Classic Shard #2

[phantus]

Coming from a pvm'er I can promise you thats just a lie you have plucked out of the air. You think a classic shard will be rampant with pvp and pk's? No chance. When you have been on the recieving end of stat loss you will understand how much it sucks mate, players don't go on casual killing sprees on a whim. Anti pk guilds are always looking to kill a red and destory his playtime for a few weeks by putting him in statloss. A bit of bad luck or a connection loss and your character has just been ruined. As many have said, you see a red you used to run as reds were usually reserved for the best

No insurance makes it a crafters dream but you try becoming a crafter, takes dedication. PvM'ers make their money by taking out big prey and getting magic weps which count for lot's.

@northwoodschopper. That bounty system was almost perfect until I thought about a new character being able to just keep getting murder counts over and over by killing friends in order to collect money. I think the normal stat loss system was fine, maybe make it 16 hours for a short term if they want to clamp down.

@ anyone who is speaking against a classic shard: You just had to have been there at the time to understand how it worked out brilliantly, the economy was perfect. Crafters flurished, treasure hunters had a great time, people fished! Nearly every profession had fun and had a purpose.

Keep it up people, keep telling your friends! Also for those old school players we should use the new Felucians forum to talk about old time!

You confuse Pk with PvP far far too easily. I never once said pk. I did that for a very specific reason. Let me make this very easy to understand statement:

The target for a classic shard is not PvM(trammel) players.

The people coming back to play a classic shard are pvpers and thieves that left after AoS and/or item insurance. Say I'm wrong all you want. Time will tell that I am correct in my assumption. Of this I am unanimous!

Connections and communications have changed. Guilds are now coordinated with voice chat and are experienced in working together the likes of which no classic memory can compare to. Reds will be even more effective now than they were then. They will have larger numbers and more experience. Things will be different.

Insurance is a blight in an item based game. It has no place. It's elimination is meaningless in regards to a classic shard where little to no gear is needed in the first place.

The bounty system was a joke. A new one would have to be created that was nothing like the original.

I was there for the classic era. I had fun. I played a crafter and a treasure hunter. The t hunter was my main character. A macer t hunter that liked to break armor. It was fun. My only complaint at that time were thieves. They were overpowered because they had no risk in their actions. If it were not for housing being completely used up because of cheating house placement and multiple houses per account I would never have moved to tram.

There is no such place as felucia old timer.

Felucians were the native species of the fungi planet Felucia. The Felucians were sensitive to the Force as a species, but were driven deep into the jungles by the settlement of Gossam colonists on the world.

 

[phantus]

Yes phantus

You at least have a sense of humour and can give as good as you get, without taking it personally. We've shared a few exchanges before on these boards and no real harm done.

I think you also know and understand what I'm referring to. I take it you agree with the rest then

Absolutely! I could pick at some of the stuff but nothing to really argue about for the most part. Some people do have this idea a classic shard will be something more that it will turn out to be though and that has nothing to do with what they experienced before.

 

[BuzZzZ]

If many people come to pvp then so what? If you want to pvp then you can, innocents are not affected by it. While people are pvp'ing then there will be many killing monsters, taking out big prey and whoring money for their dream castle.

Insurance can't be in or else it will all be about whos got the vanq kat and invul gear. You die on a regular basis and all that gm armour and regs you loose ends up costing you. Most of the old school players on this thread that want this shard have said they want to craft, own a store. Those pvp'ers you talked about will need a market. GM'ing Blacksmithing is a total pain and costs a fortune.

There is a market for every trade.

 

[northwoodschopper]

@northwoodschopper. That bounty system was almost perfect until I thought about a new character being able to just keep getting murder counts over and over by killing friends in order to collect money. I think the normal stat loss system was fine, maybe make it 16 hours for a short term if they want to clamp down.

I see what you mean. What I meant by a fine from the royal court wouldn't increase the bounty gold from turning in (only players' gold would be paid out), but would more or less set a base penalty for described crimes. so regardless if a player can physically pay a bounty, if the player reports it to a guard, there's a minimum statloss penalty. So in your example, the gold would merely be passed around.

i suppose it would be like a hybrid of the short count murders and bounty system really, where the bounty would further increase the short count penalty. this would give victims a chance to up the penalty for their victimization rather than just being another number on the notch of short counts. maybe something along the lines of for every 250-500 gold increases the penalty 0.1%, higher or lower depending on how the economy is driven.

 

[Kaivan]

Server stability is the not the reason people don't join freeshard to pvm that are anywhere close to the numbers of pvper's. The reason there are more pvpers to pvm players in that ruleset is the same reason there is more pvm players on the production shards. The percentage of "trammies" that are going to play a classic shard is very low.

It's hard for me to understand why people believe a classic shard will not be little more than a pvp shard with a few rpers and a few brave trammies scattered about a bunch of thieves and pvpers.

This shows that you clearly haven't ever step foot onto a freeshard long enough to figure out why most of the major freeshards have a much larger contingency of PvPers than Pvmers.

I have absolutely no intention whatsoever in playing a classic shard. Guess what? I will add my opinion on the matter whenever I see fit as I hope Adol does. Not that anymore is needed from that well thought out post. It was quite complete.

I'll say what I want and play where I want.

See how easy that was?

It's fine to voice your opinion, and you've made that abundantly clear. However, purporting your opinion as fact isn't fine.

You confuse Pk with PvP far far too easily. I never once said pk. I did that for a very specific reason. Let me make this very easy to understand statement:

The target for a classic shard is not PvM(trammel) players.

The people coming back to play a classic shard are pvpers and thieves that left after AoS and/or item insurance. Say I'm wrong all you want. Time will tell that I am correct in my assumption. Of this I am unanimous!

Let's not forget all the crafters that left, or those players who left because they didn't like the idea of a grind based game where you essentially entered into an instance to kill a monster for the precious item that is so deliriously powerful that it outstrips any crafted item by miles and miles (see also: EQ style game). Or how about those who didn't enjoy an item based game from the ground up, PvP or otherwise?

Connections and communications have changed. Guilds are now coordinated with voice chat and are experienced in working together the likes of which no classic memory can compare to. Reds will be even more effective now than they were then. They will have larger numbers and more experience. Things will be different.

Communications are different and players are well coordinated, but that doesn't guarantee that there will be more PKs or that they will be the only group of players to use the advanced communication to coordinate more efficiently.

Insurance is a blight in an item based game. It has no place. It's elimination is meaningless in regards to a classic shard where little to no gear is needed in the first place.

The short sightedness of this statement is so stunning that it's hard to wrap my mind around it. Eliminating insurance puts risk into carrying a valuable item. Eliminating insurance makes crafters worthwhile again. Eliminating insurance stops those who are rich from ignoring the risks that are inherent in the game by always carrying the best equipment at the cost of a couple thousand GP. Insurance is a broken system and has no place on a classic server.

I was there for the classic era. I had fun. I played a crafter and a treasure hunter. The t hunter was my main character. A macer t hunter that liked to break armor. It was fun. My only complaint at that time were thieves. They were overpowered because they had no risk in their actions. If it were not for housing being completely used up because of cheating house placement and multiple houses per account I would never have moved to tram.

So, while playing your armor breaking t-hunter, you were mad about the no-risk thieves that risked getting getting kicked out the thieves guild for an entire week by taking a single murder count. I don't even......

Edit: @northwoodschopper: Take a peek at that last line I directed at phantus, thieves took a huge risk during T2A and didn't need stat-loss on top of it.

 

[popeto]

1. Have the dev's said ANYTHING yet?

2. Please STOP talking about the same stuff that the last 1500 posts in thread#1 addressed.

THANK YOU

 

[Sabbath]

2. Please STOP talking about the same stuff that the last 1500 posts in thread#1 addressed.

THANK YOU

LOL - Yes sir

 

[phantus]

Almost not worth but...

Server stability is the not the reason people don't join freeshard to pvm that are anywhere close to the numbers of pvper's. The reason there are more pvpers to pvm players in that ruleset is the same reason there is more pvm players on the production shards. The percentage of "trammies" that are going to play a classic shard is very low.

It's hard for me to understand why people believe a classic shard will not be little more than a pvp shard with a few rpers and a few brave trammies scattered about a bunch of thieves and pvpers.

This shows that you clearly haven't ever step foot onto a freeshard long enough to figure out why most of the major freeshards have a much larger contingency of PvPers than Pvmers.

I'm sorry, was this a point? Somehow looks like you were trying to raise a point by proving mine.

I have absolutely no intention whatsoever in playing a classic shard. Guess what? I will add my opinion on the matter whenever I see fit as I hope Adol does. Not that anymore is needed from that well thought out post. It was quite complete.

I'll say what I want and play where I want.

See how easy that was?

It's fine to voice your opinion, and you've made that abundantly clear. However, purporting your opinion as fact isn't fine.

I do it on rare occasion. When I'm right and I know it.

You confuse Pk with PvP far far too easily. I never once said pk. I did that for a very specific reason. Let me make this very easy to understand statement:

The target for a classic shard is not PvM(trammel) players.

The people coming back to play a classic shard are pvpers and thieves that left after AoS and/or item insurance. Say I'm wrong all you want. Time will tell that I am correct in my assumption. Of this I am unanimous!

Let's not forget all the crafters that left, or those players who left because they didn't like the idea of a grind based game where you essentially entered into an instance to kill a monster for the precious item that is so deliriously powerful that it outstrips any crafted item by miles and miles (see also: EQ style game). Or how about those who didn't enjoy an item based game from the ground up, PvP or otherwise?

A valid point! These people most certainly exist. They are a rarer breed however that will come to a fel ruleset. The chances of a classic shard being created with tram is rather bleak. In this light that deters many of these would be crafters from returning. There will be some I'm sure.

Connections and communications have changed. Guilds are now coordinated with voice chat and are experienced in working together the likes of which no classic memory can compare to. Reds will be even more effective now than they were then. They will have larger numbers and more experience. Things will be different.

Communications are different and players are well coordinated, but that doesn't guarantee that there will be more PKs or that they will be the only group of players to use the advanced communication to coordinate more efficiently.

If you do not think voice will make a difference you are naive. Production shards have proven how pk guilds will operate in today's world. Different...

Insurance is a blight in an item based game. It has no place. It's elimination is meaningless in regards to a classic shard where little to no gear is needed in the first place.

The short sightedness of this statement is so stunning that it's hard to wrap my mind around it. Eliminating insurance puts risk into carrying a valuable item. Eliminating insurance makes crafters worthwhile again. Eliminating insurance stops those who are rich from ignoring the risks that are inherent in the game by always carrying the best equipment at the cost of a couple thousand GP. Insurance is a broken system and has no place on a classic server.

I don't think you followed my insurance statement. I do not like insurance. In an item based game it's a horrible concept. In a classic setting it's not worth even talking about because that would be ridiculous. I did in no way wish to imply insurance to be used for anything much less a classic shard. I can only guess that you misinterpreted my words to mean otherwise.

I was there for the classic era. I had fun. I played a crafter and a treasure hunter. The t hunter was my main character. A macer t hunter that liked to break armor. It was fun. My only complaint at that time were thieves. They were overpowered because they had no risk in their actions. If it were not for housing being completely used up because of cheating house placement and multiple houses per account I would never have moved to tram.

So, while playing your armor breaking t-hunter, you were mad about the no-risk thieves that risked getting getting kicked out the thieves guild for an entire week by taking a single murder count. I don't even......

Edit: @northwoodschopper: Take a peek at that last line I directed at phantus, thieves took a huge risk during T2A and didn't need stat-loss on top of it.

Throw away thieves were and will be a problem. There is no risk to playing a leg-humping naked thief. There is only gain. 3 thieves working together can circumvent countermeasure. Run into a gang of them and your only recourse it to recall. No risk to the naked thief.

What was the risk? They get caught and are chased down? They win when you chase them. It is their goal. Thieves are a different mindset of people. They will take every advantage available to them and there is no mechanism to prevent them from abuse. They will do the exact same thing they did before tram.

Keep em coming boys, although I can't be for sure how long you are going to hold my interest. I don't really have any intention of disagreeing with everyone that wants this shard. I have tendencies to get excited when every thread becomes a battleground though and I know where to bring the fight.

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

Wow is cool how you described, basically, yourself as a flamer and a forum troll, i like the sincerity in that last paragraph.
To answer to the serious (serious?) doubt you raised about thieving, i can tell you what thieves have as a counter-balance to their "profits": the fact that they do it basically for fun, because thieving is RARELY really profitable. You are talking about stealing small things, and when we talk about large sums of money by houselooting or something like it, we talk about LONG plans , long waits, we talk about EFFORTS, it's not that money or goods are raining on ress-robe ressed thieves. If i got around the world just with my ress robe i wouldn't rob anyone. Thieves like that change or quit quite fast.
I personally did (and i'm doing) it for the sake of having fun, nothing more nothing less. But i can't say it's profitable. So thieving has less risks, in term of goods, and less profits, in term of goods.

 

[Kaivan]

Almost not worth but...

Server stability is the not the reason people don't join freeshard to pvm that are anywhere close to the numbers of pvper's. The reason there are more pvpers to pvm players in that ruleset is the same reason there is more pvm players on the production shards. The percentage of "trammies" that are going to play a classic shard is very low.

It's hard for me to understand why people believe a classic shard will not be little more than a pvp shard with a few rpers and a few brave trammies scattered about a bunch of thieves and pvpers.

This shows that you clearly haven't ever step foot onto a freeshard long enough to figure out why most of the major freeshards have a much larger contingency of PvPers than Pvmers.

I'm sorry, was this a point? Somehow looks like you were trying to raise a point by proving mine.

Yes, there was actually, and you completely missed it. The number of PKs has a lot less to do with what you imply the reason to be (Trammel) and a lot more to do with the fact that most free shards have little to no restrictions on PKing. When I say that, I don't mean OSI equivalent "little or no restrictions", I'm talking no restrictions. So yes, they will have a much larger contingency of PKers because there really are no restrictions on PKing.

I have absolutely no intention whatsoever in playing a classic shard. Guess what? I will add my opinion on the matter whenever I see fit as I hope Adol does. Not that anymore is needed from that well thought out post. It was quite complete.

I'll say what I want and play where I want.

See how easy that was?

It's fine to voice your opinion, and you've made that abundantly clear. However, purporting your opinion as fact isn't fine.

I do it on rare occasion. When I'm right and I know it.

Let me know when you've got one. Until then, lets keep opinions opinions.

You confuse Pk with PvP far far too easily. I never once said pk. I did that for a very specific reason. Let me make this very easy to understand statement:

The target for a classic shard is not PvM(trammel) players.

The people coming back to play a classic shard are pvpers and thieves that left after AoS and/or item insurance. Say I'm wrong all you want. Time will tell that I am correct in my assumption. Of this I am unanimous!

Let's not forget all the crafters that left, or those players who left because they didn't like the idea of a grind based game where you essentially entered into an instance to kill a monster for the precious item that is so deliriously powerful that it outstrips any crafted item by miles and miles (see also: EQ style game). Or how about those who didn't enjoy an item based game from the ground up, PvP or otherwise?

A valid point! These people most certainly exist. They are a rarer breed however that will come to a fel ruleset. The chances of a classic shard being created with tram is rather bleak. In this light that deters many of these would be crafters from returning. There will be some I'm sure.

I'm glad that you see the point. Unfortunately, you are awarded no points for making the sweeping generalization that the server is targeted only at PvPers ("The target for a classic shard is not PvM (trammel) players", in case you missed it above).

Also, kudos on generalizing any non-PvPer as a trammie.

Connections and communications have changed. Guilds are now coordinated with voice chat and are experienced in working together the likes of which no classic memory can compare to. Reds will be even more effective now than they were then. They will have larger numbers and more experience. Things will be different.

Communications are different and players are well coordinated, but that doesn't guarantee that there will be more PKs or that they will be the only group of players to use the advanced communication to coordinate more efficiently.

If you do not think voice will make a difference you are naive. Production shards have proven how pk guilds will operate in today's world. Different...

I never said that it didn't or wouldn't. But assuming that only the PKer will use it, and thus gain some incredible advantage, is foolhardy.

Insurance is a blight in an item based game. It has no place. It's elimination is meaningless in regards to a classic shard where little to no gear is needed in the first place.

The short sightedness of this statement is so stunning that it's hard to wrap my mind around it. Eliminating insurance puts risk into carrying a valuable item. Eliminating insurance makes crafters worthwhile again. Eliminating insurance stops those who are rich from ignoring the risks that are inherent in the game by always carrying the best equipment at the cost of a couple thousand GP. Insurance is a broken system and has no place on a classic server.

I don't think you followed my insurance statement. I do not like insurance. In an item based game it's a horrible concept. In a classic setting it's not worth even talking about because that would be ridiculous. I did in no way wish to imply insurance to be used for anything much less a classic shard. I can only guess that you misinterpreted my words to mean otherwise.

See bolded text for ambiguous statement. The most direct interpretation of that text is that removing insurance is a meaningless endeavor (see also: insiginficant), which implies that insurance has no effect on a classic environment. However, you clarified your point very well in your next post and I now know where your position is on the subject.

I was there for the classic era. I had fun. I played a crafter and a treasure hunter. The t hunter was my main character. A macer t hunter that liked to break armor. It was fun. My only complaint at that time were thieves. They were overpowered because they had no risk in their actions. If it were not for housing being completely used up because of cheating house placement and multiple houses per account I would never have moved to tram.

So, while playing your armor breaking t-hunter, you were mad about the no-risk thieves that risked getting getting kicked out the thieves guild for an entire week by taking a single murder count. I don't even......

Edit: @northwoodschopper: Take a peek at that last line I directed at phantus, thieves took a huge risk during T2A and didn't need stat-loss on top of it.

Throw away thieves were and will be a problem. There is no risk to playing a leg-humping naked thief. There is only gain. 3 thieves working together can circumvent countermeasure. Run into a gang of them and your only recourse it to recall. No risk to the naked thief.

What was the risk? They get caught and are chased down? They win when you chase them. It is their goal. Thieves are a different mindset of people. They will take every advantage available to them and there is no mechanism to prevent them from abuse. They will do the exact same thing they did before tram.

You do realize that each "throw away" thief must have at least 60 skill in stealing, be 1 week old, and have 48 game play hours to join the thieves guild to start with? If the math escapes you on that one, its more than the requirement that a thief who takes a murder count must wait until he can re-join the guild (40 hours for the long term count, and 1 week's time). So no, the concept of a throw away thief goes right out the window because you have nearly the same wait time in either situation, so why not use the developed thief?

Keep em coming boys, although I can't be for sure how long you are going to hold my interest. I don't really have any intention of disagreeing with everyone that wants this shard. I have tendencies to get excited when every thread becomes a battleground though and I know where to bring the fight.

Oh they'll keep coming, and I'll have to start deducting points from your balance if you keep this up sir. I don't want to have to do it, but it may become necessary.

(Sorry if I sound harsh, but it's important to know the facts before making any statements on the subject.)

 

[Derium of ls]

*sigh*

Okay everyone, I pretty much stopped posting in the classic server threads because all that's happening is everyone is fighting now. The more we do this the more credit we lose and the less of a chance we have. Had even this thread been any other thread, it would have been locked and sliding down the list by now. I do thank the stratics folks for giving us this chance, and also for not taking it away from us... yet

I'm not trying to police all of you, just saying it's been more than just me who has been chased away by people who post here seemingly just to argue with us.

Are we any closer to a hammered out list to submit to EA? Or is the only thing we've gained lately is a higher stress level?



"Keep em coming boys, although I can't be for sure how long you are going to hold my interest. I don't really have any intention of disagreeing with everyone that wants this shard. I have tendencies to get excited when every thread becomes a battleground though and I know where to bring the fight. "

I would say it's heated debates taking place, but things like the above paragraph keep coming up. That's rather clear they want a fight, and waste out time. If this were a company and we were on strike, and all we did was try to kill each other, how do you think the company would view us?

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

I'd just like to say that while I am an Anti-PK, I do prefer the mechanics of a PvE server simply because of the kind of crowd a PvP server draws. That being said, I think there will be more "Trammeis" on a classic (read PvP) server then there will be on a production server, simply because just by browsing the posts on a lot of other UO communities you can see that most people are fed up with all the properties imbuing gems etc... that you have now. They long for a simpler time, which is why many will come to a classic shard. Now will they stay if non-con pvp interactions are not policed well? Maybe, maybe not. The human is a strange beast and no one can reliably predict what one will do.

As for throw-away thieves, Kavian has a point. There really weren't any after the introduction of the thieves guild. I never understood why people didn't just invest in the 40 points of hiding that would make it easy to hide at the bank to make themselves a little more protected.

Now to play devil's advocate. All the PK and stealing deterrents that were introduced into the game look great on paper. Stat Loss? Wow it'll be hard for a guy to build his skill back up, but we all know it didn't work. UM while you're sleeping and rotate toons. Spar with guildies etc... The fact of the matter is, despite looking back with rose colored lenses (which is what a lot of the PvPers (PK's) here are doing, PKing was driving people away. It only takes a look at fellucca as soon as Tram was introduced. The devs even made it where playing in Fel was 10 times more rewarding than Tram and no one came. They put powerscrolls and champ spawns in. Very Very few came. I'm sorry guys, but that pretty much proves the lie in the "PKing wasn't that bad, you must have just been unlucky" and "MY server wasn't like that at all, the anti's rolled through the dungeons all the time and we reds had kick ass fights with them and didn't bother the mules."

That is why Phantus is speaking the truth. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the shard will be populated only by PvPers (not necessarily PK's). The large faction of people who want to recreate their PK days will be sorely disappointed because everyone who logs into the server will be a PvPer and know how to fight them off or at the very least make themselves a hard target. There will be few if any sheep for them. This will be both a positive and a negative I think. PK's and murderers play an important role in the economy despite what some people think (look at the prices of items pre-ren to post-ren) , but without sheep they will leave. The PK's and Gankers have proven time and again that they don't want a real challenge, they want easy pickings. They will quickly grow tired of either losing their "prey" or becoming prey themselves. They will leave. But before they leave they will kill and drive off what few "sheep" our classic shard will have. This will turn off the players who never played pre-ren or even pre-aos off to our ruleset, thus ensuring the destruction of a classic shard. I don't want this to happen, which is why I support hybrid rules to make it very challenging to be a ganker yet at the same time punish them for their immoral behavior. I don't think we need any changes to the thieves guild system, it's good where it's at.

TLR- PK's are wrong, trammel proves that. Without harsh penalties for PKing we will end up with an empty shard because we will have driven off all the "sheep" and the PK's and gankers will get tired of actually having to fight skilled players, and they will leave. Thieves are good.

 

[HD2300]

That is why Phantus is speaking the truth. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the shard will be populated only by PvPers (not necessarily PK's). ...

TLR- PK's are wrong, trammel proves that. Without harsh penalties for PKing we will end up with an empty shard because we will have driven off all the "sheep" and the PK's and gankers will get tired of actually having to fight skilled players, and they will leave. Thieves are good.

Now that a certain guild has stopped hijacking a thread, doing more harm to the Classic shard proposal than good, and there can be civil debate...

We all pretty much agree it will be a PvP shard. PvPers will have support characters like crafters, resource gatherers etc in their other character slots.

However how can you attract the most PvPers and encourage the most PvP, when there are harsh penalties for killing blues. Few will want to be red, and there would be less PvP. Red PvPers would rather play a production shard or Seige or Darkfall or AoC because there is no stat loss. Why should a Red PvPer be penalised for PvPing? It is not really balanced PvP. A Blue PvPer can get back into the action in 5 minutes, whereas a Red PvPer has to retrain for weeks. Why dont Blue PvPers also get stat loss too?

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

hahahahahahaha

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

However how can you attract the most PvPers and encourage the most PvP, when there are harsh penalties for killing blues. Few will want to be red, and there would be less PvP. Red PvPers would rather play a production shard or Seige or Darkfall or AoC because there is no stat loss. Why should a Red PvPer be penalised for PvPing? It is not really balanced PvP.

You still confuse PvPers with PK's. If you really want PvP there are lots of CONSENSUAL ways to have PvP. O/C, Guild Wars and the like. Now I am about to use the term "innocent" in regards to blues. I know there are some blue players who would game the rep system to avoid murder counts, but the majority of Blues were people who just didn't want to be involved in non-con PvP activity, thus I consider them Innocents.

If you kill innocents you should be expected to suffer the consequences, weather it be being a criminal for 2 minutes and getting a count, down to being hunted by anti-pk's. If you kill enough innocents to turn red that tells me you are one of a few things.

1: An Anti-PK who kills blues who game the system to avoid counts. Being thus you're probably known in your community and won't have to worry too much about being killed, and if you do receive stat loss then you'll probably have quite a few friends who will help you regain that skill.

2: You are an RP PK, in other words you chose the role of a wandering bandit, sociopath, whatever. If you are serious about such a role and aren't using it as a justification of the killing of innocents then you're probably gonna react to stat loss in the same manner as #1. An example of this type of player would be The Shadowclan Orcs or the Temple of Mondain.

3: In a Red guild, you're in it for the fun of killing easy prey and getting the phat lewt. You know the consequences and if you go into stat loss you've got guildies to help you regain skill. If they don't want to help you re-build...well then they're probably not worth hanging around with. Red guilds will usually have many wars with other guilds in order to foster Consensual PvP. I think of old school Black Company when I think of a red guild.

4. A script kiddie ganker who gets his rocks off by killing defenseless crafters and gatherers. Kal Ort Por's at the first sign of an anti-pk or a red who will kill them for the loot they've already looted. Generally seems to be a large majority of "Pvp"ers. Likes to claim they're in it for the challenge but gripes and complains when anything resembling challenge is introduced. These are the people that the penalties are intended to drive off because they are the ones who drive off players.

A Blue PvPer can get back into the action in 5 minutes, whereas a Red PvPer has to retrain for weeks. Why dont Blue PvPers also get stat loss too?

Blue PvPers are just that. PvPers. They probably didn't murder an innocent in non-con PvP. They are playing within the accepted mores of an online society and are pvping with other people who WANT to pvp. Why should they be punished for PvPing with other PvPers?

The reason reds get punished with stat loss etc... is because a great majority of them are in my group 4. These people drive off players, people quit the game. Those type of PvPers do irreparable damage to the game both financially and perception wise. In the end in order to keep customers you end up with a Trammel or some other kind of PvP switch. In the end a red is punished for FORCING PvP on someone who doesn't want to PvP.

I'll end with this comment.

People will say they're into PvP because of the challenge. I agree. There is nothing more challenging than fighting a player because you never know what they'll do. If you really are into PvP for the challenge there are lots of consensual ways to PvP. For extra challenge you can go red, that up to you. If you really are about the challenge then it shouldn't bother you.

If on the other hand you just like to kill weaker opponents and don't really want a real challenge, you'll have to deal with the consequences, because I don't see EA investing the time into building a classic shard just to let it die again because some people just can't help but grief other players.

TL : DR- Blue PvPers shouldn't be punished for playing within the system because they are using CONSENSUAL ways to PvP. Some groups of PvPers like the added challenge of Stat Loss and not being able to use any town but Buc's. Gankers hate Stat Loss and other things because it puts them out of the game for awhile. That makes sense to me since they're driving customers away and damaging the game. Suck it up and drive on. Accept the consequences of your actions.

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

 

[HD2300]

You still confuse PvPers with PK's.
...
If you kill innocents you should be expected to suffer the consequences, weather it be being a criminal for 2 minutes and getting a count, down to being hunted by anti-pk's. If you kill enough innocents to turn red that tells me you are one of a few things.
...
If on the other hand you just like to kill weaker opponents and don't really want a real challenge, you'll have to deal with the consequences, because I don't see EA investing the time into building a classic shard just to let it die again because some people just can't help but grief other players.

...Maybe if you had a system that punished PKers, but didnt punish red-PvPers that would be a good thing, as it would attract more PvPers and more PvP and hence more players. Just saying.

Kill weaker opponents and innocents -> get penalised
Kill blue-PvPers -> dont get penalised

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

...Maybe if you had a system that punished PKers, but didnt punish red-PvPers that would be a good thing, as it would attract more PvPers and more PvP and hence more players. Just saying.

Kill weaker opponents and innocents -> get penalised
Kill blue-PvPers -> dont get penalised

There is no distinction between a PKer and a red PvP. They both killed innocents as in people who did not want to PvP. You can't wiggle around it, it's impossible. The only system that can differentiate is the player who was killed himself when he gets the "Do you wish to report so and so for murder" gump. I know when I was playing my main and got killed by a red in PvP I never reported him for murder.

If you want to kill blue pvpers and not get penalized have a guild war or O/C war.

 

[fantasy10k]

...Maybe if you had a system that punished PKers, but didnt punish red-PvPers that would be a good thing, as it would attract more PvPers and more PvP and hence more players. Just saying.

Kill weaker opponents and innocents -> get penalised
Kill blue-PvPers -> dont get penalised

Why do they go red in the first place if they only want to PvP.
Pk players were usually bad compared to O/C players.

 

[Pedde]

My account goes back to Feb.1998 and I would instantly throw everything I own today in UO into a trash barrel and start playing on a classic shard.

I got a huge friends list on ICQ from back in the days and most of them would instantly start playing too. The people made the game great, and most of them would come back if an opportunity like a classic shard came.

Normal people mind you, Pvp interested, but in no way only existing to grief. But all very passionate about the skill based pvp of "take 100 each reg and gogogogo".

To be honest I do not even mind which expansion is used for a classic shard. I could live with power scrolls too, as long as there is only the original world and T2a. The population needs to be dense.

I do understand that it is never easy for a game designer to go back, and earning money for selling expansions will be harder with a classic shard. But maybe EA could bring in micro payment for ethys or stuff like that. In the end I do want EA to make money, so they keep on supporting the best game ever.

I would at least sport two accounts instead of only one at the moment I am absolutely convinced, that this shard would be a huge success.

Make it happen

 

[Antonio Cataneo]

@ Ahuaeyjnkxs: weren't you crying that you would be silent till someone aknowledged you in come manner?

@HD2300-Renyard: I'm sure it wouldn't be a pvp only server, the playerbase is quite different from what you think, you are just generalizing in a pretty bad way. Felucca is dead land because 90% of UO people don't like non-consensual pvp, but here we are talking about a shard in which someone is quite AWARE that you are entering a dangerous realm, you can play here or stick into production shard safety

 

[phantus]

It's no fun playing chess with 8 year olds. Sure they know how to play, but they just don't understand why they suck.

Keep it in your yard fellas.

 

[BuzZzZ]

The game won't be as pvp orientated as some may think. While there will be a lot of o/c and guild pvp, there will be many others getting rich through crafting and pvm and basically controlling the economy.

While you guys are fighting away, I will be sitting in my big castle (don't forget the few spots for them) or moongate house getting rich and hording my collection of silver vanqs and rares.

Crafters and pvm'ers will enjoy this type of shard due to the diversity and lack of 1000 people fighting the same spawn. Will be good to see the return of the treasure hunter. Just nerf the locking picking spell and make treasure hunters have a more diverse skill range.

 

[Kaivan]

You still confuse PvPers with PK's. If you really want PvP there are lots of CONSENSUAL ways to have PvP. O/C, Guild Wars and the like. Now I am about to use the term "innocent" in regards to blues. I know there are some blue players who would game the rep system to avoid murder counts, but the majority of Blues were people who just didn't want to be involved in non-con PvP activity, thus I consider them Innocents.

If you kill innocents you should be expected to suffer the consequences, weather it be being a criminal for 2 minutes and getting a count, down to being hunted by anti-pk's. If you kill enough innocents to turn red that tells me you are one of a few things.

1: An Anti-PK who kills blues who game the system to avoid counts. Being thus you're probably known in your community and won't have to worry too much about being killed, and if you do receive stat loss then you'll probably have quite a few friends who will help you regain that skill.

2: You are an RP PK, in other words you chose the role of a wandering bandit, sociopath, whatever. If you are serious about such a role and aren't using it as a justification of the killing of innocents then you're probably gonna react to stat loss in the same manner as #1. An example of this type of player would be The Shadowclan Orcs or the Temple of Mondain.

3: In a Red guild, you're in it for the fun of killing easy prey and getting the phat lewt. You know the consequences and if you go into stat loss you've got guildies to help you regain skill. If they don't want to help you re-build...well then they're probably not worth hanging around with. Red guilds will usually have many wars with other guilds in order to foster Consensual PvP. I think of old school Black Company when I think of a red guild.

4. A script kiddie ganker who gets his rocks off by killing defenseless crafters and gatherers. Kal Ort Por's at the first sign of an anti-pk or a red who will kill them for the loot they've already looted. Generally seems to be a large majority of "Pvp"ers. Likes to claim they're in it for the challenge but gripes and complains when anything resembling challenge is introduced. These are the people that the penalties are intended to drive off because they are the ones who drive off players.



Blue PvPers are just that. PvPers. They probably didn't murder an innocent in non-con PvP. They are playing within the accepted mores of an online society and are pvping with other people who WANT to pvp. Why should they be punished for PvPing with other PvPers?

The reason reds get punished with stat loss etc... is because a great majority of them are in my group 4. These people drive off players, people quit the game. Those type of PvPers do irreparable damage to the game both financially and perception wise. In the end in order to keep customers you end up with a Trammel or some other kind of PvP switch. In the end a red is punished for FORCING PvP on someone who doesn't want to PvP.

I'll end with this comment.

People will say they're into PvP because of the challenge. I agree. There is nothing more challenging than fighting a player because you never know what they'll do. If you really are into PvP for the challenge there are lots of consensual ways to PvP. For extra challenge you can go red, that up to you. If you really are about the challenge then it shouldn't bother you.

If on the other hand you just like to kill weaker opponents and don't really want a real challenge, you'll have to deal with the consequences, because I don't see EA investing the time into building a classic shard just to let it die again because some people just can't help but grief other players.

TL : DR- Blue PvPers shouldn't be punished for playing within the system because they are using CONSENSUAL ways to PvP. Some groups of PvPers like the added challenge of Stat Loss and not being able to use any town but Buc's. Gankers hate Stat Loss and other things because it puts them out of the game for awhile. That makes sense to me since they're driving customers away and damaging the game. Suck it up and drive on. Accept the consequences of your actions.

For once, a post that I pretty much agree with outright.

 

[Kaleb]

This shard by far wont be a PvP shard, There are many people who enjoy the Classic dangerous feel of UO. I play a all fel ruleset "classic" server although I love the Challenge of PvP, I mostly PvM and craft there, I wait for the fight to come to me, there is no need to go out looking for a fight unlike todays production servers.

 

[Apex Xion]

...Maybe if you had a system that punished PKers, but didnt punish red-PvPers that would be a good thing, as it would attract more PvPers and more PvP and hence more players. Just saying.

Kill weaker opponents and innocents -> get penalised
Kill blue-PvPers -> dont get penalised

I've kept to lurking until I saw this...

PvP is consensual - ie, Factions, Warring guilds, and flagged (grey) PvP.

PKing is non-consensual - no explanation needed.

I think people need to understand that becoming red is a choice... If you want to kill on sight, well you've chosen your path... you can't have it both ways...

Besides, most of the time that a PvP'er sees a red, there's going to be some PvP anyway

Being red and wanting to PvP, well that's a possibility, however, being red and PvP'ing is like the cart before the horse... you kill someone without going through the proper channels to freely PvP by using the in-game tools meaning factions or warring guilds.

 

[northwoodschopper]

One thing I miss from UO before T2A was that there wasn't a big push for skill synergies -- you basically could pvp with 4-5 skills, and have the rest of the skills to fill in for jack-of-trades versitility, or focus on crafting. Synergies is what basically killed some of the more unique templates, as it made them much less effective, like detectives, and rangers.

 

[HD2300]

It is interesting to see people have different interpretations of what is PvP and PKing.

Anyway here is a question. PKers drive away paying subscribers and reduce the number of potential subscribers that would be attracted to a game. If there will be consentual PvP anyway, why not as a games development co., just not allow any PKing? Are the benefits of having PKers more than the benefits of not having PKers?

 

[Apex Xion]

It is interesting to see people have different interpretations of what is PvP and PKing.

Anyway here is a question. PKers drive away paying subscribers and reduce the number of potential subscribers that would be attracted to a game. If there will be consentual PvP anyway, why not as a games development co., just not allow any PKing? Are the benefits of having PKers more than the benefits of not having PKers?

Proof?

I'm not going to get into a flame war or huge debate as my RL doesn't allow me to spend hours online, however, I notice quite a trend in your posts... it seems to me that a lot of statements made by you are made to look like fact, yet you really have nothing to back up your statements.

Way back in the day, my guild on Napa, Orders of Justice (OoJ) used to welcome the PK'ers and we lived for the run-in's with them! It made the game so much more fun! When that calmed down (which it always does), we moved into our warring guild and did that between the occasional PK run-in.

I think the only people negatively affected by PK'ers are the people that probably won't be interested in a classic shard. For me, I welcome it with open arms as it is where I was "born" and it is pretty much where I died in my UO playing days...

 

[o2bavr6]

One thing I miss from UO before T2A was that there wasn't a big push for skill synergies -- you basically could pvp with 4-5 skills, and have the rest of the skills to fill in for jack-of-trades versitility, or focus on crafting. Synergies is what basically killed some of the more unique templates, as it made them much less effective, like detectives, and rangers.

so true

 

[Apex Xion]

Sorry, I focused in on the blatant "fact" statement and didn't address your question...

If there will be consentual PvP anyway, why not as a games development co., just not allow any PKing? Are the benefits of having PKers more than the benefits of not having PKers?

It's about choice. The choice to play on a 'ruleset' like Tram or Fel. The choice to play on a PvP, PvE or RP server (speaking of WoW). And of course, to play a classic shard...

Incoming crazy analogy...

If you went to McDonalds and asked for fries and they told you that you could have them, but you can't eat them with ketchup, would that be cool with you? (of course, if you don't like ketchup, you are fine with it!) So, what about the people that love ketchup? Will they just eat the fries and deal with it, or would they find another place to get what you want?

The benefits of having PK's keeps people sharp. If I just build a miner for the sake of mining, do you think I would be very effective in a Fel ruleset? Probably not... However, If I make a hybrid to combat a PK when he seeks to take my bounty, then it makes me better, and makes the PK more apt to choose his prey wisely...

There's no true benefit to not having PK'ers on a PvP shard, so it's really not a question for this forum... This is not a debate against PK'ers at all, this is a debate on a classic ruleset.

 

[o2bavr6]

I think the only people negatively affected by PK'ers are the people that probably won't be interested in a classic shard. For me, I welcome it with open arms as it is where I was "born" and it is pretty much where I died in my UO playing days...

yup, exactly.. why would someone who doesn't want to pvp even want to play on a classic shard? to me it makes no sense.

seems to me they want to be conscientious objectors. heh

It also seems that a lot of people who are concerned about pkers, never actually played UO back in the day. So how could they even have an opinion on it?

There were more blue noto pkers than red pkers. also there were tons of blues who would protect other blues from pkers, it was a big community.

sadly this is all gone.

 

[Guido_LS]

yup, exactly.. why would someone who doesn't want to pvp even want to play on a classic shard? to me it makes no sense.

Is it not enough to say that we abhor the AoS itemization? Classic has many definitions, even in the realm of the UO world. It's not all about kill or be killed. Because that, too, falls well into the realm of sandbox.

Does it make sense now?

 

[HD2300]

If it is about providing more choices for your customers, as a games dev. company, shouldn't EA should offer

Seige for the hardcore PvP/Pkers
Production shards with Trammel and Fel
An inbetween such as a Classic shard where PKing is penalised (new)
A Tram only consentual PvP only shard (new)

and by providing the 2 new choices, EA is offering new choices to and targetting both PvPers and the non-PvPers, rather than to only 1 group.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

Is it not enough to say that we abhor the AoS itemization? Classic has many definitions, even in the realm of the UO world. It's not all about kill or be killed. Because that, too, falls well into the realm of sandbox.

Does it make sense now?

I second that! Great use of a synonym for hate also. I love the way abhor falls off the tongue....especially when speaking about AoS.

 

[o2bavr6]

Is it not enough to say that we abhor the AoS itemization? Classic has many definitions, even in the realm of the UO world. It's not all about kill or be killed. Because that, too, falls well into the realm of sandbox.

Does it make sense now?

I guess, but the introduction of Tram/LBR was a bad idea because it divided the population and ruined the communities that were built and AoS with item based play pretty much destroyed what UO used to be all about.

And you are correct there are many definitions of classic: mine is pretty much UO before Tram. But in the end we all have opinions and everyone knows that opinions are like _________ everyone has one

 

[Apex Xion]

If it is about providing more choices for your customers, as a games dev. company, shouldn't EA should offer

Seige for the hardcore PvP/Pkers
Production shards with Trammel and Fel
An inbetween such as a Classic shard where PKing is penalised (new)
A Tram only consentual PvP only shard (new)

and by providing the 2 new choices, EA is offering new choices to and targetting both PvPers and the non-PvPers, rather than to only 1 group.

So let me get this straight. You want a classic rules Tram only ruleset?? You already have that option to PvP... Take a deep breath, walk through a moongate and with your hand gripping your mouse tightly, keeping it as steady as possible while your other hand wipes the sweat from your brow, click the FEL button! Seriously...

I think it's time you go start your own thread lobbying for your idea because these threads are specific to a classic shard T2A

 

[o2bavr6]

If it is about providing more choices for your customers, as a games dev. company, shouldn't EA should offer

Seige for the hardcore PvP/Pkers
Production shards with Trammel and Fel
An inbetween such as a Classic shard where PKing is penalised (new)
A Tram only consentual PvP only shard (new)

and by providing the 2 new choices, EA is offering new choices to and targetting both PvPers and the non-PvPers, rather than to only 1 group.

Imagine the nightmare of having to update 4 different game clients.

EA cant get one client working properly without bugs and game imbalances.

But with that said, sounds like a good idea.. not sure if there are enough people who play to justify it but im game.

 

[BuzZzZ]

People are destorying this thread. Why would non pvp players want to join this classic server?? Read the 24 pages of the other thread and find out why.

Just give us our classic shard with the rules that most agreed on in the sticky thread and you will see how fast it's filled. We need Morgana LeFay (PoV) back to deal with some of the moronic posts as she has the patience. The danger and thrill of UO made it fun for all. PK's didn't run a mock when stat loss was enforced, crafters and treasure hunters had a reason to keep hunting for treasure due to the easy ability to loose gear...

Bring back Morgana LeFay (PoV)!


Can posters please say if you played during T2a when you post? It will atleast make some of us understand these silly comments from people that think they know everything.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

People are destorying this thread. Why would non pvp players want to join this classic server?? Read the 24 pages of the other thread and find out why.

Just give us our classic shard with the rules that most agreed on in the sticky thread and you will see how fast it's filled. We need Morgana LeFay (PoV) back to deal with some of the moronic posts as she has the patience. The danger and thrill of UO made it fun for all. PK's didn't run a mock when stat loss was enforced, crafters and treasure hunters had a reason to keep hunting for treasure due to the easy ability to loose gear...

Bring back Morgana LeFay (PoV)!


Can posters please say if you played during T2a when you post? It will atleast make some of us understand these silly comments from people that think they know everything.

As Morganna pointed out to me earlier in THIS post, the sticky is not the consensus. No one here other than maybe that HD guy in his multi client post has even said NO PVP. We want penalties in place to keep the pk's who did run amock, regardless of what you think, from ruining the classic server.

There is also a very large but quiet majority I think here that would play a Pub 5-16 shard (read UO:R). It's gotta have some appeal, the largest player run shards who have 700+ clients on regularly are all in the pub15-16 range.

I think a lot of us are just tired of the itemization and will play any classic shard regardless of rule-set or publish as long as there is no AoS or beyond.

Ohh and Buzz...by trying to stifle healthy debate you yourself are killing the thread. I got my nose smacked earlier this week for trying to do that so I'm rolling up the paper and smacking yours now.

 

[BuzZzZ]

You can smack what you like, you just talk a load of bollocks.

There was a list of rules posted that most people agreed to, sounded good to me.

My comments are aimed at the people who say it will just be a pvp shard when it won't.

 

[o2bavr6]

You can smack what you like, you just talk a load of bollocks.

There was a list of rules posted that most people agreed to, sounded good to me.

My comments are aimed at the people who say it will just be a pvp shard when it won't.

Buzzz, I've played since Sept 1997. When did you start?

And as I mentioned in an earlier post, stat loss would be ok as long as it didn't take forever to get the skills back up. Imagine having stat loss on a tamer... even though I've never ever had a tamer, I know how long it takes to work the skills to as an example GM.

Also having stat loss just makes people PK on blues so it truly doesn't resolve PKing. Handling PKers should be done by the community, it is the best way to enforce it.

Now if they made it to where if you pked any innocent, upon your next death, if you were blue or red, you had a 24 hour stat loss, it might help curb rampant pking. Just a thought.

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

@ Ahuaeyjnkxs: weren't you crying that you would be silent till someone aknowledged you in come manner?

*joined in beta, became part of the honored elite bug finder team ; played everyday into release, became seer in the FoA storyline on Atlantic ; been a companion after seer team was fired for 6 months at EA's service ; none of which deserved even a thank you*

 

[BuzZzZ]

I joined on the release of T2A.

Stat loss is perfect to curb pk'ing and keep it in check. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Last thing you want is for this shard to turn into a mass red v blue server.

How does having stat loss make them target blues? No stat loss will make them target blues more. Seriously think about what you are saying.

 

[o2bavr6]

I joined on the release of T2A.

Stat loss is perfect to curb pk'ing and keep it in check. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Last thing you want is for this shard to turn into a mass red v blue server.

How does having stat loss make them target blues? No stat loss will make them target blues more. Seriously think about what you are saying.

I'll explain.

you see if you only get stat loss when your a red, then people will kill 4 blues at a time, then burn off the murder counts and do it again. lather rinse repeat.

So if you have a couple of accounts you can easily pk on a blue and when you die never have to worry about stat loss.

Make sense? and if you PvPed during T2A you would know that.

 

[o2bavr6]

Stat loss is perfect to curb pk'ing and keep it in check. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Last thing you want is for this shard to turn into a mass red v blue server.

Also, during the T2A days, there were more blue pkers than red pkers. When I say blue pkers, I mean blues who killed blues. My post above explains how they got around stat loss.

I doubt it would end up being this server with tons of reds vs tons of blues, especially if there was statloss for reds.

You would end up with a server full of blues killing blues. They are called noto pkers. you would also have known this if you pvped during the T2A days.

 

[BuzZzZ]

If you read through these threads you will find I didn't fully pvp pre Ren, well pk anyway ;-) I think it's on page 24 of the other classic shard thread so go have a look.

But yeah I get what you mean now, I didn't when you said it. Stat loss for blues too or just make long term and short term counts the same. Simples.

 

[o2bavr6]

If you read through these threads you will find I didn't fully pvp pre Ren, well pk anyway ;-) I think it's on page 24 of the other classic shard thread so go have a look.

But yeah I get what you mean now, I didn't when you said it. Stat loss for blues too or just make long term and short term counts the same. Simples.

Blue characters pking other blue characters was more of an issue than red characters pking blues character.

In fact I think they should do the original notoriety system that first came out. Your color was dictated by your actions. so if you did things that had bad karma you could go gray or red even though you didnt pk anyone. the problem with this was new people who didnt understand the rules were affected the most. Part of the problem with this system though was if you killed liche lords all day you would easily stay blue even if you did bad things.

I remember back in 1997 I killed a blue llama and went red because it made me "Dastardly" so i was fair game for anyone to attack outside of town. That is why a classic server should be, in concept for Vets who know the rules and consequences of their actions.

 

[o2bavr6]

Stat loss for blues too or just make long term and short term counts the same. Simples.

That is why maybe there should only be a 24 hour stat loss only for people upon death, regardless if you are blue or red. If you pk an Innocent person you get a 24 hour stat loss upon your next death, dropping your skills to 80% of original.

I mean people who pked others, not people who haven't killed anyone and die to a monster.

 

[Evlar]

Here's a rather interesting critique of UO that might be worth reading...

http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/sempiternal/112007/695_Why-Electronic-Arts-Ultima-Online-Sucks