Felucca only shard.

[Great DC]

Good job @TB Cookie [W] , I wasn't planning writing a wall of text to someone who seems to literally know nothing but his conspiracy theories. BTW I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll, don't tell anyone.

 

[Dorset]

Ahh I understand.
One of our core guys plays from Brazil, really top guy.
He does have conn issues himself, sometimes he can get by, sometimes he can't.

What is ironic with him in Brazil, is he gets to see more live Premiership football games than I do in England, and he gets to see live results before I do!

I live in NZ, and I can watch and record all the Prem games for a fraction of my old sky bill! Messed up aye!
Up the Cherries !!

 

[celticus]

Let's deal with your main post as there is nothing useful here to discuss.
Only negative because some players see through the ******** and won't lie down for you.


Anonymous UOPlayer;

Most posts like this are predicated on an incorrect notion: That Fel and the Fel lifestyle attracts players. Therefore Ilshenar will thrive with such a change.

Not only does it attract them, it keeps them longer, as they are less likely to get bored.
People in an old people's home die fast from boredom.
People out and about facing the challenges, aspirations, highs and lows of the real world, get far more fulfilment from life.

If that premise were true, the following list of things also would be true.

Publish 16 never would have happened. Posts from the dev team at the time said that Publish happened because most people had left Felucca for Trammel and there was a need to balance out server loads for a greater degree. If Trammel hadn't been a success, most people never would've left, and Publish 16 never would have happened.

But it did happen.

If you give people a choice between having to work for a living or a free house, free ice cream, free chocolate, free fizzy drinks for the rest of their life, they'll take the latter.
They will end up fat, listless, lazy, no drive in life and die early, and they will whine and defend their right to free stuff on forums all day long with zero self awareness.
Of course they would take Trammel in droves, it was never an equal choice.
Most new landmasses and content in Trammel?
All new starters to start in Trammel?
I'm sure some people would prefer to start in Felucca - they are not even given a choice.
They are brainwashed before they are even aware.

Trammel never would have been created, because the discontent created by Fel never would have existed and thus there never would have been a need for it.

But it was. (Then see also above.)

Richard Garriott's Memorable Moment from UO would not have consisted of a realization, caused by an incident of one player harming another, that he had to think hard about the rules of the world he'd created.

But it was.
Link: Memorable Moment – Ultima Online

Starr Long would not have indicated that the creation of Trammel was necessary when he spoke at the UO anniversary party.

But he did. (There used to be a paraphrase up someplace of the talk he gave; others will remember it though not all will remember it.)

Siege and Mugen would be the most-populated shards in UO because people would like to play that way.

But they are not.

Siege/Mugan ruleset is not a pure Feluccan rulset - it is considered harsh by even Feluccan players, it is not strictly the original ruleset.
It is a very respectable ruleset - but was put in for the seriously hardcore players.
There are players who sit in the middle of extremely easy, and extremely hardcore.
UO never had only 1 character per account - for example.
Again, you are not using a fair comparison.


There never would have been a need to have the Siege housing gimmick as people would have played there without it, because they liked to play that way.

But there was.

The Fel Abyss spawns would be crowded with folks doing them. (The undead one in particular has a lot of cool content and good rewards.)
But they're not.

They are - we do them a lot. You wouldn't know I guess.

There wouldn't be posts on Stratics complaining that VvV was dead, because people would jump at the chance to PvP.

But there are those posts.

Give VvV the same loot tables as free and easy PvM - especially Shadowguard soloable by a tamer or Sampire for the last couple of years, and see what happens.
Antique equipment from VvV?
Again, you are speaking from zero knowledge, and using completely unrealistic comparisons.
Give us something to PvP over.

Games that came out post-UO that had more of a Fel type environment would be prospering, whereas games that came out post-UO that had more of a Tram type environment would be failing.

But that's not the case. Shadowbane is dead. Darkfall has around 3,400 likes on facebook;

Darkfall Online

Everquest has around 66,000;

EverQuest

UO has around 28,000.

Ultima Online

(Facebook likes aren't a perfect indicator of a game's popularity but it's a much better metric than individual posters.)

No likes for Shadowbane because it died.

I found a Facebook page for a free shard! Number or likes: around 3,800.

I found a Facebook page for another free shard, specifically dedicated to the Second Age era. Number of likes: around 1,700.

There wouldn't be very angry posts on Stratics calling for a Fel-only shard, because everyone would be playing in Fel to start with! But there are such posts.


Eve Online - I mentioned this in another post.
So you are only happy to provide failed examples - I can provide one more failed example - UO in Trammel period.

Felucca only shard.

Finally, Fel would be so popular on its own that threads like these wouldn't exist. Ilshenar would've been made Fel-only a long time ago, perhaps even at the time of its creation. It wasn't made so and it hasn't been made so since, and why? Because they knew they'd just be making a dead facet.

I could go on and on but that's enough for now. The upshot of all this is clear: A Fel rules Ilshenar would be a dead facet.

Now of course the poster could've just wanted Ilshenar to be Fel rules as a personal preference. I can't counter that save to say that in this instance, your personal preference would be bad policy for the game. I'd like to think good policy for the game trumps your wishes.

There was a time when most players would see posts like these and just let them pass by, but I'm glad that time is gone. In not responding to posts like these we run significant risks of letting intense opinion be mistaken for popular opinion.

It is popular opinion.
It's only intense to you, because it would mean giving up your free cookies and ice cream, and you cannot begin to comprehend life after that.

I don't expect to post in this thread again, however, because it'd be pointless.

I don't expect you to post again, because you have nothing useful to say.
But you will - the entire Trammel debate is only pushed by about 5 Stratics zealots onto the rest of us.
They have huge post-counts, they never stop trolling, and they never let fact or truth stop them.
They certainly do not know how to debate, or present a reasonable argument - at least you did try here, but it was easy to take down.

Great post and good arguments on both sides:

The argument is between two different playstyles PVP and non-PVP, and people who want to obtain Fel only content for one reason or another, and PVP-expert players contest in-game. Also non-PVPers who refuse to learn PVP tactics, ie how to play PVP and how to avoid getting killed by PVP.
This argument and positions on either side brought up a lot of good posts on both sides each side with good points and also one-sided view points on both sides.

Lots of posting and energy wasted on nothing basically since absolutely nothing will change, as the Devs have clearly stated that there will be no change. There will never be a pure PVP shard, or PVP Ilsh. There will never be an agreement on all sides, and the Dev team has no resources or energy to invest in any such changes.

But we all know that. Also there are so many other problems, more important imo that need Dev time.

 

[SpyderBite]

However what does a thief do now? Steal artifacts from dungeons and maybe pick off an EM item here or there. It's more of scamming then thieving these days and while it is interesting and still requires dedication and skill, it feels wrong to me to scam.

You're just not doing it right.

 

[Fingers]

I'll be honest, I'm tired of hearing Trammies whining all day long about Felucca, non-consensual PvP and Powerscrolls.

I'm tired of doing all the work, creating all the activity, and feeding these fat cats who take no risk, and gain all the rewards, I shouldn't have to play alongside them.

Thats rich.
Crying about crying.
Trammies and care bears.
We rule.
Grow up kid.
Tired, dead argument.

 

[drcossack]

Thats rich.
Crying about crying.
Trammies and care bears.
We rule.
Grow up kid.
Tired, dead argument.

Great argument. Got anything of substance to add to the thread?

 

[OREOGL]

Thats rich.
Crying about crying.
Trammies and care bears.
We rule.
Grow up kid.
Tired, dead argument.

Well, I for one, am impressed you were able to string as many as four words together.

Hang in there champ, five is coming.

 

[Anonymous UOPlayer]

Well hopefully you've calmed down by now. I am assuming that the excessive insults you threw out were a product of your being overly-excited, and not that that's how you are, normally.

You attempt to make a few substantive arguments in there so I'll do my best with those.

1 - The success of a single example, Eve Online, somehow overrides or nullifies the numerous examples I used. Using Facebook likes as the metric, for consistency's sake, Eve Online does have a pretty impressive number: about 331,000.

EVE Online

However, reading its Wikipedia page (which is written with extreme prejudice in its favor, unlike UO's Wikipedia page sadly, which is dominated by negative types):

Eve Online - Wikipedia

reveals that it's not a comparable case. It's a science fiction setting for one. It's set up with minimal "shards" for another, to enhance the unique aspects of its gameplay. Also it looks like you mostly play a disembodied spaceship, and involve yourself in epic struggles and plotting. It also seemingly has the ability to "train" offline. (An interesting feature that in a UO-type setting would engender a lot of resentment by more-intense players against more-casual ones.)

World of Warcraft, by contrast, is a much more comparable case to UO. It is a fantasy setting with a comparable level of technological development. (Far from exact, but comparable.) You play a character, rather than a disembodied craft, and have the freedom to pursue the everyday as well as the epic. It is split up among various "shards" to avoid over-crowding. PvP is available but tightly controlled and purely consensual.

World of Warcraft

6.4 million likes. It should be clear which is the superior business model. I note that I also had the virtue of more than one example. I'll also throw out another: Dark Age of Camelot, which before it was in the same family with UO, was hailed as a PvP-centric UO killer.

Dark Age of Camelot

Well it's still alive and seems to be doing fine, unlike, say, Shadowbane or Darkfall....But, at 22,000 Facebook likes it's hardly in the same league of EverQuest to say nothing of World of Warcraft.

2- You claim that you and your friends do the Abyss Fel spawns, thereby nullifying my observations that they are done only rarely. In this case I point to Global Chat, which reveals that Fel players are not above, shall we say, exaggerations to "prove" a "point," and that even the facts are subject to heated dispute. (To say nothing of how those facts are interpreted.)

Between your likely exaggerations and my observations, I'll take the latter.

This is not an insult so I hope you take no offense -- I mean it's not really deniable that wild exaggeration is a critical part of the Fel playstyle. You all have made no secret of this.

I suppose I may have missed something amidst all the insults and baseless assumptions asserted as fact, but, yeah. There it is.

Let's deal with your main post as there is nothing useful here to discuss.
Only negative because some players see through the ******** and won't lie down for you.


Anonymous UOPlayer;

Most posts like this are predicated on an incorrect notion: That Fel and the Fel lifestyle attracts players. Therefore Ilshenar will thrive with such a change.

Not only does it attract them, it keeps them longer, as they are less likely to get bored.
People in an old people's home die fast from boredom.
People out and about facing the challenges, aspirations, highs and lows of the real world, get far more fulfilment from life.

If that premise were true, the following list of things also would be true.

Publish 16 never would have happened. Posts from the dev team at the time said that Publish happened because most people had left Felucca for Trammel and there was a need to balance out server loads for a greater degree. If Trammel hadn't been a success, most people never would've left, and Publish 16 never would have happened.

But it did happen.

If you give people a choice between having to work for a living or a free house, free ice cream, free chocolate, free fizzy drinks for the rest of their life, they'll take the latter.
They will end up fat, listless, lazy, no drive in life and die early, and they will whine and defend their right to free stuff on forums all day long with zero self awareness.
Of course they would take Trammel in droves, it was never an equal choice.
Most new landmasses and content in Trammel?
All new starters to start in Trammel?
I'm sure some people would prefer to start in Felucca - they are not even given a choice.
They are brainwashed before they are even aware.

Trammel never would have been created, because the discontent created by Fel never would have existed and thus there never would have been a need for it.

But it was. (Then see also above.)

Richard Garriott's Memorable Moment from UO would not have consisted of a realization, caused by an incident of one player harming another, that he had to think hard about the rules of the world he'd created.

But it was.
Link: Memorable Moment – Ultima Online

Starr Long would not have indicated that the creation of Trammel was necessary when he spoke at the UO anniversary party.

But he did. (There used to be a paraphrase up someplace of the talk he gave; others will remember it though not all will remember it.)

Siege and Mugen would be the most-populated shards in UO because people would like to play that way.

But they are not.

Siege/Mugan ruleset is not a pure Feluccan rulset - it is considered harsh by even Feluccan players, it is not strictly the original ruleset.
It is a very respectable ruleset - but was put in for the seriously hardcore players.
There are players who sit in the middle of extremely easy, and extremely hardcore.
UO never had only 1 character per account - for example.
Again, you are not using a fair comparison.


There never would have been a need to have the Siege housing gimmick as people would have played there without it, because they liked to play that way.

But there was.

The Fel Abyss spawns would be crowded with folks doing them. (The undead one in particular has a lot of cool content and good rewards.)
But they're not.

They are - we do them a lot. You wouldn't know I guess.

There wouldn't be posts on Stratics complaining that VvV was dead, because people would jump at the chance to PvP.

But there are those posts.

Give VvV the same loot tables as free and easy PvM - especially Shadowguard soloable by a tamer or Sampire for the last couple of years, and see what happens.
Antique equipment from VvV?
Again, you are speaking from zero knowledge, and using completely unrealistic comparisons.
Give us something to PvP over.

Games that came out post-UO that had more of a Fel type environment would be prospering, whereas games that came out post-UO that had more of a Tram type environment would be failing.

But that's not the case. Shadowbane is dead. Darkfall has around 3,400 likes on facebook;

Darkfall Online

Everquest has around 66,000;

EverQuest

UO has around 28,000.

Ultima Online

(Facebook likes aren't a perfect indicator of a game's popularity but it's a much better metric than individual posters.)

No likes for Shadowbane because it died.

I found a Facebook page for a free shard! Number or likes: around 3,800.

I found a Facebook page for another free shard, specifically dedicated to the Second Age era. Number of likes: around 1,700.

There wouldn't be very angry posts on Stratics calling for a Fel-only shard, because everyone would be playing in Fel to start with! But there are such posts.


Eve Online - I mentioned this in another post.
So you are only happy to provide failed examples - I can provide one more failed example - UO in Trammel period.

Felucca only shard.

Finally, Fel would be so popular on its own that threads like these wouldn't exist. Ilshenar would've been made Fel-only a long time ago, perhaps even at the time of its creation. It wasn't made so and it hasn't been made so since, and why? Because they knew they'd just be making a dead facet.

I could go on and on but that's enough for now. The upshot of all this is clear: A Fel rules Ilshenar would be a dead facet.

Now of course the poster could've just wanted Ilshenar to be Fel rules as a personal preference. I can't counter that save to say that in this instance, your personal preference would be bad policy for the game. I'd like to think good policy for the game trumps your wishes.

There was a time when most players would see posts like these and just let them pass by, but I'm glad that time is gone. In not responding to posts like these we run significant risks of letting intense opinion be mistaken for popular opinion.

It is popular opinion.
It's only intense to you, because it would mean giving up your free cookies and ice cream, and you cannot begin to comprehend life after that.

I don't expect to post in this thread again, however, because it'd be pointless.

I don't expect you to post again, because you have nothing useful to say.
But you will - the entire Trammel debate is only pushed by about 5 Stratics zealots onto the rest of us.
They have huge post-counts, they never stop trolling, and they never let fact or truth stop them.
They certainly do not know how to debate, or present a reasonable argument - at least you did try here, but it was easy to take down.

 

[Anonymous UOPlayer]

Great post and good arguments on both sides:

The argument is between two different playstyles PVP and non-PVP, and people who want to obtain Fel only content for one reason or another, and PVP-expert players contest in-game. Also non-PVPers who refuse to learn PVP tactics, ie how to play PVP and how to avoid getting killed by PVP.
This argument and positions on either side brought up a lot of good posts on both sides each side with good points and also one-sided view points on both sides.

Lots of posting and energy wasted on nothing basically since absolutely nothing will change, as the Devs have clearly stated that there will be no change. There will never be a pure PVP shard, or PVP Ilsh. There will never be an agreement on all sides, and the Dev team has no resources or energy to invest in any such changes.

But we all know that. Also there are so many other problems, more important imo that need Dev time.

I appreciate your suggestion that there are good arguments on both sides. I am, however, unfortunately constrained to point out that this statement: "non-PVPers who refuse to learn PVP tactics, ie how to play PVP and how to avoid getting killed by PVP" is not strictly speaking true. I, for one, have PvPed a lot across multiple shards and have made a deliberate decision to leave it behind for many reasons. My inside knowledge gives me a unique perspective on just how bad for the game some of these proposals would be. I hope you're right that the UO team wouldn't do any of these things but I've learned that hope by itself is kinda pointless. It has to be helped by evidence-based argument.

 

[railshot]

1 - The success of a single example, Eve Online, somehow overrides or nullifies the numerous examples I used. Using Facebook likes as the metric, for consistency's sake, Eve Online does have a pretty impressive number: about 331,000.

They also conveniently ignore the fact that EVE has it's own version of Trammel (The Empire). Guess where the vast majority of the players live?

 

[OREOGL]

Well hopefully you've calmed down by now. I am assuming that the excessive insults you threw out were a product of your being overly-excited, and not that that's how you are, normally.

You attempt to make a few substantive arguments in there so I'll do my best with those.

1 - The success of a single example, Eve Online, somehow overrides or nullifies the numerous examples I used. Using Facebook likes as the metric, for consistency's sake, Eve Online does have a pretty impressive number: about 331,000.

EVE Online

However, reading its Wikipedia page (which is written with extreme prejudice in its favor, unlike UO's Wikipedia page sadly, which is dominated by negative types):

Eve Online - Wikipedia

reveals that it's not a comparable case. It's a science fiction setting for one. It's set up with minimal "shards" for another, to enhance the unique aspects of its gameplay. Also it looks like you mostly play a disembodied spaceship, and involve yourself in epic struggles and plotting. It also seemingly has the ability to "train" offline. (An interesting feature that in a UO-type setting would engender a lot of resentment by more-intense players against more-casual ones.)

World of Warcraft, by contrast, is a much more comparable case to UO. It is a fantasy setting with a comparable level of technological development. (Far from exact, but comparable.) You play a character, rather than a disembodied craft, and have the freedom to pursue the everyday as well as the epic. It is split up among various "shards" to avoid over-crowding. PvP is available but tightly controlled and purely consensual.

World of Warcraft

6.4 million likes. It should be clear which is the superior business model. I note that I also had the virtue of more than one example. I'll also throw out another: Dark Age of Camelot, which before it was in the same family with UO, was hailed as a PvP-centric UO killer.

Dark Age of Camelot

Well it's still alive and seems to be doing fine, unlike, say, Shadowbane or Darkfall....But, at 22,000 Facebook likes it's hardly in the same league of EverQuest to say nothing of World of Warcraft.

2- You claim that you and your friends do the Abyss Fel spawns, thereby nullifying my observations that they are done only rarely. In this case I point to Global Chat, which reveals that Fel players are not above, shall we say, exaggerations to "prove" a "point," and that even the facts are subject to heated dispute. (To say nothing of how those facts are interpreted.)

Between your likely exaggerations and my observations, I'll take the latter.

This is not an insult so I hope you take no offense -- I mean it's not really deniable that wild exaggeration is a critical part of the Fel playstyle. You all have made no secret of this.

I suppose I may have missed something amidst all the insults and baseless assumptions asserted as fact, but, yeah. There it is.

Arguably, WoW supports PVP servers, successfully.

US Realm Pop

EU Realm Pop


The rest don't seem to be much of a comparison since they are also niche games like UO, capping out at less than 500k subscriptions, while WoW still is in the millions.

Really, I really suspect the gameplay, graphics, actively influence these numbers. This includes consistent expansions and advertising.

I don't know what UO subscriptions are around now, but if I recall they were well below 50k a few years ago. You could probably guess it's floating around the 10k mark now. And comparatively, has seen very few expansions since 04' - 05'.

 

[Fingers]

Great argument. Got anything of substance to add to the thread?

You mean like yours?
Yeah, thats rich as well.
Move along.

 

[Fingers]

Well, I for one, am impressed you were able to string as many as four words together.

Hang in there champ, five is coming.

Had to keep it simple for you slow folk.
Wipe that drool off

 

[OREOGL]

Had to keep it simple for you slow folk.
Wipe that drool off

Touché!

 

[Anonymous UOPlayer]

Arguably, WoW supports PVP servers, successfully.

US Realm Pop

EU Realm Pop


The rest don't seem to be much of a comparison since they are also niche games like UO, capping out at less than 500k subscriptions, while WoW still is in the millions.

Really, I really suspect the gameplay, graphics, actively influence these numbers. This includes consistent expansions and advertising.

I don't know what UO subscriptions are around now, but if I recall they were well below 50k a few years ago. You could probably guess it's floating around the 10k mark now. And comparatively, has seen very few expansions since 04' - 05'.

What I had stated was that in WoW, "PvP is available but tightly controlled and purely consensual." Not that mechanisms for it didn't exist.

You used a site called Realmpop.com. I Googled "is Realmpop.com accurate" (without the quotes) and the first hit was a thread from 2016 (so neither 100% current nor terribly old) on the official WoW boards:

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20749006618

wherein the consensus is that it was not. Here's where someone replies "that's true they actually under-estimate the PvP servers' population because of [insert reason here]." Sometimes when I research these reasons, those reasons either prove incorrect or cannot be verified either way.

I also note that when I Googled "how do wow pvp servers work" (again without the quotes), I found this link:

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/4768349799

which had the following answer: "On a PvP or RP-PvP server, you can openly attack anyone of the opposite faction." The last four words, I think, are key, because it goes back, yet again, to the issue of "consensual" PvP, which isn't what is being asked for when threads like these are started. I also found this:

https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17611352209

wherein this post: https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17611352209#post-4

again stresses consent for PvP. It's horde vs alliance only. You lose nothing but time when you die. A very, very far cry from the Fel days. Both those threads also stress that most PvP occurs in the Battleground areas. Even on the PvP servers it's not open PvP: It's constant Factions. Presumably that means an Alliance player can't randomly PK another Alliance player which is very far from the Fel days in UO.

Sure you might say "an open PvP server in UO would be consensual too," and in the technical sense you could be right because no one makes you play on it. But it's still not the same as the PvP servers in WoW based on the publicly available descriptions. And, accordingly, there's no good reason at all to think that it'd be successful even on its own terms. The clear intent would be to get "normal" players to prey upon. And it wouldn't work that way. Which would lead to attempts at incentives. Don't believe me? Look at Siege again: Would it need the housing gimmick if people just wanted to play there for the hard core atmosphere? No. (And, again, I point out that thanks to Siege and Mugen UO does have open PvP servers, and they are failed attempts.) Still don't believe me? Then look at all the threads saying "give us reasons to PvP." Look at the invention of power scrolls. If people wanted to PvP they wouldn't have needed any reasons. They would just do it.

Regarding UO's population, whatever it is now, my argument (which I supported by appropriately documented facts) is that there's no good reason to think that it'd be better if there were more Fel in the game. And, indeed, there are good reasons (again, supported by appropriately documented facts) to think the exact, polar opposite.

And finally there are good reasons to think that UO's population is higher than posts like these speculate it to be. To cite the best reason: It's still alive. EA would not hesitate to cancel us if it weren't making money. Indeed given how irrational EA is I wouldn't be surprised to see them cancel it when it still was.

 

[OREOGL]

What I had stated was that in WoW, "PvP is available but tightly controlled and purely consensual." Not that mechanisms for it didn't exist.

You used a site called Realmpop.com. I Googled "is Realmpop.com accurate" (without the quotes) and the first hit was a thread from 2016 (so neither 100% current nor terribly old) on the official WoW boards:

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20749006618

wherein the consensus is that it was not. Here's where someone replies "that's true they actually under-estimate the PvP servers' population because of [insert reason here]." Sometimes when I research these reasons, those reasons either prove incorrect or cannot be verified either way.

I also note that when I Googled "how do wow pvp servers work" (again without the quotes), I found this link:

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/4768349799

which had the following answer: "On a PvP or RP-PvP server, you can openly attack anyone of the opposite faction." The last four words, I think, are key, because it goes back, yet again, to the issue of "consensual" PvP, which isn't what is being asked for when threads like these are started. I also found this:

https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17611352209

wherein this post: https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17611352209#post-4

again stresses consent for PvP. It's horde vs alliance only. You lose nothing but time when you die. A very, very far cry from the Fel days. Both those threads also stress that most PvP occurs in the Battleground areas. Even on the PvP servers it's not open PvP: It's constant Factions. Presumably that means an Alliance player can't randomly PK another Alliance player which is very far from the Fel days in UO.

Sure you might say "an open PvP server in UO would be consensual too," and in the technical sense you could be right because no one makes you play on it. But it's still not the same as the PvP servers in WoW based on the publicly available descriptions. And, accordingly, there's no good reason at all to think that it'd be successful even on its own terms. The clear intent would be to get "normal" players to prey upon. And it wouldn't work that way. Which would lead to attempts at incentives. Don't believe me? Look at Siege again: Would it need the housing gimmick if people just wanted to play there for the hard core atmosphere? No. (And, again, I point out that thanks to Siege and Mugen UO does have open PvP servers, and they are failed attempts.) Still don't believe me? Then look at all the threads saying "give us reasons to PvP." Look at the invention of power scrolls. If people wanted to PvP they wouldn't have needed any reasons. They would just do it.

Regarding UO's population, whatever it is now, my argument (which I supported by appropriately documented facts) is that there's no good reason to think that it'd be better if there were more Fel in the game. And, indeed, there are good reasons (again, supported by appropriately documented facts) to think the exact, polar opposite.

And finally there are good reasons to think that UO's population is higher than posts like these speculate it to be. To cite the best reason: It's still alive. EA would not hesitate to cancel us if it weren't making money. Indeed given how irrational EA is I wouldn't be surprised to see them cancel it when it still was.

Sure, i had already assumed you'd have questioned the legitimacy of the website, but was more for reference than anything since it seemed to show the biggest census.

The same thread references it as a rough estimate which I was okay with.

Warcraftrealms.com/realmstats.php was another I saw.

Or www.wowprogress.com/realms/rank/us

Take your pick really, I think any of them illustrate the point I was making.

Power scrolls were added in 2002 and 16 years there is still pvo. I'd say that takes care of that argument.
Stop adding content to trammel for 16 years and see how long it lasts.


Siege and Magen are poor examples of a pvp shards because they made the conditions of the servers more extreme, for lack of a better term, than normal shards.

Given any chance at a normal pvp shard would probably be noted as such and the lure argument goes away.

But sure the UO population may be a good deal higher.

 

[Fingers]

Power scrolls were added in 2002 and 16 years there is still pvo. I'd say that takes care of that argument.
Stop adding content to trammel for 16 years and see how long it lasts..

Powerscrolls were added to Trammel via Fel lolol.
Horrible attempt to make people cross over.
Fel has survived only because the devs see fit.
If they based their decision on live or die based on fel player activity......pffft...dead years ago.
Pretty sure thats why Tramms came about.
I know all the care bear comments, but facts are that.
Tramms has kept UO alive this long.
Hundreds of fel folks who would hate on my comment years ago are gone now.
I rest my case.
PS.....my own "personal" opinion.....redo the lands in Fel or Tramms, as in new and different layouts, etc, and open UO up to ONE shard, pvp optional but mandatory areas. Maybe add events like bandits stuff, but allow killing on certain roads, or certain areas, and just do away with reds and blues!
Its long overdue that UO is ONE again.

 

[TB Cookie [W]]

Hundreds of fel folks who would hate on my comment years ago are gone now.

We agree on one thing.

 

[Fingers]

We agree on one thing.

Whew.....I was worried.....

 

[TB Cookie [W]]

Whew.....I was worried.....

(Not a bad final idea by the way...)

 

[OREOGL]

Powerscrolls were added to Trammel via Fel lolol.
Horrible attempt to make people cross over.
Fel has survived only because the devs see fit.
If they based their decision on live or die based on fel player activity......pffft...dead years ago.
Pretty sure thats why Tramms came about.
I know all the care bear comments, but facts are that.
Tramms has kept UO alive this long.
Hundreds of fel folks who would hate on my comment years ago are gone now.
I rest my case.
PS.....my own "personal" opinion.....redo the lands in Fel or Tramms, as in new and different layouts, etc, and open UO up to ONE shard, pvp optional but mandatory areas. Maybe add events like bandits stuff, but allow killing on certain roads, or certain areas, and just do away with reds and blues!
Its long overdue that UO is ONE again.

Yeah, power scrolls were also made available to trammel players who can go to fel to farm them.

The devs have put minimal effort into fel.

VVV was added because of the removal of factions. You don't get credit for fixing something you broke.

And then the Pvp balancing which is routine matinence of game mechanics.

Whether or not trammel keeps the game going, I'm not sure it affects the merit of a pvp shard idea. It wouldn't change anything in trammel, so whatever business model argument being made seems pretty moot.

It's never going to happen anyways but its nice to think about, much in the same way of dreaming of power scrolls moving to trammel.

 

[Spartan]

... <snip> ...
PS.....my own "personal" opinion.....redo the lands in Fel or Tramms, as in new and different layouts, etc, and open UO up to ONE shard, pvp optional but mandatory areas. Maybe add events like bandits stuff, but allow killing on certain roads, or certain areas, and just do away with reds and blues!
Its long overdue that UO is ONE again.

This is an idea that was bandied about right here on Stratics pre-Tram! What had been proposed is that one land existed, guardzones remain as is, roads and "safe zones" were 1 screen in size (clarification ... safe area was one screen either side of road) and anything outside that was fair game. Cemeteries were to be a safe zone as well moongates so younger players could train up in relative safety. Dungeons ... open season.

The only sticking point was how in the heck do we guard a cemetery where all sorts of mobs are? I mean a mongbat gets smashed if it so much as looks at someone in a guard zone! Even the ardent PVP crowd was seeing the benefit of how it could work.

Amazing what Spiels and Rants was like in the "good ole daze"! I would like to see one land with a GOOD method for non-PVP players to survive and do decently in the game. Maybe some day ... yeah, in my dreams.