Would you move to an all Fel or all Tram shard?

[FrejaSP]

If EA choose to changes the shard to all Fel and all Tram shards, how would you react?

Lets say, some of the old shards are changes to all Felucca and the newer one are changed to all Trammel.

EA will allow you to move all chars, bank, stable, house, own vendors from one shard to shard with wanted ruleset

The Felucca shards will be the one listed below. They will be without blessing and Item Insurance but with better drop of crafting resoutces, bod/heartwood rewards and artifacts.

Atlantic
Great Lakes
Catskills
Pacific
Chesapeake
Drachenfels
Siege Perilous

The rest of the US/EU shards will get all Trammel ruleset.

 

[Connor_Graham]

If they made Pac all Fel, I'd be gone before the transfer token got cold.

 

[FrejaSP]

If they made Pac all Fel, I'd be gone before the transfer token got cold.

Pac was the shard with the worse PK's, it have to be a Fel shard.

Or maybe it just had most complaining non PvP'ers

 

[RichDC]

I dunno, I mean i mainly play in fel these days but to be honest i dont think id want to have a split. Currently i like the way its split the only annoying thing is when i go red and have to sit for2days doing nothing. Oh and sometimes you do "have" to PK blues to protect an investment.

I like to be able to do the spawns in fel and have a bit of pvp fun in factions and then when i get bored of that go and do stupid "trammy" stuff.

It would be tough but i know one thing, i wouldnt move to all tram that would just bore the hell outta me and i actualy think that griefing would skyrocket on these shards. With no way of any retribution griefers would run rampant!

I know at the moment there is little apart from trying to get the person into fel and put up or shut up, but there wouldnt even be that!

If im being honest i think it would be a better choice to merge shards rather than force a rule-set upon some.

 

[FrejaSP]

I dunno, I mean i mainly play in fel these days but to be honest i dont think id want to have a split. Currently i like the way its split the only annoying thing is when i go red and have to sit for2days doing nothing. Oh and sometimes you do "have" to PK blues to protect an investment.

I guess you would stay red. You would be able to traveling on all the facets, no need to sit for 2 days doing nothing

 

[Connor_Graham]

Pac was the shard with the worse PK's, it have to be a Fel shard.

Or maybe it just had most complaining non PvP'ers

If (and that's a huge if) this was to actually happen, it shouldn't be the non-PvP'rs that should have to move, it should be the PvP'rs themselves. There are fewer of them so there would be fewer players that would be affected by the change.

 

[FrejaSP]

If (and that's a huge if) this was to actually happen, it shouldn't be the non-PvP'rs that should have to move, it should be the PvP'rs themselves. There are fewer of them so there would be fewer players that would be affected by the change.

You see, my logic was, when the first UO servers was born, they was born as PvP servers. The newer servers was born as Trammel servers with a single PvP facet.

So the older shards should stay true to their originale ruleset and so should the newer.

No matter how you do it, some will have to move, both non PvP'ers and PvP'ers.

I don't believe there is fewer PvP players than non PvP'ers.

 

[RichDC]

There are fewer of them so there would be fewer players that would be affected by the change.

Im not actually sure that on alot of shards there are. I know on quite a few visits to other shards tram side was dead but fel there was everyone.

Even on GL most of the largest guilds are PvP guilds, at the events there are more PvP char alts than "trammies".

 

[Tazar]

Freja,

Given your listing of Atlantic as a fel shard, I'd close all of my accounts and there would be a huge empty spot in Malas where the fortress (6 - 18x18's) now stands. I am way too developed in real-estate to transfer to another shard.

That said, I'd be almost as upset it Atlantic went all tram.

 

[RichDC]

I guess you would stay red. You would be able to traveling on all the facets, no need to sit for 2 days doing nothing

True, true. I dunno im on GL anyways which would become PvP so id probably stay and then move away if i didnt like it.

 

[Crysta]

There's no "I would stay on my current shard because I like it too much and don't care about the ruleset" option.

 

[Connor_Graham]

I don't believe there is fewer PvP players than non PvP'ers.

You can try to convince yourself of that all you want. It won't make it any less true.

 

[FrejaSP]

There's no "I would stay on my current shard because I like it too much and don't care about the ruleset" option.

I was thinking about it but decided most would fit in one of this below

I would stay on my shard (now Fel) but dislike the ruleset
I would stay on my shard (now Tram) but dislike the ruleset
I would stay on my shard (now Fel) that's the ruleset I want
I would stay on my shard (now Tram) that's the ruleset I want

 

[FrejaSP]

Freja,

Given your listing of Atlantic as a fel shard, I'd close all of my accounts and there would be a huge empty spot in Malas where the fortress (6 - 18x18's) now stands. I am way too developed in real-estate to transfer to another shard.

That said, I'd be almost as upset it Atlantic went all tram.

Atlantic is my old shard too, I had so much fun there before Siege was born. I could never see Atlantic with Trammel ruleset as it was a great shard when it was all PvP.

Lets say you could pack your chars, house, everything and EA would make sure, you could move all 6 accounts and place them all on same Trammel shard. All in the houses would be like before you moved, design and deco.

I know it may never happen but I wanted to see how the players would react

 

[D'Amavir]

I don't believe there is fewer PvP players than non PvP'ers.

You don't believe there are fewer pvp players than non pvp players? Really?

I guess that is why Fel is more crowded than Trammel on most shards, huh? You forgot the option of 'Turn Siege into a Trammel ruleset'. Would you stay on it? Probably not.

The simple fact is that even though the original shards STARTED as a 'Fel' ruleset, most people are playing on those shards these days that came AFTER they became Trammel and Fel rulesets. Sure, there are some vets let. But most players playing the game today started playing after Trammel was created. So it makes no sense to force those players to move just because a lesser number of Fel players want to drive them off.

Also, if you really want to make the shards like they were as created, you would have to bring back statloss. And I know a lot of people are against that idea. But, if you support it on this new Fel only shard that you want to create, I will support you in that. After all, I can just stay on my home shard and not have to worry about it.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

This is logistically and technically nightmarish of an idea which would epic fail 9999999 out of 10000000 times. I am sorry.

 

[D'Amavir]

Atlantic is my old shard too, I had so much fun there before Siege was born. I could never see Atlantic with Trammel ruleset as it was a great shard when it was all PvP.

Lets say you could pack your chars, house, everything and EA would make sure, you could move all 6 accounts and place them all on same Trammel shard. All in the houses would be like before you moved, design and deco.

I know it may never happen but I wanted to see how the players would react

Let's say you could pack up your characters, house and everything and EA would make sure, you could move all 6 accounts and place them all on the same Fel shard. All the houses would be like before you moved, designed and deco.

Would that work for you? If so, I support it.

Trammel and Fel players need to get over the 'not in my backyard' mentality. Each side wants THEIR playstyle to be the one that exists on THEIR shard. The good thing about Trammel/Fel mixed shards is that both sides can have what they want. Trammel players can stay on their shards and play Trammel rules. Fel player can stay on their shards and play Fel rules.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

I guess that is why Fel is more crowded than Trammel on most shards, huh? You forgot the option of 'Turn Siege into a Trammel ruleset'. Would you stay on it? Probably not.

Afk people at Luna bank do not count. I am sorry.

More people go to Felucca than ones who never go to Fel. I am willing to bet on it if a developer is willing to broker it

 

[RichDC]

This is logistically and technically nightmarish of an idea which would epic fail 9999999 out of 10000000 times. I am sorry.

but what about that 1 time it would work!

Was already mentioned as not a viable option just more of an insight into player mindsets.

 

[D'Amavir]

Afk people at Luna bank do not count. I am sorry.

Yes, because every one on Trammel is an AFK'er at Luna. Right on, mate! If you honestly believe that Fel has more active players than Trammel, then that is your right. I also support people's right to be wrong. Its the american way.

 

[FrejaSP]

Also, if you really want to make the shards like they were as created, you would have to bring back statloss. And I know a lot of people are against that idea. But, if you support it on this new Fel only shard that you want to create, I will support you in that. After all, I can just stay on my home shard and not have to worry about it.

No my friend, The shards was born without stat loss, it was first added in 1998 together with the rep public

 

[D'Amavir]

More people go to Felucca than ones who never go to Fel. I am willing to bet on it if a developer is willing to broker it

Yes. And more people go to Trammel than the ones who never go to Trammel. Your point? I guess I missed it. Please elaborate.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

but what about that 1 time it would work!

Was already mentioned as not a viable option just more of an insight into player mindsets.

You cannot possibly get any useful insight out of something that can go wrong in so many unimaginable ways

 

[D'Amavir]

No my friend, The shards was born without stat loss, it was first added in 1998 together with the rep public

Yes. It was added long before Trammel. So, you only want things in game that were added on day one then? No Malas, no Lost Lands, no Ilsh? No colored ore. No colored wood.

Sounds dull to me but if you want a Fel ruleset shard set up just like Day One of UO, I will support that. It doesn't have an impact on me but I still support your option to move to a brand new shard.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

Yes. And more people go to Trammel than the ones who never go to Trammel. Your point? I guess I missed it. Please elaborate.

My point is that majority of players enjoy both facets and are used to it and Fel/Trammel talk is pointless!

 

[RichDC]

Course you can, its not about how the actual move would go but about the migration of players and there mindset of shard vs playstyle.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

Course you can, its not about how the actual move would go but about the migration of players and there mindset of shard vs playstyle.

I doubt most can fathom the consequences of such a move and hence, anything they say now will be null and void if it were to actually happen!

 

[D'Amavir]

My point is that majority of players enjoy both facets and are used to it and Fel/Trammel talk is pointless!

I AGREE. That was my point. Did you read my posts? I merely brought into the discussion the fact that most of the 'change it' threads the last two days have been really 'change it to my ruleset and make people not playing my ruleset have to change'.

I really couldn't agree more. I am all about the choice. Making a Trammel only ruleset is just as bad for the game as a Fel only ruleset. However, if Fel only players really really want a Fel only shard, I am not going to go against them on that.

 

[Connor_Graham]

More people go to Felucca than ones who never go to Fel. I am willing to bet on it if a developer is willing to broker it

There are more players that spend most of their time in Tram than players that spend most of their time in Fel. That was the point, not who has never visited Fel vs those who have.

 

[T'Challa]

99% of all statistics are yanked from someone's arse <---just like that one

Point being, not a single one of you can claim the other is wrong, all you are doing is flinging your opinions at one another like monkeys flinging poop.

 

[RichDC]

There are more players that spend most of their time in Tram than players that spend most of their time in Fel. That was the point, not who has never visited Fel vs those who have.

You should look at Great lakes, the majority of the players spending there time in trammel are PvPers burning counts at a moongate.

 

[D'Amavir]

There are more players that spend most of their time in Tram than players that spend most of their time in Fel. That was the point, not who has never visited Fel vs those who have.

I know the devs have the ability to track time on characters. Statloss and such is measured by actual time in game. Why can't they just put in a timer to show how much time a player spends on each facet? Honestly, I would love to see the numbers from that. You can even break out the time chart by how much time they spend in each city. That way people like Tomas who is thinking as he reads the first part of this post "Ya, people AFK'ing in Luna will effect the numbers" can look at how much Trammel time is actually used and in their own mind can tell themselves that most Trammel players are AFK in Luna while Fel is chocker block full of players.

They can also calculate how much time is spent in Fel in non Champ Spawns as well. Sounds like a good way to measure what players are actually doing.

 

[D'Amavir]

99% of all statistics are yanked from someone's arse <---just like that one

Point being, not a single one of you can claim the other is wrong, all you are doing is flinging your opinions at one another like monkeys flinging poop.

Welcome aboard, Cheeta.

 

[D'Amavir]

You should look at Great lakes, the majority of the players spending there time in trammel are PvPers burning counts at a moongate.

Well we should definitely make a full Fel shard to prevent that from happened then. I am all for it. Do counts still go away while you are a ghost? That should go away on the new Fel shard I think too. That's just my opinion of course. *flings opinion at you like Cheeta flinging poo*

 

[T'Challa]

Welcome aboard, Cheeta.

Not really, I honestly couldn't care less who plays in fel or in tram, as I play Siege exclusively.

I just get a kick out of the Uhall regulars bashing each other's brains in with the deadhorse stick, honestly

 

[D'Amavir]

Not really, I honestly couldn't care less who plays in fel or in tram, as I play Siege exclusively.

I just get a kick out of the Uhall regulars bashing each other's brains in with the deadhorse stick, honestly

Most people do. That's why threads like this are usually the biggest and most active ones on the boards.

And I, like you, couldn't care less who plays what facet. I play where I want to play and others can play where they want to play. My only part of this is pointing out that the people behind the 'change all the shards to Fel ruleset and make new Trammel only shards' would not be as supportive of the 'change all shards to Trammel and make knew Fel only shards' idea.

I would be just as fast to point out something like that on a Trammel based thread when people try to take away the Fel ruleset.

 

[Turdnugget]

The Felucca shards will be the one listed below. They will be without blessing and Item Insurance but with better drop of crafting resoutces, bod/heartwood rewards and artifacts.

If it were an all Fel shard... I would want no artifacts/no insurance/item blessing etc etc... I don't want a Siege server, that's basically what the servers would become, the way you're putting it...and I wouldn't play there. If I were to play an all Fel server, it would have to be close to classic. I don't want an all Fel server that is still item warfare.

 

[CatLord]

Remove cheating, scripting, speedhacks... then a dual facet UO is ok.
Until then... it is unfair.

Welcome to the Dark Ages and the Merchant-Warlords ruling Sosaria.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

I saw this post while I was looking at the boards not logged in.

The result was that I posted two (mostly) nonsense polls, because, well, that's kinda what this is from what I could discern. Nonsense at best, flame bait at worst. And in my case, sadly, it worked!!! I posted the first polls I've ever posted here on Stratics.

So my question is: What?

-Galen's player

 

[Der Rock]

If EA choose to changes the shard to all Fel and all Tram shards, how would you react?

Lets say, some of the old shards are changes to all Felucca and the newer one are changed to all Trammel.

EA will allow you to move all chars, bank, stable, house, own vendors from one shard to shard with wanted ruleset

The Felucca shards will be the one listed below. They will be without blessing and Item Insurance but with better drop of crafting resoutces, bod/heartwood rewards and artifacts.

Atlantic
Great Lakes
Catskills
Pacific
Chesapeake
Drachenfels
Siege Perilous

The rest of the US/EU shards will get all Trammel ruleset.

Sry.Freja,but your poll is absurd.You matched diferent polls together.
in your poll are 2 questions in itself,the question WOULD player move to a fell shard
and the question WOULD player let THEIR shard-ruleset change.
1st.poll should be :"Would you move to a fell shard"? YES or NO
2nd.poll should be the other questions then.
the more you splitt the answers in 1 poll the more you can interpret in the poll results.
a steady analysis is impossible.
sry,you failed here

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

It's not going to happen...so does it really matter? Maybe I'll make a poll on it...la

 

[Der Rock]

99% of all statistics are yanked from someone's arse <---just like that one

Point being, not a single one of you can claim the other is wrong, all you are doing is flinging your opinions at one another like monkeys flinging poop.

I can

 

[Draxous]

If (and that's a huge if) this was to actually happen, it shouldn't be the non-PvP'rs that should have to move, it should be the PvP'rs themselves. There are fewer of them so there would be fewer players that would be affected by the change.

There are not fewer PvPers than non-PvPers.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Connor_Graham]

There are not fewer PvPers than non-PvPers.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Oh yeah, I forgot that almost ALL of the new content the Devs have introduced over the last 5 yrs has been almost exclusively all Fel content, because the Dev's know there are more PvP'rs than not and they want to cater to the majority of their playerbase.

Oh wait.

They didn't do that.

Go figure.

 

[Draxous]

Oh yeah, good thinking!

Oh wait... definitely not.

Thanks.


PS. All the new content for the last year has had Felucca in it.

k tks bye.

 

[Tazar]

Atlantic is my old shard too, I had so much fun there before Siege was born. I could never see Atlantic with Trammel ruleset as it was a great shard when it was all PvP.

Lets say you could pack your chars, house, everything and EA would make sure, you could move all 6 accounts and place them all on same Trammel shard. All in the houses would be like before you moved, design and deco.

I know it may never happen but I wanted to see how the players would react

Add in: All houses in the exact same location (since they merge via illusions into each other and the surrounding landscape).

Add in: All friends and contacts also on the same shard (even the fel-based friends).

then you might have it. But even if you could do the first, you could never do the second.

 

[Connor_Graham]

k tks bye.

Yeah, you're right, it IS time for you to return to your fantasy world in which everyone just loves PvP and all the crap that goes with it, and Fel is bustling with players while Tram stays empty every day. I'm sure you're very happy there. Self delusion is like that.

 

[Pindershot]

I play on Pac and it's fine the way it is. I wouldn't want an all-Trammel shard, nor an all-Fel shard.

So if they changed Pac to an all-Fel shard, I'd move and be cheesed off unless I could find a great housing spot on the new place.

 

[Beer_Cayse]

I would prefer to have a choice on the shard I play ... ie., if I want Fel rules I go to Fel or whatever. When I played DAoC on an "all-Tram" (no RvR or PvP) setting it got boring after a bit. You need the ability to alter playstyles and NOT work one only.

Exception: Siege/Mugen. <grin>

But ... I selected the last option. I just killed the accounts a moth or so ago. <shrug>

 

[FrejaSP]

Sry.Freja,but your poll is absurd.You matched diferent polls together.
in your poll are 2 questions in itself,the question WOULD player move to a fell shard
and the question WOULD player let THEIR shard-ruleset change.
1st.poll should be :"Would you move to a fell shard"? YES or NO
2nd.poll should be the other questions then.
the more you splitt the answers in 1 poll the more you can interpret in the poll results.
a steady analysis is impossible.
sry,you failed here

No, here is one question, "how would you react if your shard did changes to one ruleset.?"
Now if it changes to your choice of ruleset, you would most likely stay.

Or if it changes to a ruleset that do not fit your playstyle, it would give you 3 choices:

• Live with it, maybe because you did not want to move shard
• Move to a shard with a ruleset that fit you.
• Quit the game

Or maybe you don't care or don't play.

I know some would had liked a choice for keeping the shard as they are but I choose to not add that choice as we can't have 3 ruleset. I also choose to changes Siege to a regular Fel shard without all our special rules as we can't have 3 ruleset.