting to train. So I don't know how many pets that holds. shhh don't tell anyone, I don't want someone to buy them. That's without any new tamable pets. Also have 30 Battle chicken lizards.

So ya, I have More than 42 pets right now.

I was hoping the revamp would make the one slot pets better. So I was going to have a set of 5 things like frenzied Ostards, hell hounds, and others that have pack ability. So I wont need sets of those since That didn't work out.

You like collecting boxes, some people like to collect pets.

 

[Pawain]

lot of whining here because you won't get 9909382349080982230 stable slots?

Nope, 150 just like bank storage would be fine. I could handle 70 without complaint. Why does that bother you???? I promise not to tame and store all the creatures in UO. More will show up.

 

[cobb]

meh. I don't really care either way. wouldn't bother me if you had 1000 pets. Just think it is funny that people get worked up over not having unlimited stable slots.


But they have the UO store now, so it should be quite obvious unlimited stable lots are not going to happen

 

[Poo]

Have you eaten a 110 vet scroll? If not, it will show no difference.

120 eaten, locked at 100.

it dosnt show +10 on your skill anyways.
its bandaids.
its just a pretend number that is added to your skill.
what im saying is i dont think it works for vet.
not that it matters much, all my tamers are 120 vet/lore so i wont see any benefit from using them regardless.

 

[Thimotty]

Stable slot number was insufficient before this publish. Most tamers already have them completely full.

Nope, most tamers are just too lazy to use the options they already have. 105 free and 294 paid. It is easier to demand more! Instead of constant complain in every thread why don't you try just saying "Thank you for DOUBLING our already more than sufficient slots"!

Really, now you presume to tell me how many weapons my Sampire has. I have more than 20.

Yes, my bad, i meant the word "need" not "have".

So what? This is a sandbox game.Why put arbitrary limits on how many pets or how many weapons I should have.

You have limit to your backpack items, limit to your house items, limit to your bank items, limits, limits, limits. This game has limits on EVERYTHING! Would i like limitless house storage - yes, limitless bags - yes, limitless stable slots - yes. Would i get it - no!
The arbitrary numbers should be discussed once in a while but not in every thread and certainly not with bad analogies! That is what i am arguing!

He sure can. He can go with jack of all trades weapon and be as equally effective as a tamer with a single pet.

Yeah good luck with that! Ohh and changing your slayer counts as weapon change no matter if it is on weapon or tali

Why do you care?!?!?!!? It has zero effect on gameplay, why must it be so limited?!?!?!!? :/

I have already answered that multiple times. If you don't care to understand the answer why would i care to give one again?

They didn't GIVE us any. They gave us the option to buy more, which is ******** IMO.

Yes they did:
they gave 2 slots with SA - you complain
they gave 2+3 for TA - you complain
they will give option to buy lots more - you complain

I absolutly have more weapons on my warrior than my tamer has stable slots. I have different weapons for the rare times I pvp, I have super slayer sets of multiple weapons of each melee type for different situations, specific slayer sets for several slayer types, plus different sets of spawn weapons. I easily have over 50 weapons, and that's probably on the low end.

Again with that bad weapon analogy. Like i said tamers can use weapons too. But let me throw your logic back at you - what if a fighter say "i want to own every weapon with every possible props combination made of every possible material"? Even if we don't include different props values because pets have different stats too - it is still a number big enough to fill zillion castles!

Just because YOU play a certain way that doesn't mean that way is "right". People should be allowed to do what they want to do, so long as it doesn't ruin **** for everyone else.

People are not allowed to do what they want. There are limits on everything, like i said. But you still don't read. Noone is against raising or removing stable caps. The problem is constant complains. Every time i am on stratics someone is complaining about this using bad analogy - that IS RUINING my stratics experience!

It's also not reasonable in a subscription based game to add a game change that activly encourages taming more pets to rather than adjust the stable cap to match the new content, instead force people to pay MORE money to get to a more reasonable number. That is some predatory f2p **** right there. "Hey check out this cool new system! Wanna try it out?? Of course you do! That will be $1.99. " ********.

Do you believe you can change that? Also with the constantly dropping subscriptions if that is what it takes for my game to continue to exist - i'm more than happy with it!

Second of all you are using the slippery slope argument here. If people ever ask for more, then they will never be satisfied. We both know that's a nonsensical argument.

I think the best way to understand my answer to that is if you first answer this: What is the difference between asking for something and spamming for something?

Finally, and i have to ask this question again, and again, and again...

Well you can ask as many times as you like but as long as you don't care to listen to the answer you will never be satisfied!

 

[Lord GOD(GOD)]

I think they should reduce stable slots to 5.

 

[Mrsbug]

mees habes ta create new tamers wif dat token thingy to stable more pets. *stomps feet* and dat tupid pet gain bar keeps poping up...mees wants ta habe a shut off fer it!

 

[Merus]

Nope, most tamers are just too lazy to use the options they already have. 105 free and 294 paid. It is easier to demand more! Instead of constant complain in every thread why don't you try just saying "Thank you for DOUBLING our already more than sufficient slots"!


Yes, my bad, i meant the word "need" not "have".

You have limit to your backpack items, limit to your house items, limit to your bank items, limits, limits, limits. This game has limits on EVERYTHING! Would i like limitless house storage - yes, limitless bags - yes, limitless stable slots - yes. Would i get it - no!
The arbitrary numbers should be discussed once in a while but not in every thread and certainly not with bad analogies! That is what i am arguing!

Yeah good luck with that! Ohh and changing your slayer counts as weapon change no matter if it is on weapon or tali



I have already answered that multiple times. If you don't care to understand the answer why would i care to give one again?


Yes they did:
they gave 2 slots with SA - you complain
they gave 2+3 for TA - you complain
they will give option to buy lots more - you complain

Again with that bad weapon analogy. Like i said tamers can use weapons too. But let me throw your logic back at you - what if a fighter say "i want to own every weapon with every possible props combination made of every possible material"? Even if we don't include different props values because pets have different stats too - it is still a number big enough to fill zillion castles!

People are not allowed to do what they want. There are limits on everything, like i said. But you still don't read. Noone is against raising or removing stable caps. The problem is constant complains. Every time i am on stratics someone is complaining about this using bad analogy - that IS RUINING my stratics experience!

Do you believe you can change that? Also with the constantly dropping subscriptions if that is what it takes for my game to continue to exist - i'm more than happy with it!

I think the best way to understand my answer to that is if you first answer this: What is the difference between asking for something and spamming for something?

Well you can ask as many times as you like but as long as you don't care to listen to the answer you will never be satisfied!

I'm sorry, but this is just a bunch of nonsense.

The current restrictions on stable slots are:
-Proportionally low given the availability and diversity of pets in the game.
-Mostly irrelevant given the technical aspects of today's server capacity
-Flat out pointless when it comes to game balance because a tamer only has 5 control slots.

The idea that players should have to create more characters if they want more slots is ludicrous. Any other class of characters can store hundreds, if not thousands, of weapons if they choose without the need for more characters.

Barring a conflict with game balance or technical programming issues, I see no reason a stable needs to function any different from any other container. 125 items/pets.

Some will use it all, some will use 3 or 4... what difference does it make. The answer is none. Some mages use 1 spellbook, some use many. Some warriors use 3 or 4 weapons, some use many. Is 40 stable slots enough for most players, probably... but without some other competing interest, capping it there serves no purpose except pissing off those who would use more with no ancillary benefits.

 

[Lord GOD(GOD)]

-Proportionally low given the availability and diversity of pets in the game.

Proportionally high given what people use. Which since GD's has been 99% GD's.

-Mostly irrelevant given the technical aspects of today's server capacity

Assuming that they are using servers of today. Not an assumption I'd readily make for a 20 year old game that they are not pumping money into.

-Flat out pointless when it comes to game balance because a tamer only has 5 control slots.

I agree. Though it's also pointless for them to consider it when there are pretty much no upsides to them doing so. I don't know the ins and outs of whatever game store/codes things they've done because I don't spend on it but from what I gather they're charging for extra storage, so no reason to give it away free. Doing it at all equates to time/effort/cost for them.

Pets are not comparable to weapons, weapons are objects, pets are mobiles with AI that you can leave fighting for you/hide behind etc. if you choose.

I've yet to hear one good reason for giving more stable slots that isn't just 'because we want to store dozens of pets/have a Hiryu in every colour' or whatever, these are not good reasons given all the drawbacks... which good or not to those who want more slots are still there.

And I am looking forward to this getting on prod, but realistically there's still only going to be 3-5 pets or combinations that are going to be worth bothering with, for PvM at least.

 

[Merus]

Proportionally high given what people use. Which since GD's has been 99% GD's.



Assuming that they are using servers of today. Not an assumption I'd readily make for a 20 year old game that they are not pumping money into.



I agree. Though it's also pointless for them to consider it when there are pretty much no upsides to them doing so. I don't know the ins and outs of whatever game store/codes things they've done because I don't spend on it but from what I gather they're charging for extra storage, so no reason to give it away free. Doing it at all equates to time/effort/cost for them.

Pets are not comparable to weapons, weapons are objects, pets are mobiles with AI that you can leave fighting for you/hide behind etc. if you choose.

I've yet to hear one good reason for giving more stable slots that isn't just 'because we want to store dozens of pets/have a Hiryu in every colour' or whatever, these are not good reasons given all the drawbacks... which good or not to those who want more slots are still there.

And I am looking forward to this getting on prod, but realistically there's still only going to be 3-5 pets or combinations that are going to be worth bothering with, for PvM at least.

And why is the fact that some people want to have pet "collections" not a "good" reason? Let's face it, people collect all sorts of random things in UO... why should pets be thrown under the bus? I think it's insane for people to collect hundreds of different holiday boxes just so they have 1 of each, but so what? If that's their thing, it doesn't hurt my game whatsoever.

UO owes its survival to the fact that we as players attach sentimental value to certain pixels in the game. Allowing players who attach that value to pets to have their collections IS a good reason to expand the slot count... not infinitely, but to something much more reasonable.

 

[It Lives]

I want more pet slots because ever since AOS was forced on us every thing became about numbers. I want the best weapon to get the job done be it a sword or my pet.

I Need more pet slots because I make my UO living by selling pets to others players and need decent storage to do so more effectively.

I want more storage because its been full since the last time the team added more tames to the game.

I want more slots because I am a pixel junkie and I assign value to my pets.

I need more Slots for pets because harder and different challenges are constantly being added to the game that require a larger range of pets.

I want more slots and I want more options/ something other than 21 gd's with different stats for different bosses.

Lots of good reasons for more and very little to restrict the stable slot issue. I pay monthly for accounts and should have access to more...

 

[Lord GOD(GOD)]

And why is the fact that some people want to have pet "collections" not a "good" reason?.

The people that make the game have to consider the time/effort/cost vs the benefit of any idea. Benefit being increased revenue. If players wanting things alone was a sufficiently good reason for adding stuff to the game there would be all sorts of stupid things in it.

Is increasing stable slots going to bring scores of new paying players to UO? Pretty unlikely, they tend to release paid expansions when they want to do that, not just update one tiny part of a system that only really benefits long term existing players that want to hoard pets (not giving that a negative connotation, but just to differentiate them from long term existing players that don't hoard pets and just use the few that are useful to them). No new player (if there are any new players) is going to be (at least until they aren't new anymore) at a point where things like stable count are even a factor to them.

They can charge you for it in store so why give it away free.

Whatever staff they have left working on this game have a limited amount of time/resources available to them, and are faced with dozens or other things that need updating/fixing, on a pretty much constant basis. That alone would make it extremely low priority.

 

[It Lives]

Is increasing stable slots going to bring scores of new paying players to UO?

Maybe not, but it will keep a lot of existing customers happy:] With no adverse consequences to the game or other players...

 

[Lord GOD(GOD)]

I want more pet slots because ever since AOS was forced on us every thing became about numbers. I want the best weapon to get the job done be it a sword or my pet.

I need more Slots for pets because harder and different challenges are constantly being added to the game that require a larger range of pets.

I want more slots and I want more options/ something other than 21 gd's with different stats for different bosses.

There is only ever one 'best'. If newer challenges being added to the game required a range of pets you'd all be using more than just GD's/Cu's.

I Need more pet slots because I make my UO living by selling pets to others players and need decent storage to do so more effectively.

You needing to sell pets more effectively is not a good enough reason for them to put staff to work on something. Especially when there already exists pet vendors.

I want more storage because its been full since the last time the team added more tames to the game.

I want more slots because I am a pixel junkie and I assign value to my pets.

They don't care.

I want more slots and I want more options/ something other than 21 gd's with different stats for different bosses.

Again, you wanting it is not enough of a reason, especially when you wouldn't use anything different anyway. You'll all keep using the best all purpose pet when going in to an event. Maybe 3-5 other options for specific events.

Lots of good reasons for more and very little to restrict the stable slot issue. I pay monthly for accounts and should have access to more...

Personal reasons are not good reasons. Paying for something doesn't entitle you to dictate how a business is run.

 

[Lord GOD(GOD)]

Maybe not, but it will keep a lot of existing customers happy:] With no adverse consequences to the game or other players...

There are adverse consequences. Time devoted to keeping a few hoarders happy is time deducted from fixing things that are more important.

 

[It Lives]

There are adverse consequences. Time devoted to keeping a few hoarders happy is time deducted from fixing things that are more important.

What do you horde? I know you do... :]

 

[Drakelord]

If I was to purchase a stable slot will it affect every char on that account or is it for just one char? This has me confuse as I have multi tamers across several shards, @Mesanna can you answer this one?

 

[Drakelord]

I am guessing no..I patched up the EC this morning and here are the 2 new mares I got yesterday...one on the bottom is the shiny metallic one...

View attachment 65417

they both look alike to me in EC

 

[Thimotty]

If I was to purchase a stable slot will it affect every char on that account or is it for just one char? This has me confuse as I have multi tamers across several shards, @Mesanna can you answer this one?

I don't think it is even properly announced yet

 

[Drakelord]

And newly tamed nightmares are now 3 slots... this messed up...

???

 

[Keith of Sonoma]

Has anybody else noticed that the platinum and crimson drakes will freely attack you, but if you kill one you lose karma? Surely that is a bug?@bleak @Kyronix

 

[Pawain]

Personal reasons are not good reasons. Paying for something doesn't entitle you to dictate how a business is run.

So lets get rid of the PvP threads. Yay

Why do people care if someone has 50 pets stored in a stable? Please explain. The servers can handle it. I have a full stable, full magencia vendor and 30 battle chickens in coops. LS runs fine.

 

[Pawain]

???

Are you sure all of them are? Better tame some 2 slotters while you can.

 

[Gorbs]

There are adverse consequences. Time devoted to keeping a few hoarders happy is time deducted from fixing things that are more important.

I might agree with you about the time spent complaint if there weren't a tool coming to test center in the near future for mocking up castle designs for a contest.

 

[railshot]

The people that make the game have to consider the time/effort/cost vs the benefit of any idea. Benefit being increased revenue. If players wanting things alone was a sufficiently good reason for adding stuff to the game there would be all sorts of stupid things in it.
Is increasing stable slots going to bring scores of new paying players to UO?

The cost benefit analysis does not apply here, because the cost of adding 21 slots is exactly the same is adding 121.
And while increasing stable slots would not bring new players in, it may very well bring old players back who don't tame anymore because their stables are full. Moreover it's an incredibly cheap way to add 100s of hours of content. Which translates into player retention, because while those tamers are taming and training, they are not quitting because they are bored.
So IMO limiting the pet slots, especially if you charge for them is an idea with no upsides to it. It hurts both the players and UO for no good reasons whatsoever.

 

[Thimotty]

The cost benefit analysis does not apply here, because the cost of adding 21 slots is exactly the same is adding 121.
And while increasing stable slots would not bring new players in, it may very well bring old players back who don't tame anymore because their stables are full. Moreover it's an incredibly cheap way to add 100s of hours of content. Which translates into player retention, because while those tamers are taming and training, they are not quitting because they are bored.
So IMO limiting the pet slots, especially if you charge for them is an idea with no upsides to it. It hurts both the players and UO for no good reasons whatsoever.

Yes, i agree, that is pretty valid argument!

 

[WhiteWitch]

How can adding 21 slots be the same cost as adding 121?

 

[MalagAste]

If I was to purchase a stable slot will it affect every char on that account or is it for just one char? This has me confuse as I have multi tamers across several shards, @Mesanna can you answer this one?

This was addressed in the Newsletter and it is PER CHARACTER... not account which IMO Sucks....

 

[MalagAste]

Are you sure all of them are? Better tame some 2 slotters while you can.

Sad to say that even if you do that now... the instant this goes live and you go to "train" any of those you tamed they will become 3 slots... this has already been pointed out on TC.... sucks.

 

[railshot]

How can adding 21 slots be the same cost as adding 121?

Does it take a programmer more time to type something like "set slotlimit==42" than "set slotlimit==121"?

 

[WhiteWitch]

Does it take a programmer more time to type something like "set slotlimit==42" than "set slotlimit==121"?

No it takes more storage space on the server for all the details of the extra stored mobs multiplied by the amount of chars on that server

Im sure someone is going to come back with "yes but thats tiny in this day and age", maybe, but the statement was that cost of adding 121 was EXACTLY the same as 21.

Dont get me wrong, I dont give a monkeys if they raise the slots or not, Ive had my tamer since 2000 and have lots of free slots, but I understand many do not and I have nothing against the idea of the slots being raised, but to say giving a hundred more slots has no "cost" is just obviously not true

 

[Drakelord]

This was addressed in the Newsletter and it is PER CHARACTER... not account which IMO Sucks....

I have to agree there, especially since the token will be account bound? Still was that the News letter from before as this letter UO Newsletter says nothing about it? went back a few issues here Ultima Online can you show me where this is as I am so lost

 

[Larisa]

This was addressed in the Newsletter and it is PER CHARACTER... not account which IMO Sucks....

From the Cliloc files....

This account-bound token will increase the maximum number of creatures a character can house at the stables by 3, up to a maximum of 42 total stables slots from all sources. A character may use a total of 7 tokens

I just re-read the latest newsletter and I see nothing about this.

 

[railshot]

No it takes more storage space on the server for all the details of the extra stored mobs multiplied by the amount of chars on that server

Im sure someone is going to come back with "yes but thats tiny in this day and age", maybe, but the statement was that cost of adding 121 was EXACTLY the same as 21.

Dont get me wrong, I dont give a monkeys if they raise the slots or not, Ive had my tamer since 2000 and have lots of free slots, but I understand many do not and I have nothing against the idea of the slots being raised, but to say giving a hundred more slots has no "cost" is just obviously not true

Well, as long as you are nitpicking, the statement was about adding, not storing, so it is correct.

 

[RockoNV]

Lots of troll feeding going on in this thread now.

 

[MalagAste]

From the Cliloc files....

This account-bound token will increase the maximum number of creatures a character can house at the stables by 3, up to a maximum of 42 total stables slots from all sources. A character may use a total of 7 tokens

I just re-read the latest newsletter and I see nothing about this.

And the statement there is exactly the one I read and it does say "A CHARACTER" ... singularly ... it does NOT say nor imply anything like "This account-bound token will increase the maximum number of creatures YOUR ACCOUNT can house at the stables by 3, up to a maximum of 42 total stables slots from all sources. YOUR ACCOUNT may use a total of 7 tokens"

And IMO it sucks ass... and I'm half willing to bet that if you transfer said character to another shard you'll LOSE that increase. Just like 99% of the rest of stuff... And I for one am not willing to risk that...

And any way you look at it ..... it's a money grab and it's lame. Costly expense to add to tamers and for what??? 3 lousy slots? Really? Totally of 21 that will cost you a hell of a lot.... they don't charge other characters so... Start charging Sampires for stuff they need.

 

[omukai]

Why do people who don't main a Tamer even bother?
I don't go and post something like "nerf vamp form, put a 30 sec cooldown on life leeched, put a cooldown on weapon on hit effects" etc either.

 

[Dot_Warner]

 

[kazeandi]

The amount of trolling in this thread would make every WOW forum poster feel right at home.

And people complain about the Millennials. The Boomers can be just as pathetic

 

[Lord Frodo]

meh. I don't really care either way. wouldn't bother me if you had 1000 pets. Just think it is funny that people get worked up over not having unlimited stable slots.


But they have the UO store now, so it should be quite obvious unlimited stable lots are not going to happen

What people are getting worked up about is that we are limited to a few pets compared to all the items any other Temp may want to own/store.

 

[Thimotty]

What people are getting worked up about is that we are limited to a few pets compared to all the items any other Temp may want to own/store.

There is another non reader that deserve to be trolled!
What is the item you cannot use/own/store that others can?

 

[Drakelord]

dang need a link to all this

And the statement there is exactly the one I read and it does say "A CHARACTER" ... singularly ... it does NOT say nor imply anything like "This account-bound token will increase the maximum number of creatures YOUR ACCOUNT can house at the stables by 3, up to a maximum of 42 total stables slots from all sources. YOUR ACCOUNT may use a total of 7 tokens"

Where was this at?

 

[Uvtha]

Yes they did:
they gave 2 slots with SA - you complain
they gave 2+3 for TA - you complain
they will give option to buy lots more - you complain

Because as the numbers were still very low. I honestly would have been fine with 40 if we didn't have to buy them. More would always be nice, but 40 is at least a quasi-reasonable number.

Again with that bad weapon analogy.

You brought it up. I was responding to your claims about how many weapons people use. You said people have more than 20 weapons. That's incorrect.

what if a fighter say "i want to own every weapon with every possible props combination made of every possible material"? Even if we don't include different props values because pets have different stats too - it is still a number big enough to fill zillion castles!

If they did say that, I would say "you do you, it doesn't effect me". Now like I said before 2000 storage slots is a more than reasonable number for anything you want to collect.

People are not allowed to do what they want.

No kidding?

There are limits on everything, like i said. But you still don't read. Noone is against raising or removing stable caps. The problem is constant complains. Every time i am on stratics someone is complaining about this using bad analogy - that IS RUINING my stratics experience!

I have no problem with limits. The constant complains exist because in the view of most people who regularly play a tamer the slots have always been unreasonably low when considering the system particulars. They keep adding slots, but they have done so exceedingly infrequently, and in exceedingly small amounts.
As for the new option, like I said, if they had just came out and said "Hey we are doubling stable slots!" I would have been cheering, because it would show they saw the community displeasure, and addresses it. What pissed me off is that they didn't just add them as they should have, they instead force us to pay if we want them, which of course with a this new system overhaul, everyone will. It's this design to get people to pay more philosophy, the kind you see in your average f2p game that I don't like.

As for it ruining your stratics experience... it only gets brought up in taming related threads, and we have an ignore feature. Feel free to use it.

Do you believe you can change that? Also with the constantly dropping subscriptions if that is what it takes for my game to continue to exist - i'm more than happy with it!

Do I believe I can change what? Getting bilked double by paying a sub and then having to pay for system upgrades? The only way I can have any effect on the game is by stating my displeasure or my approval. Stuff like this is part of what causes subs to drop. Ever new "store only" thing they add makes me wanna play a little bit less.

I think the best way to understand my answer to that is if you first answer this: What is the difference between asking for something and spamming for something?

I mean... do you think that this is the only topic people bring up repeatedly? Perhaps because you have no interest in this issue it's annoying to you, in the same way that say, pvp stuff is annoying to non pvpers. Again, if you don't wanna read it... stop reading it.

I think this is the real heart of this current conversation. You don't actually have a problem with stable slots, or people wanting more of them, you are just tired of hearing about it, so you decided to rag on people.

Well you can ask as many times as you like but as long as you don't care to listen to the answer you will never be satisfied!

Translation: "I have no answer."