Mesanna about a house here and on the other shards

[FrejaSP]

At the event I got to speak a little with Mesanna.

Freja: I have one wish for Siege
Freja: that new account can see us
Freja: on shard list
Mesanna: Freja thats not fair to new players
Mesanna: I am not saying siege is a bad shard but it is hard core
Freja: let it not effect their young on other shards
Dionysis: any chance that advanced tokens could be enabled?
Freja: many want to go here
Freja: some returning
Freja: from back in 1998
Morea Aenil: *nods*
Freja: they don't know we are here
Morea Aenil: I just returned from forever ago, came back for a short time in 2004 and had to make a new
Mesanna: I will talk to the engineers but I am not sure we can seperate the two
Mesanna: but
Morea Aenil: account. boo! haha
Mesanna: oen thing I do know I want to do for here
Mesanna: is allow you to have a house here and a house on the other shards
Freja: please only a small
Freja: else we will get to many ghost houses
Here I lost her and dis not think she heard my reply. I remember last we could have a house on each shard, it was so hard to place a house on Siege so I hope they will be careful what they do.
Alot start to play here and if the house do not need refresh, it will stay forever and block for the active community's houses.

 

[Symma]

I was there with you at that conversation and I took a screenshot. Then in the excitement I forgot to save it before switching my PC off.

Whoops.

 

[Lady Raja]

I really like the fact that our land is not clustered with so much housing that we can't even walk around... I really hope they do not allow people to have a house that they do not need to refresh. If that does happen, and I can't roam freely without bumping into a house everywhere I go, I think that would be my exit door...

If I am hearing all this right, You can own a house on any prodo shard, and a siege house. How does that work for us then? Does that mean I can own a house on Siege, and have a house on any prodo shard of my choosing?

*paints a scenario*

So let's say all this does happen, and the +1 house is the house you have to refresh. So can I select a house on Siege as my "primary", no need to refresh that house, but it screws over that shard... I make my Atlantic house the one I have to refresh. No worries there, I get on enough that the house will not decay... End of story...

No thanks!

P.S.
:mylittlepony:Thanks!

 

[TheDrAJ]

Agrees with Lady Raja

 

[kelmo]

Yay! My question got in there. I do know for a fact that advanced character tokens did work on Siege in the past. It was an accident I was told. I would like to see them work again.

 

[kelmo]

About the houses... I am hesitant.

 

[Tina Small]

Here is a link to a post I made in UHall when Manticore started a similar thread there: Mesanna announced today on Seige that.. | Stratics Forums . I have grave concerns about this happening on Siege. I'm also really, really disgusted about other things that happened today but I'll just keep my mouth shut. I'm very glad I couldn't log on or else I'd probably have a bunch of banned accounts at this point. Although maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing if this is the way things are going to go from here on out.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I have a major problem with Manticore's wording. That conversation in no way constitutes an 'announcement'.

My suggestion on the houses is a 30 day age requirement for the placing character and 30 day manual refresh thereafter. IF it happens, Mesanna has only said she wants to do it, wanting to and being able to aren't the same thing. It may depend on whether it's possible within the coding.

 

[FrejaSP]

I have a major problem with Manticore's wording. That conversation in no way constitutes an 'announcement'.

My suggestion on the houses is a 30 day age requirement for the placing character and 30 day manual refresh thereafter. IF it happens, Mesanna has only said she wants to do it, wanting to and being able to aren't the same thing. It may depend on whether it's possible within the coding.

Sounds good, but I would add, a second house can only be placed in Malas as that's where we have most free house spots and it's already limit in size of the house. This way, malas is only place we will risk ghost houses.

 

[Symma]

I don't mean to be a baddie here, but alot of you are jumping to conclusions to quickly. The transcript Freja posted is where the conversation ended as Mesanna went to fix the portrait in the Hall.

IF she does implement this change (with a pinch of salt I say that) then I would expect, meh hope for, a reasonable consultation period rather than a out of the blue addition in a publish.

Lets not all jump to conclusions from two lines in chat, otherwise we might scare off the lady

 

[FrejaSP]

I don't mean to be a baddie here, but alot of you are jumping to conclusions to quickly. The transcript Freja is where the conversation ended as Mesanna went to fix the portrait in the Hall.

IF she does implement this change (with a pinch of salt I say that) then I would expect, meh hope for, a reasonable consultation period rather than a out of the blue addition in a publish.

Lets not all jump to conclusions from two lines in chat, otherwise we might scare off the lady

Agree but still, alot ask for being able to place on Siege, so we have to tell how we feel about it so the solusion will work both for new Siege players and for us who only play Siege and fear to many vacations houses here

 

[Symma]

Agree but still, alot ask for being able to place on Siege, so we have to tell how we feel about it so the solusion will work both for new Siege players and for us who only play Siege and fear to many vacations houses here

I agree, that's why I hope for a reasonable consultation period so that it works out for all parties

 

[Rumpy]

How about increased bank storage?

 

[Petra Fyde]

Summarising what I think we've said so far.
On the whole we would welcome this, but just as the Gargoyle Queen requires a display of loyalty before you may build on her lands, we would like a commitment before you may build on Siege.
We don't want this to be like pet bonding where you stable the pet and then don't go near it till the time is up, we want proof of playing.
We have a better chance of our ideas being workable if we re-use existing in game systems, therefore my most recent proposal is that we use the thief guild criteria of 40 hours logged into the shard.
How to avoid multiple abandoned, unused houses? I'm not sure. We already have some of these with people who play the 90 day game and people who continue to pay for their accounts but don't actually play. Not to mention unspotted Return to Brit houses (which is coming up btw, something else Mesanna mentioned last night - only house placing won't be possible on return to brit accounts this time round). Mesanna is deleting these as and when she can, when they're identified.

 

[Rizarium]

Summarising what I think we've said so far.
On the whole we would welcome this, but just as the Gargoyle Queen requires a display of loyalty before you may build on her lands, we would like a commitment before you may build on Siege.
We don't want this to be like pet bonding where you stable the pet and then don't go near it till the time is up, we want proof of playing.
We have a better chance of our ideas being workable if we re-use existing in game systems, therefore my most recent proposal is that we use the thief guild criteria of 40 hours logged into the shard.
How to avoid multiple abandoned, unused houses? I'm not sure. We already have some of these with people who play the 90 day game and people who continue to pay for their accounts but don't actually play. Not to mention unspotted Return to Brit houses (which is coming up btw, something else Mesanna mentioned last night - only house placing won't be possible on return to brit accounts this time round). Mesanna is deleting these as and when she can, when they're identified.

So the actual synopsis would be: We are turning Siege ibnto Florida. Please buy a condo there and visit from time to time.

Do we get a theme park as well?

This will not add the population siege needs. Please save this post, so I can say I told you so later, if this happens.

 

[Luka Melehan]

I was not in attendance yesterday, Not been feeling good. But based on what your saying here, I am torn. I am ready to allow things we wouldn't have 6 years ago. But if we go this route, we need some kind of regulating factor. If the coding doesn't allow for some form proof of commitment, Then I would say no, if it were up to me. Maybe require a weekly refresh, -and- a time of active playing before they can place. Maybe a series of quests, so they can't just sit hiding somewhere. Maybe add to that, that they can only place only classic houses.

Can these things be coded?
SP second housing community quests. (written to help familiarize with life on SP and the various player areas, maybe that would have to be repeated every 4 months.)
Weekly refresh.
Only classic houses under the size of the keep.
Increased bank storage.

 

[Tina Small]

I've already said it other places, but I'm totally against the idea of letting people place a second house on Siege without jeopardizing their house elsewhere. Everyone would scream if the idea were floated to let people place a second house on one specific shard elsewhere in the game and every active player then had the potential to descend on that shard and be a real estate speculator. Why saddle Siege with that problem too? Can you imagine what would happen to real estate prices on Atlantic if someone said, "Let's let everyone place second houses on Atlantic, since everyone wants to move there anyway and we're losing people from the game because they have to give up their houses on other shards and pay for transfer tokens or soulstones or start new characters to be able to play on Atlantic"? Yeah, let's see how everyone would feel if one of the most popular shards in the game suddenly had to support 50,000 new houses.

If the developers buy into this idea, though, they also would need to fix the problems with being able to gate into and out of certain areas to increase the viable housing area as much as possible so people that would take advantage of this are as spread out as possible. There are places in Tokuno, Malas, and Ter Mur that are problematic. When I still had a house in Ter Mur, I couldn't gate to certain areas in Tokuno or Malas or Felucca. I also had a plot for about an hour in the Homare Jima area until I figured out that it was buggy too and I couldn't get to my Malas or Zento houses or to Yew or Skara Brae in Felucca.

All in all, though, I'd much rather see some creativity go into making Siege an easier place to play for a while without having a house. Then maybe people would be more willing to give it a try and if they decide they like it, they'll make the same sacrifice we all made to give up a house somewhere else or reopen a closed account or even buy another account to place a house on Siege. Increase bank storage on Siege by a modest amount for an account if you have a house on that account somewhere else. Or let accounts that have a house on another shard rent out a crate or two in the Magincia bank and a few other banks for a month or two weeks at a time for a modest fee. You'd get a notice like we do now for the bazaar vendors a week before your rental period's about to end and can renew it for another fee or you lose the contents. Do it in the bank so it's easier for people to move stuff around and put a reasonable weight limit on the rented crates, maybe 1600 stones like pack animals, so you have to keep the heavy stuff like resources in your bankbox but can put stuff like oodles of crafting tools and scrounged loot in the rented crates.

I'd also like to see some attention paid to other issues that have been identified that keep people from giving Siege a serious try. For example, the cap on stat gains. How many people lose patience because of that one limitation? It makes no sense to have it still with the removal of the cap on skill gains.

I did a survey in UHall almost exactly a year ago to find out which unique aspects of Siege keep people from trying Siege. What Keeps You From Trying Siege? | Stratics Forums . The top reasons selected in the poll were: restriction of one character per account (47 people--33.6%); inability to use recall and sacred journey spells (37 people--26.4%). And only 11 out of 60 people who bothered to make a post in the thread identified placing a house on Siege would jeopardize their house elsewhere as a deterrent to playing on Siege. (I didn't make "no free house on Siege" a poll option because the poll asked what things that make Siege different from other shards keeps you from playing there. Siege is no different from any other shard when it comes to having to pay for an account to have a house on the shard.) I think those numbers and the comments in that thread should make it somewhat clear that having to sacrifice a house elsewhere isn't really the thing that's keeping people from trying Siege. It's a lot of other things.

 

[FrejaSP]

I agree a second char slot and recall with randum 5-20 sec delay would be more needed and let the new accounts see Siege on the shard list

 

[Sprago]

I think it would be ok IF they had to manually refresh them but if they get to i want to place a second house here that i would have to manually refressh too

 

[Tina Small]

I agree a second char slot and recall with randum 5-20 sec delay would be more needed and let the new accounts see Siege on the shard list

Maybe let the Sacred Journey spell work on Siege, but increase the skill requirement and mana and tithing costs for it? So, instead of needing 15 chivalry skill you'd need at least 66.1 skill to even cast it (that's the same amount of magery needed to cast 7th circle magery spells) and 110 chivalry skill to cast it successfully 100% of the time; it would use 40 mana like the gate spell (if you don't have LMC on your suit); and the tithing cost would be in the 45-55 gp range. People couldn't follow you like they can with gate spell; but you also wouldn't have the ability to take groups of people with you when you'd use it and you also wouldn't be able to use a scribed spell scroll to lower the casting requirement.

 

[TheDrAJ]

I don't think anything should be changed.

 

[T'Challa]

You people don't get it.

They aren't going to write Siege-specific code. It's bit them in the ass too many times.

The best you're going to get is no house restrictions between Siege and other shards. The *only* reason I'll concede to that is because Mesanna mentioned it on her own. This tells me it's probably already in the works.

Oh, and Sprago, if you think they're going to change rules to allow two homes on Siege alone, then you got hold of the same thing Tina is smoking with her changes to recall/sacred journey spell circles and Freja's recall timers. Were it to happen the uproar from production shards would be deafening. However, if they don't give Siege players their way, the uproar is...well, analogous to a mosquitofart in the wind.

It's just not going to happen.

I've been wrong before, and I hope I am. I hope they totally revitalize this shard and there's a huge thriving community going when I get off satellite inter-NOT. I have a !@#$load of crap to unload on all of you suckers...

But, my track record at calling EA's next move is pretty good. About 90%, Kelmo? So I have don't have high hopes.

 

[FrejaSP]

Maybe let the Sacred Journey spell work on Siege, but increase the skill requirement and mana and tithing costs for it? So, instead of needing 15 chivalry skill you'd need at least 66.1 skill to even cast it (that's the same amount of magery needed to cast 7th circle magery spells) and 110 chivalry skill to cast it successfully 100% of the time; it would use 40 mana like the gate spell (if you don't have LMC on your suit); and the tithing cost would be in the 45-55 gp range. People couldn't follow you like they can with gate spell; but you also wouldn't have the ability to take groups of people with you when you'd use it and you also wouldn't be able to use a scribed spell scroll to lower the casting requirement.

Naeh, just allow it as it is but with a delay so you can't use it as ascape

 

[Afterglow]

I don't think anything should be changed.

Party pooper me agrees. All those proposed changes would soften Siege and getting here up...

 

[Lady Raja]

I agree with TheDrAJ... Why should we change anything at all? I love Siege the way it is...

You know what... If this 2nd house thing does happen, and we do get some of "those" kinds of players, I am going to go red and kill every single one of them on sight... I am not one to complain, and I always go with the flow, but if this is going to change Siege to a softer Siege, please count me out...

Second house? Second character slot? Sacred Journey? Can we get insurance and Trammel too please?

I know I have not been on Siege as long as some of you, and I even just recently came back to UO/Siege, but wow... Makes a girl want to turn red...

[insert something here] Yeah... Sad...

 

[kelmo]

*smiles*

 

[chise2]

I agree with TheDrAJ... Why should we change anything at all? I love Siege the way it is...

You know what... If this 2nd house thing does happen, and we do get some of "those" kinds of players, I am going to go red and kill every single one of them on sight... I am not one to complain, and I always go with the flow, but if this is going to change Siege to a softer Siege, please count me out...

Second house? Second character slot? Sacred Journey? Can we get insurance and Trammel too please?

I know I have not been on Siege as long as some of you, and I even just recently came back to UO/Siege, but wow... Makes a girl want to turn red...

[insert something here] Yeah... Sad...

Well to be fair I don;t think a second char slot would be so bad. I mean most here have multiple accounts and soulstones anyway. However yeah I am iffy about letting sacred journey be allowed unless the skill required was greatly raised. I am not totally against the idea of a second house either IF it is done right. However I think if they just turn it on no restrictions it would be an utter disaster

 

[Montie1123]

The char slot thing i would not mind, heck i payed to get the extra bank space and the 7th char slot for my acct. In my mind that should have got me a 2nd char slot on SP that or more bank/house space. I Would not mind the recall/sacred journey, and giving them a long cast time and or a flag to combat would not be a bad thing. Heck i have had to log out once already in a dungeon because i could not recall out and didnt have time to run out.

 

[Tina Small]

I only suggested the change to Sacred Journey as a less drastic way to get people to play Siege than to allow every single player in the game the ability to place a house on Siege in addition to whatever they have elsewhere. I'd really rather they didn't change anything at this point either, but apparently someone's convinced Mesanna a second house on Siege is a brilliant idea for increasing the population of Siege. If something like that goes through and the shard's vendors simultaneously get full of event and Mesanna items because our new EM thinks that is what everyone on the shard is craving, pretty soon it won't be any different from any other shard: the economy will be borked; the only vendors you'll be able to find will be full of high-priced event items; houses that most people might actually use if they're serious about playing on Siege will cost too much for the average player to afford; and the rest of the shard will be full of deserted and decaying housing. Heck, we might even end up with Plague-bots if some people have their way so buyers can buy event items for cash via the safety of third-party search sites. Won't that just be dandy.

 

[T'Challa]

... the economy will be borked ...

You haven't been around long enough I guess. Our economy doesn't get borked. At least not to the degree that prod shards do. We don't have character transfer dupes spread out all across the shard and duped mill gold checks everywhere.

If EM's flood the shard with garbage, it will remain low-priced garbage unless it entails some benefit. Even then it'll cost 1/20th what it would cost on production...Pretty shinies mean nothing on Siege to anyone but dumhed orks!

 

[Tina Small]

You haven't been around long enough I guess. Our economy doesn't get borked. At least not to the degree that prod shards do. We don't have character transfer dupes spread out all across the shard and duped mill gold checks everywhere.

If EM's flood the shard with garbage, it will remain low-priced garbage unless it entails some benefit. Even then it'll cost 1/20th what it would cost on production...Pretty shinies mean nothing on Siege to anyone but dumhed orks!

Earlier today, one of the illegal search sites listed a lantern like the ones handed out yesterday for sale on a vendor for 100 million gold. Or, you could pay $110 to have the search site buy it for you. Someone somewhere is making a lot of RL money off those items.

 

[T'Challa]

Earlier today, one of the illegal search sites listed a lantern like the ones handed out yesterday for sale on a vendor for 100 million gold. Or, you could pay $110 to have the search site buy it for you. Someone somewhere is making a lot of RL money off those items.

You're barking up the wrong tree. Siege's low population is not due to the economy and never was.

 

[Rumpy]

If anything screwed up the economy, it was when I started on Siege 6-7 years ago after AoS and came here with A|B. Then from the guilds that spawned through there.. We flooded the shard with powerscrolls, stat scrolls, and gold. The price of gold when we came here was $50 a mil almost. By the time I quit, I was lucky to get $5 a mil. It dropped in price so much cause we flooded the market. I use to undersell my gold to Cybernickel to let him unload it, so I wouldn't need to deal with selling it. I never payed for Gametime/Expansions for 2 years while playin Siege with RL cash. Everything was paid for in gold.

Powerscrolls and such were the only thing that made the economy back in the day. No one wanted anything else less it was an artifact or amazing loot item.



Siege has never really been about economy as with no insurance, nothing is sacred. There is no selling a single piece of barbed runic armor for 20-50 mil like a while back on Prodo Shards. The only thing with Siege's economy is we lack a good vendor system, due to everyone either not needing to sell stuff cause they have nothing to spend the gold on or no one needs to buy anything cause they have it all. It doesn't play a role in population.

 

[Tina Small]

You're barking up the wrong tree. Siege's low population is not due to the economy and never was.

???

 

[SpyderBite]

2 house? Second character slot? Sacred Journey? Can we get insurance and Trammel too please?

Like I said. A slippery slope. I knew it wouldn't take long for all the compromises beyond a second house to come pouring in. I just didn't realize it would happen immediately.

I say scrap the whole idea. Give an inch take a yard has already begun.

 

[TheDrAJ]

Like I said. A slippery slope. I knew it wouldn't take long for all the compromises beyond a second house to come pouring in. I just didn't realize it would happen immediately.

I say scrap the whole idea. Give an inch take a yard has already begun.

I agree

 

[Heavenless]

I want guard zones dropped on Fridays and mongbats to drop million gold checks!!

 

[Pyrite]

What you missed Rumpy was a Siege that was ALL about the economy. It was meant to create an economy that did not rely on crafters being able to sell their wares to NPCs. And Siege thrived. It worked great until AoS- you are right about AoS ruining the economy of Siege- it threw everything off balance, as we became an item based game. And it has just kept getting worse as items became more powerful.


About the houses- Freja is right, we will end up with small houses all over the place that are not used. So, if others are allowed to place a second house on Siege, does that mean I can go to Atlantic and place another house there with each of my accounts just so I can visit now and then? I doubt they will allow that.

I still think they should just give any account a much larger bank account on any shard that they do not own a house. That way, if I want to go mess around on another shard, I don't have to give up my Siege house- that same advantage should be across all shards.

 

[Tina Small]

For all we know, this whole subject is just a distraction to keep us from focusing on other current aspects of UO and its management and fighting with each other.

Physical UO Art | Stratics Forums

 

[MANSBETH]

Second character on a account sounds fair.

 

[Lady Raja]

This is Siege Perilous...


UO Stratics *New* | Siege Perilous

Siege Perilous - UOGuide, the Ultima Online encyclopedia

Siege Ruleset - UOGuide, the Ultima Online encyclopedia


Anything else would just be stupid...

:mylittlepony:Thanks!

 

[Afterglow]

This is Siege Perilous...


UO Stratics *New* | Siege Perilous

Siege Perilous - UOGuide, the Ultima Online encyclopedia

Siege Ruleset - UOGuide, the Ultima Online encyclopedia


Anything else would just be stupid...

:mylittlepony:Thanks!

.this...if changes are needed get rid of the faction system and re-release hero/evil one

 

[PuckOfPacific]

Why not just have the cost of placing a house 3 times as much? Like buying resources? Since you can't transfer gold here. The have to stay awhile to afford the second house. And give it the same game mechanics as a boat for refreshing and your good to go. I think it's a good thing

 

[FrejaSP]

Why not just have the cost of placing a house 3 times as much? Like buying resources? Since you can't transfer gold here. The have to stay awhile to afford the second house. And give it the same game mechanics as a boat for refreshing and your good to go. I think it's a good thing

It not the placing of the house, that is a problem but houses left over, noone use, that will be a problem

 

[PuckOfPacific]

Well if you don't give the newbs tons of gold when they start brand new on siege. They'd have to play awhile to get skills high enough to be able to afford placing a house right? Plus having a requirement to refresh it would dissuade all but the committed right? You know how long it took me to get to 500k in gold? Awhile, I play PAC ATL and siege. I have a house on PAC but I'd love one on siege. Don't care to drop my PAC house and def. don't want one on ATL they are greedy basturds there. Bu if I could have one on siege too well I'd have come there a long time ago. My $0.02

 

[FrejaSP]

I'm all for houses to the chars who play Siege but there need to be a way to make sure, we don't end up with alot houses noone use.
Advance char token and a second char slot is more important than the houses. More room in the bank may be enough.

 

[chise2]

I'm all for houses to the chars who play Siege but there need to be a way to make sure, we don't end up with alot houses noone use.
Advance char token and a second char slot is more important than the houses. More room in the bank may be enough.

Yes and Mesanna did come on today and ask if we really want advanced char tokens to work here. So while we can;t know for sure if she will do it I am hoping that since she asked and since apparently they worked before it will happen again.

 

[kelmo]

I have been asking this for a long time. The advanced character tokens will only get you a head start on RoT. I know for a fact they did work once on Siege. I even reported this fact to EA... Then we were a fairly robust community.

Right now... If a boost of a few skills (they still have to RoT) and maybe some accommodation for living and/or storage would help our population, I would love to listen.

 

[chise2]

Yeah judging by todays conversation in chat though most seem to still like the house idea. If they could make it work I am not against it. Mine main worry is the restrictions and whatever needed would just be too much for them to code and they would either not do anything or just go whatever and activate housing. And we would be left praying we are wrong about the shard filling up with ghost houses. Though I donlt think a weekly or every two week refresh woudl be that hard to code. But if we wanted things like size restriction and all that that could be a problem. Wonder too how hard it would be to increase bankstorage by a significant amount and turn npc inns into hotels of sorts? But yeah hopefully if they do this they are willing to go the extra mile and do it right. Also we did ask Mesanna about a second char slot I too think that would be a decent idea she didn;t say anything though to that hehe.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I don't think increased bank storage will be offered - they sell tokens for that.