If they gave reds access to Trammel

[Maplestone]

I'll only support a system that works how it's supposed to.

*cough*

Please ignore the people crying about how nothing is ever good enough.

 

[Ash]

Following your logic, there should not even be reds. Since Blues make a personal choice to travel to the lands that allow open pvp and those that attack blues are choosing their style of play, why even have Red as a character name color?

Why have Red, simple, because their still exists coercive bait to lure blues from safety that don't want to PvP or are not good at PvP. As long as the lambs are being led to the slaughter, then the wolves should keep their penalty.

But, no one will even consider removing the bait because then the reds won't have easy pickings and will be forced to fight people that want to fight back. And we can't have a fair fight, that just wouldn't be fair to the reds.

So, leave the scrolls where they are at, but also leave the penalties alone for murdering.

 

[Surgeries]

Trying to equate game facts with real life facts is the worst idea I have ever seen. Choosing to be subject to pvp upon entering Fel has nothing at all to do with real life crimes. If and when the government declares real world murder as a playstyle, then maybe you can make those comparisons. But they haven't, so you can't.

The whole concept of Reds is outdated anyway. There are just as many, if not more, Blues that pk other blues than there are Reds anyway. In my opinion, you should go Red upon your first 'murder'. Not your 5th, 6th or
7th. Either that, or get rid of the color red altogether. You don't have to have your name show up as Red to rp evil just like you don't need Glorious Lord as your title to rp good.

This way, people that pk blues could go to all the facets and the anti red set wouldn't even notice. I just don't get how they are ok with a blue that pk's them being allowed in Trammel afterwards but is so opposed to a red being allowed there.

I can try to address this, if you aee willing to objectively listen.

Reds are usually pretty scrolled out, and armored characters. Some of the suits that are "PvP" suits cost in the hundreds of millions. If a person wants to really scroll out a Mage, just the scrolls for Eval, Magery, and Resist could easily cost 40 mill. Not to mention all the other accouterments needed to really round the suit out.

In addition, those Reds made concious choices to kill Blue players, which are considered "Innocents" by Game Mechanics. Of course, we all know that Noto PKs suck azz, and should turn Red as soon as they do what they do, but we will have to save that for another thread. But trust me...I get that ALL blues shouldn't really be able to give counts...but when a person has a Blue colored name, and another player attacks them, and kills them, the attacker can be given a Murder Count, by the recently deceased.

Anyway...

So...Mr. Red, on his multi multi million GP toon, has chosen to kill at least 5 blues against their will, and they went Red because the Red Toon initiated the attack. Sometimes one thousand times, or more they have done this.

Now...Mr. Red doesn't want to have to equip another toon, to the tune of multi multi millions...he/she just want to take their already scrolled out, and highly trained Red that they have used to kill at least 5 blues, sometimes thousands, to the place where only players that have killed less than 5 blues, currently, are allowed. That way, they can only spend the amount needed to scroll out one character as nicely as their Badd Azz Red, and not have to replicate it, on their Blue, as well.

It is a money saver for the Reds.

Add that to the fact that the Reds are Red because of the choices they made, when they had the choice, and it becomes apparent why most people don't want the Red Toon allowed into anywhere other than Fel.

If Mr. Red Toon owner wants to spend another 150 mill to outfit another Blue Toon, and show restraint on that Toon, with regard to whacking other players against their will? Then OK...THAT Toon should be able to go to Tram based facets all they want.

I don't hold grudges like that, and if a previously Red Toon goes Blue, and can come to Tram, I am all for it, but it isn't about Grudges for me...it is about accountability, and consequences.

At least it isn't like Lineage, where Reds get attacked on sight by Ranger and Guard NPCs, and can't deal with Vendor NPCs at all...and where Reds can lose more items on Death, than a Blue colored character.

The Reds in UO just can't come to Trammel on their Red. It is highly unlikely that this will ever change.

I hope that helps you to understand.

 

[D'Amavir]

I can try to address this, if you aee willing to objectively listen.

Reds are usually pretty scrolled out, and armored characters. Some of the suits that are "PvP" suits cost in the hundreds of millions. If a person wants to really scroll out a Mage, just the scrolls for Eval, Magery, and Resist could easily cost 40 mill. Not to mention all the other accouterments needed to really round the suit out.

There are just as many blue scrolled out characters as red, if not many more. So I don't see how that should be a factor.

In addition, those Reds made concious choices to kill Blue players, which are considered "Innocents" by Game Mechanics. Of course, we all know that Noto PKs suck azz, and should turn Red as soon as they do what they do, but we will have to save that for another thread. But trust me...I get that ALL blues shouldn't really be able to give counts...but when a person has a Blue colored name, and another player attacks them, and kills them, the attacker can be given a Murder Count, by the recently deceased.

Blues made a conscious choice to travel to lands that allowed open pvp. Not sure how that is a factor either.

Anyway...

So...Mr. Red, on his multi multi million GP toon, has chosen to kill at least 5 blues against their will, and they went Red because the Red Toon initiated the attack. Sometimes one thousand times, or more they have done this.

I haven't been killed against my will in this game since Trammel came out. How does that happen? What tool do reds use to force blues to go to trammel so I can avoid it? By your logic, greens and oranges that get attacked in Trammel by warring guilds should be able to give murder counts since they didn't necessarily 'concent' to the pvp. Right?

It is a money saver for the Reds.

So you are against reds in trammel because it might save them some money? I don't see that at all. Since most reds have blue alts that are already scrolled and geared up it doesn't seem to make sense that suddenly they have no gold to get alts up to par.

Add that to the fact that the Reds are Red because of the choices they made, when they had the choice, and it becomes apparent why most people don't want the Red Toon allowed into anywhere other than Fel.

Blues made a choice to go to Fel and accepted the open pvp concept. Are you saying blues should be punished more for making that choice? Sounds fair to me, since I never go to Fel and never get pk'd, it wouldn't impact me. But you would have a lot of blues on your tail for suggesting such a radical change.

I don't hold grudges like that, and if a previously Red Toon goes Blue, and can come to Tram, I am all for it, but it isn't about Grudges for me...it is about accountability, and consequences.

So basically, you are ok with murderers as long as they don't have names that show up as red. Suddenly that evil rotten pk that killed you is alright in your book just because they sat in their house long enough to go back to having a blue name. How does the color of the name affect you? I still don't see that answer. Other than more ways to say 'they are red and should suffer for their choices but my blues shouldn't suffer for their choices'

At least it isn't like Lineage, where Reds get attacked on sight by Ranger and Guard NPCs, and can't deal with Vendor NPCs at all...and where Reds can lose more items on Death, than a Blue colored character.

I would be ok if guards attacked reds. Sounds like good enough punishment for choosing an accepted playstyle to me.

I hope that helps you to understand.

Not at all. I still don't see anywhere in there an explanation of how the color of a character's name has such an impact on you. Blues pk and are allowed in Trammel. Reds pk but aren't allowed in Trammel. Whats the difference between the two other than the color of their name? Are the blue pks suddenly more friendly because they don't have a red name? Are reds suddenly less friendly because they do?

 

[Draxous]

His "logic" is astounding... as you can plainly see, D'Amavir

rofl

 

[Draxous]

Its all about spite. People against reds being allowed in Tram and following Tram rules are against it just because they hate the fact that someone chose a different playstyle than them.

I don't go to Fel and I don't have a red, but I am fine with Reds being allowed in Trammel under the same trammel ruleset because, quite frankly, it doesn't affect me. I don't hold a grudge against someone based on their chosen playstyle. Unlike the anti red in trammel set. Its just silly.

So true. It's all about spite. People's feathers are all ruffled at the prospect of someone else chosing a playstyle that isn't theirs.

Every single one of my 14 characters are blue... both on Siege and on Atlantic. This doesn't impact me either way as being red is not a part of my playstle, but it is nice to think that other playstyles could possibly have the opportunity to enjoy all the content in this game... and not just parts of it because people who have feathers ruffled over something that won't even affect them (lol!!!!)

I know the devs have taken a look at this and are probably mulling it over, weighing the benefits and drawbacks. I know they are busy so seeing this change go into effect tomorrow isn't likely. I also have a cute little poll that shows that consent is pretty cut and dry to the playerbase by a very clear majority. I also know that this issue won't be quelled until it's addressed, as the majority is in favor of this proposal.

No one has been able to explain just how allowing Reds in Trammel would impact them enough to justify this overwhelming need to squash even the conversation of it being allowed. Can anyone explain that?

BINGO. I've been waiting for that this entire thread now.

*crosses arms and taps foot*

 

[Ash]

This doesn't impact me either way as being red is not a part of my playstle, but it is nice to think that other playstyles could possibly have the opportunity to enjoy all the content in this game... and not just parts of it because people who have feathers ruffled over something that won't even affect them (lol!!!!)

Glad you agree non-PvPers should be allowed to do Champ Spawns and reap the benefits of scrolls without having to be subjected to PKs..

Oh wait, I forget you are all for everyone as long as they PvP.

I know the devs have taken a look at this and are probably mulling it over, weighing the benefits and drawbacks. I know they are busy so seeing this change go into effect tomorrow isn't likely.

Or at all.. Yeah they are so busy worrying about the reds, which is why all events are based in facets other than Fel. And as you and plenty of others pointed out, majority of reds have blue alts, so why would anyone with a business to run devote resources to lifting punishments off the reds.

 

[Draxous]

I'm all for crafters who want to try to do champ spawns.

If they want to go there and try, I'm all for that... I don't know how successful they will be tho.

And non-PvPers who do PvM can do plenty of Champ spawns, they are available all over ilsh and ML dungeons.

And they can obtain powerscrolls by buying them or going to Fel and doing champ spawns... just because they can be stopped, doesn't mean that they always are. Oh and did I mention they could buy them off of other players too? So it's definately available to them.

The option is there for them... you have no legs to stand on, your argument against this is not only petty, it's lame.

Can reds enter into Bedlam? Nope. They don't even have the option, thanks for proving why they should have it tho!


No Soup 4 U, try again.

 

[Ash]

I'm all for crafters who want to try to do champ spawns.

If they want to go there and try, I'm all for that... I don't know how successful they will be tho.

And non-PvPers who do PvM can do plenty of Champ spawns, they are available all over ilsh and ML dungeons.

And they can obtain powerscrolls by buying them or going to Fel and doing champ spawns... just because they can be stopped, doesn't mean that they always are. Oh and did I mention they could buy them off of other players too?

The option is there for them... you have no leg to stand on, your argument against this is not only petty, it's lame.

Can reds enter into Bedlam? Nope.


No Soup 4 U, try again.

Again, you and plenty of others have pointed out Reds make blue alts to go to Tram/ilsh.. So, no soup 4 you either..

 

[Draxous]

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn dude.

Whether on the boards or in game you really just can't stand losing at PvP, can you?


:loser:

 

[D'Amavir]

Again, you and plenty of others have pointed out Reds make blue alts to go to Tram/ilsh.. So, no soup 4 you either..

Again, explain exactly how a red in Trammel under the normal trammel ruleset impacts YOU. The players are allowed there on their alts, as you admit. What exactly about the color of their name impacts you so severely? Please just answer that simple question.

 

[Ash]

Again, explain exactly how a red in Trammel under the normal trammel ruleset impacts YOU. The players are allowed there on their alts, as you admit. What exactly about the color of their name impacts you so severely? Please just answer that simple question.

Have done so several times.. The penalty trying to be lifted was placed upon them for killing blues on that char. Granted it isn't much of a penalty, but hey if someone wants to petition that penalty's be held to the account and not the char then fine by me. But that isn't the way it is. The system is a check and balance system. I by no means advocate removing power scrolls from Fel only, but as long as that monoply exists, then non-PvPers are forced to PvP or do without. As long as they have to make that difficult choice, the penalty for killing blues should remain.

I know they wouldn't make penalty's go for account, wouldn't want them to as there are plenty of decent people that play reds. I have met a good many. In time they may think about giving power scrolls outside PvP lands, but I would be against that as well, because that would all but kill off Fel without the sheep for the wolves to prey upon.

But if there is going to be a change either way it needs to reflect both play styles. If going to make it easier (less inconvenient) for reds to go anywhere, then similar concessions should be given to non-PvPers as they are still excluded from obtaining power scrolls and such.

It is 2 simple choices, those that choose to never PvP are restricted from Fel, those that choose to prey on sheep are restricted from Tram.

 

[Ash]

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn dude.

Whether on the boards or in game you really just can't stand losing at PvP, can you?


:loser:

What's the matter? Can't respond with something intelligent so have to proceed with personal attacks?

 

[D'Amavir]

Have done so several times.. The penalty trying to be lifted was placed upon them for killing blues on that char. Granted it isn't much of a penalty, but hey if someone wants to petition that penalty's be held to the account and not the char then fine by me. But that isn't the way it is. The system is a check and balance system. I by no means advocate removing power scrolls from Fel only, but as long as that monoply exists, then non-PvPers are forced to PvP or do without. As long as they have to make that difficult choice, the penalty for killing blues should remain.

I know they wouldn't make penalty's go for account, wouldn't want them to as there are plenty of decent people that play reds. I have met a good many. In time they may think about giving power scrolls outside PvP lands, but I would be against that as well, because that would all but kill off Fel without the sheep for the wolves to prey upon.

But if there is going to be a change either way it needs to reflect both play styles. If going to make it easier (less n PvP are restricted from Fel, those that choose to prey on sheep are restricted from Tram.

You still aren't answering the actual question. How does a Red in Trammel under the trammel ruleset impact you. Not, why do you think reds are redsd or why you think scrolls should be fel only or trammel only or available on both. How does seeing a character with a Red name impact you?

No one seems able to answer that. They instea choose to rail on and on about why they think reds should be punished for choosing an accepted playstyle. No one can tell anyone why the color of a character's name has such a negative impact on their gameplay.

You talk about impacts on playstyle but I am not seeing any actual impacts in any of your posts or others' posts. If its just spite because you hate the fact that reds exists, just admit that. Otherwise, give an actual impact that the color of a person's name in Trammel impacts you. Please, I am trying to understand that part but no one seems willing to discuss it.

 

[Surgeries]

There are just as many blue scrolled out characters as red, if not many more. So I don't see how that should be a factor.



Blues made a conscious choice to travel to lands that allowed open pvp. Not sure how that is a factor either.

Because the Reds, who had a choice to attack, or not...chose to. The Blues didn't attack the Reds, and have the Reds get a count. It doesn't work like that.

That is the factor you subjectively choose to ignore.

I haven't been killed against my will in this game since Trammel came out. How does that happen? What tool do reds use to force blues to go to trammel so I can avoid it? By your logic, greens and oranges that get attacked in Trammel by warring guilds should be able to give murder counts since they didn't necessarily 'concent' to the pvp. Right?

When you are in a Warring Guild, you can either stay in it, knowing that you are "At War", or not. Plus game mechanics clearly state that any warring guild member may attack, without provocation or cause, any other member of a warring guild, or even their own guild members, and there will be no murder count given.

You get a warning, now, when joining guilds that tells you that.

The same way a Red, when attacking another character that is Blue, and who has the option turned on, knows that they are engaging in a Criminal Act, because it tells them that.

You get that part...but want to subjectively ignore it, to make some subjective point, which has zero sricking power.

So you are against reds in trammel because it might save them some money? I don't see that at all. Since most reds have blue alts that are already scrolled and geared up it doesn't seem to make sense that suddenly they have no gold to get alts up to par.

If "Most Reds" already have scrolled and geared chars...where's the beef?

There isn't one, in that case. They just take their Blue Alt Char, that is already geared and scrolled to Tram, or Tokuno, or Malas...right?

I didn't say they "Didn't Have" the gold...I said it would "Save Them" having to spend more gold to to it.

There is a distinction between the two. Your subjectivity must be getting in the way of your objectivity, in understanding that point, I am thinking.[/quote]

Blues made a choice to go to Fel and accepted the open pvp concept. Are you saying blues should be punished more for making that choice? Sounds fair to me, since I never go to Fel and never get pk'd, it wouldn't impact me. But you would have a lot of blues on your tail for suggesting such a radical change.

Any Blue that attacks another Blue, and kills them, faces the exact consequences, as any Red does.

If a Blue goes to Fel, and a Red attacks them and kills them, they lose Insurance Gold, and any unisured items they may have, in addition to the most valuable, and hardest to replace commodity; the time to get back up again.

I never said a Blue should be "Punished" for going to Fel. There is no game mechanic that says traveling to Fel is punishable, at all. But there is a written rule about killing Blue Characters...it is a published rule that anyone can access. That rule is quite clear on what happens when you kill a Blue Character, and what happens when you get to 5 kills, or more. That is game induced, and well known. Those that step past that line in the sand of 5 kills, have to pay the price for their actions. Not much of a price, since "Most Reds" already have Blue Alts, according to you...but a price that any Objective person can readily see.[/quote]

So basically, you are ok with murderers as long as they don't have names that show up as red. Suddenly that evil rotten pk that killed you is alright in your book just because they sat in their house long enough to go back to having a blue name.

Yep...you got that part right. They dropped below the threshhold...the line in the sand of acceptable number of kills...they can go anywhare they want.

YOU are the one that holds that somehow people that don't want Reds to go to Trammel are holding "Grudges"...remember?

How does the color of the name affect you? I still don't see that answer. Other than more ways to say 'they are red and should suffer for their choices but my blues shouldn't suffer for their choices'

Because game mechanics state clearly that if you attack without provocation, and kill 5 Blue Chars, for any reason whatsoever, your name turns Red. If your name Turns Red you are fereely attackable, and you are unable to travel to other facets.

Why should a Blue "Suffer" anyhting, if it is not in the rules, and clearly stated? Blues "suffer" risk of attack, when they go to Fel. Most Blues know that. Blues that attack other Blues without being attacked first "Suffer" the risk of getting a Murder Count. Those who kill 5 or more Blues in this manner, within a specified period of time "Suffer" the risks decscribed above.

Is THAT clear enough for you, or do you just want to keep up the subjective posting, for fun?

I would be ok if guards attacked reds. Sounds like good enough punishment for choosing an accepted playstyle to me.

Well...you aren't a programmer, and we disagree on that. As do a lot of people. I think facet restriction, Stat Loss, not be able to trade, at all...and several other factors should be applied, like they should lose items when they die, etc. You know...like that really popular PvP game, Lineage does it. *Winks*

Not at all. I still don't see anywhere in there an explanation of how the color of a character's name has such an impact on you. Blues pk and are allowed in Trammel. Reds pk but aren't allowed in Trammel. Whats the difference between the two other than the color of their name?

The Blue PK stayed within the prescribed number oif kills, and the Red one didn't. You really don't understand that?

Are the blue pks suddenly more friendly because they don't have a red name? Are reds suddenly less friendly because they do?

Not at all. It's just that the Blues have 4 or less Murders, and the Reds have 5 or more. In addition, the Reds knew that when they got 5 or more, certain consequences applied. They knew it.

Now some would like to have no consequence for being Red.

I would call that having your cake (No restraint, at all in how a person deals with others in a video game...do whatever you'd like to anyone, at all), and eat it too (take the very character in the game that can kill at will anywhere, with no consequences).

Naw...sounds like that line of thinking ignores the basics that even really popular games like Lineage know have to be there...there MUST be consequences, for actions taken.

This is the consequence of killing 5 or more Blue Chars in UO...and everyone knows it. In Lineage, just one kill will get you "Pink" for 24 hours, from what I understand. On the PvP servers, that is.

Like I said...I would try to explain it to you...and I tried.

Obviously, your subjectivity is clouding the way of true objectivity, and logical posting for you.

And we shall have to agree to disagree, for sure.

 

[Ash]

You still aren't answering the actual question. How does a Red in Trammel under the trammel ruleset impact you. Not, why do you think reds are redsd or why you think scrolls should be fel only or trammel only or available on both. How does seeing a character with a Red name impact you?

No one seems able to answer that. They instea choose to rail on and on about why they think reds should be punished for choosing an accepted playstyle. No one can tell anyone why the color of a character's name has such a negative impact on their gameplay.

You talk about impacts on playstyle but I am not seeing any actual impacts in any of your posts or others' posts. If its just spite because you hate the fact that reds exists, just admit that. Otherwise, give an actual impact that the color of a person's name in Trammel impacts you. Please, I am trying to understand that part but no one seems willing to discuss it.

The examples have been given, I can't open your mind or your eyes if you choose to have them both closed tight.

 

[D'Amavir]

The examples have been given, I can't open your mind or your eyes if you choose to have them both closed tight.

I would gladly open my eyes if you directed me to one comment from you that told me how a character's name color impacts you. I have read them all, and you don't address that. Sure, you load on the typical 'they made a choice' comments but don't accept that blues also made a choice by accepting to enter into the open pvp lands. And that still doesnt come close to answering how the color of their name impacts you. I can only assume that it is spite like others have said. Since you can't explain how a name color impacts you in trammel I can only assume it doesn't.

 

[Surgeries]

You still aren't answering the actual question. How does a Red in Trammel under the trammel ruleset impact you.

It isn't that them being in Trammel impacts ME, or anyone else.

It's that they chose to kill more than 5 Blues in Fel, and the GAME says they aren't, then, allowed to travel facets, after they do that.

That's why.

It is the consequence for their actions, that they control.

What part of that do you simply not understand? It is very clearly spelled out. Go read the Playguide. Do a search for "Murder"...hopefully, if it isn't clear to you now, it will be then.

It is "Allowed" that any player can attack and kill another player in Fel. It is ALLOWED.

It has consequences, just like traveling to Fel does, however.

It isn't "Accepted", though, that person can attack and kill all the Blues they want, and not have Consequences for doing so.

So please don't confuse "Allowed" and "Accepted". They have very different meanings.

A car is "Allowed" to go faster than the posted speed limit. A car has a speedometer that tells the driver how fast they are going. If a driver goes faster than the published speed limit, then they can be ticketed for that action. If they are ticketed enough, they will lose their license. If they don't speed (or get caught, or both) for a period of time, they can get their license to travel around, back.

Speeding is "Allowed"...but it isn't "Accepted", unless the driver doesn't get caught. The same way a Red can attack kill a Blue, or a Blue can attack kill a Blue. That is called "Murder" in UO. Has been for a long time. As soon as the "Murder" gets reported, then the counts start. When the acceptable counts exceed the posted limit, then the consequences start.

Think of Murdering in UO as Speeding in real life. Think of Murdering too much, and getting caught 5 times, and not being able to travel to other facets on that Toon, as losing your "License" to travel around, on that char, in UO, as your "Punishment".

See how that works? It's not hard, really. It's all about accountability.

 

[Mordocuo]

To Surgeries and all the other people trying to debate with Black Rain and the 3-4 supporters he has.

Why are you wasting your time?

They will not debate point for point--if you make a point that actually is sensible they will cry foul-personal attack-or simply say your logic is flawed without any counterpoints. That is the way Board Warriors work. They get enjoyment from seeing you get frustrated. JUST AS THEY DO IN GAME when they pk. They dont PK for the competition, nor for looting rights. They PK simply to see if they can get you upset and lose control. That is why the sh*t talk goes on after a murder. Thats why the ganks, the rez kills etc. Not for any form of competition (like they claim), it is to see if they can get you upset. Thus if you curse in game the page a GM--some competition they are trying for there huh?

That is why the competition of 1-1 vs the gank squads that run around. That is why they always try for first shots vs duels. It is all to give them the advantage and to get people upset.

Why should the REDs be punished to remain in Felucca. After all there is no statloss any more, they are allowed to enter cities now. The only punishment is Felucca locked. Yet if you ask for power scrolls in Trammel, watch them yell and cry foul.

I have learned two things in my time in uo:

1) Reds are the biggest whinners in the game. Yet they will say the trammel players are.

2) Reds do not want competiton, they just want to make people upset.

The best thing to do to frustrate these people is not to post anything to do with thier suggestions. Do not try to have a reasonable discussion or debate with them--do as they do. If they post like they did here about reds being allowed in Trammel respond as they would and talk about seeds, or fishing, or anything except reds in trammel. Do the same thing they do in reverse. P*ss them off by not trying to debate with them.

 

[Mordocuo]

I would gladly open my eyes if you directed me to one comment from you that told me how a character's name color impacts you. I have read them all, and you don't address that. Sure, you load on the typical 'they made a choice' comments but don't accept that blues also made a choice by accepting to enter into the open pvp lands. And that still doesnt come close to answering how the color of their name impacts you. I can only assume that it is spite like others have said. Since you can't explain how a name color impacts you in trammel I can only assume it doesn't.

Personally I like to fish around Minoc. I find the Sea Bass are more tender than they are around Skara.

 

[D'Amavir]

Because the Reds, who had a choice to attack, or not...chose to. The Blues didn't attack the Reds, and have the Reds get a count. It doesn't work like that.

That is the factor you subjectively choose to ignore..

I haven't ignored anything. I accept that going red was a choice just like going to fel is a choice. Once you make either choice, you should have to deal with it.

When you are in a Warring Guild, you can either stay in it, knowing that you are "At War", or not. Plus game mechanics clearly state that any warring guild member may attack, without provocation or cause, any other member of a warring guild, or even their own guild members, and there will be no murder count given.

Replace 'warring guild' with Trammel and you prove my point. You choose to take part in pvp on trammel by joining guild wars. You choose to take part in pvp on Fel by going to the facet that allows open pvp.

If "Most Reds" already have scrolled and geared chars...where's the beef?

There isn't one, in that case. They just take their Blue Alt Char, that is already geared and scrolled to Tram, or Tokuno, or Malas...right?

Again, the unanswered question, how does a name color impact you in Trammel?

I never said a Blue should be "Punished" for going to Fel. There is no game mechanic that says traveling to Fel is punishable, at all. But there is a written rule about killing Blue Characters...it is a published rule that anyone can access. That rule is quite clear on what happens when you kill a Blue Character, and what happens when you get to 5 kills, or more. That is game induced, and well known. Those that step past that line in the sand of 5 kills, have to pay the price for their actions. Not much of a price, since "Most Reds" already have Blue Alts, according to you...but a price that any Objective person can readily see.

No one is questioning if there is a rule against pk'ing I don't believe. If so, I don't follow that line of thinking. I completely agree that there is a rule against it, that rule is the murder count rule. No argument there. See, I understand, I just don't think you do. Beyond the obvious byass you have against a playstyle other than your own, you can't answer the simple question either. How does allowed a red character in Trammel under the Trammel ruleset impact you? In short, it doesn't. No more than it impacts me.

As for number of murders, you think that a person really becomes a murderer after 5 kills? Last dictionary I checked showed that a murderer is someone that murders someone. Not someone that murders 5 someones.

It all goes back to my initial question, how does a red character name in Trammel under the Trammel ruleset impact you? Can't answer that but you are telling me that I am the one that doesn't understand? Spite is a valid reason. Its not mature or logical. But its still a reason. Can't you just admit that thats all it is for you? You hate reds so much that you can't stomach the fact that they might be able to go to Trammel even though it really has no impact on you.

Yep...you got that part right. They dropped below the threshhold...the line in the sand of acceptable number of kills...they can go anywhare they want.

So magically a 4 murder count Blue is somehow better than a 5 murder count red in your logic stream? A blue murderer is ok in Trammel but a red murderer isn't? Can't seem to follow that reasoning. Maybe I am just slow. So hopefully someone will actually post a short answer to my several times unanswered question. How does the color of a player's name impact you under the trammel ruleset?

To make it easier, just fill in the blanks....

"A character with a red name in Trammel impacts me by....."

YOU are the one that holds that somehow people that don't want Reds to go to Trammel are holding "Grudges"...remember?

Because people like you are unable to answer the why the color of a character's name has such an impact on them in Trammel.

Because game mechanics state clearly that if you attack without provocation, and kill 5 Blue Chars, for any reason whatsoever, your name turns Red. If your name Turns Red you are fereely attackable, and you are unable to travel to other facets.

Again, I am not questioning the game mechanics. I don't think anyone is. I understand how it works and understand that people that don't pk have an irrational hatred of red character names. I get that. What I don't get is how the color of their name impacts you in Trammel.

Why should a Blue "Suffer" anyhting, if it is not in the rules, and clearly stated? Blues "suffer" risk of attack, when they go to Fel. Most Blues know that. Blues that attack other Blues without being attacked first "Suffer" the risk of getting a Murder Count. Those who kill 5 or more Blues in this manner, within a specified period of time "Suffer" the risks decscribed above.

Again, not questioning the red murder count game mechanics. We all get it, you don't have to say it over and over. Just answer the question, how does the color of their name impact you in Trammel?

Is THAT clear enough for you, or do you just want to keep up the subjective posting, for fun?

I just want one person to answer the question. No one seems able to even though they pop up on every 'reds allowed in Trammel' thread for as long as there have been reds. Going over andover the game mechanics of reds and murder counts is fine for another thread. But this thread, if I remember correctly, was about Reds in Trammel. Try to stick to that topic. Its easier to understand if you actually address the points made instead of falling back on the 'they made the choice so ha' line. Reds in Trammel under the Red ruleset has zero impact on anyone in game. None. Seeing a blue character name or a red character name in Trammel is just the same. Please explain how its not.

 

[D'Amavir]

It isn't that them being in Trammel impacts ME, or anyone else.

Finally! Someone actually admits that it doesn't have an impact on them. Thank you thank you thank you. No one here was questioning that going red and murder counts were a current game mechanic. What no one wanted to admit, before you did, that it really didn't impact them at all if Reds were allowed in Trammel. I feel liberated that someone finally admitted that fact.

Speeding is "Allowed"...but it isn't "Accepted", unless the driver doesn't get caught. The same way a Red can attack kill a Blue, or a Blue can attack kill a Blue. That is called "Murder" in UO. Has been for a long time. As soon as the "Murder" gets reported, then the counts start. When the acceptable counts exceed the posted limit, then the consequences start.

Except that the police don't entice you to speed by adding rewards to going where spending is allowed. The developers entice players to go to Fel and, by common sense, accept that its an open pvp facet.

As for 'murder', I still stand by the fact that a blue with 4 murder counts and allowed in Trammel is just the same as a Red with 5 murder counts allowed in Trammel. People seem so stuck on the color of someone's name to define them. I wish they wouldjust get rid of that aspect so people wouldn't use the color as a crutch like they have been on this thread.

 

[Lady_Mina]

People please , it's never going to happen....

We all know that.

 

[D'Amavir]

People please , it's never going to happen....

We all know that.

People said the same thing about the removal of statloss. And people never thought something like Trammel would ever be created in UO since the devs were so gung ho about the 'players policing themselves' concept. Never say never.

 

[Maplestone]

My main concern is community friction.

If someone is playing a red, they generally in the frame of mind that they want to initiate PvP. If someone can play a blue, they probably have a blue they can take to Tram. If they can't/won't play a blue then how long is it going to take before they start lobbying to change the rules so that people can be lured/forced into PvP?

I look at how the battle lines have drawn up in this thread and the visciousness of the flames and I can see very little good that can come to the community from putting these two groups together with a cleared coloured marker of which side people are on.

The peace and tranquility of the game is how it might affect me. If the friends of the reds can convince me they can play nice and get along with people, I'll be more open-minded.

 

[D'Amavir]

My main concern is community friction.

If someone is playing a red, they generally in the frame of mind that they want to initiate PvP. If someone can play a blue, they probably have a blue they can take to Tram. If they can't/won't play a blue then how long is it going to take before they start lobbying to change the rules so that people can be lured/forced into PvP?

I look at how the battle lines have drawn up in this thread and the visciousness of the flames and I can see very little good that can come to the community from putting these two groups together with a cleared coloured marker of which side people are on.

The peace and tranquility of the game is how it might affect me. If the friends of the reds can convince me they can play nice and get along with people, I'll be more open-minded.

How is their being red as opposed to a 4 count blue different? They are the same player, they are allowed to go to Trammel with their alts and they can join guilds with people their alts may have actually murdered.

I get that if there was some actual in game impact on anyone by allowing Reds in Trammel, people would be against it. Heck, I would be against it. But I haven't seen anything to suggest that a red named character in Trammel would have a negative impact. Red characters and blue 4 count characters are played by the same people. How is being a blue named murderer any nicer than being a red named murderer? I don't get it.

 

[Lady_Mina]

People said the same thing about the removal of statloss. And people never thought something like Trammel would ever be created in UO since the devs were so gung ho about the 'players policing themselves' concept. Never say never.

Trammel was created by the old dev team.

This new dev team has limited skills in coding.

 

[D'Amavir]

Trammel was created by the old dev team.

This new dev team has limited skills in coding.

As one of those that started playing in the early early days, all I can say is that dev teams change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Just like mindsets change. Old UO was about player skill and player enforced justice. New UO is about items and gear. Nothing says that that trend can't change once new mindsets get involved.

 

[Draxous]

People said the same thing about the removal of statloss. And people never thought something like Trammel would ever be created in UO since the devs were so gung ho about the 'players policing themselves' concept. Never say never.

Trammel was created by the old dev team.

This new dev team has limited skills in coding.

I'm sure you insulting the Dev team will motivate them to consider your point of view!

And lets face it, this is Mythic Entertainment... they are all about Realm vs Realm PvP... and since this is a step in that direction, I find it highly likely that they will consider this.

They've talked about a unified PvP system and I wouldn't be surprized if a future expansion had more zones for open PvP that players could choose to go for.

Look at the last several publishes all of them had some kind of update for PvPers contained in them.

So sorry, never say never.

 

[Omnius]

My most capable blue is on siege. He's not a pvp focused char but he sure does get plenty of kills and fights when i log him in.

 

[Yalp]

Is there any player, PLAYER, in this game that can NOT get access to Tram? Speak up...

Ok any member on these forums, who may or may not have UO characters that CAN NOT get access to Tram? Speak up....

 

[Draxous]

My main concern is community friction.

If someone is playing a red, they generally in the frame of mind that they want to initiate PvP. If someone can play a blue, they probably have a blue they can take to Tram. If they can't/won't play a blue then how long is it going to take before they start lobbying to change the rules so that people can be lured/forced into PvP?

That's a valid concern, but I'm not sure how that applies to this proposal. Trammel and splitting the two player-bases from interacting with each other consistantly has destroyed this community.

Allowing everyone to interact on each-others "turf" would do more to bring this game and community together, than leaving things in the current state imho.

Just because you have concerns that people will ask for something down the road doesn't excuse not giving them something thats fair, right here, right now... as it doesn't negatively affect anyone and only adds positive things to a playerbase otherwise ostracized for enjoying a playstyle others don't.

=)

I look at how the battle lines have drawn up in this thread and the visciousness of the flames and I can see very little good that can come to the community from putting these two groups together with a cleared coloured marker of which side people are on.

This is a result of the deep brooding between different playstyles because of how both sides have been treated in the past. It's really ridiculous. Both have a place in this game and keeping them seperate or favoring one by excluding the other from new content, events, dungeons and so on... is ridiculous.

This would be a step forward in a good direction that brings all of us, closer together... while respecting eachothers preferences of play.

*tips hat*

 

[Draxous]

Is there any player, PLAYER, in this game that can NOT get access to Tram? Speak up...

Ok any member on these forums, who may or may not have UO characters that CAN NOT get access to Tram? Speak up....

Is there a player in this game that would like all of their characters to be red, but is forced to not... of course there are.

And you still haven't explained how this would negatively effect you... go on, speak up!

 

[Yalp]

How is their being red as opposed to a 4 count blue different? They are the same player, they are allowed to go to Trammel with their alts and they can join guilds with people their alts may have actually murdered.

I get that if there was some actual in game impact on anyone by allowing Reds in Trammel, people would be against it. Heck, I would be against it. But I haven't seen anything to suggest that a red named character in Trammel would have a negative impact. Red characters and blue 4 count characters are played by the same people. How is being a blue named murderer any nicer than being a red named murderer? I don't get it.

This issue might be validly discussed and/or in need of change.. but that is not this thread's topic. It has no bearing on whether the devs should change the ruleset of the game to allow reds in tram.

 

[Yalp]

Is there a player in this game that would like all of their characters to be red, but is forced to not... of course there are.

And you still haven't explained how this would negatively effect you.

It's been answered 15 ways till Sunday. No need to my waste time dumbing the concept down any further.

 

[Draxous]

They will not debate point for point--if you make a point that actually is sensible they will cry foul-personal attack-or simply say your logic is flawed without any counterpoints. That is the way Board Warriors work.

You mean, like ignoring points like this?

Again, you and plenty of others have pointed out Reds make blue alts to go to Tram/ilsh.. So, no soup 4 you either..

Again, explain exactly how a red in Trammel under the normal trammel ruleset impacts YOU. The players are allowed there on their alts, as you admit. What exactly about the color of their name impacts you so severely? Please just answer that simple question.

Oh wait, Surgeries agreed that it wouldn't negatively effect them in any way... that's a totally awesome counter point!!!


Oh wait, they just want to dictate how another playerbase is treated? What makes you so special? Can we dictate for you the same?

Since it's ok to dictate what should happen to other playerbases, I think the game shouldn't police players, but players should police themselves. So remove Trammel rules all-together... oh wait, that's just selfish and a ridiculous request... hmmm, reminds me of you and your camps entire point for arguing.

tah tah nao

 

[D'Amavir]

This issue might be validly discussed and/or in need of change.. but that is not this thread's topic. It has no bearing on whether the devs should change the ruleset of the game to allow reds in tram.

Actually, it has a lot to do with that discussion. A red is just a character whose name shows up as red. Just like a blue with 4 counts is just a character whose name shows up as blue. Both are the same regardless of it the red character burns off a count to become blue or the blue character kills again to become red. Why is one allowed in Trammel but the other isnot? I think thats the topic here, Reds having access to Trammel, correct?

It's been answered 15 ways till Sunday. No need to my waste time dumbing the concept down any further.

Actually, the only person that answered the question admitted that having a red character name in Trammel has no impact on them. You haven't answered the question, but I understand your hesitance to admit that its just a matter of spite for you.

It was a simple question really, but one that seemed to cause the anti red set to go haywire and not be able to address it at all. Except for one person that is. What you call dumbing down I call avoiding the issue. You refuse to admit that reds in Trammel would really have zero impact on you in game. I accept that. Not everyone can come to terms with their own prejudices.

 

[Draxous]

Is there a player in this game that would like all of their characters to be red, but is forced to not... of course there are.

And you still haven't explained how this would negatively effect you.

It's been answered 15 ways till Sunday. No need to my waste time dumbing the concept down any further.

You mean, you're answer is that they shouldn't experience or enjoy the new content that they paid for.

No, so sorry... doesn't fly.

 

[Surgeries]

Finally! Someone actually admits that it doesn't have an impact on them. Thank you thank you thank you. No one here was questioning that going red and murder counts were a current game mechanic. What no one wanted to admit, before you did, that it really didn't impact them at all if Reds were allowed in Trammel. I feel liberated that someone finally admitted that fact.

No one denied, or said they wouldn't admit it, that I saw. You just turn a blind eye to the cogent points brought up, that's all...and then tell us all that you are "Eyes Wide Open". Yup Yup. Good to know.

Also good to know that you will only quote that which supports your argument, and leave the rest out. Shows how weak your entire argument actually is. I dissect, and post, ALL of yours. You have to pick and schoose which parts of mine to keep. Not compelling, at all.

It is a fact, also, that the Reds will never will be in Trammel.

So...does that make you feel better, too? Facts is Facts

Statloss? Towns access?

And you really think Trammel next?

Good for you.

One must have hope, I guess.

Except that the police don't entice you to speed by adding rewards to going where spending is allowed. The developers entice players to go to Fel and, by common sense, accept that its an open pvp facet.

The Car Companies, and people who make roads do, though. Why would any car manufacturer make, and sell, a car that goes 140 top speed, when almost all speed limits are 70 or less? Why would any municipality put in roads that would allow such a speed to be achieved?

Accepted and Allowed are not the same thing. You can spin it however you want, ut they just aren't.

Not when Logic is applied, anyway.

As for 'murder', I still stand by the fact that a blue with 4 murder counts and allowed in Trammel is just the same as a Red with 5 murder counts allowed in Trammel.

Well...that's a fairly weak position. You have shown, now, that you will stand by any position, without documentation or logic, that YOU deem to be correct, even when shown that today, that position is incorrect.
4 Counts = You Can Go to Trammel.
5 Counts = No Can Go.

Restraint and Kill Management = Go To Trammel.
Free For All Do Whatever The Hell I want When I want to Whom I Want and I Don't Care About No Stinking Consequences = Stay in Fel.

People seem so stuck on the color of someone's name to define them. I wish they wouldjust get rid of that aspect so people wouldn't use the color as a crutch like they have been on this thread.

It isn't the color...it is the actions that made them that color, that they freely engaged in, that most people have the problem with.

Except you, of course.

But then again...to the best of my knowledge, you neither write code for, or work for, UO.

I guess that those people will make those tough calls about who gets to go, and who doesn't get to go, to Trammel...yes? Yes.

Maybe you should apply to UO, and see how far your subjective and lame argument goes with the people who make the actual decisions.

Yeah...go do that.

I need to go try the fishing off of Minoc.

I hear the Sea Bass are most tender there.

 

[Draxous]

ROFL

 

[Lady_Mina]

I'm insulting the devs so they know their work is the laughing stock of the online RPG games.

With a dev team like this i'm going to say 'never'.

They have their hands full fixing the bugs in UO 2D and UO:KR.

+ UO:KR is a nice example of what we'll be getting more off..
New content but bugged like hell.

So i'm not asking for adjustments or new content...i'd rather see old annoying bugs fixed...
Rather then getting new content that brings along yet more problems and bugs.


+
For years i've heared people say 'trammelite' and now all of a sudden they're all jumping the bandwagon to get acces to trammel.

 

[Maplestone]

How is their being red as opposed to a 4 count blue different?

From a community point of view, I see a player getting on a blue as being like the "yes I am aged 14+" click-through on a web page. Yes, functionally it makes no difference, but it's an acknowledgment of acceptance to play nice.

You see, mostly I'm just worried about the psychology of having a "red team" and a "blue team" in Tram. I look at the way people gang up in us-vs-them tribes on the these boards and its just not healthy - it tears the community apart and drives people off the boards. I have no proof that this is the way it would end up playing out in-game and perhaps I underestimate our collective maturity-level, but my gut instinct is that it would go badly.

I could also make a role-playing argument about murders exiled to Fel, but whatever I said would also apply to any PvM dread lord ... I'll leave that as a topic for another day.

 

[Yalp]

A red is just a character whose name shows up as red.

Well don't sell yourself short there sport.. A red is a player that commited acts which resulted in consequences outlined by EA.

Just like a blue didn't wake up one day with a GLORIOUS LORD/LADY title.. they BOTH earned it

 

[Yalp]

I think thats the topic here, Reds having access to Trammel, correct?

Indeed that is the topic.. reds having access to trammel.. but not the side argument of HOW players got red.. or whether the murder system is fair, or whether some blues exploit the system to commit the same acts as a red but avoid the consequences. This part is a very valid discussion and may indeed need to be more closely looked at by the devs/pvp player base.

 

[Lady_Mina]

Well don't sell yourself short there sport.. A red is a player that commited acts which resulted in consequences outlined by EA.

Just like a blue didn't wake up one day with a GLORIOUS LORD/LADY title.. they earned it

+ it could be worse...

EA could have invented some sort of jail system..everytime a red is defeated he has to do 'jail' time.

So being a murderer and roaming around free in fel and just not being allowed to go to trammel ruled facets with just that ONE char...is a quite mild punnishment.

The old days all your chars turned red if one of your chars turned red.
Then you were pretty much f*cked and stuck on one facet.

 

[D'Amavir]

No one denied, or said they wouldn't admit it, that I saw. You just turn a blind eye to the cogent points brought up, that's all...and then tell us all that you are "Eyes Wide Open". Yup Yup. Good to know.

Actually, you were the only person that answered the specific question I asked. If you can find another post that I may have missed that answered my specific question, I would love to see it.

Also good to know that you will only quote that which supports your argument, and leave the rest out. Shows how weak your entire argument actually is. I dissect, and post, ALL of yours. You have to pick and schoose which parts of mine to keep. Not compelling, at all.

I just dont feel the need to quote and post things that have no bearing on the topic at hand. I asked a question, you finally answered it. No one else did that I have seen. If I am wrong, please show me.

It is a fact, also, that the Reds will never will be in Trammel.

You know what every dev team and every game runner that may come to UO will do till the end of the game? Brilliant! Teach me that trick.

So...does that make you feel better, too? Facts is Facts

Facts are usually able to be proven. Can you prove that reds will never be allowed into Trammel? If so, show me that proof. I would wager that you can't.

Statloss? Towns access?

I still remember people like you saying that Statloss would never go away. And that reds would never be able to enter towns. So much for your crystal ball.

And you really think Trammel next?

Next? No. But possible? Of course. Anything is possible despite your unproveable facts.

Good for you.

One must have hope, I guess.

Exactly, I hope that things will change. I hope that uo will turn away from item based play and back to skill based. I hope that content will be added that draws new players here. I hope that people like you will prove things they claim as fact.

Accepted and Allowed are not the same thing. You can spin it however you want, ut they just aren't.

I would say accepted, allowed and encouraged in Fel. Why else would the game developers double resource in the open pvp facet and put champ spawns there if not to encourage people to go to the open pvp facet?

Not when Logic is applied, anyway.

If you are using some logic, let me know what it is. Otherwise it justseems like you saying over and over 'never going to happen because I know all that will ever be in UO'.

Well...that's a fairly weak position. You have shown, now, that you will stand by any position, without documentation or logic, that YOU deem to be correct, even when shown that today, that position is incorrect.
4 Counts = You Can Go to Trammel.
5 Counts = No Can Go.

Having reds allowed in Trammel has no impact on you.You already admitted that. I know the game mechanics. This topic was about 'Allow Reds in Trammel' not 'state the game mechanics over and over because I can't make a point'.

Restraint and Kill Management = Go To Trammel.
Free For All Do Whatever The Hell I want When I want to Whom I Want and I Don't Care About No Stinking Consequences = Stay in Fel.

Again, we know the game mechanics well.

It isn't the color...it is the actions that made them that color, that they freely engaged in, that most people have the problem with.

Except you, of course.

A murderer is a murderer. 5 counts, 4 counts or 400k counts. Not sure what your point is there except this made up logic saying that 4 count murderers are ok while 5 count murderers aren't.

But then again...to the best of my knowledge, you neither write code for, or work for, UO.

But you do. Which is why you were able to prove your 'it will never happen' comment, right?

I guess that those people will make those tough calls about who gets to go, and who doesn't get to go, to Trammel...yes? Yes.

Of course. Which is why you never know what the next round of devs decide. Unless you read the future. Spoooooooky.

Maybe you should apply to UO, and see how far your subjective and lame argument goes with the people who make the actual decisions.

Sorry you can't follow common sense. Then again, you never even attempted to make an argument, you just stated over and over what the current game mechanics are. Did you know that reds aren't allowed in Trammel? Not sure you knew that or not since you never mentioned it on this thread about 'Allowing Reds to enter Trammel.

 

[D'Amavir]

Well don't sell yourself short there sport.. A red is a player that commited acts which resulted in consequences outlined by EA.

Just like a blue didn't wake up one day with a GLORIOUS LORD/LADY title.. they BOTH earned it

Ahh, the poster than uses little names like son and sport to cover up that they don't have a point. I was wondering when you would show up. Good job.

As I have stated several times, the color of a name has no impact on any player in Trammel. 4 count blues and 5 count rounds are one and the same in Trammel.

 

[Yalp]

Maybe you should apply to UO, and see how far your subjective and lame argument goes with the people who make the actual decisions.

Yeah...go do that.

I need to go try the fishing off of Minoc.

I hear the Sea Bass are most tender there.

OH Surgeries.. been where you are at my friend.. don't waste it dude. Trying to dumb down the logic to people who have no desire to see the big picture is a waste of your talents my friend.. like trying to get a fish to ride a bicycle.

Suffice it to say.. these aren't the peeps that make the decisions about such matters and when the day is over it will be intelligent, educated peeps who get paid to make such decisions without ulterior motives or agendas.

 

[D'Amavir]

+ it could be worse...

EA could have invented some sort of jail system..everytime a red is defeated he has to do 'jail' time.

So being a murderer and roaming around free in fel and just not being allowed to go to trammel ruled facets with just that ONE char...is a quite mild punnishment.

The old days all your chars turned red if one of your chars turned red.
Then you were pretty much f*cked and stuck on one facet.

Actually, in the old days everyone was stuck on one facet. You shoulda been there, it was a game with promise.

You should make your own thread where you go over what all the game mechanics are currently in UO. Since that is what you seem to dwell on. Leave those of us that are actually discussing something else to do so without having to weed through your rehash of what the game mechanics are.

 

[D'Amavir]

OH Surgeries.. been where you are at my friend.. don't waste it dude. Trying to dumb down the logic to people who have no desire to see the big picture is a waste of your talents my friend.. like trying to get a fish to ride a bicycle.

Suffice it to say.. these aren't the peeps that make the decisions about such matters and when the day is over it will be intelligent, educated peeps who get paid to make such decisions without ulterior motives or agendas.

I would love to hear what my ulterior motive is since I don't play in Fel, don't have a red and don't pk. Since you seem to know, fill me in. But, sadly, you won't. You will just post a comment to someone that also feels the need to skip over points and just make silly comments telling them how simpatico you two are.

There are people on this thread that actually get what the thread is about.Its about the concept of allowing reds in Trammel. Its not about what the game mechanics are currently. Sadly, you aren't one of them. But keep up the nonsense posts to pad your post count. I am sure your e-ego is delighted that you once again got several posts added to your count without actually discussion the thread you were posting on.