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

[Lord Drakelord]

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

AMEN! If they did that to Sonoma,[all Felucca ruleset], we be on the first transfer token out.

 

[Der Rock]

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.

er... Freja,other question...

would it not be adequate if they would make ONLY Siege shard to a fel only shard?????
i am confused here,is there not enough landscape on siege for all ~100 of ure kind worldwide ??

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I would stay on Atlantic. I don't think an all Fel ruleset is the right way to go, but it's not nearly as scary as all the "I would transfer out/close my account" folks make it seem.

I had a tower in Fel for years after Trammel was created. The sad fact of the matter is, with the reduced number of active players on UO, the whole place would still be a ghost town with or without the Fel Rules.

If it did happen (and it certainly won't) you people that are claiming you would quit or leave your shard should just give it a try. Think about where your house is now. Do you see lots of people around it often? So ask yourself, what impact would a ruleset change really have on you? Is it really that scary that you would actually quit UO because you might see a red ever 7-10 days or so?

 

[D'Amavir]

I would stay on Atlantic. I don't think an all Fel ruleset is the right way to go, but it's not nearly as scary as all the "I would transfer out/close my account" folks make it seem.

I had a tower in Fel for years after Trammel was created. The sad fact of the matter is, with the reduced number of active players on UO, the whole place would still be a ghost town with or without the Fel Rules.

If it did happen (and it certainly won't) you people that are claiming you would quit or leave your shard should just give it a try. Think about where your house is now. Do you see lots of people around it often? So ask yourself, what impact would a ruleset change really have on you? Is it really that scary that you would actually quit UO because you might see a red ever 7-10 days or so?

Do you play SIMS online? If not, is it because you are afraid to? Do you play Parapa The Rappa? If not is it because you are afraid to?

The point is that just because someone doesn't want to play in an all Fel ruleset it doesn't mean that they are scared. I started in Fel. Fear in a video game is not an issue for me. The greatest pvp'er in all the world doesn't scare me. Would he kill my character? Sure. But fear is not an issue.

Many people that don't enjoy Fel just don't find pleasure in it. Don't be one of those typical posters, and you know the type I mean, that equates lack of interest to fear.

PVP just isn't fun to me in the current UO. So, I play in an area where pvp isn't forced on me. I also support those that choose to play in areas where pvp can be 'forced' on people.

 

[Vierna_GL]

Thankfully this won't happen, seems to be some kinda strange fascination with this topic tho lately ...

 

[Harb]

Wow, these "type" poll threads dealing with Tram/ Fel are all the rage nowadays aren't they?

I'd postulate that were EA to begin a deliberate planning process on the topic (extremely unlikely); they'd have to determine a solid set of facts and assumptions before seriously proceeding. So here are a few things to ponder:

- After the release of EQ, UO's subscription rate began decreasing faster than it was expanding, continuing until the advent of the Tram rule set and consequent in-game "split." In other words, from public release through a little after T2A, we were growing. EQ was published with a PvP switch, as many on our supporting boards had been clamoring for, and an exodus began. We got a lot of them back as time moved along, but were unable to recover the preponderance of folks who simply did not enjoy being victimized in an entertainment product. With the release of UOR, it turned around, and our subscription base began growing again. Subscription rate fluctuations were never so "dramatic" again, all movement from about ML onward was generally downward, and due to a lot of things I won't delve into here. The bottom line is this - we lost more subscriptions prior to the advent of Tram than any MMORPG other than WoW has ever achieved at their peak. Exit data indicated it was due to unrestrained activity of other players.

- Utilization rates of sub servers, when last openly discussed by dev personnel, were somewhere along the lines of 90% Tram/ 10% Fel. A walk around the sub servers, anywhere other than Siege/ Mugen, indicates this probably still holds true today. Dev is not likely to comment, and haven't for a long time, though they are the only ones who can provide an accurate assessment.

- As Stratics posters, we do not constitute the majority of UO players. Many former players post regularly, but do not play. Many avid, current players do post, many regularly. Those who do, tend to speak from a perspective of "self," there are no communal voices or collective representation on any public board. But seriously, there are not a lot of us here, and we have a disproportionally high number of Fel aficionados relative to the game's population at large.

- Players tend to play their shard of choice, other than those with high end vendors or participants in after market activities tend to cross shards regularly. Many have 12 years of time vested in where they choose to play. While there are many valid arguments for/ against shard mergers, which the underlying concept of this thread would require in a de facto sort of way, it's likely that if dev forced movement to accommodate play style preferences that we would experience another exodus of players - which none of us can really afford at this time.

- There are already two Fel only shards. The OP plays on one. If you want your shard expanded, fine - say so, explain, and justify the development committal of resource. But why infringe on anyone else? These shards are vacant, more so than any others except Origin.

- A lot of us like exactly what we have now, flexibility and choice. Both sides of the void are part of each shards history. I grew up in Fel, and loved it prior to the rise of one particular 3d party app that destroyed PvP IMHO. I moved to Tram, and love it. I venture back to Fel at least annually to assess what’s going on. Once there are no more cheats and hacks, I may stay, as there is much to like/ enjoy.

When you take out personal feelings/ preferences, the proposal doesn't look so good. Loose enough subscriptions and you will end this game. And this thread, like all the other threads regarding Tram v. Fel, is simply some of us die hard folks postulating that which dev never can. I didn't vote, I don't know how based on options. Just leave it be - please!!!

 

[FrejaSP]

er... Freja,other question...

would it not be adequate if they would make ONLY Siege shard to a fel only shard?????
i am confused here,is there not enough landscape on siege for all ~100 of ure kind worldwide ??

No because we would need more Felucca shards. Siege only have few players because of some of our rules, "only one char slot" being one of them.

The PvP players are not willing to accept the harder rules on Siege, that's why we are few.

 

[Harb]

Siege only have few players because of some of our rules, "only one char slot" being one of them.

The PvP players are not willing to accept the harder rules on Siege, that's why we are few.

I see. Then really what you're asking for is a new shard, with Fel only rules? If that's your objective, and if dev can commit the resources, more power to ya! But again, leave my shard alone please - it works just fine as is

 

[Maplestone]

Even though I'm a hard-core Trammie mongbat-hunter, I don't like the idea of forcing a Tram/Fel server split - it feels like the wrong solution to force people to commit to a playstyle and never have the option to change their minds or "try out" a different way of life.

 

[Der Rock]

No because we would need more Felucca shards. Siege only have few players because of some of our rules, "only one char slot" being one of them.

The PvP players are not willing to accept the harder rules on Siege, that's why we are few.

moment pls... i´ll do it for you....

Dev´s if you read this, on siege sever are to few players,so please change it and help them please.
Please, give them 7 char. slots and fel rules only,the majority of them would like it.

..........so, i REALY hope that helps a little, because i am not a siege player and i think the dev´s see the acuteness...

 

[FrejaSP]

I see. Then really what you're asking for is a new shard, with Fel only rules? If that's your objective, and if dev can commit the resources, more power to ya! But again, leave my shard alone please - it works just fine as is

I'm not asking for an new shard, I'm asking how the players would react if the shards was changed to one ruleset.

Maybe each shard should vote for their future, Trammel or Felucca ruleset.

I have chars on Atlantic too but had been unable to play the shard for 9 years. I still have friends there.
I feel it was a mega mistake to add trammel to the shard I loved.

On the other hand, the shard born after Trammel was added should become Trammel only.

I don't find it to late to fix it.

 

[D'Amavir]

I'm not asking for an new shard, I'm asking how the players would react if the shards was changed to one ruleset.

Maybe each shard should vote for their future, Trammel or Felucca ruleset.

I have chars on Atlantic too but had been unable to play the shard for 9 years. I still have friends there.

Most players already vote for their choice. If they want Trammel rules they plan in Trammel. If they want Fel rules they play on Fel. If they want Siege rules they play on Siege. Its a pretty decent set up already, all things considered. Driving more players away from an already low playerbase by changing their entire facet into something they don't want isn't helpful at all.

 

[Harb]

I'm not asking for an new shard, I'm asking how the players would react if the shards was changed to one ruleset.

Maybe each shard should vote for their future, Trammel or Felucca ruleset.

I have chars on Atlantic too but had been unable to play the shard for 9 years. I still have friends there.
I feel it was a mega mistake to add trammel to the shard I loved.

On the other hand, the shard born after Trammel was added should become Trammel only.

I don't find it to late to fix it.

Well, I've always been, and remain commited to one "ideal" over all overs with regard to our game, and thats simply to empower all players to enjoy the product as they choose. The only "caveat" I'd add is so long as it's not at someone else's expense - again, unless they so choose. Be a new shard, or as mentioned above simply removing all restrictions from Seige/ Mugen to make them more "playable," whatever makes folks happy - I'm all for it. The trouble has been, is, and always will be, is that any change making one subset happy very often irks another subset. I would warn ya however, that if you're really serious about letting players, all players, choose as they wish - that probability runs extremely high that all that would be left of the Fel rules set would be Seige/ Mugen, which inherently reduces flexibility/ choices in play for everyone.

 

[FrejaSP]

Well, I've always been, and remain commited to one "ideal" over all overs with regard to our game, and thats simply to empower all players to enjoy the product as they choose. The only "caveat" I'd add is so long as it's not at someone else's expense - again, unless they so choose. Be a new shard, or as mentioned above simply removing all restrictions from Seige/ Mugen to make them more "playable," whatever makes folks happy - I'm all for it. The trouble has been, is, and always will be, is that any change making one subset happy very often irks another subset. I would warn ya however, that if you're really serious about letting players, all players, choose as they wish - that probability runs extremely high that all that would be left of the Fel rules set would be Seige/ Mugen, which inherently reduces flexibility/ choices in play for everyone.

No problem, if all shards except Mugen and Siege voted for Trammel only ruleset, Siege and mugen would get more players, special if some but not all of the restrictions was removed.

 

[Lady Aalia]

Well since Atlantic would be all Fell i would be a bit in a nutshell....

I dont like pvp, for reasons known
But alot of my friends do, and i dont mind that they do , they kick ass at it and have loads of fun...

Besideds that i really like Atlantic and its history and i love my house spots... I would hate having to chose over spending time with my friends or watching them split up across 3 diffrent shards and staying on a shard wich Ruleset is not what i like , therefore not enjoying it as much anymore...

Aye UO isnt what it was in 98 when it was in the beginning stages, but times have changed so much... its allways easy to forget that yes back then the comunity was strong and Pks where mature and had honor... Well aye most of them where adults , since the internet was so darn expensive and the game was rated 18 +

Now its open to all ages and everyone has internet, and you are dealing with a crowd of kids that grew up on FPS games and lived pvp in games like wow...
Its a diffrent world.

having said that.. I still think the shards with both Rulesets work best, the pvpers have the freedom to do so and the non pvpers can stay away, if they do choose to take part in it, they have to face the consequenses.

Besideds who would buy all those 80 million Gold pvp Suits if there was no pvp on a shard

 

[Connor_Graham]

Besides who would buy all those 80 million Gold pvp Suits if there was no pvp on a shard

The Sampires.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Do you play SIMS online? If not, is it because you are afraid to?

Nope. I did, but they shut it down.

Do you play Parapa The Rappa? If not is it because you are afraid to?

I beat Parapa years ago...but still drag it out when drinking and hanging out with friends...YOU GOTTA BELIEVE!!!

 

[D'Amavir]

Nope. I did, but they shut it down.



I beat Parapa years ago...but still drag it out when drinking and hanging out with friends...YOU GOTTA BELIEVE!!!

Ewwwww. And by that I mean ewwwww.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

Please, give them 7 char. slots and fel rules only,the majority of them would like it.

We only have the fel ruleset...la

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

... its allways easy to forget that yes back then the comunity was strong and Pks where mature and had honor... Well aye most of them where adults , since the internet was so darn expensive and the game was rated 18 +

That is a romanticized version of how it really was back then.

Most of the PKs were trash talking little teenagers playing on their parents CCs. I was one of them! I was only 16 when UO came out. I didn't PK, but I fought PKs. Many of the PKs from back then were young, immature, didn't RP, talked trash, and were generally doing what they were doing to ruin the game experience for those around them.

You hear a lot about how good the Community was back then, and some of it was. But the unchecked PvP just led to griefing and people being PO'ed because they couldn't leave town without taking a small army with them...and even then, on dial up, you were likely to lag out or loss connection and wake up dead.

In some ways, I miss the old days, the sense of purpose of fighting the PKs and helping the community. But I don't miss the apathetic approach most non-PvPers (if there was such a thing back then) took to the whole thing. If more people had cared when a play showed up at the bank and a ghost and said they were PKed, instead of saying to themselves "glad that wasn't me...let's not go over there", PK'ing could have been brought into check.

Sorry for the near-rant

I think the Atlantic community is still strong, its just different now. You can make friendships now that don't usually end in someone looting your house or Ebolting you in the back when you are in need of a heal.

We lost some good, we lost some bad, we gained some bad, we gained some good.

But it really doesn't matter to me, I will play UO until they pull the plug...even if I rant and complain about stuff.

 

[Jhym]

I don't care, since I will never leave Chesapeake as it is where all my history resides.

However, turning into 100% either would be annoying. I like playing both rulesets.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Ewwwww. And by that I mean ewwwww.

You don't like Parapa?

What about Samba de Amigo??

 

[D'Amavir]

You don't like Parapa?

Not at all. I guess I am just afraid of him. Her? It? heh

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Not at all. I guess I am just afraid of him. Her? It? heh

He does look a little frightening...

 

[FrejaSP]

Besideds who would buy all those 80 million Gold pvp Suits if there was no pvp on a shard

On a Fel only shard without item insurance, you would never ever see a 80million gold PvP suit, the suit would sell for less than 500k gold.

 

[Tazar]

If it did happen (and it certainly won't) you people that are claiming you would quit or leave your shard should just give it a try.

Been there, done that for years... grown way past it and not going back. That might work on someone newer to UO, but not to an original player. It's not just the red... add thieves... add in the 100's of millions instantly lost due to the removal of blessings...

Sorry, No! I'd be gone in a heartbeat - and I also would not be here to whine about it for ages afterwords. I'd be here modding as usual.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Been there, done that for years... grown way past it and not going back. That might work on someone newer to UO, but not to an original player. It's not just the red... add thieves... add in the 100's of millions instantly lost due to the removal of blessings...

Sorry, No! I'd be gone in a heartbeat - and I also would not be here to whine about it for ages afterwords. I'd be here modding as usual.

I don't think it would be like before. I was there too ya know. Also, who said anything about removing blessings? We had blessed stuff in the old days too.

But I don't think it would be the way it was, because I don't think there are nearly (1/10th?) the number of people there was back then, and the land mass is much much larger.

That's why I say, you wouldn't encounter as many reds as you did back then.

But you have a good point about thieves. Can you imagine, the Night of a Thousand Ricos??

 

[Ailish]

To be completely blunt, Freja, if I wanted to play on Siege, I would. I play almost solely in Fel, but I happen to LIKE insurance and blessing.

Now, in the classic game style (no AoS) I wouldnt have a need for insurance.

 

[wanderer1origin]

seige players shouldnt make polls
lol

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.

 

[Tazar]

I don't think it would be like before. I was there too ya know. Also, who said anything about removing blessings? We had blessed stuff in the old days too.

To quote Freja in the original post...

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.

 

[FrejaSP]

To be completely blunt, Freja, if I wanted to play on Siege, I would. I play almost solely in Fel, but I happen to LIKE insurance and blessing.

Now, in the classic game style (no AoS) I wouldnt have a need for insurance.

I find insurance and blessing hurt the crafters badly. Just take my single bless on Siege, I will never ever need a new bow unless I find one better than the one I have.

I know monster drop and resource drop need to be different on a shard without insurance and blessing and crafters need more control over the mods on the items.

Sure, the crafters can't sell x mills suits but they will sell alot of suits so it may make up for it.

 

[MalagAste]

I don't want any of those shards..... I PvP and I PvM I like Tram when I want Tram and Fel when I want Fel.... I don't want to split myself between two shards..... not gonna happen.....

I would move if they started a Role-players shard where they had Seers like before.... who actually "could" change and do things in-game and you "could" get special things from them and the community as a whole was oriented to RP..... now whether this was Tram or Fel type I think it would have to be a Fel type server but one where bounties existed again and you had stat loss or something of a consequence for your actions.....

But I would quit if I had to stay on an all Fel shard and I don't want to play an all tram shard without my RP friends... So I would quit... But to have an all fel RP shard.... that went back to Pre-AoS armor and weapons....... THAT I might play... "might"....

 

[Ailish]

I find insurance and blessing hurt the crafters badly. Just take my single bless on Siege, I will never ever need a new bow unless I find one better than the one I have.

I know monster drop and resource drop need to be different on a shard without insurance and blessing and crafters need more control over the mods on the items.

Sure, the crafters can't sell x mills suits but they will sell alot of suits so it may make up for it.

You might notice, Freja, that I said in a pre-AoS style game there would be no need for insurance. Otherwise, you are asking people "What would you do if all shards were Siege, but either PvP or Non". Sorry, my answer is neither.

I would play happily on a Fel-ruleset only INSURANCE shard with AoS rules, or a Fel-only no insurance PRE-AOS shard, but I would not play on ANY shard that was AOS no insurance.

I am not a crafter, so I really dont care what a crafter can sell their suits for, but let me tell you, pre-AoS, I happily kept my neighbors in gold 5k at a time for armor.

 

[FrejaSP]

You might notice, Freja, that I said in a pre-AoS style game there would be no need for insurance. Otherwise, you are asking people "What would you do if all shards were Siege, but either PvP or Non". Sorry, my answer is neither.

No, I would not want the Fel shards to be like Siege.

Siege rules
No recall
No gating in and out of of dungeon.
Only one char on an account
NPC vendors take 3X the price for their wares.
NPC won't buy your wares
NPC and factions vendors won't sell resources
RoT, Rate over Time skill gain for non resourse using skills.

Some of this rules do keep players off Siege.

The shards are balanced for Trammel ruleset. If we had 2 kind of shards, devs could balance crafting and drop to a ruleset with no item insurance.

On a Fel shard, you need to be able to replace your items without to much trouble.

One of the most annoying thing, when putting a suit together on Siege is this 5 element resists on armor, you can't just ask a crafter to make you a suit with 60+ in all, because it's a hell to put together.

A valorite suit should be 70 in all resists and a barded leather suit should be 60 in all resists. Think a normal leather suit should be 40 in all resists and a light archer suit in iron should be 50 in all mods.
This would make it easier to make and sell PvP suits if we did not need a calculator to put a suit together.

On Tram shards, where they never lose their items, it need to take time to build the perfect suit but one a Fel shard, where you can lose it 5 mins after you buy it, it do not make sense.

 

[D'Amavir]

No, I would not want the Fel shards to be like Siege.

Siege rules
No recall
No gating in and out of of dungeon.
Only one char on an account
NPC vendors take 3X the price for their wares.
NPC won't buy your wares
NPC and factions vendors won't sell resources
RoT, Rate over Time skill gain for non resourse using skills.

Some of this rules do keep players off Siege.

I definitely agree that the unique rules of Siege keep a lot of people away. I know for me, personally, the one character per account is a deal breaker for me. The RoT system is definitely not appealing either.

You might be better served trying to get your shard changed to become more appealing (for more people, knowing it won't appeal to everyone) instead of pushing for the other shards to be changed in such a drastic and unappealing (to most people) way.

 

[FrejaSP]

I definitely agree that the unique rules of Siege keep a lot of people away. I know for me, personally, the one character per account is a deal breaker for me. The RoT system is definitely not appealing either.

You might be better served trying to get your shard changed to become more appealing (for more people, knowing it won't appeal to everyone) instead of pushing for the other shards to be changed in such a drastic and unappealing (to most people) way.

I would be willing to give up the special Siege rules as long we do not get trammel ruleset and blessing/insurance and new players can start directe on Siege without having to drop their young status on normal shards.

If that's the way to get PvP servers, then lets fill Siege with players and get more Siege shards.
However other Siege players may not agree with me in this.

 

[Tazar]

However other Siege players may not agree with me in this.

Siege or Production... Have we (meaning all of us in U-hall) ever agreed on anything? lol

 

[Harb]

However other Siege players may not agree with me in this.

I strongly suspect that should Siege players reach a consensus of what the rules set should like, that dev would make the necessary modifications. This portion of the base probably has more control over its own fate than any other. This thread, like many others, contains many of the specifics that many other threads attempt to address separately, PvP, item insurance, shard population, pre-AOS, etc. Were siege/ mugen to become Fel only and without item insurance, and those were the only differences from a "conventional" shard, it would 1) adress all of the above at least to some extent and 2) simplify many things for dev. But as you state, how many would agree or disagree? If thats really what you want - petition dev!

 

[FrejaSP]

I do like Siege as it is now but we are to few players on Siege, far to many do not like our special rules.

I rather saw the shard filled with players. If our rules are = an emty shard, then it's time to give up the rules.

 

[Harb]

I do like Siege as it is now but we are to few players on Siege, far to many do not like our special rules.

I rather saw the shard filled with players. If our rules are = an emty shard, then it's time to give up the rules.

Yep, its a dilemma. If siege functioned exactly like a production shard, but was Fel only and item insurance didn't function, you'd think more players would come. Technically, as before many player "dislikes" would be addressed. While AOS items would be present, without insurance, "function" itself would be very akin to pre-AOS. No Tram/ Fel debate. Many die hard Fel addicts would at least take a look again. And to this point, its easy for dev to implement. About the only other thing that may "hold you back" is housing. Players put their houses where they play most, their "home shard." If population is your goal, you're trying to pull new players in, but not necessarily "away" from where they call "home." If everyone were allowed 1 Tram house and 1 Fel house per account, that may also serve to eliminate an added deterent. You really couldn't simply allow for a second house per account specifically on Siege or you'd flood the shard with folks really not playing there. Anyhow, some more food for thought.

 

[GreywolfUK]

There is nothing wrong with the way things are now, facet wise, the shards being split as they are, gives people choice, to do either play style when they want, while staying on their home shards.

Your poll/argument would see a reduction of that choice, by making shards all one ruleset. be it fel rules or tram rules.

 

[Ailish]

No, I would not want the Fel shards to be like Siege. [...]

One of the most annoying thing, when putting a suit together on Siege is this 5 element resists on armor, you can't just ask a crafter to make you a suit with 60+ in all, because it's a hell to put together.

A valorite suit should be 70 in all resists and a barded leather suit should be 60 in all resists. Think a normal leather suit should be 40 in all resists and a light archer suit in iron should be 50 in all mods.
This would make it easier to make and sell PvP suits if we did not need a calculator to put a suit together.

On Tram shards, where they never lose their items, it need to take time to build the perfect suit but one a Fel shard, where you can lose it 5 mins after you buy it, it do not make sense.

You may not really realize it, but you are basically asking for a hybrid of AoS and non that leans very close to classic. Even your term "Light archer suit" points to this, as this suit doesnt exist anymore - it was a pre-AoS suit. The armor is the whole issue, when it comes to no insurance. The armor changes are what AoS was really all about. So yes, that goes to my assertion that I would play a pre-AoS Fel only shard.

As for never losing a armor in Tram ... it isnt really true. I lost armor all the time pre-AoS in Tram. Sometimes a couple times a day. You stumble into a bad situation on accident, die and get looted, and cant get back in time or cant overcome the situation that killed you in the first place. I know a guy who mostly doesnt use insurance, and every couple of weeks has to replace his suit due to not being able to get back to his corpse in time.

 

[WildWobble]

Where is the I would stay on my shard now Both option i play in both rule sets and enjoy the features of each. Why so many of you PVP NOOBS all think if you do any pvm you a trammie no i just enjoy the big picture and like to get the Insane items to PWN you all with! also lots of good people in tram only that said FK fel to many children hacking to be worth the effort.


Remove the ability of speed hack to function and i bet fel would pick up alot more players again. its not about a fel only or tram only rule set it should be about the game itself not some antiquated notions of the past how it was long ago face it grow up and evolve with the game.

A better poll would be would you return to pvp if
Speed hack was rendered inoporable
yes
no

i bet the numbers would be big on the yes side

another poll to ask would be why did you quit playing fel

Speed hack
Scripers
Idiot kids
ext ext ext.

 

[Cutblade]

I would not mind it if EA reverted back to a Felucca shard only. Or just have its own server with the old rule sets around the time Silver Vanq weapons was the bomb. With the option of using a transfer token or just create a new char there.
Ever since T2 days, there has not been a feeling of surprize or suspense in PvP. And when PVP became to item based from LBR I began to loose intrest in PVP.I grew up in Delucia before Trammel. I did not mind getting my head cut off and my things taken because I knew I was taking a chance leaving the borders of the town making me vulnerable target for a much more expieranced player or sometimes when I ran across a player wanting to attack me and then he discovers he made a mistake while he was looking for his first PK kill. Back in those "basic" days it was much more exciting to me in my opinion.
I am not saying EA needs to force folks to move shards.. but they could set aside a server with the ole Fel rule sets. I think there would be lots of folks wanting to be on that type shard..especially older Pre T2 Vets..and I could see players from Today going there to check it out and see the comparisons for themselves. After all, if you think about it they "listen" to ole stories from vets and wonder what it was like. Why not give them a chance to see for themselves..and if the Server doesn't make it..then merge it back down or something.
Sometimes games get theirselves to spread out..I have seen Vanguard go through this type sceneiro..they are hanging onto a thread..the worst thing they done was get rid of the PVP and RPG servers...when they done that the head count plumetted. So I think it would not be a good idea to drop servers.. just give folks a option and see the results for yourself EA..

So yes I vote on a Felucca old rule set server

 

[Ailish]

Why so many of you PVP NOOBS all think if you do any pvm you a trammie

PvPers do PvM all the time, champs spawns for just one example. I enjoy a variety of PvM, but I prefer to do it in Fel unless I have no option (Travesty, Cu's, Doom, etc). I also like to mine and LJ sometimes ... again, I just see no reason to do it in Tram. Others do, thats fine for them. I just prefer to carry out my game life in Fel.

 

[FrejaSP]

So yes I vote on a Felucca old rule set server

The problem with making a Felucca old rule set server is, the code is long gone, so they would have to be resources to making a shard with a new ruleset and have 3 set of servers to keep updated.

You may say, the Felucca old rule set server should be static and never changes but I'm not sure that would work.

Better would be to take the Felucca/Siege ruleset we have now and make a few changes that will remove the bad effect of AoS.

Maybe we just need a little tweak of loot/resource drop, a way to craft runic tools from resources a crafter can get, mods on colored leather, metal, scala like we have on wood and armslore give same bonus as we have on Siege.

To make a Felucca shard, I found it important, that the crafters will be needed to replace lost PvP and PvM gear.

I find it sad to see, that some players (not you) think Fel and Siege is all about PvP, Fel as it is now may have lost the crafters and some of the PvM'ers but on Siege, where we don't have Trammel, all play styles are present as it was in old days on normal shards.

 

[FrejaSP]

However other Siege players may not agree with me in this.

Siege or Production... Have we (meaning all of us in U-hall) ever agreed on anything? lol

I don't know about UHall but it did happen a few times, that Siege agreed about something.

Siege may event agree with me this time, as noone had disagreed yet and Siege use to be very vocal.

I do think we all agree, that we need more players on Siege even when we may have to give up some of our special rules.

 

[Gellor]

Hmm... I don't see the right option to vote since I playish multiple shards.

If it was an all Fel shard, I'd stay.

If it was an all Tram shard, accounts would close.

My experience has been Tram leads to more antisocial behavior than Fel. By "antisocial", I mean less player interaction(ie playing with one's self ) not "acting badly toward players".