My wish for UO is to place a house on each of several shards...but

[Val Van Wolf]

I am down to only 2 accounts now from a high of seven. I remember when the game started there were only five characters per account and each character could place a house. I had five 7 X 7 houses on Atlantic which I sold to ZamboniDriver and then transfered to gold to GL which was my main shard at the time. Those were the bad old days, where if you lost your keys and a rune to your house...blah blah blah.
The game has become both too complex and too boring over 18 years. It would be nice to spread out and play on several shards, maybe even have a castle on one of them. I have no idea how to become a billionaire. I guess if I had a castle early on I could have sold it and placed another and so on and might be able to afford one now on Atlantic which is my one and only shard at this time.
This will not happen I'm sure but WHAT HARM WOULD IT DO? I'm not looking for arguments here...or to be treated like a dummy. Just a thought. So much open space on other shards.... Too much open space on Atlantic too, really, why not open even more for housing...?

 

[Uvtha]

I am down to only 2 accounts now from a high of seven. I remember when the game started there were only five characters per account and each character could place a house. I had five 7 X 7 houses on Atlantic which I sold to ZamboniDriver and then transfered to gold to GL which was my main shard at the time. Those were the bad old days, where if you lost your keys and a rune to your house...blah blah blah.
The game has become both too complex and too boring over 18 years. It would be nice to spread out and play on several shards, maybe even have a castle on one of them. I have no idea how to become a billionaire. I guess if I had a castle early on I could have sold it and placed another and so on and might be able to afford one now on Atlantic which is my one and only shard at this time.
This will not happen I'm sure but WHAT HARM WOULD IT DO? I'm not looking for arguments here...or to be treated like a dummy. Just a thought. So much open space on other shards.... Too much open space on Atlantic too, really, why not open even more for housing...?

Actually when the game started you could place as many houses as you could afford, if I remember correctly. Pretty sure I had more than 5 on multiple occasions. I honestly doubt that opening up housing to one a shard would make much difference, though I would limit it to only one larger than 18x18 per account. Those things just take up too much space.

 

[Gem]

Been around since beta...you were allowed five houses......

 

[Rieley]

I really cannot see the negative with a player having the ability to place a custom house, no larger than a cabin or such on a second shard. This could be a vet reward house deed, or purchase a house deed from origin. These could be rental houses, where we pay rent to the town each month. We actually would need to go to a bank NPC to pay your rent. It's hard to play on a shard when we cannot have a house to live out of. Heck, let the towns place and own the houses, have a classified section where we can see what is for rent. I try often to play other shards, and it's fun to start over from scratch, but no house makes it more difficult. There are plenty of building around the lands with 'INNS', let those rent out for visitors to play different shards. It wouldn't matter to me if Broadsword made the rent payable by RL money or in game gold.

 

[Eärendil]

Like Old Gypsy always said: Give out Gypsy Wagons! Primary houses on your home shard and Siege, Gypsy Wagons for the other shards you are playing. Offer them on Origin Store with some customizing options for 15,99. And you will make players as well as yourself happy!

 

[Gem]

Tents! We used to have tents....let me have a tent on another shard or two for a shard shield

 

[Eärendil]

Yea. Tents or gypsy wagons!

 

[Yadd of Legends]

I would totally love this. I would love starting new characters on more shards but can't stand it without a house - even a tiny house - and don't want to pay for accounts

 

[Angel of Sonoma]

i always thought it would be cool if we could rent a room in the town Inns.

 

[Jaden Rain]

I think the tents or gypsy wagon is a great idea,,,,,to allow people to check out other shards and get life back in the smaller shards, who knows it could cause people to want to get another account later on to place a house on other shard ...it could end up being a profitable thing for everyone, Or even make it where you can log on on a boat would help also .

 

[Parnoc]

Refuge camps? Tent cities? Thieving Gypsies living in wagons? oh my.............

 

[Acid Rain]

I had several tents in the forest all placed together by the same character at the start of UO. A year or two later came the policy of one home per character.
Two or three years later it became one home per account. Housing policy (pertaining to #'s of homes) has changed 3 times over the years to my knowledge.

 

[MalagAste]

I had several tents in the forest all placed together by the same character at the start of UO. A year or two later came the policy of one home per character.
Two or three years later it became one home per account. Housing policy (pertaining to #'s of homes) has changed 3 times over the years to my knowledge.

4 because just a few years ago they allowed us to have a home on our shard AND on Siege/Mugen.

 

[SugarMMM]

Back in the day I made a goal to have a house and a million gold on every server.

I started off with the house goal and it took me a couple of months to reach. Then I started in on the having a million gold and I did it on a handful of servers.

I then lost motivation on having a million gold on each server because I lost a bunch of houses due to server reverts and other server issues. Back in those days you'd have to log in and open the door on the house to refresh it and I had to do that on every server! So when a server would revert it screwed with the status of the house.

On that account I still have over 40 houses on it.

I'm still on the lookout for a castle on Sonoma so if I ever find one or a spot to put one i'll add another account to my existing 13.

 

[WhiteWitch]

4 because just a few years ago they allowed us to have a home on our shard AND on Siege/Mugen.

And now a large percentage of the houses on Siege are 18x18 dirt plots or empty classic type houses blocking the most desirable places, owned by people who probably haven't logged into Siege since the day this change came in and they swapped/bought gold in order to place them.

The idea behind it was sound enough, Siege is a different ruleset type of shard with a character limit making it more difficult to use as a "home shard" unless you have multiple accounts, being able to have a house there as well as prodo allowed people to be able to get the full game experience on both, Im sure in a lot of cases this has worked well, but it seems in many cases people rushed to place a house just because they could, and now many places are blocked for people who actually play on Siege.

As one prodo shard is much the same as another aside from population density, there is really no valid reason to fill them all up in this way with dirt plots.

 

[MalagAste]

And now a large percentage of the houses on Siege are 18x18 dirt plots or empty classic type houses blocking the most desirable places, owned by people who probably haven't logged into Siege since the day this change came in and they swapped/bought gold in order to place them.

The idea behind it was sound enough, Siege is a different ruleset type of shard with a character limit making it more difficult to use as a "home shard" unless you have multiple accounts, being able to have a house there as well as prodo allowed people to be able to get the full game experience on both, Im sure in a lot of cases this has worked well, but it seems in many cases people rushed to place a house just because they could, and now many places are blocked for people who actually play on Siege.

As one prodo shard is much the same as another aside from population density, there is really no valid reason to fill them all up in this way with dirt plots.

I placed about 3 or 4 houses on Siege... but then was given a really nice one by Tokuno. I do log in there and do sometimes play and ALL my homes are nicely built. Though I do totally agree with your sentiment.

 

[FrejaSP]

Yea. Tents or gypsy wagons!

Yes with refresh and secure setting like Ships and only possible to own one for a char/account a shard.

 

[FrejaSP]

And now a large percentage of the houses on Siege are 18x18 dirt plots or empty classic type houses blocking the most desirable places, owned by people who probably haven't logged into Siege since the day this change came in and they swapped/bought gold in order to place them.

Changes it to let players place a second house on any shard, this way, they may want to replace their Siege dirt plot. and make it drop, if account had not been logged into the shard for 3 or maybe 6 month

 

[MalagAste]

Yes with refresh and secure setting like Ships and only possible to own one for a char/account a shard.

I was just talking about something similar to this awhile ago with some friends. I'd like to see Gypsy style wagons that had things like a forge and anvil or a spinning wheel and loom, or a soulforge... (yes a gargish wagon!).... That you could temporarily place that would have the same properties of a boat that you can use and have to refresh... one per account per shard... but it would allow say Governors to designate that they are having a craft fair and the crafters could come to town with their wagons... (this would be the only time they could be placed in town).... otherwise they can be placed anywhere out of town that you can place housing.. so NOT in caves or dungeons... but anywhere houses can be placed. (Yes this would be like having a portable forge but... we already have one... it's called a fire beetle) Anyway it should have the same storage of the ships... and I'd say it should require High Seas.

 

[THP]

what a wonderfull idea to fill the green acres that lay to waste...id say not trammel or felucca though as people would block folks keeps/castle hopes...make it malas etc etc places were 1818s are the max and let people only place 7x7 huts extra ..i likey!!

 

[Velvathos]

This got me into thinking, you should be able to place up an X amount of housing space per account, per shard, rather than just one shard.. So, the size of a castle is 31x31, maybe make that the max, so you could place an 18x18 and you would like and you have an extra 13x13 space where you could use up elsewhere on another shard or the same shard you are currently on..

I have always supported the idea of a refresh and secure setting for houses especially if UO were to go free 2 play ever.. (which it should) and then us subscribers would have the benefit of not needing to do that, that way you can't simply place a house to just have a big empty plot sitting there forever, if you don't refresh it, bye bye.. It could work this way for a house per shard or for people that want to have more than one house..

 

[Rieley]

Please know this post is not to be negative, just my recent observation. I am working on creating a toon on each shard, and loving every moment of it. Living out of my bank box and a blue beetle. Right now playing in Legends, have imbuing so I spent the past week escorting in New Haven, killing spawn for items to imbue. Lot's of running around, however I've been able to purchase cheap NPC armor in new haven and imbue LRC, (100%) using the rings and bracelets for imbuing magery. Met a few players and like it there. In a few weeks I'll also try another shard and start over with a new toon. Tell ya, I log in a lot more now. However, not sure I'm going to be happy having to log into each and every shard to refresh a house. It won't be the house I'll miss so much if the house would decay, it would be the items inside the house. An 8 x 10 rental house owned by the town would be fantastic, that way I can store items I use often, plus looms, anvils..things like that.

My wish would be to have rental homes on other shards, if by chance we would have to refresh every 30 days or such, maybe our items in the house can go to a bank for storage, like they do if one of the bazaar vendors fall? Rental homes could be in a trailer park in Malas set up like the bazaar. There is also a system set up for character transfer where our items are in boxes when we land on the new shard, something like that would also work if we did lose a second home.

I love my home shard and don't want to give it up, however it's nice to take a vacation, meet other people and create new toons. Something to think about.

 

[Mina_Lino]

That seems a bit over the top.

But 2 houses per account seems decent.

 

[Rieley]

That seems a bit over the top.

But 2 houses per account seems decent.

2 houses per account would make a lot of people happy, especially if an account's second house included Siege. Maybe give life to lower populated shards and free up some land space in Siege.

 

[Lady Storm]

Rieley where you been? We can put a house on siege/mugen without hurting our accounts production house.

Gem yes he was correct.. the opening of UO we could have as many houses on a single character or on all of your 5 characters.
It changed shortly in the first year to 1 per character.

We had the 1 per character for a long time till the bean counters wanted more $. EA being greedy..
You might remember this as the grandfathering... so few are left.

Right now all but a few... are getting thin even in the big homes... and I am counting in all the shards.
I am saying keeps....18x18/towers, and on a few castles. Yes castles.

I have sat here over the years reading the loud mouthed over berring bunch tout how 1 house is enough for anyone... no need to add more.

It's all barn yard dropping!

I have to commend the Syndicate for its centralizing the players to one main "city" shard. I also condem their actions too for the very same thing.
Reasons are many....
To be honest it was the consolidation of population. This led us down the garden path to the point we are at now.
Home shards empty of all but the hapless few.
Before this rush to set 1 shard as the hub of all commerce, many shards had sustainable populations and a working shard. Don't get me wrong it was brilliant to a point.
Only as a single hub it is vunerable to greed and that kills. Better it had been 2 or even 3 shards set up.

Siege was set up so it didn't die on the vine... the adding of the house system not counting to the mains.
The set up of Atlantic as the hub did a lot of damage that cant be rectified over night.
How do you avoid major housing troubles on Atlantic but give the other shards the boost in players they so badly need?
Remaking those shards usefull should be prime in the dev handbook but how?
You see the delema?
Give all the players a second house sounds great and I for one would applaud the Dev for it, but I also see the hell of all the space on Atlantic and the other shards still being empty except for houses that only take up ground with a owner who visits it once a month for the EM event.
Yes I do see the pain this will bring.
I wish....
Well what I wish for is to go back before the whole debacle started and kick some idiots arse and stop the changes to the housing and how this whole mess got started.
Sit there and deny this all you like...
I see the game in a light that most of you refuse to...
If the game keeps heading in the direction it is, soon enough not even Atlantic will save UO.

Diversification is needed and I am not just talking of housing.
More shard specific events with shard bound items.. yea I know this will peve off the collectors but think about it..*
Shards have been being milked of all their riches for years.. with houses falling like rain more of UO's rich history is lost.
If I had my way id reopen housing for 1 per character... yes I said 1 per and no size limit.
Let the house war begin!
That's what is missing...
We all faught for houses in our first year... that placement when the shard was so full it took on war like tactics.
Reds and Blues duking it out for that spot.

* I know many event items leave to be sold on Atlantic.. some within minutes of dropping.

Just think back to when you had to WORK for that house plot... it meant more to you then a bought preplaced....

 

[kelmo]

*chuckles* Yer alright Lady Storm.

 

[Rieley]

Boy I really must having been drinking something other than soda when I posted above. What I meant to say was allow two houses per account would be fine, especially if the second (not primary) house would be available not only just on Siege, but a choice between Siege and other production shards. That way player may not simply place a house on Siege 'just because then can'. They would choose between siege or production, and possibly pick a shard they will actually play on. It wouldn't enhance the way I personally play, but sounds like it would be good for the game as a whole.

 

[Eärendil]

Rieley where you been? We can put a house on siege/mugen without hurting our accounts production house.

Gem yes he was correct.. the opening of UO we could have as many houses on a single character or on all of your 5 characters.
It changed shortly in the first year to 1 per character.

We had the 1 per character for a long time till the bean counters wanted more $. EA being greedy..
You might remember this as the grandfathering... so few are left.

Right now all but a few... are getting thin even in the big homes... and I am counting in all the shards.
I am saying keeps....18x18/towers, and on a few castles. Yes castles.

I have sat here over the years reading the loud mouthed over berring bunch tout how 1 house is enough for anyone... no need to add more.

It's all barn yard dropping!

I have to commend the Syndicate for its centralizing the players to one main "city" shard. I also condem their actions too for the very same thing.
Reasons are many....
To be honest it was the consolidation of population. This led us down the garden path to the point we are at now.
Home shards empty of all but the hapless few.
Before this rush to set 1 shard as the hub of all commerce, many shards had sustainable populations and a working shard. Don't get me wrong it was brilliant to a point.
Only as a single hub it is vunerable to greed and that kills. Better it had been 2 or even 3 shards set up.

Siege was set up so it didn't die on the vine... the adding of the house system not counting to the mains.
The set up of Atlantic as the hub did a lot of damage that cant be rectified over night.
How do you avoid major housing troubles on Atlantic but give the other shards the boost in players they so badly need?
Remaking those shards usefull should be prime in the dev handbook but how?
You see the delema?
Give all the players a second house sounds great and I for one would applaud the Dev for it, but I also see the hell of all the space on Atlantic and the other shards still being empty except for houses that only take up ground with a owner who visits it once a month for the EM event.
Yes I do see the pain this will bring.
I wish....
Well what I wish for is to go back before the whole debacle started and kick some idiots arse and stop the changes to the housing and how this whole mess got started.
Sit there and deny this all you like...
I see the game in a light that most of you refuse to...
If the game keeps heading in the direction it is, soon enough not even Atlantic will save UO.

Diversification is needed and I am not just talking of housing.
More shard specific events with shard bound items.. yea I know this will peve off the collectors but think about it..*
Shards have been being milked of all their riches for years.. with houses falling like rain more of UO's rich history is lost.
If I had my way id reopen housing for 1 per character... yes I said 1 per and no size limit.
Let the house war begin!
That's what is missing...
We all faught for houses in our first year... that placement when the shard was so full it took on war like tactics.
Reds and Blues duking it out for that spot.

* I know many event items leave to be sold on Atlantic.. some within minutes of dropping.

Just think back to when you had to WORK for that house plot... it meant more to you then a bought preplaced....

That is exactly why I prefer tents or gypsy wagons. You could buy them for 14,99 at the store, they would NOT decay as long as you pay your account and you could customize them a bit. You could place basic stuff like small forge, anvil etc. and live the life in the forests, on the Islands, in the desert. HOW ROMANTIC! And how profitable, dear Devs! I would love to buy 2-3 of them!

 

[Gameboy]

That seems a bit over the top.

But 2 houses per account seems decent.

Your home shard and Siege

 

[Drakelord]

Ya I remeber the old days with 5 characters, had a house on every shard back then, I wish I had kept playing and had grandfather them, I wish we could put a house on every shard today.