90 Day stuff - M&G 02/08/16

[Capt. Lucky]

I think the point being missed is those that are unable/unwilling to pay every month, are unable to play every month so in the end, the only one suffering is the person not paying every month. I might be wrong but I wouldnt think those that do the paying less than 12 times a year, would pay every single month if threatened to lose their house thus those extra dollars are gone from the game. Furthermore, I for one, if everything I had were lost including my house, a very slim chance to return and play again would exist. In my opinion, there is no abuse or cheating or exploitation going on. People having houses and account that are not paid for 12 times a year do not affect me or anyone else in any aspect. It does not prevent me from playing or hunting or enjoying my game time.

If this happens to affect someone's game play, I would love to hear that point be made so I can have a reason to change my thoughts about this.

It hurts you, me and everyone. They hoard prime house spots such as castles and Luna. They would pay for them if they have to. But they don't have too. I have a Camaro. I'd rather have a Corvette but Chevy won't let me pay one month and skip 3 payments. It's a flawed system that will end UO long before it should have. There's no possible way to look at this without it being clearly wrong. No one has to loose anything. Just pay for your game. How is this possibly such a radical concept? All the complaining here just shows probably millions UO is losing in revenue. For every 4 exploiters that quit only ONE of those has to pay up full time to break even. To end this exploit. To stop insulting the full time subscribers. To make UO more profitable. To add revenue to greatly extend and improve the game. To give honest full time subscribers shots at all the prime house spots being hoarded. etc etc Many of these people are hoarding these prime spots just to sell them for real life cash on the gold sites. Many people are hoarding up these spots just to sell to the full time subscribers that are actually paying the money to keep this game going. Full subscription players can't place in a prime location cause the exploiters have them all hoarded up for pennies on the dollar. It's time it ends. Because everyday it festers and spreads till UO dies a premature death. If you can't raise 10 bucks a month for a full time account you shouldn't be playing games. You shouldn't have internet. You should be going to school and getting a better job instead of sitting on your butt playing games, lol. I bet there's not one in a thousand here that can't afford it. They just like free stuff and hosing people lol. They've calculated their best bang for the buck. Why pay for 4 houses when I could have 20 for the same money? If you made them actually pay for their stuff they would do it. They were consolidate all the junk they've hoarded. They would keep their best places and free up some spots. Sure there's a lot of spots in UO. How about Luna, castle, on the water, island, etc kinda spots? Not very many, they're hoarded by exploiters. When new player and returning player realized they'll never have a dream spot because of exploiters, they don't stick around either. I'll take one honest player over 4 exploiters any day.

 

[OREOGL]

I am indifferent to the 90 day scheme, since it doesn't affect me in any way.

I think it is a bit of a stretch to call them cheaters, to use a system they intentionally changed.

Mesanna should bite her tongue or change it.

I am not sure how she got into the position she's in but sometimes I can only shake my head at the things she says.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Thank you for your intriguing thoughts about this and I still remain unconvinced that this topic has any real detriment on someone else playing. There are still plenty of spots to place houses and with the in-game vendor search, in my opinion, there is no longer a need to be right at luna or crossroads or any such areas. I do understand how it would be nice to have a house in a heavily populated area but that still doesnt stop me or anyone I know from playing this game and enjoying it. Ill remain open minded on this topic though.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

Thank you for your intriguing thoughts about this and I still remain unconvinced that this topic has any real detriment on someone else playing. There are still plenty of spots to place houses and with the in-game vendor search, in my opinion, there is no longer a need to be right at luna or crossroads or any such areas. I do understand how it would be nice to have a house in a heavily populated area but that still doesnt stop me or anyone I know from playing this game and enjoying it. Ill remain open minded on this topic though.

The real point being is people will always abuse getting free stuff. If they actually had to pay they would. Or they would cut back to spending the same they are now without exploiting and hoarding up prime spots. You would stop the bleeding of people saying "Why am I being a sap? I'll do it too!". You'll make two or three times more on a Luna spot than anywhere else. People wander around and buy stuff they would never have thought to search for. The current exploit smells... you can't even from the most simplistic view not walk around in it and not smell it. That should tell everyone something. Make the exploiters pay and they will. They won't give up their hoarded stuff. At the very most they would drop some free houses but still pay the same or probably more in actual cash each month.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Great explanation yet I would far from call it an exploit and start being disrespectful towards those that are forced to miss a month or two due to real world issues.

I do agree, to be able to have a house say in Luna, would be nice as the for traffic is higher there for selling your goods. For players that play the game more than just buy and sell items to try and turn a profit, logic would show that the 90 day rule would pose not detriment towards gameplay but we all have our own ways we enjoy those great game and in the words of the great Tosh.O "and for this, I thank you"

 

[THP]

like i said... too mnay accounts people would leave close accounts if they mess with the 90 day rule...think they should be happy if a player runs 2 accounts paying 12x a year but runs 2 extra 90 days accounts 4x a year...just for the extra housing on maybe shards they only occasion play....lot of income will be lost...lot of gamers will be lost... enough of this...id say increase it to 120 days if anything...

 

[Uvtha]

It hurts you, me and everyone. They hoard prime house spots such as castles and Luna. They would pay for them if they have to. But they don't have too

Complete supposition. You have only a suspicion that this is the case, and like people have pointed out multiple times, even if it were the case, those spots are going to be on lock down regardless of whether the account is active or not. Would the moral victory and complete lack of tangible distinction between the two situations really be worth putting so many honest players homes at risk with a no account no house rule?

 

[Capt. Lucky]

Complete supposition. You have only a suspicion that this is the case, and like people have pointed out multiple times, even if it were the case, those spots are going to be on lock down regardless of whether the account is active or not. Would the moral victory and complete lack of tangible distinction between the two situations really be worth putting so many honest players homes at risk with a no account no house rule?

Yes it would. Because the people would actually pay for them if they were forced to. That's MAJOR revenue for EA/BS and that means a better game for us all. If these spots get locked down it will be with full time subscriptions and you might notice I'm in favor of that. I'm all for everyone having everything they want. Simply actually pay for it. It's the right thing to do. Lets put an end to low lifes mooching off me, EA/BS, and everyone else. I suppose people could walk into a party store and buy one bottle of Coke and steal 3 and people would be all over the news about these "poor people" can't afford Cokes and the rich can buy them anytime they want lol. NONSENSE. There's not ONE logical argument that justifies people not paying their way. Go grub off some other game and put them outta business. Bye bye!

 

[Uvtha]

Yes it would. Because the people would actually pay for them if they were forced to. That's MAJOR revenue for EA/BS and that means a better game for us all. If these spots get locked down it will be with full time subscriptions and you might notice I'm in favor of that. I'm all for everyone having everything they want. Simply actually pay for it. It's the right thing to do. Lets put an end to low lifes mooching off me, EA/BS, and everyone else. I suppose people could walk into a party store and buy one bottle of Coke and steal 3 and people would be all over the news about these "poor people" can't afford Cokes and the rich can buy them anytime they want lol. NONSENSE. There's not ONE logical argument that justifies people not paying their way. Go grub off some other game and put them outta business. Bye bye!

Ok, so instead of making these IRL correlations that don't really compare, look at the potential ramification. You credit card info changes, and you forget to update it. Poof you house is gone. Any situation where by mistake or accident or anything like that you lose everything. First of all you are betting that people won't quit if you get rid of the rule, which is a risky bet, but then you are willing, because you are so obsessed with this topic to potentially put people's homes at risk.

Again you have to ask yourself, if getting rid of the change IS good for the game... why has it never been done? Maybe the dev team knows a little more of the potential ramifications than we do?

 

[Capt. Lucky]

Ok, so instead of making these IRL correlations that don't really compare, look at the potential ramification. You credit card info changes, and you forget to update it. Poof you house is gone. Any situation where by mistake or accident or anything like that you lose everything. First of all you are betting that people won't quit if you get rid of the rule, which is a risky bet, but then you are willing, because you are so obsessed with this topic to potentially put people's homes at risk.

Again you have to ask yourself, if getting rid of the change IS good for the game... why has it never been done? Maybe the dev team knows a little more of the potential ramifications than we do?

Mesanna strongly dislikes this system, when she finally "man's up" were all set. I think she already smells the coffee and is trying to figure the best path. I believe these changes are already in the works. It will take time for it to happen. It's my job to keep this topic alive in various formats (forums, emails, etc) and I appreciate your help with that. 30 days is fine for people to realize a mistake has happened. It's happened with me. It didn't go 90 days lol It didn't go 7 days. Hmmm I can't log into my account hmmmmmm. Duh lol. Things are leaning towards a 45 day grace period. I'm not really happy with that but it's better. It's a compromise. No one will love it but it's better than what we have now by far. I'm sure people will exploit that too and much as possible. That's how that type of person is. I'm waiting for the "Exploiters have been a staple of UO since day one! You get rid of exploits people will quit!" defense lol. Actually I think I've seen that one already.

 

[Uvtha]

Mesanna strongly dislikes this system, when she finally "man's up" were all set. I think she already smells the coffee and is trying to figure the best path. I believe these changes are already in the works.

I think it's puzzling that that's what you got from that transcript. If they are working on a system the rewards people for consecutive months subbing, that says to me the direct opposite, that they are NOT getting rid of the 90 day period, but rather trying to incentivize people not to use it for extra housing.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

I think it's puzzling that that's what you got from that transcript. If they are working on a system the rewards people for consecutive months subbing, that says to me the direct opposite, that they are NOT getting rid of the 90 day period, but rather trying to incentivize people not to use it for extra housing.

It's in discussion. I've been discussing this with people behind the scenes for weeks. So far we've gone from, it's been going on a long time and we inherited this, to yes I don't like it either, to yes it is being abused, to well what can we do with this to make it fair? So progress is being made because everyone knows this current exploit needs fixing. Your absolutely correct I didn't get this from the dev chat. Although on the bright side we did see acknowledgement of a problem and an off the cuff remark about making it more fair. Progress is being made. I support a 30 day grace period, but 45 seems like a clear leader lol. The final solution will take some time I regret. Nothing happens quickly as I would like with this sort of thing. But I feel a 45 day grace period coupled with incentives to be a full time subscriber might be a palatable compromise. I'm done with this today. I come here as a courtesy and some posts are just so far off track they can't be ignored. But real progress lies behind the scenes and that where I need to be now. Have a great day! The writing is on the wall folks... you should be looking for compromises and submitting them to the people that matter. There is still time.

 

[Uvtha]

So far we've gone from, it's been going on a long time and we inherited this, to yes I don't like it either, to yes it is being abused, to well what can we do with this to make it fair?

That seems like a pretty clear indication to me that they aren't planning on changing it. I can't speak on what you've been told privately, I don't email the dev team.

I support a 30 day grace period, but 45 seems like a clear leader lol.

So it's not so much the imagined "mooching" you mind, just the specific level it's currently at?

 

[Angel of Sonoma]

Yes it would. Because the people would actually pay for them if they were forced to. That's MAJOR revenue for EA/BS and that means a better game for us all. If these spots get locked down it will be with full time subscriptions and you might notice I'm in favor of that. I'm all for everyone having everything they want. Simply actually pay for it. It's the right thing to do. Lets put an end to low lifes mooching off me, EA/BS, and everyone else. I suppose people could walk into a party store and buy one bottle of Coke and steal 3 and people would be all over the news about these "poor people" can't afford Cokes and the rich can buy them anytime they want lol. NONSENSE. There's not ONE logical argument that justifies people not paying their way. Go grub off some other game and put them outta business. Bye bye!

wrong, wrong, wrong. why do you fail to acknowledge the posts from people stating they will permanently leave? i am one of them. a 50/50 split of 12 full & partially paid accounts. you think you are singlehandedly saving the game when in fact you are putting another nail in the coffin. that must be it! ea closed down every other game you played so now you are trying to get them to close down uo too?

 

[AtlanticRealtor]

Uhm

It's in discussion. I've been discussing this with people behind the scenes for weeks. So far we've gone from, it's been going on a long time and we inherited this, to yes I don't like it either, to yes it is being abused, to well what can we do with this to make it fair? So progress is being made because everyone knows this current exploit needs fixing. Your absolutely correct I didn't get this from the dev chat. Although on the bright side we did see acknowledgement of a problem and an off the cuff remark about making it more fair. Progress is being made. I support a 30 day grace period, but 45 seems like a clear leader lol. The final solution will take some time I regret. Nothing happens quickly as I would like with this sort of thing. But I feel a 45 day grace period coupled with incentives to be a full time subscriber might be a palatable compromise. I'm done with this today. I come here as a courtesy and some posts are just so far off track they can't be ignored. But real progress lies behind the scenes and that where I need to be now. Have a great day! The writing is on the wall folks... you should be looking for compromises and submitting them to the people that matter. There is still time.

Do you realize that by the end of the day it wont matter? 30 days, 45 or 90, you know why? Basic math!!! , because Folks will be paying a lot more for the "Castles" . Why?

To Build a castle on those shards, you need to Invest, buy the small houses around and so on and on and on, All those costs + Subscriptions and so on , will be added to the final Selling price... so You will see Castles been sold for 10B, 20B... does that help you on anything??

 

[UNKNOWN of Atlantic]

Well I believe it all comes down to the $ Factor ..Those of us that cant afford to pay for 5 houses or more a month use the 90 day System. Now if they remove that ..they lose those 4 payments a year of about $52, because I cant afford to pay every month for all my houses, I have multiple Castles, keeps and Max storage houses Full of IDOC loot I go through to vendor. The castles are 60% storage upgraded to 7,500 storage.

Now if they Set it up where you can buy more Storage upgrades that will actually Hurt EA's Bottom line, because that is a one time payment , where as with the 90 day system they are making money every 90 days for years. I seriously Don't see them changing this System Due to this factor.

When you are paying every month you have access to all your chars and their skills & are able to work their skills up.

Above I read too & they are right in this game you can fill up your houses so fast just with decorations. That's is why they created the Turn in points to clean up the servers. Yeah I guess you could call me a pixel Hoarder But I like the thrill of watching a house fall & all the goodies fall to the ground for everyone to snatch & grab. Felluca side is even more fun. Plus if to many houses fall at the same time it tends to break the server ..well at least on Atlantic it did the last 2 times we had mass house decays we had reverts up to 14 days ..so there is that problem also in changing the 90 day system .

I don't know id be fine for them giving you say an extra vet reward per so many months ..but in the end people now just use those to get the best item to sell for profit, So in the end its really the same thing your just making money a different way. unless They set up a new system that is Vet reward Bonus system that are account bound like the shield tokens. You don't hear me on here crying about that where tons of people go over to other shards Farm items & come back to Atlantic to sell them where they can get the most gold out of them ? Nope cus its part of the game They want People to go to other shards Hence they going to need a house there to store their farmed goods for awhile. They Usually take a character from their main account that is all skilled up so why pay every month for a house on a dead shard when your just farming for scrolls Etc.? I don't know I don't see a problem with this ...

I have Not bought tons of gold like other people do just to Decor their house up in other shard rares like ALOT of people do ... In my time of playing I have only bought 3 keeps and 1 castles the rest I have placed my self ...I upgraded my self from a small 7x7 to what I have today and that's because UO is set up to do that. yeah to get a castle is rough but I have known vets that never got a keep or a castle due to the Hassle it is in trying to upgrade them ...that's where the people who buy houses to upgrade come in & it wouldn't be possible With out the 90 day system.

I don't know I just think people Should point things out to the Dev Team, maybe remind them once a year .and let it go at that... I mean come on we all got better things to do than too keep ( sorry I love this animation heheh) Like um décor our keeps & castle with the new walls yeah they aren't what we expected but its ALOT better than what we had ..but we do need more Granite ....Pssst any Granite sellers

 

[Lady Storm]

PSSST...
I want to end this....
After reading the complete line of posts my sister who by the way is not into computer games gave me her insight.
Her reply after reading this whole thing was "So its about kicking off people to get their house spot".
Her words not mine... but read it... from her view.
They want the house spot some poor guy has for a castle or keep.
They are tired of waiting and figure that "empty" house blocking them will go away if you kill off the 90 day grace.
Just like the RtB houses they want that empty house that they never see someone at gone so they can place.
My sister has no interest in UO or any other online game but knows of my play when I go and visit her.
It's got to be a 90 day gracer!! pfft
She is right if you think about it....who would benefit from the loss of the 90 day grace?
At first it would be IDOC'rs as hundreds of houses fall when a credit card is denied and you cant get the Origin store to sell you a damn monthly code...
Secondly the race on ATL for castle land would heat up.. other shards will open up like a can of worms... only one problem.
Right now its not unusual for one to drop granted but your looking at not just 1 going bye bye.
We are talking major drops to the point there will not be enough players left to keep the doors open.. much less a low populated shard.

Atlantic Realtor and others can tell you a lot of property on Atl is up forsale..... I have even dropped in a new tower on atl last week and no one was around a very good spot. Even Atlantic is getting thin in people I have observed in the last few months.

The game is getting thin on players and your talking of cutting off the cash flow that keeps the game open.

Getting rid of the 90 day grace is just that...
Mesanna said it plainly she don't like the misuse of the 90 day grace, She also said it has saved many from leaving the game for good because of all that can go wrong like billing and the code purchase. That is not misuse of the 90 day grace and she has also said that.

From the sound of this op's post he wants us back to the days when you had a few days to log in and open your door to refresh your house..so they can know your playing....
that happens buddy...
I will destroy every thing I own in uo
let it rot on my floors and then leave....
then you tell EA why I stopped paying $584.55 a month to keep my accounts open and all the others who will be right behind me.

 

[claudia-fjp]

Because someone has to pay for keeping the game going. I and many others are doing that with full time accounts. Your 3 payments a year doesn't do that. The game would shut down when we all decide to play your buy 1 get 3 free game. The problem is currently there's nothing preventing everyone from "smelling the coffee" and doing the same. We pay for the game, you mooch off us by living in the cracks.

You seem to be under the impression that we only pay 3 times a year. Every single person with house holding accounts has main accounts like you that we keep open year round. These accounts have the characters we play. So we DO pay to keep the game going. However unlike you we also give EA more money for the extra accounts that hold houses 3 times a year. You are railing against people who in many cases are contributing more revenue to EA than you are.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

PSSST...
I want to end this....
After reading the complete line of posts my sister who by the way is not into computer games gave me her insight.
Her reply after reading this whole thing was "So its about kicking off people to get their house spot".
Her words not mine... but read it... from her view.
They want the house spot some poor guy has for a castle or keep.
They are tired of waiting and figure that "empty" house blocking them will go away if you kill off the 90 day grace.
Just like the RtB houses they want that empty house that they never see someone at gone so they can place.
My sister has no interest in UO or any other online game but knows of my play when I go and visit her.
It's got to be a 90 day gracer!! pfft
She is right if you think about it....who would benefit from the loss of the 90 day grace?
At first it would be IDOC'rs as hundreds of houses fall when a credit card is denied and you cant get the Origin store to sell you a damn monthly code...
Secondly the race on ATL for castle land would heat up.. other shards will open up like a can of worms... only one problem.
Right now its not unusual for one to drop granted but your looking at not just 1 going bye bye.
We are talking major drops to the point there will not be enough players left to keep the doors open.. much less a low populated shard.

Atlantic Realtor and others can tell you a lot of property on Atl is up forsale..... I have even dropped in a new tower on atl last week and no one was around a very good spot. Even Atlantic is getting thin in people I have observed in the last few months.

The game is getting thin on players and your talking of cutting off the cash flow that keeps the game open.

Getting rid of the 90 day grace is just that...
Mesanna said it plainly she don't like the misuse of the 90 day grace, She also said it has saved many from leaving the game for good because of all that can go wrong like billing and the code purchase. That is not misuse of the 90 day grace and she has also said that.

From the sound of this op's post he wants us back to the days when you had a few days to log in and open your door to refresh your house..so they can know your playing....
that happens buddy...
I will destroy every thing I own in uo
let it rot on my floors and then leave....
then you tell EA why I stopped paying $584.55 a month to keep my accounts open and all the others who will be right behind me.

Bingo! Might be time for this thread to take a break.

 

[HoneythornGump]

I think you should end on : Lady Mesanna says: "changing the 90 day is not something we are going to do anytime soon".

Read em' and weap boys.

In two years hence I'll be sure to prod a few of the fools on this board about them 90 day changes that were coming "soon".

Actually, before you close this thread...I think an apology is in order...

This 90 day policy has been in place for 10 + years now, and I think an apology is in order for those within the UO community that have been referred to as cheaters.

Lady Mesanna says: "well rewarding the players that are not cheating"

Shame on you @Mesanna for calling players who abide by a policy put forth by the company that employs you ....cheaters.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Be nice

 

[Zosimus]

It's pretty clear what Mesanna stated. She doesn't like it but the 90 day cycle is not going to change or be changed at this time. She didn't say it would or wouldn't change either.

Btw the 90 day cycle was not implemented because of the US military abroad serving during any war. The locked thread had a statement from the dev team that did implement the 90 day cycle the reason why and it was not because of the military. So please quit bringing the US military or any countries military in a game mechanic's argument. These men and women around the world that are serving their countries should be honored and not used as a false argument. I think the people that serve the military have more pressing issues to worry about than digital pixels like trying staying alive and protecting their brothers and sisters in arms out in the field. So using the military as a reason for the 90 day cycle when it wasn't in the first place is outrageous. The politicians do this at election time and when its all done and over they are forgotten about when elections are over and the same with this game discussion are not talked about.

 

[Fridgster]

It's pretty clear what Mesanna stated. She doesn't like it but the 90 day cycle is not going to change or be changed at this time. She didn't say it would or wouldn't change either.

Btw the 90 day cycle was not implemented because of the US military abroad serving during any war. The locked thread had a statement from the dev team that did implement the 90 day cycle the reason why and it was not because of the military. So please quit bringing the US military or any countries military in a game mechanic's argument. These men and women around the world that are serving their countries should be honored and not used as a false argument. I think the people that serve the military have more pressing issues to worry about than digital pixels like trying staying alive and protecting their brothers and sisters in arms out in the field. So using the military as a reason for the 90 day cycle when it wasn't in the first place is outrageous. The politicians do this at election time and when its all done and over they are forgotten about when elections are over and the same with this game discussion are not talked about.

I was going to mention the same thing but didn't really know how to put it without someone taking offense. Very well done.

 

[Zosimus]

I was going to mention the same thing but didn't really know how to put it without someone taking offense. Very well done.

Thank you and glad you understood It may offend somebody but it was not my intent to offend.

 

[Lady Storm]

Zoimus
You might be correct... I do know we have had many reasons for it to remain in place.
Outside reasons, the impact of the billing system then and now has taken its toll on players coming in and staying in UO.
How many of us have had trouble over the last 10 years... now add in the purchase of time codes.... or should I say lax there of.
Buying more then 1 in the store is impossible.... now add in some of us need 2,3,4 or more. You buy more then 2 meaning 2 transactions your CC gets whited*.
*whited is when the CC is locked up by EA and cant be used till you talk to customer service. This can take a few days as EA might not do so right away or even not understand what your needing. Now you may also need to talk to your bank, as a fraud alert sent by EA to them will have the bank lock up its use till they talk to you.*

Now if the op and those who support the removal of the 90 day grace got their way...
Do we really want to go back to the days where you log in and find your house and everything you own gone because you didn't refresh your door? Or because your so busy in RL you didn't see the e mail in the stacks you get the notice your cc was declined for exp date.
There are tons of reasons we in UO loose players... I would love to stop the billing being one of them...
If wishes were fishes the poor would eat well....

 

[Lady Storm]

Deep Ellum Dan
Perhaps this has upset enough of us for the time being...?
I think the dev gave a ruling that's the end.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

It's in discussion. I've been discussing this with people behind the scenes for weeks. So far we've gone from, it's been going on a long time and we inherited this, to yes I don't like it either, to yes it is being abused, to well what can we do with this to make it fair? So progress is being made because everyone knows this current exploit needs fixing.

Because I'm new, it would be nice to get to know all of Broadsword staff. Who are you at Broadsword and what is your official job title?

 

[Zosimus]

Zoimus
You might be correct... I do know we have had many reasons for it to remain in place...

Correction its Zosimus

I had to go to the locked thread and find it but all the credit goes to @WootSauce since he posted it. I bolded one part you need to read from Draconi. It wasn't

I do know we have had many reasons for it to remain in place

as you said. Just one and that was about the IDOC fixes. So the word might is wrong. I am correct.

Player: I can't imagine what other thing this would mean than they are scraping for coin.

Draconi: Ah, and here I was sure you had a stronger imagination than that! At least it beats the original 10 days we used to have. It was set to 90 days after all the confusion with the original IDOC fixes.

MrTact: It's not like the old days where you had to physically login to refresh your house. This means, 30 days *after you stop paying us* your house goes away. The main reason why we're doing this? Well, back in the day, when we originally changed to 90 days, I remember someone . . . let's see, who would that have been . . . oh yeah, ME . . . complaining internally that people would use this to "kite" and only keep their account active 1 month out of 3 to hold houses. Well, guess what's happening? Essentially, we're sick of seeing house signs with ICQ numbers on them. If you want to be a house broker, fine, but now you're going to have to keep your account up to date.

 

[HoneythornGump]

Deep Ellum Dan
Perhaps this has upset enough of us for the time being...?
I think the dev gave a ruling that's the end.

And so they should lock the thread now? Is that what your asking?

Am I the only one who finds it bizarre when players and moderators say "I think this has been discussed enough now!", or "We need a break from this conversation".

If you need a break, then take a break. If you think it's been discussed enough...stop reading the thread, and stop posting it in.

It's weird, and creepy these requests to end threads.

If it's been discussed the thread will die on it's own.

For a second there, I thought we came to forums to engage in discussion.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Where did locking a thread come from? I tried searching all of the text in this thread and didn't see anyone mention that. Did I miss something?

 

[Zosimus]

I think the meaning from post #126

 

[HoneythornGump]

Yeah...

Am I wrong?

But we're seeing more and more of these types of posts. I don't want anyone controlling free speech or exerting control over a conversation. I dislike it..vehmently even when I can't stand what the other guy is saying and think he's a complete fool. Take this thread for example...

The "perhaps this has upset us enough for the time being" post #126 - directed at you.. a moderator with the power to close this thread.

I'm reading it like Lady Storm wants the thread closed because this 90 day cycle has "upset" the community.

I know I won't get any sleep tonight because of it...I'm totally upset.

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Sleep ... I personally at no reason to lock this at all but I'm my personal opinion, the same thing is being started over and over and over which starts to lose substance and trending towards being heated to where lines might get crossed. I totally am for freedom of speech as long as e post stays on topic. Lol but please give me a valid augment here either for or against the topic other than calling people names, making it personal against others, or saying someone is stealing from another player. I'm glad to see passion here but I would just like to see everyone being respectful.

 

[Merlin]

This thread has overall been a much more fruitful discussion than the last thread on this topic that needed to get locked due to trolling and going off the rails.

Let's continue to discuss the topic at hand and not debate over minor semantics.

 

[Lady Storm]

Forgive my fingers Zosimus I sometimes don't hit the keys hard enough and didn't see the error.
Where did I ask for the thread to be closed????
I was making a comment to the mod not asking for anything. Believe me I do Ask when its needed.
Your two cents HoneythornGump was not nice, nor respectfull.
Facts remain nothing is going to change. Ether way you sit on the fence, the reasons are multi on both sides.
I for one do not wish to cut off the flow of funds in any way to the game I have played for close to 20 years. OR effect some other players need for the help it provides if needed. Till the day you need that 90 days to save your account... for any reason.
I agree with Merlin it has been a fruitfull discussion.

 

[Zosimus]

@Lady Storm Explain in more detail this comment you said above "Facts remain nothing is going to change."

By the way, you seemed to ignore this in my post..... Draconi: Ah, and here I was sure you had a stronger imagination than that! At least it beats the original 10 days we used to have. It was set to 90 days after all the confusion with the original IDOC fixes.

 

[Lady Storm]

Yes the Original fixes... Dracconi would remember well the mess that was made
that 10 day bit was hell.... no one could go on vacation!
The meet and greet Mesanna said it is not gunna change anytime soon.

 

[Zosimus]

Change can always happen but I do agree at this time it isn't going to be changed.

It was for the IDOC changes. Not for the people couldn't go on vacations. Not for the military or anything else besides the idoc changes. I am so face palming right now.

 

[Lady Storm]

well what spurred the first house changes was the overwhelming complaint by players who were needing more then a week. when the average family was going on 2 week vacations and having friends refresh only to have them forget.. or worse yet quit and leave them high an dry to loose all they had... but there was also tossed in a lot of other reasons the dev changed things. Now remember we talking way over a decade ago..

 

[Deep Ellum Dan]

Boy, I vaguely remember having to refresh your house back in the day but I do remember. That was never fun to have an active account but you could lose your house if you didnt login in time to play. Do not miss that at all.

 

[Angel of Sonoma]

i remember those days all too well. i had a sandstone on chessy in trammel when housing space was at a premium and anything bigger than a 7x7 was something special. i refreshed my house only to come back a few days later to discover i couldn't enter my own house. as it turned out, it was no longer my house because the server crashed and OSI did a revert. my refresh got wiped out, the house decayed and someone place a new sandstone in the spot.

 

[Lady Storm]

oh that was common too.... all the reverts we got
I remember all too well racing to check on all my homes... not remembering if I did them all the day before or not
That's one hell I do not want to see again...

 

[TimberWolf]

I just have a final observation because I just went through the whole change in credit card info issue. ( the issue most people quote for why a 30 day cycle would be totally unfair)

I got an email the day the account deactivated because the old credit card number got denied... it went to spam folder so I didnt notice.
Logged in the next day and got error
checked spam found email
check accounts found issue
connected CC to account and activated
All told my account was down for 1 day ( because I was away and didnt try to log in)

time to resolve issue once discovered...less then 5 mins

if you arent getting emails when this happens either your system is deleting them....or you account is linked to a dead email addy.
this can be changed fairly easily ( if you are just incapable of figuring this out,,,you all have bonnie's email address)
she might not be the best developer but she is not slouch in resolving account issues.

that is all I have....I just figured that since I just went through this it was some what poignant to the discussion....

 

[Zosimus]

The true issue isn't what they are saying why it was done to a 90 day cycle. People just believe it was this or that when it wasn't in the first place lol.

It wasn't about vacations either. It was IDOC changes.

Draconi: Ah, and here I was sure you had a stronger imagination than that! At least it beats the original 10 days we used to have. It was set to 90 days after all the confusion with the original IDOC fixes.

 

[TimberWolf]

The true issue isn't what they are saying why it was done to a 90 day cycle. People just believe it was this or that when it wasn't in the first place lol.

It wasn't about vacations either. It was IDOC changes.

Draconi: Ah, and here I was sure you had a stronger imagination than that! At least it beats the original 10 days we used to have. It was set to 90 days after all the confusion with the original IDOC fixes.

I didnt make a single comment in this post about why the changes were made....I did make a comment ( which is 100% valid) about the often used excuse about why it would be unfair to change it.................

 

[Fridgster]

I didnt make a single comment in this post about why the changes were made....I did make a comment ( which is 100% valid) about the often used excuse about why it would be unfair to change it.................

Why does everything have to be fair? Fair is a funny word since its totally subjective depending on your thoughts and beliefs. Yet so many use it as fact.

 

[Thrakkar]

90 Day stuff...

I don't really get it, what the issue is here. If the issue is, that during the 90 days, the house can be used by friends, co-owners & for vendoring, then why is everyone talking about having those 90 days cut down to less days or not?
There seems to be a much more simple solution to that: If the owner suspends the account make the house completely unusable for friends, co-owners, etc... Disable vendors as well. Chars logged out inside the house will get ejected upon loggin in. 90 days can stay. Problem solved...
Did I miss anything?

 

[Uvtha]

Why does everything have to be fair? Fair is a funny word since its totally subjective depending on your thoughts and beliefs. Yet so many use it as fact.

Have you ever been in an unfair (by either your subjective estimation, or by discernible objective realities) position and thought to yourself: "This is a good position to be in"? Or did you think "I wish this were different."?

It's not especially complicated, no one likes being treated in a way they feel has been unfair. They may tolerate it because of outside factors, but it's always a condition you wish you could remedy or avoid.

As for the legitimacy to a claim of unfairness, it really depends, like really all non objective statements, on the argument backing it up and the general consensus among the relevant individuals on those arguments.

 

[Uvtha]

I don't really get it, what the issue is here. If the issue is, that during the 90 days, the house can be used by friends, co-owners & for vendoring, then why is everyone talking about having those 90 days cut down to less days or not?
There seems to be a much more simple solution to that: If the owner suspends the account make the house completely unusable for friends, co-owners, etc... Disable vendors as well. Chars logged out inside the house will get ejected upon loggin in. 90 days can stay. Problem solved...
Did I miss anything?

I think it's not just that people are potentially using the house, but that they are "stealing" the real-estate.

 

[Zosimus]

I didnt make a single comment in this post about why the changes were made....I did make a comment ( which is 100% valid) about the often used excuse about why it would be unfair to change it.................

Sorry that wasn't directed at you. That was meant for @Lady Storm since she keeps on saying there are other reasons why it was changed even though it has been quoted by a dev why it was.