A Siege player saying this: I want a classic shard, forget Siege.

[Draxous]

Turn Siege into a classic shard or just make a classic shard and just forget about Siege.

My take on this? Siege is dead and broken. You, the developers don't fix the issues that trickle over from the content that's tailored to trammel styled shards. The community could have helped make things easier for you to have fixed them, but personal grudges between the few remaining on Siege don't get set aside. Players comment to stonewall fixes on systems they have no experience with or understanding of just because they have issues with the people. Or they have a "whats in it for me" mentality so no one else can get anything until they get it first... no matter how easy it would be to make the game just that much better for someone else. Either way, the players and community have looked to you to address things (and not through inaction and silence) and you've let us down.

Besides Freja, I've been playing on Siege YEARS longer than most every Siege player left playing this game. And even regarding Freja, unless she's a beta (atlantic) player... I'm her elder too.

Siege is an empty shard because there aren't enough players, playing it. The population has dwindled periodically every time big ticket issues go unaddressed by you, the developers.

AoS brought the Personal Bless Deed issue to a shard without insurance and wasn't addressed for 2 years.

UOSE brought the blessed sammy helms and ember legs and wasn't addressed for another 2 years.

Greater Dragons (versus players in sub-prodo gear) on a shard that has no passive detect and allows players to abuse ninjitsu, hiding and stealth to circumvent rules the Devs put in (like no hiding, moongate/gate travel, entering a house, etc. etc. when your flagged an aggressor.

Private housing which is the ultimate safe zone and instanced dungeons that players cannot raid.

Faction artifacts that cost 5 times what they do on other shards even though Siege factioners risk more than any other server (having only 1 character slot and no trammel to escape the risks of factions with.) Faction artifacts that cost 5 times what they do on other shards because ONE guy who doesn't even play UO anymore complained to you Devs. An uptick in price that took moments of dev time to increase... has been sitting at 5 times the price even though the community's faction players have asked for it to be brought back to normal so more than just those of us who are the elite will enjoy participating in factions.

Monster loot tables that don't make sense. Risking more than on any other server hunting monsters... only to get the same rewards one gets on any other server. Nobody has gone to Doom in YEARS because nobody wants to waste time completing a few runs of the gauntlet only to get nothing. Treasure of Tokuno?

So on and so on and so on.

Then we get this:

Mythic Entertainment | Ultima Online - Play the 14-Day Free Trial!

SEIGE ATTENTION

So with all the other features and bugs in UO, why did we decided to remove the daily stat cap for Siege?

The simple answer: Why not? Over a month ago I visited Seige to discuss a few topics, not the least of which was their population, and what they thought would drive more visitors to the shard. I made no promises, but asked them to identify a few easy fixes we could implement in one of the development cycles we have for this summer.

So, we did it. Will we implement other requests from their list? Perhaps. We will see how this update goes first before moving forward.

There are barely any current siege players playing anymore because of all of the broken systems on the server. Because of all the neglect. Because of getting fed up with playing a BROKEN game. This coming from one of the Siege players that's been playing at the top level of factions, champion spawns, what-ever since before there were such things. They are broken and they sit broken... WHY??

There are many players that like no insurance, no trammel and everything else that Siege is... but there are very few players who give a rats ass about playing a broken version of what they enjoy. Don't believe me? Look at the population of Siege.

Notice all the talk about a classic shard? Well that's because there are A LOT of people who want to play an Ultima Online that WORKS like it's supposed to.

I've been here for 14 years. This is not just some random talking here. When you have a player who's been here and stuck it out this long telling you what I'm saying... you should know that you're losing a BIG chunk of what made this game to begin with.

So wipe Siege and replace it or give us an alternative: a classic shard. Take it back to a version of Ultima Online that worked. Then you can focus on more themepark tailored additions to this game and forget about the sandbox so the oodles of us can log online and enjoy our time in game.

So I can start logging in again and enjoying my time in game.

 

[popps]

I said it a thousand times and will repeat it again, I blame it a whole lot of the failure for Siege and Mugen to the fact that we are inhabilitated to place 2 houses per account.

Therefore, any player playing a production shard who "might be" tempted to also play Siege or Mugen is then, possibly, deterred in doing it by the fact that they cannot have a house there or that they have to tear down the one on their production shard with all that means.

Perhaps, if we could have been able to place an extra house on Siege or Mugen this might have helped increasing the population on those shards.

Yet, no matter for how many years since they were created I (and others) lamented this limtation, nothing was done to change the status quo.

Make them a Classic shard ?

Alright for me BUT, keep them not transferable in and out AND, fix all of the cheating first and foremost.

Then, when cheating is no longer possible wipe them out and start them anew with players truly now capable of confronting each other on an equal footing.

PvP that is not balanced and with open outcomes at all times can hardly be succesfull or popular, IMHO.

And, of course, allow for accounts to place a second house on them............

 

[Symma]

So all existing Siege players who worked hard building their characters, owning multiple accounts to get another characters, creating friendships with players and communities should just allow them to be deleted just to make you happy?

Anyway, removing Siege would do nothing to make the improve the chances of a Classic Shard. There would still have to be a lengthy time for development of a classic shard. It just can't be re-installed and set to go within a few days. Sooo many issues would have to be considered and the client would have to be looked at to prepare it from that ruleset. Bugs would have to be reassessed and it would take a considerable number of man hours. I'm not against a Classic Shard, I wouldn't play it but happy for others to, I just fail to see what the removal siege would do to speed it up.

I'm not losing all my work on Siege just to please a poster who hasn't played Siege for sometime.

You seem to take it upon yourself to talk 'for Siege', yet it'd be hard to see the majority of the community agreeing to removing the shard.

 

[Evlar]

A classic shard supporter saying this:

Let Siege live. Give it the changes the players there have been asking for and let it thrive.

I too "want" a classic shard, but not at the expense of what others enjoy. Unlike some, I prefer not to display the same selfishness or contempt that they would offer me and others, who support "classic".

 

[Siteswap]

I'm not losing all my work on Siege just to please a poster who hasn't played Siege for sometime.

You say that like you'd actually have a choice in the matter. If EA decided to go down this route, then you WOULD lose all of your "work".

However, I personally dont think they'd ever turn Siege into the classic shard. Its much more likely to run along side Siege (if it ever happens at all). It probably would however, sadly, be the final nail in Siege's coffin

 

[FrejaSP]

What you really mean is "One multi shard player saying this: I want a classic shard, forget Siege."

Why ruin it for all Siege players because one or maybe a few multi shard players don't care for the community on Siege.

It's almost as stupid as saying "An Atlantic player saying this: I want a classic shard, forget Atlantic."

 

[Draxous]

I said it a thousand times and will repeat it again, I blame it a whole lot of the failure for Siege and Mugen to the fact that we are inhabilitated to place 2 houses per account.

I'll say it again because you may have missed it in my wall of text.

I blame Siege and Mugens failure on the Developers who left it sit broken while they watched player after player leave because it was broken.

Players having the ability to have a house fixes nothing that is broken with the server. Those players will still be dealing with the off tilt risk vs reward and themepark (trammel) tailored content that was not adjusted for Siege.

 

[Draxous]

A classic shard supporter saying this:

Let Siege live. Give it the changes the players there have been asking for and let it thrive.

I too "want" a classic shard, but not at the expense of what others enjoy.

I'd be surprised if that happened.

Do you realize that Siege players have been asking for the same changes to silver prices, monster loot and for something to be done about hiding/stealth for years now?

for YEARS.

its not getting fixed. Just leave it broken as is for the handful still clinging on and give the rest of us Siege players a WORKING version of no insurance, no trammel UO that we can play. AKA a classic shard.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

give the rest of us Siege players a WORKING version of no insurance, no trammel UO that we can play. AKA a classic shard.

There is a lot more to a Classic Shard than just no trammel, no insurance. How about no AOS, no neon crap, no massive expansion landmasses, no item properties, no artifacts, 5 character slots, etc. etc.

Siege =/= Classic Shard

If the developers see fit to close Siege, it should not be because of the creation of a Classic Shard. The two are not similar enough to make most Classic UO fans happy. In fact, I'd say you'd please more Classic Shard fans with a UO:R (Trammel, but no AOS) shard than you would a spiffed up Siege.

Personally, I wouldn't play a Classic Shard with Trammel OR AOS.

I have been around since the beta (Atlantic) as well, and I want the same thing you want...the OLD GAME BACK...but I don't think Siege should suffer for us to get it.

 

[Siteswap]

I blame Siege and Mugens failure on the Developers who left it sit broken while they watched player after player leave because it was broken.

Which in itself doesnt bode well for a classic shard. The developers obviously have little appetite, if any, for maintaining, fixing or developing alternative rulesets. This alone makes me think a classic shard will never happen.

 

[Draxous]

If the developers see fit to close Siege, it should not be because of the creation of a Classic Shard. The two are not similar enough to make most Classic UO fans happy. In fact, I'd say you'd please more Classic Shard fans with a UO:R (Trammel, but no AOS) shard than you would a spiffed up Siege.

It looks like you have that backwards...

There have been polls and discussions regarding what classic shard fans want and are looking forward to. Their desires are pretty clear... and a UOR shard is not amongst their desires.

Siege does not function properly and it is not going to get properly fixed so that it does.

At the very least, Siege players should be offered an alternative to the broken gameplay we endure daily and a classic shard is a reasonable alternative for a WORKING version of that server because it will make more than just the handful of Siege players left... happy.

The few left that are currently happy with Siege, can remain blissful too.

 

[Draxous]

I blame Siege and Mugens failure on the Developers who left it sit broken while they watched player after player leave because it was broken.

Which in itself doesnt bode well for a classic shard. The developers obviously have little appetite, if any, for maintaining, fixing or developing alternative rulesets. This alone makes me think a classic shard will never happen.

No. It does not bode well, but there seems to be many interested in it and perhaps the number of subscribers/players to this server will be the incentive EA/Mythic needs to approach it differently than they have Siege.

Plus, this would be an opportunity for them to have learned from their mistakes. Sieges population dwindled drastically because big ticket issues were left to sit for years. I imagine Ultima Online (or any game for that matter) would experience the same exodus of players under those conditions.

Siege lost the majority of its population when the personal bless deed issue went neglected for years.

Siege then lost another huge chunk of its population when the [blessed] sammy helms and ember legs did not get addressed for again... years.

Siege has now been losing the rest of its population because of the off tilt risk vs reward (in factions, monster hunting and template builds.)

There is only a handful remaining and the majority (80%!!!) of the population has hiding/stealth so you don't see players in... Luna. You don't see players out n about in the world. They're hiding from each other! The majority does not monster hunt (they monster farm in the few remaining locations worth it) because the rewards for places like doom do not balance with the risks. The rewards of using items made from peerless ingredients do not balance with the risks of farming the ingredients (how many peerless need to be killed for ONE pendant of the magi?) Treasures of Tokuno aren't turned on, so only the elite get to enjoy them... the rest lock the items down in their homes. Greater Dragons towed around by naked players abusing the no passive detect, stomp all over other players in sub-prodo gear. So on and so on and so on do the issues pile up.

The few remaining are those that continue to put up with this stuff in hopes that one day the developers will set things right.

As those few remaining watch one by one, their ranks leave for greener pastures because its obvious... no ones going to set things right. They've been "wrong" for 8 years now.. and each year, more things are added to the "whats wrong" list.

Siege players need a working alternative. We need a classic shard.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It looks like you have that backwards...

There have been polls and discussions regarding what classic shard fans want and are looking forward to. Their desires are pretty clear... and a UOR shard is not amongst their desires.

Wait a sec...that's not what I am saying. What I *am* saying is that you would find more Classic Shard supporters that would take a UO:R (Tram, no AOS) shard than you would a Siege with fixes shard. I am *not* saying that most Classic Shard supporters want a UO:R shard over a T2A shard (or a no Tram/no AOS shard)

At the very least, Siege players should be offered an alternative to the broken gameplay we endure daily and a classic shard is a reasonable alternative for a WORKING version of that server because it will make more than just the handful of Siege players left... happy.

The few left that are currently happy with Siege, can remain blissful too.

Of course, I agree on this. I am ALL ABOUT offering choices.

 

[Draxous]

It looks like you have that backwards...

There have been polls and discussions regarding what classic shard fans want and are looking forward to. Their desires are pretty clear... and a UOR shard is not amongst their desires.

Wait a sec...that's not what I am saying. What I *am* saying is that you would find more Classic Shard supporters that would take a UO:R (Tram, no AOS) shard than you would a Siege with fixes shard. I am *not* saying that most Classic Shard supporters want a UO:R shard over a T2A shard (or a no Tram/no AOS shard)

I do not agree.

The 2 main reasons players have stated they come to siege are:

1. To get a feel of classic UO back.

2. To experience the UO they love, but has become stale... in a different way. (since they've done did it all.)


You make a lot of assumptions and statements without any facts to them. There are a lot of players who enjoy modern UO and would enjoy the Feluccan perspective as something to freshen up their stale, Trammelian existance.

Again I disagree, but the developers aren't going to fix it... so let's hope that a working classic shard will give us Feluccans a working version of what we want. Felucca.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I do not agree.

The 2 main reasons players have stated they come to siege are:

1. To get a feel of classic UO back.

I play on Siege (when I play anymore) and it doesn't feel "Classic"...at all. Far from it. The only thing that feels classic about it is that you might get PKed (and that assumes you actually SEE anyone else)

2. To experience the UO they love, but has become stale... in a different way. (since they've done did it all.)

Which I why I came to Siege, so I agree there.

You make a lot of assumptions and statements without any facts to them.

The only assumption I made is that Classic Shard fans don't want AOS. I base that assumption upon the hundreds upon hundreds of posts I have read here stating that.

There are a lot of players who enjoy modern UO and would enjoy the Feluccan perspective as something to freshen up their stale, Trammelian existance.

And hence why we should have both Siege, AND a Classic Shard.

Again I disagree, but the developers aren't going to fix it... so let's hope that a working classic shard will give us Feluccans a working version of what we want. Felucca.

I think you and I are on the same page, mostly. I think that Trammel pretty much ruined this game, but I am no fan of AOS either. To each their own though. That's why it is important that the devs keep Siege alive, and offer a Classic Shard to all of us who are both sick of our "Trammelian existance" AND are sick of pastel colored ridable dogs bearing neon clad uber-dewds in their spaceman/ninja get ups.

 

[Symma]

Siege players need a working alternative. We need a classic shard.

No, thats what you want.

You're entitled to your opinion and to your desires, but don't speak for Siege.

 

[Draxous]

I think you and I are on the same page, mostly.

Then no sense arguing with me just to argue.. is there?

You make a lot of assumptions and statements without any facts to them.

The only assumption I made is that Classic Shard fans don't want AOS. I base that assumption upon the hundreds upon hundreds of posts I have read here stating that.

You made a lot of assumptions on what players want. The polls that have been done actually show that a UOR is one of the least desired classical periods in UO.

I don't see hundreds upon hundreds of posts either. I read this forums and they simply aren't there.

Siege is Ultima Online with all the trimmings. All the expansions, all the content, all of it. The expansions and content have not always been tailored to how Siege works and it is a fact that if Siege was working properly, more people would be playing and enjoying it. How many more? Who knows, that's a different debate I'm not here to entertain.

There are a lot of players who enjoy modern UO and would enjoy the Feluccan perspective as something to freshen up their stale, Trammelian existance.

And hence why we should have both Siege, AND a Classic Shard.

I stated in my opening sentence that at the very least we should have a classic shard even if Siege remains open.

I do not agree that there needs to still be a modern UO version of Felucca if the Devs don't care about having it function properly. If they can't devote the resources and time to having it function properly, then there is no sense in it puttering along and eventually taking up time they could be spending on a classic shard or on other cool content.

I'd even say give the Siege players incentives for when a classic shard comes out as a token of their regret. Give players on Siege (who have had characters and time devoted to that shard) something like... exclusive access to the classic server for a set period of time to establish themselves properly.

Then let the Siege players enjoy their new home, on a new server that actually works the way Felucca is supposed to. With balanced risks and rewards.

 

[Draxous]

Siege players need a working alternative. We need a classic shard.

No, thats what you want.

You're entitled to your opinion and to your desires, but don't speak for Siege.

No, that is not what only I want as you're trying to imply.

And yes, I speak for Siege. I speak for the part of Siege that I represent which is as much a part as any of the other. I've been a part of Siege since the very beginning and you nor anyone else has any place or right telling me what I do and don't speak for.

As a Siege player, if you have a differing perspective on Siege you'd like to share... then feel free because you speak for Siege too.

 

[Aragon100]

There have been polls and discussions regarding what classic shard fans want and are looking forward to. Their desires are pretty clear... and a UOR shard is not amongst their desires.

Depends on what poll you look at.

Here you have 54 voting for UOR and fewer want pre UOR-

http://vboards.stratics.com/uhall/184052-new-classic-shard-poll.html

Here it is the other way arround-

http://vboards.stratics.com/uhall/181397-classic-shard.html

And in the stickied classic poll you dont even have a real UOR option (only powerscroll one)-

http://vboards.stratics.com/uhall/185375-classic-shard-narrowing-gaps.html

I think more classic shard supporters prefer a UOR shard over pre trammel.

I have most likely missed out on alot of earlier discussions but playing freeshards both pre UOR and UOR gives me the impression that UOR is the alot more popular time period.

Edit: I would play a classic shard that was pre UOR but prefer a UOR one.

 

[Draxous]

Depends on what poll you look at.

Precisely so it is easy to manipulate it as you have.

And in the stickied classic poll you dont even have a real UOR option (only powerscroll one)-

There is a reason for that, which you've ignored in your prose. I challenge you to find out and realize: why it was set up the way it was.

 

[John Connelly]

If you don't like Siege just leave, I doubt many will miss you. Besides, you have been crying for weeks about the price of faction artis and suits being too expensive to replace. Maybe you are better suited for a Tram shard where you can insure your stuff. On Siege, "If you can't afford to lose it don't wear it". That seems to work fine for most people.

 

[Zodia]

I think more classic shard supporters prefer a UOR shard over pre trammel.

I think you're wrong. The trouble with those polls is that the vast majority of those voting are current UO players. Most current UO players like Trammel, or they wouldn't be here. The problem is they are a shrinking lot. UO needs to grow again. How does it do that?

How does UO get back some of the thousands of players that quit UO and don't come here anymore? Another trammel shard? No. That's not going to do it.

It needs to be a pre-Trammel shard.

Word would spread like wildfire across the interwebz. "RETURN TO THE CLASSIC UO YOU REMEMBER!" Return to the sandbox vision of Designer Dragon.

It's worth a shot. Just put up a shard. UO is dying (cue ominous music), it needs something to inject some new blood.

Only a pre-Trammel shard can provide this excitement.

 

[Draxous]

If you don't like Siege just leave, I doubt many will miss you. Besides, you have been crying for weeks about the price of faction artis and suits being too expensive to replace. Maybe you are better suited for a Tram shard where you can insure your stuff. On Siege, "If you can't afford to lose it don't wear it". That seems to work fine for most people.

Who exactly do you think you're fooling with your troll attempts? I sit at the top of the totem pole, roaming empty lands because Siege is broken. Maybe I'm better suited for a server that actually has people playing on it... like *drumroll* a classic shard!

Good to see trash like you on my shard being trash in my threads too though

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Here's my plain, simple, basic question:

With all of the complaints that you have about how they have failed to develop Siege Perilous correctly, what makes you think they will be more successful with how they develop a "Classic Shard?"

 

[Alvinho]

There is a lot more to a Classic Shard than just no trammel, no insurance. How about no AOS, no neon crap, no massive expansion landmasses, no item properties, no artifacts, 5 character slots, etc. etc.

Siege =/= Classic Shard

If the developers see fit to close Siege, it should not be because of the creation of a Classic Shard. The two are not similar enough to make most Classic UO fans happy. In fact, I'd say you'd please more Classic Shard fans with a UO:R (Trammel, but no AOS) shard than you would a spiffed up Siege.

Personally, I wouldn't play a Classic Shard with Trammel OR AOS.

I have been around since the beta (Atlantic) as well, and I want the same thing you want...the OLD GAME BACK...but I don't think Siege should suffer for us to get it.

As I said before and will continue to say, The Nostalgia that you think you will get the"golden days" back, you will not. You will find the exact reason that the game progressed and introduced Trammel from the players who will "pick" on other newer players. I know for a fact that if there is a classic shard I WILL create a character just to harass and give new players a hard time period.

The game will grow boring for many, as the content will be extremely limited with no added content, the server will basically be launched and forgotten as no updates will be wanted nor needed to keep it a true classic shard.

Want to know how boring it will be, go play a old Atari system, or 8 bit Nintendo and see how long it keeps your attention, I have tried it, the longest game i had was star tropics to rebuild my "team" but i did grow bored of it very fast, as will many with a "classic shard" as the content will be stagnated and once those who forgot that the harassment that happened see it again will ditch the shard to go back to a production shard, or quit all together once again.

 

[kelmo]

I do not believe EA/Mythic(BioWare) will destroy a community to build a "Classic" shard. If you are fed up with Siege, move on. Asking for it's destruction is a troll in my humble opinion.

*shakes head*

 

[Draxous]

As I said before and will continue to say, The Nostalgia that you think you will get the"golden days" back, you will not. You will find the exact reason that the game progressed and introduced Trammel from the players who will "pick" on other newer players. I know for a fact that if there is a classic shard I WILL create a character just to harass and give new players a hard time period.

The game will grow boring for many, as the content will be extremely limited with no added content, the server will basically be launched and forgotten as no updates will be wanted nor needed to keep it a true classic shard.

Want to know how boring it will be, go play a old Atari system, or 8 bit Nintendo and see how long it keeps your attention, I have tried it, the longest game i had was star tropics to rebuild my "team" but i did grow bored of it very fast, as will many with a "classic shard" as the content will be stagnated and once those who forgot that the harassment that happened see it again will ditch the shard to go back to a production shard, or quit all together once again.

No matter how many times you've said it before, it still makes little to no sense.

It's been more than 10 years since Trammel was introduced yet player run shards still exist and flourish with player populations that rival the more populated of UOs servers.

A classic shard does not need new content in the form of new "neon" items or candy coded pixel crack. A dedicated team of EMs can provide all the content a sandbox game needs... a sandbox game like UO once was.

You don't realize that you talk about this "themepark" evolution UO has undergone and how that's affected the "sandbox" so many players loved and still enjoy (in other games, including other versions of this game.)

Siege Perilous is the remaining bits of Sandbox that this game once had. The reason it is broken is because of how this game has been forcefully "evolved" into a sandbox.

Please realize this. Your arguments of "harassment" and whatever do not apply because this game whether it's themepark or sandbox is simply a niche market with a dedicated playerbase that enjoys EACH of those styles of game. There was never a golden ticket to get this game to WoW status like the themepark kiddies try to so often imply and there are just as many people who enjoy the risks of a WORKING Feluccan world as there are a Trammelian styled one.

The community was split in half, buddy. Not 10/90.. not 60/40... but 50/50 and it's high time the bread was passed ALL the way around the table instead of constantly stopping at just your plate.

Thanks.

 

[Draxous]

I do not believe EA/Mythic(BioWare) will destroy a community to build a "Classic" shard. If you are fed up with Siege, move on. Asking for it's destruction is a troll in my humble opinion.

*shakes head*

I do not believe that EA/Mythic has been entertaining all the discussions about a classic shard because it has nothing to do with destroying anything.

Misrepresenting my post is a troll in my humble opinion and a stratics representative doing it is the biggest hypocrisy to the ROC there is.

I've not asked for Siege to be destroyed, but rebuilt. You may insult your own reading skills all you want, but do not insult me in the process.

Read it again Kelmo before you come here making up things.

There are a lot of players who enjoy modern UO and would enjoy the Feluccan perspective as something to freshen up their stale, Trammelian existance.

And hence why we should have both Siege, AND a Classic Shard.

I stated in my opening sentence that at the very least we should have a classic shard even if Siege remains open.

I do not agree that there needs to still be a modern UO version of Felucca if the Devs don't care about having it function properly. If they can't devote the resources and time to having it function properly, then there is no sense in it puttering along and eventually taking up time they could be spending on a classic shard or on other cool content.

I'd even say give the Siege players incentives for when a classic shard comes out as a token of their regret. Give players on Siege (who have had characters and time devoted to that shard) something like... exclusive access to the classic server for a set period of time to establish themselves properly.

Then let the Siege players enjoy their new home, on a new server that actually works the way Felucca is supposed to. With balanced risks and rewards.

If they want to keep siege plugging along as it has been... cool.

But as a beta and Siege player who has been here since the beginning of both, I and the oodles of others just like me want a working version of Felucca.

Thanks.

 

[Uvtha]

I do not believe EA/Mythic(BioWare) will destroy a community to build a "Classic" shard. If you are fed up with Siege, move on. Asking for it's destruction is a troll in my humble opinion.

*shakes head*

Now, now, It's hardly like drax to make a post that will clearly alienate and anger people, only to then become antagonistic to people who disagree with his "style".

That doesn't spounds like the regular "constructive criticism" he can be counted on to proffer up.

rolleyes:

 

[kelmo]

And those of us on Siege that do not wish to play a "Classic" shard? What becomes of us?

 

[Draxous]

And those of us on Siege that do not wish to play a "Classic" shard? What becomes of us?

I hope they continue to cater to Siege the same way they have been all these years.

I completely support keeping Siege open for those of you who don't wish to make the transition.

 

[kelmo]

Answer the question...

 

[Draxous]

Answer the question...

??!?

I did...

I completely support keeping Siege open for those of you who don't wish to make the transition.

 

[kelmo]

So you are backing away from the premise of destroying Siege and making it a Classic shard?

 

[kelmo]

These comments are from the original post.

Turn Siege into a classic shard or just make a classic shard and just forget about Siege.

So wipe Siege and replace it or give us an alternative: a classic shard..

So I can start logging in again and enjoying my time in game.

 

[Draxous]

So you are backing away from the premise of destroying Siege and making it a Classic shard?

Nope, because that was never my premise even though I personally am open to it.

Sorry to say it Kelmo, but there are Siege players that wouldn't mind that.

Their point of view is just as valid and has every right to be heard and considered.

These comments are from the original post.

Turn Siege into a classic shard or just make a classic shard and just forget about Siege.

So wipe Siege and replace it or give us an alternative: a classic shard..

So I can start logging in again and enjoying my time in game.

Should I use snippets of things you've said and take them out of context too. Want me to make you look like a tyrannical jerk who abuses his mod powers by quoting bits and pieces of the things you've said?

The things I've said were parts of larger paragraphs and points I was making. You taking them out of context does not convey the same message, I was.

 

[kelmo]

There are players on every shard that want a "classic" shard. I see none of them asking for their shard to be destroyed.

 

[Draxous]

There are players on every shard that want a "classic" shard. I see none of them asking for their shard to be destroyed.

There aren't any other strictly Feluccan shards out there either.

If the community of Siege uproots and moves to a working version of Felucca because the devs give them that option then I see no issue with that. I see no issue with asking for that either.

Why shouldn't this games current Feluccans be given the opportunity to access or first crack at a working Felucca to establish themselves when their version of Felucca has been broken for so many years?

 

[Nexus]

2/3rds of the problem with Siege has nothing to do with the developers and what they have and haven't done, 2/3rds of the issue is the players on the shard. Too many have higher expectations or pre-conceived notions of what Siege should be than what it was ever intended to become.

Quick Run down...

• Harder Skill Gains
• No Selling to Or Stealing from NPCs
• Higher Cost for NPC Goods
• Open PvP Environment
• No Recall
• One Character Per Account
• Minor Skill Tweaks (Tailors requiring less material for Leather Armor for example)

Everything outside of those items are pretty much inside the "Siege" scope of things that means they could have put in Insurance, Blessed Items, PBD's etc. and it would not have been outside what Siege "Promised" based on the information provided on UO.com. In other words Siege was supposed to be an Advanced versions of Production nothing more or less.

Unfortunately too many people on Siege have complained, and negotiated with the Developers over the years attempting to bring Siege more in line to their or a portion of it's communities vision. If Siege had progressed along the lines of Prodo while keeping to those Core Elements listed above there would be Zero issues other than what the removal of Multi-Shard housing caused.

Instead Siege has a broken community, half of it champions the most annoying aspects of PvP, a quarter actually tries to play Siege and make the most of it and the remaining quarter likes to think that because they play Siege they are better than everyone on Prodo and that allows them the right to help dictate and guide the direction of the shard. I'll let you guys work out who is who.

My advice and it's the same advice I told the devs personally. Let Siege Live or Die by it's own merit, either the Community can unify and keep it going and work together to improve Siege from within, or they can continue to squabble, among themselves, display Elitist attitudes here and on the shard towards new players there, or they can fade quietly out of mind and just go with the flow and enjoy what they have. But the Last thing the Devs need to do is tinker with Siege further, if they do they are opening a can of worms that I promise they will regret. If one Shard can get them to change how their shard "works" then how long before other low population shards try to attempt the same?

Let Siege Live or Die on it's own, it's the best solution all the way around.

 

[kelmo]

I don't want to move... *looks over snippets* Did you mean them? Please explain. I am working on my "reading comprehension".

Did you mean those things or was it just language to incite?

I see you edit a lot...

 

[kelmo]

Let Siege Live or Die on it's own, it's the best solution all the way around.

This is all I ask. *nods*

 

[Draxous]

2/3rds of the problem with Siege has nothing to do with the developers and what they have and haven't done, 2/3rds of the issue is the players on the shard. Too many have higher expectations or pre-conceived notions of what Siege should be than what it was ever intended to become.

Quick Run down...

• Harder Skill Gains
• No Selling to Or Stealing from NPCs
• Higher Cost for NPC Goods
• Open PvP Environment
• No Recall
• One Character Per Account
• Minor Skill Tweaks (Tailors requiring less material for Leather Armor for example)

Everything outside of those items are pretty much inside the "Siege" scope of things that means they could have put in Insurance, Blessed Items, PBD's etc. and it would not have been outside what Siege "Promised" based on the information provided on UO.com. In other words Siege was supposed to be an Advanced versions of Production nothing more or less.

Unfortunately too many people on Siege have complained, and negotiated with the Developers over the years attempting to bring Siege more in line to their or a portion of it's communities vision. If Siege had progressed along the lines of Prodo while keeping to those Core Elements listed above there would be Zero issues other than what the removal of Multi-Shard housing caused.

Instead Siege has a broken community, half of it champions the most annoying aspects of PvP, a quarter actually tries to play Siege and make the most of it and the remaining quarter likes to think that because they play Siege they are better than everyone on Prodo and that allows them the right to help dictate and guide the direction of the shard. I'll let you guys work out who is who.

My advice and it's the same advice I told the devs personally. Let Siege Live or Die by it's own merit, either the Community can unify and keep it going and work together to improve Siege from within, or they can continue to squabble, among themselves, display Elitist attitudes here and on the shard towards new players there, or they can fade quietly out of mind and just go with the flow and enjoy what they have. But the Last thing the Devs need to do is tinker with Siege further, if they do they are opening a can of worms that I promise they will regret. If one Shard can get them to change how their shard "works" then how long before other low population shards try to attempt the same?

Let Siege Live or Die on it's own, it's the best solution all the way around.

I disagree because you demonstrate no knowledge of how Siege was set up or what Siege was designed to function as.

Let's break down some of the points you highlighted.

Open PvP environment? Then why does Siege have instanced dungeons?

Do you realize that Siege was designed with a special housing ruleset strictly for that shard? That reds and criminals could not ban intruders from their homes so other players could raid and enact justice on those running into them and hiding in them? That a friended red player opening a door wiped the ban list. So why does Siege housing have an invisible force field preventing all players from entering?

Do you know what the purpose of having one character slot was? To force player accountability and encourage player interaction (need a weapon repaired, well you're not logging onto your other character that happens to be a blacksmith.) So why does Siege have soul stones and name change tokens?

Do you know what no recall means? Why does Siege have faction runes that allow for instant recall?

Do you know what balanced PvP is? Do you know why they limited magic casting to 2 fast cast? Because things like that are game breaking issues. Is no passive detect on that little list you provided? No? So why does Siege have players constantly abusing no passive detect with ninjistu/hiding and stealth when this game is tailored to PvP with passive detect?

Let's take your little quip about being the hard/advanced shard. Do you think it would be easier to get artifacts from Doom if it wasn't located in Trammel? Do you know what Risk versus Reward is? Just because it is the harder and more advanced shard.. does not mean that the risks should be greater AND rewards should be less. I don't. It's not in your little list of things either.

Why shouldn't they should be balanced so this game functions properly!?!? Greater risks for greater rewards. Is it because of misconceptions about what harder means?

Balanced Risk versus Reward is a fundamental property of Ultima Online. That is only a Siege specific issue in that it is out of wack on Siege only. Because Siege players risk more than players on any other shard yet are rewarded the very same. It would be a game-wide issue if it was the case on any other shard...

So why do Siege players risk more (no insurance, no trammel) for the same rewards?

You really want to sit there and claim it's a fault of the players and not the devs that Risks and Reward is off tilt?

You want to know what the real problem is? The rest of the servers who'd get jealous at Developer attention being given to Siege AKA the proper attention it deserved. The elitists who think the Themepark portion of this game was the only valid one to it's players. Your post demonstrates that perfectly. Let it sit and rot with crap like instanced dungeons, unbalanced combat, off tilt risk/reward, housing systems that go against the design, so on and so on and so on.

Well the bread should have got passed the whole way around the table instead of constantly stopping at only your plate.

Siege will only die by the neglect it's been given.

Thanks and please refrain from commenting on things you demonstrate no knowledge of. It derails the good discussion being had by addressing your misconceptions and half truths.

Have a good night.

 

[kelmo]

This is not a good discussion. You ask for the extermination of a community. There is nothing good about that.

 

[JC the Builder]

Siege died when the developer who created it left the team (which was like 9 years ago). That is all there is to it. No developer took up to protect it like the original creator did.

A shard such as Siege Perilous can't be done by a team, it needs one developer to decide what is right for the shard. It does not make sense for the entire UO team to spend time meeting, deciding and working on it when only a tiny fraction of the players play it.

Even if a developer did step up, they would likely shy away from making the serious balance changes like removing private housing, all blessed items except spellbooks, deleting items which should have never been added to the shard, etc. One of the biggest changes needed for Siege is likely the removal of bonding for pets (unless it doesn't already exist, I can't remember). Players are going to balk at this change, but it doesn't fit with the theme of the shard. Then bump up taming Dragons to 1 in 20 like it used to be before skill scrolls and suddenly tamers are balanced again.

 

[kelmo]

Siege is not dead, JC.

 

[Draxous]

This is not a good discussion. You ask for the extermination of a community. There is nothing good about that.

Stop trying to ruin a good discussion by twisting things that have been said. Add something constructive or sit back and let those discussing continue to do so in the constructive manner we have been.

 

[JC the Builder]

Siege is not dead, JC.

I am not saying this is when the player base died. It is when developer support died for the shard. People are saying Siege went bad with Age of Shadow or Samurai Empire. It actually happened back in 2000-2001. The shard might have been fun for a while after that, but that can only last so long without any developer support.

 

[Draxous]

Siege died when the developer who created it left the team (which was like 9 years ago). That is all there is to it. No developer took up to protect it like the original creator did.

A shard such as Siege Perilous can't be done by a team, it needs one developer to decide what is right for the shard. It does not make sense for the entire UO team to spend time meeting, deciding and working on it when only a tiny fraction of the players play it.

Even if a developer did step up, they would likely shy away from making the serious balance changes like removing private housing, all blessed items except spellbooks, deleting items which should have never been added to the shard, etc. One of the biggest changes needed for Siege is likely the removal of bonding for pets (unless it doesn't already exist, I can't remember). Players are going to balk at this change, but it doesn't fit with the theme of the shard. Then bump up taming Dragons to 1 in 20 like it used to be before skill scrolls and suddenly tamers are balanced again.

Bingo. Siege has been dying from neglect since runesabre left.

Hell, at this point... Id be down for the job. Siege needs to be fixed or the population needs to be given a working Felucca alternative.

PS. Hopefully Kelmo read what I just said and finally realized the premise of my post!

 

[kelmo]

Explain why you think eliminating an entire community is OK.

 

[Draxous]

Explain why you think eliminating an entire community is OK.

Explain why you keep falsely implying what I think.


EDIT:

Siege needs to be fixed or the population needs to be given a working Felucca alternative.

PS. Hopefully Kelmo read what I just said and finally realized the premise of my post!

Apparently, I hope for too much.