Would You Still Play UO if it were All Fel Rules?

[Arcamedies]

I voted no. I remember what started happening to Sosaria before Fel/ Tram came to be. Judging by how many other people were ready to drop this game like a bad habit, I was certainly not alone. Here is an excerpt from an interview of Star Long back on August 19, 1997.

"For online games to be successful, they need to maintain order in a player community comprised of experienced players, rogue players, newbies, and longtime fanatics. Upset the balance, and a company could lose business; for example, if rogue players kill all the newbies, renewed subscriptions plummet."

Now while this was good in theory, in practice, it failed terribly. Players ended up mining in guard zones so they wouldn't get ganked by groups of 3-4 PKs, for no other reason that chest thumping. Anyone remember boat mining?

Of course this wasn't the playstyle of everyone that activly engaged in PvP, but it only takes a few handfulls of "L33T" players to make people not want to play anymore. Regardless of what anyone says, it's all about the subscriptions and the subscription numbers were dropping as a result of uncontrolled PvP.

As for why did people buy the game if it was so fustrating and hard. It wasn't a matter of being frustraded or the game being too difficult. It had to do with some players killing you over and over and over for no other reason than to keep you from doing anything. That is what started turning people off from the game. Besides, people were new to this PvP and PvM thing. No one knew what to expect, not even Origin. Also, how can someone even know if they will get frustraed or find a game too hard if they don't buy it and try it?

The Tram/ Fel split happened for a few reasons. People were fed up with the childish ganking. They had to increase the landmass to accomodate housing for more players and with more players, they needed more areas to hunt.

One thing was for certain though. Subscriptions were dropping. A big reason was the failed attempt at "free for all" PvP. Giving people the option to PvP when they wanted to and not when they didn't, kept this game from becoming a footnote in the gaming industry.

Amost all games after UO offered the option to PvP or not.

Well your right in one instance, it was all about money. Just like Lucas destroyed the star wars movies. Thanks for proving my point!! And as far as L33T players killing YOU over and over, well guess this game just wasnt for you in its hay day. WE NOW LIVE IN THE TIMES OF GM TOWNIES

 

[red sky]

Now while this was good in theory, in practice, it failed terribly. Players ended up mining in guard zones so they wouldn't get ganked by groups of 3-4 PKs, for no other reason that chest thumping. Anyone remember boat mining?

Dang, too bad I was a noob when all that was going on. I guess there was a pack of murderers scouting every mining location in Sosaria which I suppose would of made it quite rough for anyone to mine.

 

[siyeng0]

Well your right in one instance, it was all about money. Just like Lucas destroyed the star wars movies. Thanks for proving my point!! And as far as L33T players killing YOU over and over, well guess this game just wasnt for you in its hay day. WE NOW LIVE IN THE TIMES OF GM TOWNIES

No. It wasn't all about money. It was about the developers wanting to give their players - all of them, not just the ones with the superiority complex and the purportedly massive e-peen - a game that they enjoyed. And many of the players? Didn't enjoy PvP. That's a fact. You can cry all you want about it being the One True Playstyle, but the fact remains that had there not been a majority rule to overturn it, it would still be in place.

I can't tell you why the others didn't want to play a game with compulsory PvP anymore, but I can tell you why I would rather not see it return to that state.

People like you.

Look at your post. I've quoted it very nicely for you. Look at Black Rain's posts. Look at the pro-PvPers coming in and roundly dismissing everyone who doesn't play the game in exactly the same way that they do, telling them that they're somehow playing it wrong - how? It's a sandbox! - because they'd rather not spend all their time hunting down and killing other players. (You know, if I wanted to hunt down and kill other players, I'd find a multiplayer FPS. I like FPSs. I'm good at them. But I'm not playing UO for PvP because, to be honest, the game has better things to offer me.)

You say that the devs "destroyed" the game by introducing Trammel. That was years ago. The game is still running and, presumably, you're still playing.* Some of us are happy with it. I personally like not being forced to play like someone else wants me to play. I have a right to do what I want without being imposed on - think about it this way: how would you feel if I was able to teleport you into a room, lock it, and not let you out until you'd roleplayed with me for a whole hour? - so, as far as I'm concerned, giving players that choice didn't destroy the game; it saved it. If they hadn't implemented that, there'd either be no game, or you'd be playing with the handful of antisocial players who ruined it for everyone else back in the "good old days." The entire game would be like Siege. You'd probably like that. But it wouldn't be making half as much money as it is now.

"And as far as L33T players killing YOU over and over, well guess this game just wasnt for you in its hay day." No, I guess it wasn't. Also, I'd like you to, just before you reply, sit back for a moment and think. What did those 1337 players accomplish? So they killed a miner or a minor PvMer over and over, emoted defiling their corpse, hurled abuse, and all those other things they like to do. What did they accomplish? So often I'm told that I'm wasting my time roleplaying because that's not what the game is for**; how was going out of your way to make another player miserable - for the sole purpose of making them miserable; after the sixth or seventh time you've killed them, they're not going to drop any more loot - somehow superior to how I play? How is that any better? We're both essentially equal. We're sitting in a computer chair, avoiding the sun, playing pretendy games and being unhealthy. I'm having fun being a "GM TOWNIE", and you - well, you're making someone else unhappy. Without challenge. Over and over. Mechanically. Like a trained monkey.

And you like that. And anybody who doesn't like making someone else unhappy, over and over, without challenge, like a trained monkey, is playing the game wrong.

To be honest, as far as I'm concerned, that's the saddest thing I've ever heard. It's sadder than people spending six hours a day killing Lady Melisande in the hope they'll get a crimson cincture. It's sadder than UO weddings. It's sadder than me sitting in Luna pretending to be someone else. You can say what you will about the challenges and delights of PvP, but it's not the PvP system I don't like; it's the players. You think that humiliating others and ruining the game for them is fun. You think that anybody who doesn't think like you is worthy of ridicule. You are immature, intellectually stunted, and pitiful - and sadly, you're not alone.

I don't want to play with you or anybody like you, and that's why I'm voting No.


*If you're not playing and you're still reading and commenting on UHall after all these years, I'll just let that speak for itself.
**What does "MMORPG" stand for?

 

[Der Rock]

No. It wasn't all about money. It was about the developers wanting to give their players - all of them, not just the ones with the superiority complex and the purportedly massive e-peen - a game that they enjoyed. And many of the players? Didn't enjoy PvP. That's a fact. You can cry all you want about it being the One True Playstyle, but the fact remains that had there not been a majority rule to overturn it, it would still be in place.

I can't tell you why the others didn't want to play a game with compulsory PvP anymore, but I can tell you why I would rather not see it return to that state.

People like you.

Look at your post. I've quoted it very nicely for you. Look at Black Rain's posts. Look at the pro-PvPers coming in and roundly dismissing everyone who doesn't play the game in exactly the same way that they do, telling them that they're somehow playing it wrong - how? It's a sandbox! - because they'd rather not spend all their time hunting down and killing other players. (You know, if I wanted to hunt down and kill other players, I'd find a multiplayer FPS. I like FPSs. I'm good at them. But I'm not playing UO for PvP because, to be honest, the game has better things to offer me.)

You say that the devs "destroyed" the game by introducing Trammel. That was years ago. The game is still running and, presumably, you're still playing.* Some of us are happy with it. I personally like not being forced to play like someone else wants me to play. I have a right to do what I want without being imposed on - think about it this way: how would you feel if I was able to teleport you into a room, lock it, and not let you out until you'd roleplayed with me for a whole hour? - so, as far as I'm concerned, giving players that choice didn't destroy the game; it saved it. If they hadn't implemented that, there'd either be no game, or you'd be playing with the handful of antisocial players who ruined it for everyone else back in the "good old days." The entire game would be like Siege. You'd probably like that. But it wouldn't be making half as much money as it is now.

"And as far as L33T players killing YOU over and over, well guess this game just wasnt for you in its hay day." No, I guess it wasn't. Also, I'd like you to, just before you reply, sit back for a moment and think. What did those 1337 players accomplish? So they killed a miner or a minor PvMer over and over, emoted defiling their corpse, hurled abuse, and all those other things they like to do. What did they accomplish? So often I'm told that I'm wasting my time roleplaying because that's not what the game is for**; how was going out of your way to make another player miserable - for the sole purpose of making them miserable; after the sixth or seventh time you've killed them, they're not going to drop any more loot - somehow superior to how I play? How is that any better? We're both essentially equal. We're sitting in a computer chair, avoiding the sun, playing pretendy games and being unhealthy. I'm having fun being a "GM TOWNIE", and you - well, you're making someone else unhappy. Without challenge. Over and over. Mechanically. Like a trained monkey.

And you like that. And anybody who doesn't like making someone else unhappy, over and over, without challenge, like a trained monkey, is playing the game wrong.

To be honest, as far as I'm concerned, that's the saddest thing I've ever heard. It's sadder than people spending six hours a day killing Lady Melisande in the hope they'll get a crimson cincture. It's sadder than UO weddings. It's sadder than me sitting in Luna pretending to be someone else. You can say what you will about the challenges and delights of PvP, but it's not the PvP system I don't like; it's the players. You think that humiliating others and ruining the game for them is fun. You think that anybody who doesn't think like you is worthy of ridicule. You are immature, intellectually stunted, and pitiful - and sadly, you're not alone.

I don't want to play with you or anybody like you, and that's why I'm voting No.


*If you're not playing and you're still reading and commenting on UHall after all these years, I'll just let that speak for itself.
**What does "MMORPG" stand for?

very good post
one of the main problem is, you cant argue with those players,doesn´t matter wich fact you offer, it is all wrong and they have the wisdom how the world works.

if there would be no champs or double resourcess or what ever in fel, then there would be no interaction there.
(if we are objective, there isn´t even with this carrots almost no interaction now )
it is NOT a problem of PvP in itself, it is the main problem of UO´s PvP style.
as i posted above, if there would be a party/guild/faction war only, with certain events
many NO voters would start PvP again.

it is very sad to see that those hardcore "PvP" player can´t see that they destroy their playstyle by them self.

 

[Tomas_Bryce]

I voted yes, but Siyeng0's post is very true.

Another gold plated truth is that when the usual chest thumping "I own juu" or worse spewing PvPer dies, he is quick to blame imaginary exploits or "gimp" templates. The amount of crap they talk just makes you wonder about their emotional (and physical) state.

Luckily, there are many classy PvP'ers in game. Just not as many as in the past.

 

[FrejaSP]

Why are all making it a Trammel vs Felucca issue?

EA made a mega mistake when they added Trammel the way they did. We need both Trammel and Felucce but not on same shards.

If we goes back to 1998, we had a game with alot of active customers. It was not like the numbers was dropping.

Yes some did quit, but more did start. If EA should have keeped the old shards all PvP (without stat loss). They was working and had alot of happy customers.

Then to please the unhappy customers and the ones who did quit, they should had made new shards with all Trammel ruleset.

This way we had been able to keep all the players, both the PvP'ers and the non PvP'ers.

For 9 years, we had tryed to have Trammel and Felucca on same shards and each year, we have lost players.

I think it's about time to changes the road. Make the old shards (the ones we had year 1998) all PvP and the newer ones all Trammel.
The Fel rules shard should not have Item Insurance but drop of items and resources for crafting should be better so it become easier to replace items.

Give all accounts 1 shard-transfer tokens, that can transfer all chars and house(s) an account own on a shard to a shard of different ruleset.
Houses should be deeded with items and accounts vendors, other vendors would be left near the old spot but moved to close to road or edge of forest so the owner of them do have time to take them down.

Maybe the system should offer place for the house on the new server, close to old spot on old server. Inactive accounts, only paid each 4 month may lose their spots, as their houses should be deeded and placed in their bank to give room for active accounts server changes.

 

[Grumm]

FrejaSP, they wanted people to have a choice to whether they wanted to PvP a certain day or just go bash Mobs. I don't think they wanted people to have to play multiple shards to enjoy all the content. How they chose to introduce Trammel was poor. A consentual PvP system with new lands and not just a mirror image would have been much better.

Red Sky, if you played "back in the day", you would remember that resource nodes were static. A Valorite spawn would always be in the same spot. The back of the Minoc mines were always camped by PKs waiting for someone to step just out of the guard zone. Not every inch of mining area was camped, but as the game went on, more and more of the the good nodes were.

Arcamedies, how did I prove your point? I only replied to the very end of your post.

I know this isn't a Trammel VS Felucca thread, but to just say yes or no to the question presented before us would lead to the replies asking why someone said yes or no. The title of this threads prods us into it.

 

[Yalp]

Something I've always thought in the back of my mind as I read various threads, how many peeps playing UO now, played when the game was in its "heyday"?

I do know a few peeps that have played for more than 5, 6, 10 years... but the far far majority of players I know have played less than 5 years. Myself, 3.5 years.

Discussion of how the game was "better" or "ruined" because of x,y, or z change, leaves me with the thought... so what? I played a certain way when I was in grade school..... doesn't mean I'm going to continue to play that same way in high school, college or my adult life. Why? Because I've matured. And so has the game.

I appreciate people documenting how things used to be.. but I have a hard time bemoaning how the game has been ruined since the AOS, pub 16, pre-tram, etc.. changes. It's a dynamic set of software.. designed to change, modify, upgrade adapt.

Just me and my thoughts...

 

[siyeng0]

I don't think they wanted people to have to play multiple shards to enjoy all the content. How they chose to introduce Trammel was poor. A consentual PvP system with new lands and not just a mirror image would have been much better.

I do agree with this.

Also, when it came to a consentual PvP system, I think that the much-talked-about "PvP switch" (basically an option - 'If this box is ticked, people can freely attack you') would have been the best choice; guilds are tricky, politics gets involved and it's impossible to be as free as one would like to be. However, then there'd be issues with some poor fools accidentally turning the switch on and losing all their stuff, and I'm not actually sure they had the mechanics to implement such a thing back when Trammel was introduced.

(I would actually play UO if it were all Fel rules and contained nothing but roleplayers. But, well, that's never going to happen.)

 

[FrejaSP]

FrejaSP, they wanted people to have a choice to whether they wanted to PvP a certain day or just go bash Mobs.

That would still be possible, you can have a char in guildwar on a Trammel shard or in Faction.
Sure it may be a little little harder to bash monsters on a Fel shard without risk for PvP, but some like it that way.

Red Sky, if you played "back in the day", you would remember that resource nodes were static. A Valorite spawn would always be in the same spot. The back of the Minoc mines were always camped by PKs waiting for someone to step just out of the guard zone. Not every inch of mining area was camped, but as the game went on, more and more of the the good nodes were.

"Back in the day" we did not have colored ore, we only had iron ore!

 

[D'Amavir]

Why are all making it a Trammel vs Felucca issue?

You, of all people, have been on Stratics long enough to know the answer to that. Any, and that's ANY, thread made about Trammel rules will soon be overrun by Fel players talking about how sceered, stupid, poor sports or lazy Trammel players are. And any thread about Fel rules will soon be overrun by Trammel players talking about how Fel players are stupid, mean and cheaters. And any thread about improving any normal shard will soon be overrun by Siege players talking about how Siege is the end all be all of all shards and that anyone that doesn't play Siege is sceered, stupid or 'wants it easy' all non Siege players are. Its the way Stratics works.

EA made a mega mistake when they added Trammel the way they did.

Agreed. They should have put a lot more work into ensuring that as many of the existing 'player communities' in the game at the time had a seamless transition to this new change. And I think a non mirrored landmass for 'Trammel' would have been much better. Personal opinion of course.

We need both Trammel and Felucce but not on same shards.

Why? Some people like the choice of going through a gate to have wide open pvp when they want. And some people like the choice of going through a gate to have limited pvp when they want. Choice is good.

If we goes back to 1998, we had a game with alot of active customers. It was not like the numbers was dropping.

In 98, EQ, WoW, SWG and many others had much lower numbers than today. I am pretty sure that UO even had MORE customers than WoW in 98. Can you imagine?

Yes some did quit, but more did start. If EA should have keeped the old shards all PvP (without stat loss). They was working and had alot of happy customers.

As many developers have learned in the last 10 years, more people want limited pvp than all open pvp. All pvp games don't really do very well.

Then to please the unhappy customers and the ones who did quit, they should had made new shards with all Trammel ruleset.

Again, why not give people a choice?

This why we had been able to keep all the players, both the PvP'ers and the non PvP'ers.

We would have lost a lot of people that didn't want to leave a shard they had been on since they started to start over on a new one. People quit because they had to move facets, can you imagine how many would quit if they had to move shards?

For 9 years, we had tryed to have Trammel and Felucca on same shards and each year, we have lost players.

Look at the numbers, more people play on Trammel than on Fel. Its true. Trammel isn't why people quit. The devs not keeping up with the new technology and graphics is a big big big reason. Show a brand new pvm player WoW and UO and tell them both are all PVM and most will pick WoW. Show a pvp player WoW and UO and tell them both are all PVP and most will pick WoW. I am not saying WoW is better, but if a new player unaware of both just LOOKS at each, one clearly seems like a modern game and one doesn't.

I think it's about time to changes the road. Make the old shards (the ones we had year 1998) all PvP and the newer ones all Trammel.

Or make the old shards all PVM and make newer ones all Fel. Works for me. Actually, it doesn't. See, I respect and support pvp'ers (most of them I know at least) enough to not try to push such a change on them without them wanting it. It most of the pvp'ers came out and said they wanted their current shard changed to pvm only and a new shard opened for PVP only I would support them in that.

The Fel rules shard should not have Item Insurance but drop of items and resources for crafting should be better so it become easier to replace items.

I have given my opinion on the flaw in this mentality, for many, so I won't do it again. I respect your opinion and support your right to have it though.

Give all accounts 1 shard-transfer tokens, that can transfer all chars and house(s) an account own on a shard to a shard of different ruleset.
Houses should be deeded with items and accounts vendors, other vendors would be left near the old spot but moved to close to road or edge of forest so the owner of them do have time to take them down.

Fel players would be ok with this idea if they had to all move to a new shard? If so, I support making all shards PVM and adding new ones for PVP.

Maybe the system should offer place for the house on the new server, close to old spot on old server. Inactive accounts, only paid each 4 month may lose their spots, as their houses should be deeded and placed in their bank to give room for active accounts server changes.

I think housing and 'player establishments' need much much much more attention and support from the devs than it has now. UO is, and always has been, about community. The RP community, the PVM community, the PVP community, the 'insert combo of above' community. Those aspects should be more encouraged.

 

[D'Amavir]

Something I've always thought in the back of my mind as I read various threads, how many peeps playing UO now, played when the game was in its "heyday"?

I do know a few peeps that have played for more than 5, 6, 10 years... but the far far majority of players I know have played less than 5 years. Myself, 3.5 years.

Discussion of how the game was "better" or "ruined" because of x,y, or z change, leaves me with the thought... so what? I played a certain way when I was in grade school..... doesn't mean I'm going to continue to play that same way in high school, college or my adult life. Why? Because I've matured. And so has the game.

I appreciate people documenting how things used to be.. but I have a hard time bemoaning how the game has been ruined since the AOS, pub 16, pre-tram, etc.. changes. It's a dynamic set of software.. designed to change, modify, upgrade adapt.

Just me and my thoughts...

If you could change your job in adult like to make it as enjoyable as the playtime you had as a child, you wouldn't want that?

And just because something changes it doesn't mean it was made better. People talk about how things were before because, to them, things were better then. Just like people before talked about things they thought would make things better then. You may not been around for this, but in the early days boards like this were filled with 'get rid of the pvp!', 'remove statloss!' and 'insert change requested here'. Why? Because in their opinion their change ideas would have been improvements to the game. There is nothing wrong with people giving their ideas on how to improve a game. Regardless of it its a change to something completely new or one reminiscent of something that happened in the past.

Using terms like 'pre-ren' or 'pre AoS' is just a way to help describe what they are talking about. Sure, I could say 'I wish resists and item properties worked differently'. But, to better describe what I mean I use 'I wish resists and item properties worked more like they did Pre AoS. Nothing wrong with that really.

 

[D'Amavir]

(I would actually play UO if it were all Fel rules and contained nothing but roleplayers. But, well, that's never going to happen.)

That is one of the main problems right there. A lot of people are tossing out comments like 'Why did you buy UO in 97-00 when you knew it was all open pvp?". Well, the answer is simple. For me, for many other players AND for the people that originally designed the game, we underestimated the amount of 'anti social' players that would flock to a game like this.

Some of my best UO experiences are those that involve me either getting hunted and attacked by Reds or me hunting and attacking Reds. It was fun. But for every cool and respectful Red, there were 20 punks that killed you, looted you dry and rez killed you over and over. People drove players out of Fel, not rules. Sure, if the rules were changed to not allow pvp at all, Trammel wouldn't have ever been needed. But, as you said, a lot of people would have enjoyed Fel were it not for the players that tried to ruin to experience for everyone else.

 

[Draxous]

No. It wasn't all about money. It was about the developers wanting to give their players - all of them, not just the ones with the superiority complex and the purportedly massive e-peen - a game that they enjoyed. And many of the players? Didn't enjoy PvP. That's a fact. You can cry all you want about it being the One True Playstyle, but the fact remains that had there not been a majority rule to overturn it, it would still be in place.

I can't tell you why the others didn't want to play a game with compulsory PvP anymore, but I can tell you why I would rather not see it return to that state.

People like you.

Look at your post. I've quoted it very nicely for you. Look at Black Rain's posts. Look at the pro-PvPers coming in and roundly dismissing everyone who doesn't play the game in exactly the same way that they do, telling them that they're somehow playing it wrong - how? It's a sandbox! - because they'd rather not spend all their time hunting down and killing other players. (You know, if I wanted to hunt down and kill other players, I'd find a multiplayer FPS. I like FPSs. I'm good at them. But I'm not playing UO for PvP because, to be honest, the game has better things to offer me.)

Excuse me. You talk of hyper-extended e-peens and then you come here and stroke your own?

I never dismissed your playstyle. What I did was clearly define it and you just didn't want to hear (read) the truth.

I read the BS by the Trammies saying that players were leaving in droves because of Felucca... which by all accounts of the data is total BS because UO was steadily GAINING in subscriptions. I read that 85% of the UO playerbase prefer Trammel... which by all accounts of data is total BS. I read that Trammel saved UO because it would have been doomed to die... which is TOTAL BS as there are today, emulations of pre-tram going strong with servers that rival production server populations. All this crap I read constantly which is untrue is acceptable, but someone can't point out that Trammel is the easier version of Felucca?!?!? Which is 100% true?

Is your freaking ego hurt or something?

Maybe as Surgeries loves to point out, that most of North American players enjoy playing an easier version of a videogame, where you don't have to compete with other players for the ability to just play (what pking essentially is.) Great fact... but that has nothing to do with UO.

The reason why we have Trammel is because EA/OSI freaked out when they saw what EQ had done and... rather than being the pioneers they once were... decided to cookie cut another game and paste it into this one. We all agree that the way they implemented Trammel was not ideal. We all agree that players should have the option to play Trammel OR Felucca... depending on what they want.

Where I don't agree, is the notion that your playstyle is somehow better than mine. It is not. And neither is it vice versa.

What my playstyle is-is more challenging than your playstyle.

Regardless of how you try to spin it.

-BlacK RaiN

PS. Feluccans Role-Play too... we do everything done in Trammel and more... which is why I laughed at your analogy. It didn't even warrant a response.

 

[D'Amavir]

Excuse me. You talk of hyper-extended e-peens and then you come here and stroke your own?

I never dismissed your playstyle. What I did was clearly define it and you just didn't want to hear (read) the truth.

I read the BS by the Trammies saying that players were leaving in droves because of Felucca... which by all accounts of the data is total BS because UO was steadily GAINING in subscriptions. I read that 85% of the UO playerbase prefer Trammel... which by all accounts of data is total BS. I read that Trammel saved UO because it would have been doomed to die... which is TOTAL BS as there are today, emulations of pre-tram going strong with servers that rival production server populations. All this crap I read constantly which is untrue is acceptable, but someone can't point out that Trammel is the easier version of Felucca?!?!? Which is 100% true?

Is your freaking ego hurt or something?

Maybe as Surgeries loves to point out, that most of North American players enjoy playing an easier version of a videogame, where you don't have to compete with other players for the ability to just play (what pking essentially is.) Great fact... but that has nothing to do with UO.

The reason why we have Trammel is because EA/OSI freaked out when they saw what EQ had done and... rather than being the pioneers they once were... decided to cookie cut another game and paste it into this one. We all agree that the way they implemented Trammel was not ideal. We all agree that players should have the option to play Trammel OR Felucca... depending on what they want.

Where I don't agree, is the notion that your playstyle is somehow better than mine. It is not. And neither is it vice versa.

What my playstyle is-is more challenging than your playstyle.

Regardless of how you try to spin it.

-BlacK RaiN

PS. Feluccans Role-Play too... we do everything done in Trammel and more... which is why I laughed at your analogy. It didn't even warrant a response.

Just a little reminder of how your first part went in regards to not dismissing other playstyles.

"Of course, the mindless NPCs are no where near the challenge level of another human and the only thing I can come up with (the only difference) is that the trammies really can't stand playing videogames at a more challenging level.

I'd wager these are the same people who purchase a console game in the store and play it on "Easy" even if they can handle medium. I suppose they know full-well they can't do it on hard so why not cry about it.

Anything else is just bull****."

Nicely done.

As for being more 'challenging'. In your mind, I am sure it is. Then again, I imagine a lot of things are more challenging for you that it is for others. Nothing wrong with that at all.

What do you do in Fel that isn't done in Trammel? I haven't seen anything unique done by players in Fel that can't be done in Trammel. But, I am sure you can come up with something to back up that claim. Go for it.

But, you won't. We both know that.

 

[Draxous]

What do you do in Fel that isn't done in Trammel? I haven't seen anything unique done by players in Fel that can't be done in Trammel. But, I am sure you can come up with something to back up that claim. Go for it.

But, you won't. We both know that.

- Factions.

- PKing.

- Role-Playing an Orc and killing any warrior who tries to invade the fort.

How about 3 off the top of my head?

Do you like being thrashed in debates or something? Do you not realize that this is not a videogame you and I are engaging in and the 'insert 2 coins and play again' thing does not apply!?!?!?

You can stop trolling now. Try doing something productive with your time.

Thanks.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

What do you do in Fel that isn't done in Trammel?

Stealing from other players. (well, there are ways around that)...la

 

[D'Amavir]

- Factions.

Trammel has factions too. Unless you only mean what you call factions. RP guilds create factions all the time. Minax supporting RP guilds war TB supporting RP guilds in Trammel all the time. If you mean the whole 'take a town' thing, then ya, you can only do that in Fel. And, considering how many people complain about factions being crap, it doesn't happen much these days.

- PKing.

Players (P) kill (K) other players all the time in Trammel. Just the other day I attended an RP trial IN TRAMMEL where some pirates got out of line and were killed by the guards at the trial. Fun times.

- Role-Playing an Orc and killing any warrior who tries to invade the fort.

RP'd orcs used to raid the Abbey all the time, in Trammel even. You can do that in Trammel so fail again.

How about 3 off the top of my head?

Do you like being thrashed in debates or something?

Not sure, I will let you know when it happens.

Do you not realize that this is not a videogame you and I are engaging in and the 'insert 2 coins and play again' thing does not apply!?!?!?

Not sure what that even means so I can't commit. No hablo moron, sorry.

You can stop trolling now. Try doing something productive with your time.

Thanks.

Same to ya. Go back to your chocker block full shard of pvp'ers. I can't imagine you have much time between all the pvp you are doing there considering you have all the players there and all the other facets are empty.

 

[D'Amavir]

Stealing from other players. (well, there are ways around that)...la

Exactly. My thief used to steal some wayyyy nasty weapons in Trammel from other rp guilds. But, that was before insurance. Not sure how many weapons you are stealing these days on normal shards but I would imagine its pretty low. Or am I mistaken?

 

[T'Challa]

D, you're arguing with someone who spends most of his time on a Trammel shard...

BR, Atlantic Doom is that way --->

 

[Draxous]

D, you're arguing with someone who spends most of his time on a Trammel shard...

BR, Atlantic Doom is that way --->

You fail.

 

[Bo Hica]

An NPC can attack you, kill you, loot your corpse and even trash talk you (lady mel trash talks!)

The thing that after 11+ years of UO that I cannot wrap my mind around is that there is a group of players in UO who only have a problem with this scenario if it's another player doing it to them and not a mindless NPC.

Of course, the mindless NPCs are no where near the challenge level of another human and the only thing I can come up with (the only difference) is that the trammies really can't stand playing videogames at a more challenging level.

I'd wager these are the same people who purchase a console game in the store and play it on "Easy" even if they can handle medium. I suppose they know full-well they can't do it on hard so why not cry about it.

Anything else is just bull****.

This is the reason why so few people are willing to listen to you. You assume that anyone that does not think like you is a cry baby and you think that "trammies" are afraid of coming to Fel because they might die. Anyone that is afraid to die in UO is most likely a crafter or some other low to no risk type of character. I do not go to fel much these days but that is only because I BOUGHT a house in an area that only has dial-up. I still go to fel and do spawns but not nearly as much as I used to do them.

Maybe you should try to pvp with the same handicap that some of us have and then try to find it to be as fun as you do now. I ping around 250-310 and if you think that with a slow connection you can still pvp then you must be the "KING OF PVP".

 

[Draxous]

This is the reason why so few people are willing to listen to you. You assume that anyone that does not think like you is a cry baby and you think that "trammies" are afraid of coming to Fel because they might die. Anyone that is afraid to die in UO is most likely a crafter or some other low to no risk type of character. I do not go to fel much these days but that is only because I BOUGHT a house in an area that only has dial-up. I still go to fel and do spawns but not nearly as much as I used to do them.

Maybe you should try to pvp with the same handicap that some of us have and then try to find it to be as fun as you do now. I ping around 250-310 and if you think that with a slow connection you can still pvp then you must be the "KING OF PVP".

I PvP'd for 7 years on dial up (97 to 05) and I just recently (this past christmas) bought a new computer to replace the 2002 laptop I had been playing UO on for 7 years.

I'm finally playing UO with a broadband connection AND a good computer in tandum... after 11 years of playing this freaking game.

One isn't any better than the other... it's just harder. You can make any excuse you want because as a player, you are either up to the challenge or you are not.

Want to guess which one you sound like?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

The Tram/ Fel split happened for a few reasons. People were fed up with the childish ganking. They had to increase the landmass to accomodate housing for more players and with more players, they needed more areas to hunt.

One thing was for certain though. Subscriptions were dropping. A big reason was the failed attempt at "free for all" PvP. Giving people the option to PvP when they wanted to and not when they didn't, kept this game from becoming a footnote in the gaming industry.

Amost all games after UO offered the option to PvP or not.

A couple of things I would like to address on this.

- Yes, ganker PKs are what led to Trammel. You can only fish for so long in the same pond. So they went unchecked for so long that the devs finally had to do something about it.

- Introducing Trammel was the second worst approach to the problem (right behind doing absolutely nothing) that could have been done. Something did have to change, but just make a mirror image of the world where an unrealistic rule set was introduced was not it.

Better PvP rules, random guard spawns, incentives for "good" PvPers and disincentives for "bad" PKs, harsher punishments for reds that died, etc. etc. could have curtailed PKing enough to satisfy most of the UO population that played at the time. Certainly it would not appease the 'gimmie,gimmie,gimmie' neon-clad bank sitter artie hoarder types we have now, but back then, it would have done the trick without ruining that aspect of the game.

- Subscriptions were falling = EQ just came out. Granted, a large number of po'ed ex UO players jumped to EQ because it came out with the option to not PvP. I think that the lack of response to PK'ing was a factor in the decline of subscriptions back then, but it was certainly not the only factor.

- The "free for all" PvP model failed because OSI didn't create enough negative incentive for rampant PKing. But it was by far a more realistic environment than Trammel. What exactly in Trammel, from a game fiction standpoint, prevents me from taking a sword and killing anyone with it? It just doesn't make sense. Whereas, something like getting guard-whacked as soon as you tried it would have. I know "its just a game" but immersion in an RPG is important.

 

[siyeng0]

Excuse me. You talk of hyper-extended e-peens and then you come here and stroke your own?

Translation: DEFEND THE PEEN!

I never dismissed your playstyle. What I did was clearly define it and you just didn't want to hear (read) the truth.

Let me get that quote again. It seems to be quoted a lot in this thread. Do you know why? Because not only was it breathtakingly stupid, but you, rather hilariously, in the face of all evidence, keep denying it.

"Of course, the mindless NPCs are no where near the challenge level of another human and the only thing I can come up with (the only difference) is that the trammies really can't stand playing videogames at a more challenging level.

I'd wager these are the same people who purchase a console game in the store and play it on "Easy" even if they can handle medium. I suppose they know full-well they can't do it on hard so why not cry about it.

Anything else is just bull****."

Really, now. Surely, if you're man enough to go out and battle other players in supreme combat!, you're man enough to not do backflips on your own expressed opinion on a forum. What's the matter? Is dealing with the consequences of your words too hard for you? Would you prefer some sort of easy version? Maybe you'd like a Trammelised forum - one where people can't quote previous posts, so if you keep saying "I didn't say that!" or "I didn't mean that!" for long enough, the other posters will start to believe you.

I read the BS by the Trammies saying that players were leaving in droves because of Felucca... which by all accounts of the data is total BS because UO was steadily GAINING in subscriptions. I read that 85% of the UO playerbase prefer Trammel... which by all accounts of data is total BS. I read that Trammel saved UO because it would have been doomed to die... which is TOTAL BS as there are today, emulations of pre-tram going strong with servers that rival production server populations. All this crap I read constantly which is untrue is acceptable, but someone can't point out that Trammel is the easier version of Felucca?!?!? Which is 100% true?

Is your freaking ego hurt or something?

That's some rather frantic use of the term BS. I like to imagine you flailing wildly at the keyboard, muttering "It's BS! He's BS! You're BS! Everything's BS! Question mark, exclamation point, question mark, exclamation point, question mark, exclamation point... hah, that'll learn him, he'll know I'm really angry and he'll be scared because I'm so tough that I play Ultima Online on Hard mode. Heh. Trammie." Be careful with that punctuation, by the way. I don't want you to hurt yourself.

So the statistics are total BS? The devs introduced Trammel for no reason at all? You're starting to sound like you think they introduced it just to upset you. And everybody who provides you with evidence is lying. Lying! Because the statistics are BS! How can they not understand it when you've repeated it so many times?!

One more thing. Production servers are paid for. Free servers are free. I won't spell out to you the difference between being content to put up with things because you don't have to pay for your time, and having the right to demand your money's worth; I hope that you're cleverer than that, although something - maybe it was all the exclamation points - makes me a bit dubious.

And yes. You've hurt my ego. My e-peen, it is a-wilt.

Where I don't agree, is the notion that your playstyle is somehow better than mine. It is not. And neither is it vice versa.

What my playstyle is-is more challenging than your playstyle.

Regardless of how you try to spin it.

Oh yes. I think my playstyle is better than yours. I think that roleplaying is the only playstyle that Ultima Online supports, that it should be compulsory, and that anybody who doesn't roleplay is a slavering fool.

Here is a post wherein I, in my verbose way, wholeheartedly agree with somebody saying just that.

I challenge you to find one quote from my post where I said that my playstyle is better than yours. Saying that I don't like being griefed, abused and basically treated like crap because I don't PvP != saying that roleplaying is superior.

Although, you know... when it comes to roleplayers, I can understand how hard it must be for you. Not only do you have to be afflicted by the sight of them in the bank, not killing people, not playing properly, using their words on each other like it's 1702, but it really sucks, the things they do to this forum. I mean, it's terrible how post after post lines up of "Devs, the game is going to die if you don't fix this insignificant glitch with roleplay that nobody but myself has experienced, right now!!!!!!", "Devs! I want a roleplaying event! I demand a roleplaying event! I demand it now! By God I have the emotional control of a toddler and if you're not careful I'm going to use it!", and "Devs! I understand that you spent hours trying to implement fixes and new content for roleplaying in your last publish, but it still wasn't enough! If every single thing wrong with roleplaying is not fixed by this time next week, I am taking my eighteen paid accounts and I AM LEAVING FOREVER." And it's so annoying how they hijack every second thread with advertisements for their precious roleplay-only shard that approximately four people play, all the while disparaging anybody who plays on any other shard as not being a "real" player. And all those PvP threads that are invaded by roleplayers going "LOL pvp is so sad UO is all about roleplay LEARN TO ROLEPLAY FELLIES I PROMISE YOU IT'S SO MUCH BETTER THAN BEING A LONELY PvPing HOUSEWIFE which is what you are if you PvP because only girls, gays and bored fat lonely women PvP LOL"... it's just tragic.

PS. Feluccans Role-Play too... we do everything done in Trammel and more... which is why I laughed at your analogy. It didn't even warrant a response.

Did I say that I hated all Feluccans? No. I said that I hated the immature, griefing, ganking, abusive, superiority-complex-toting Feluccans, the likes of which are rather prevalent on this board. Again, I will repeat myself. I don't want to play with Felucca-only rules because I don't like Felucca. I don't want to play with Felucca-only rules because I don't like the people who inhabit Felucca, and your shrill cries of "PERSECUTION! YOU DON'T LIKE MY PLAYSTYLE!" are doing little to change that.

 

[D'Amavir]

What's the matter? Is dealing with the consequences of your words too hard for you? Would you prefer some sort of easy version? Maybe you'd like a Trammelised forum - one where people can't quote previous posts, so if you keep saying "I didn't say that!" or "I didn't mean that!" for long enough, the other posters will start to believe you.

Now I am one that doesn't believe anyone is as awesome as me. However, that right there is pretty darn awesome. If I do say so myself.

 

[Draxous]

I apologize in advance for chopping up your post into itty bitty pieces as I was unfortunately... forced to-to make sense of this diatribe.

Excuse me. You talk of hyper-extended e-peens and then you come here and stroke your own?

Translation: DEFEND THE PEEN!

I never dismissed your playstyle. What I did was clearly define it and you just didn't want to hear (read) the truth.

Let me get that quote again. It seems to be quoted a lot in this thread. Do you know why? Because not only was it breathtakingly stupid, but you, rather hilariously, in the face of all evidence, keep denying it.

"Of course, the mindless NPCs are no where near the challenge level of another human and the only thing I can come up with (the only difference) is that the trammies really can't stand playing videogames at a more challenging level.

I'd wager these are the same people who purchase a console game in the store and play it on "Easy" even if they can handle medium. I suppose they know full-well they can't do it on hard so why not cry about it.

Anything else is just bull****."

Really, now. Surely, if you're man enough to go out and battle other players in supreme combat!, you're man enough to not do backflips on your own expressed opinion on a forum. What's the matter? Is dealing with the consequences of your words too hard for you? Would you prefer some sort of easy version? Maybe you'd like a Trammelised forum - one where people can't quote previous posts, so if you keep saying "I didn't say that!" or "I didn't mean that!" for long enough, the other posters will start to believe you.

So let me also quote a post of mine too:

I apologize for my original post which may have been a bit abrasive as I'm seeing the defensiveness you and others have projected towards the simple truth behind my words. There is nothing wrong with you preferring to play a videogame at a lower level of difficulty. That is your prerogative and you should not feel anything negative towards that choice.

So I sincerely apologize if I gave that impression. I am human... after all.

You can find it on page 1 of this thread, for which I have no problem admitting that I was off-base and wrong. For some reason... I don't think you even got past this post and have been fixated on typing a book in an attempt to show the world how much of a ******* I am (and in turn, because I'm a *******... there's no way there could be any merit to anything I said... right?) Surely you're not reading this right now, doing backflips... smashing the keyboard... wearing a leprechaun leotard and tights, complete with matching tin-foil hat... as you curse my name... right?

Now, I know this was a crushing blow to your tirade against me. I can even hear D'Amavir's faint "god damnit" screaming through the computer.

You did however expend a sh*t ton of energy in trying to re-explain something that was already covered.

*golf clap*

Now, much like the rest of us... move the **** on.

I read the BS by the Trammies saying that players were leaving in droves because of Felucca... which by all accounts of the data is total BS because UO was steadily GAINING in subscriptions. I read that 85% of the UO playerbase prefer Trammel... which by all accounts of data is total BS. I read that Trammel saved UO because it would have been doomed to die... which is TOTAL BS as there are today, emulations of pre-tram going strong with servers that rival production server populations. All this crap I read constantly which is untrue is acceptable, but someone can't point out that Trammel is the easier version of Felucca?!?!? Which is 100% true?

Is your freaking ego hurt or something?

That's some rather frantic use of the term BS. I like to imagine you flailing wildly at the keyboard, muttering "It's BS! He's BS! You're BS! Everything's BS! Question mark, exclamation point, question mark, exclamation point, question mark, exclamation point... hah, that'll learn him, he'll know I'm really angry and he'll be scared because I'm so tough that I play Ultima Online on Hard mode. Heh. Trammie." Be careful with that punctuation, by the way. I don't want you to hurt yourself.

Translation: I don't know what to say so I'm going to write a paragraph that makes no point, but wastes a bunch of time to whoever tries to read it.

So the statistics are total BS? The devs introduced Trammel for no reason at all? You're starting to sound like you think they introduced it just to upset you. And everybody who provides you with evidence is lying. Lying! Because the statistics are BS! How can they not understand it when you've repeated it so many times?!

One more thing. Production servers are paid for. Free servers are free. I won't spell out to you the difference between being content to put up with things because you don't have to pay for your time, and having the right to demand your money's worth; I hope that you're cleverer than that, although something - maybe it was all the exclamation points - makes me a bit dubious.

I must be genius. I totally said that the devs created Trammel for no reason.

Let's use a refrigerator to illustrate how you came to this beyond stupid conclusion.

Saying the refrigerator was created to keep food warm is BS.
Saying the refrigerator was created to watch the kids while you cook is BS.
Saying the refrigerator was created to cook food for people is BS.

So that HAS TO MEAN that they created the refrigerator for no reason at all?

(as you so astutely pointed out.)

Did the lack of exclamation marks, make that hard to understand?

And yes. You've hurt my ego. My e-peen, it is a-wilt.

QFT.

Where I don't agree, is the notion that your playstyle is somehow better than mine. It is not. And neither is it vice versa.

What my playstyle is-is more challenging than your playstyle.

Regardless of how you try to spin it.

Oh yes. I think my playstyle is better than yours. I think that roleplaying is the only playstyle that Ultima Online supports, that it should be compulsory, and that anybody who doesn't roleplay is a slavering fool.

Here is a post wherein I, in my verbose way, wholeheartedly agree with somebody saying just that.

...

I challenge you to find one quote from my post where I said that my playstyle is better than yours. Saying that I don't like being griefed, abused and basically treated like crap because I don't PvP != saying that roleplaying is superior.

You sure made that little request challenging... all I had to do was go up 1 paragraph.

Although, you know... when it comes to roleplayers, I can understand how hard it must be for you. Not only do you have to be afflicted by the sight of them in the bank, not killing people, not playing properly, using their words on each other like it's 1702, but it really sucks, the things they do to this forum. I mean, it's terrible how post after post lines up of "Devs, the game is going to die if you don't fix this insignificant glitch with roleplay that nobody but myself has experienced, right now!!!!!!", "Devs! I want a roleplaying event! I demand a roleplaying event! I demand it now! By God I have the emotional control of a toddler and if you're not careful I'm going to use it!", and "Devs! I understand that you spent hours trying to implement fixes and new content for roleplaying in your last publish, but it still wasn't enough! If every single thing wrong with roleplaying is not fixed by this time next week, I am taking my eighteen paid accounts and I AM LEAVING FOREVER." And it's so annoying how they hijack every second thread with advertisements for their precious roleplay-only shard that approximately four people play, all the while disparaging anybody who plays on any other shard as not being a "real" player. And all those PvP threads that are invaded by roleplayers going "LOL pvp is so sad UO is all about roleplay LEARN TO ROLEPLAY FELLIES I PROMISE YOU IT'S SO MUCH BETTER THAN BEING A LONELY PvPing HOUSEWIFE which is what you are if you PvP because only girls, gays and bored fat lonely women PvP LOL"... it's just tragic.

I have no idea what the hell it is you tried to say here. I'm not even sure you did either.

Although, I bet it felt good to vent about how disenfranchised RPers have been because the devs were too busy with neon pixel crack and cyborg lord blackthornes from the star wars galaxy.

In today's UO, try suiting up as a Savage with a few pieces of bone armor and a deer mask or an Orc in ringmail/orc mask and role-playing. Your character is fodder to mongbats.... I get it... role-players got the shaft for 6+ years now.

I get your angst...

Maybe you now understand the tone oozing from my first post in which 8 years of mistreatment to Feluccans had brought out.

Maybe you understand that I have no problem being a man about my own actions and admitting when I messed up.

And maybe you don't understand, which is ok because D'Amavir surely doesn't get it... and it doesn't change a damn thing about what the truth is in my posts and in this matter.

Good night... I'm off to not waste any more time on this.

-BlacK RaiN

PS. And yes. The Feluccan play-style is in fact harder than the Trammie one.

 

[Draxous]

ugh... dbl pst

 

[Aran]

I play Siege 50% of the time, but still play standard servers when I don't feel like putting up with morons who just have to fight with anyone they see.

 

[D'Amavir]

You can find it on page 1 of this thread, for which I have no problem admitting that I was off-base and wrong. For some reason... I don't think you even got past this post and have been fixated on typing a book in an attempt to show the world how much of a ******* I am (and in turn, because I'm a *******... there's no way there could be any merit to anything I said... right?) Surely you're not reading this right now, doing backflips... smashing the keyboard... wearing a leprechaun leotard and tights, complete with matching tin-foil hat... as you curse my name... right?

Now, I know this was a crushing blow to your tirade against me. I can even hear D'Amavir's faint "god damnit" screaming through the computer.

Sadly for you, no. I will show you what you said AFTER your pseudo apology just as a refresher.

"What my playstyle is-is more challenging than your playstyle.

Regardless of how you try to spin it.
"

Its not more challenging. Well, it may be for you as you claim. But, as I said before, many things are probably more challenging for you. I won't list them because I will get banned but, we know.
.

And maybe you don't understand, which is ok because D'Amavir surely doesn't get it... and it doesn't change a damn thing about what the truth is in my posts and in this matter.

You said something true? I must have missed in between all your nonsense about Trammel players being skeered of your massive pvp skills and how anyone that doesn't find PVP FUN is really just looking for something easy. You fail, as always, to see that there is more to many people's dislike of pvp than 'fear'. But, keeping saying you are only speaking truth.

Good night... I'm off to not waste any more time on this.

-BlacK RaiN

Heard that one before. From you even. Guess that's another truth? You won't be back in this discussion right? Cool.

PS. And yes. The Feluccan play-style is in fact harder than the Trammie one.

Incorrect again. But you know that already. And, to quote something you said so eloquently....

I guess you also watch the Hills. You are definitely the type.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

And yes. The Feluccan play-style is in fact harder than the Trammie one.

My miner disagrees completely, and he doesn;t even get involved in PvP yet mines almost exclusively in Felucca... why? Because it's EASIER.

 

[Barry Gibb]

My miner disagrees completely, and he doesn;t even get involved in PvP yet mines almost exclusively in Felucca... why? Because it's EASIER.

My miner is of the same mindset as Dermott's. Thank you double resources!!!

Stayin Alive,

BG

 

[Bara]

For 9 years, we had tryed to have Trammel and Felucca on same shards and each year, we have lost players.

Realistically, UO is losing players because it's such an old game. Not bellyaching here, just being pragmatic.

 

[FrejaSP]

For 9 years, we had tryed to have Trammel and Felucca on same shards and each year, we have lost players.

Realistically, UO is losing players because it's such an old game. Not bellyaching here, just being pragmatic.

For a Tram player, it may not seem as a big deal as you have 4 facets that fit your play style but for a Fel player, he/she is limit to the Fel facet, if he want to go to the other facets, he will be forced to give up his playstyle no matter if he is a red, a hunter of red or someone who enjoy the risk for being attacked when PvM'ing or gathering resources.

Don't tell me, this did not make lots of PvP players quit UO because I know it have.

 

[D'Amavir]

For a Tram player, it may not seem as a big deal as you have 4 facets that fit your play style but for a Fel player, he/she is limit to the Fel facet, if he want to go to the other facets, he will be forced to give up his playstyle no matter if he is a red, a hunter of red or someone who enjoy the risk for being attacked when PvM'ing or gathering resources.

Don't tell me, this did not make lots of PvP players quit UO because I know it have.

Whenever a Trammel player goes to Fel they have to play under the Fel ruleset. So I don't see how Fel players going to Trammel shouldn't follow the same rule.

I am all in favor of Reds being allowed on all facets. As long as they are under the ruleset of that facet. I know that's not a popular opinion with most Trammel players. But I have never seen the issue with allowing Reds in Trammel as long as the Trammel ruleset was still in effect.

This would actually go a long way towards improving the 'red vs blue' animosity issue since it would make it to where Trammel players could interact with players of red characters in an environment where they couldn't just be attacked on sight. But, that is a topic for another day.

 

[FrejaSP]

Whenever a Trammel player goes to Fel they have to play under the Fel ruleset. So I don't see how Fel players going to Trammel shouldn't follow the same rule.

It's only a mirror of one of their facets, a tram player can't access, no big deal.

I am all in favor of Reds being allowed on all facets. As long as they are under the ruleset of that facet. I know that's not a popular opinion with most Trammel players. But I have never seen the issue with allowing Reds in Trammel as long as the Trammel ruleset was still in effect.

No, that won't work, the reds need to be allowed to at least fight each others on the Tram facets and blue need an options to turn PvP on.
Make all non PvP'ers white and make all with PvP on blue.
Someone posted in other thread, 5 mins when turning on or off PvP, where you can't attack red or other PvP on. Reds and PvP on should get double resources/PS scrolls/fame on all facets.
Killing a PvP on will still give a count if reported and turn you red with 5 counts.

This would allow Trammel players to keep their ruleset and Fel players to bring their ruleset with them to all facets
Now you can make all facets same rules. It will still not fix this little tracktalker with PvP off.

This would actually go a long way towards improving the 'red vs blue' animosity issue since it would make it to where Trammel players could interact with players of red characters in an environment where they couldn't just be attacked on sight. But, that is a topic for another day.

Seems like the day is fine for that topic

 

[D'Amavir]

It's only a mirror of one of their facets, a tram player can't access, no big deal.

Then Fel players really shouldn't be so upset about not being able to go to Trammel. I can understand the desire to go to the others though.

No, that won't work, the reds need to be allowed to at least fight each others on the Tram facets

Why?

and blue need an options to turn PvP on.

They already have that option. Guildwars work in all facets. Including Fel. So 'blues' can pvp all the want.

Make all non PvP'ers white and make all with PvP on blue.

Again, why? Those on the 'Trammel' facets already have the 'green' color option should they choose to engage in pvp on the Trammel facets. No need for more color stuff I don't think.

Someone posted in other thread, 5 mins when turning on or off PvP, where you can't attack red or other PvP on. Reds and PvP on should get double resources/PS scrolls/fame on all facets.
Killing a PvP on will still give a count if reported and turn you red with 5 counts.

I thought pvp'ers were violently opposed to a pvp switch. I might go to Fel more often if they made a pvp switch for there but I am not really a fan of a 'switch'. To me, the moongate switch works just fine.

This would allow Trammel players to keep their ruleset and Fel players to bring their ruleset with them to all facets

You are suggesting that Trammel players should be able to play in Fel but still be able to play under the Trammel ruleset while there? That's a unique opinion amongst Fel players from what I have seen.

Now you can make all facets same rules.

Again, I don't know many Fel players that want Trammel players to be able to play in Fel using the Trammel ruleset. But I guess if you support it that's your right.

 

[Bara]

Don't tell me, this did not make lots of PvP players quit UO because I know it have.

My point is: The primary reason why uo has a dwindling playerbase is because it's such an old game.

 

[T'Challa]

It's sadder than UO weddings.

I did read your whole post, but the only comment I have is towards this.

My wife and I had a UO wedding. Kelmo officiated, heh

It was actually one of the more endearing moments in UO for me. I, like you, felt that UO weddings were pretty "sad" and was enduring because my wife and our guild pushed on. But on that day, when all of our friends showed up to congratulate us, I realized what community means in this game.

That is all. Back to topic, sorry about that

 

[Anon McDougle]

...
- Treasure of Tokuno (should be on permanently... we lose our items and can't replace them... other shards just never lose them. We should still be allowed to enjoy them. Thanks.) ...

Heh... I was with you until you got to this part. Siege is the "hard core" rule set, but you want it easier. Heh

Siege will always be the "Hard Shard" because we can and often do lose everything on Death, and you can die everywhere including the Bank.

this part i dont realy get in the old days were there no guard zones the citys were unsafe ??

 

[Tina Small]

...
- Treasure of Tokuno (should be on permanently... we lose our items and can't replace them... other shards just never lose them. We should still be allowed to enjoy them. Thanks.) ...

Heh... I was with you until you got to this part. Siege is the "hard core" rule set, but you want it easier. Heh

Siege will always be the "Hard Shard" because we can and often do lose everything on Death, and you can die everywhere including the Bank.

this part i dont realy get in the old days were there no guard zones the citys were unsafe ??

I don't really play on Siege, but I'm guessing that until there is another publish, the eight faction cities there are still considered war zones and thus have no city guards. I think the rest of the towns probably still have guards, but I could be wrong about that.

 

[Anon McDougle]

no now that i think about it a lot of the yew gate style PVP happens in luna.

so my next question would be why no guards in towns if they intend siege to be "old school"?

 

[T'Challa]

no now that i think about it a lot of the yew gate style PVP happens in luna.

so my next question would be why no guards in towns if they intend siege to be "old school"?

The guards leaving because of the event cycle is the same on Siege, there are no guards in faction cities. The guards do remain in normal, non-faction cities.

However, I believe the original reference to dying at the bank on Siege is in reference to the time-honored tradition of "bank-bombing" A tactic still well-known and used often on afk players on Siege You see, Siege players aren't afraid to strip down to nothing, light up another player, and streak across the screen naked from the guards and die for their cause. They'll take the murder count proudly and do it again tomorrow. Hoowah!

 

[Draxous]

For a Tram player, it may not seem as a big deal as you have 4 facets that fit your play style but for a Fel player, he/she is limit to the Fel facet, if he want to go to the other facets, he will be forced to give up his playstyle no matter if he is a red, a hunter of red or someone who enjoy the risk for being attacked when PvM'ing or gathering resources.

Don't tell me, this did not make lots of PvP players quit UO because I know it have.

Whenever a Trammel player goes to Fel they have to play under the Fel ruleset. So I don't see how Fel players going to Trammel shouldn't follow the same rule.

Trammel sure, because it's a 'mirror of fel.' But, the Trammel-type facets (Ilshenar, tokuno and Malas) offer things for players to do that you just cannot do in Felucca.

Why shouldn't a PK be able to go do a Travesty, Bedlam, Labrynth, or even Doom... if that's what they want to do on that character?

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that they should not be subject to Tram rules in those places...

I am all in favor of Reds being allowed on all facets. As long as they are under the ruleset of that facet. I know that's not a popular opinion with most Trammel players. But I have never seen the issue with allowing Reds in Trammel as long as the Trammel ruleset was still in effect.

This would actually go a long way towards improving the 'red vs blue' animosity issue since it would make it to where Trammel players could interact with players of red characters in an environment where they couldn't just be attacked on sight. But, that is a topic for another day.

Which is actually something I suggested a long time ago... and I agree with it.

And on top of the, it actually was a popular opinion. The only problem was that 3-4 trammy posters were so hell-bent on sabotaging the discussion... it got derailed and locked after several pages.

I even have permission from high level admins to re-open the discussion whenever I like...

 

[Draxous]

no now that i think about it a lot of the yew gate style PVP happens in luna.

so my next question would be why no guards in towns if they intend siege to be "old school"?

We're supposed to be able to fight for guardzone protection through Faction fighting.

If a good faction controls all the towns, then there should be guardzone protection in the 8 cities... if an evil faction does, then there should not be.

I have no idea if it's still actually working like that, but that's how it was during the invasion and how it should be working still now that the invasion is over.

It is the essence of Good vs Evil.

 

[D'Amavir]

Trammel sure, because it's a 'mirror of fel.' But, the Trammel-type facets (Ilshenar, tokuno and Malas) offer things for players to do that you just cannot do in Felucca.

Why shouldn't a PK be able to go do a Travesty, Bedlam, Labrynth, or even Doom... if that's what they want to do on that character?

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that they should not be subject to Tram rules in those places...

I totally agree there. As you know.

Which is actually something I suggested a long time ago... and I agree with it.

And on top of the, it actually was a popular opinion. The only problem was that 3-4 trammy posters were so hell-bent on sabotaging the discussion... it got derailed and locked after several pages.

Isn't that always the way though? A discussion starts and a vocal minority derails it and it can't get back on track before being shut down. And, that happens from both sides. In the Red In Trammel discussion it was a few loud Trammel players that jumped up and starting things in a bad direction. In other thread types, its a few loud Felucca players that do so.

This is yet another reason why I think that the devs should better utilize the log on screen to get a firm idea of where the playerbase falls on certain issues. I am not saying to have 50 polls everytime you log in as with Galen's (no offense, ) but once in a while just to get a feel for their playerbase.

Polls on this forum, while sometimes enjoyable, are really pointless as it really doesn't give an accurate depiction of what the overall playerbase is thinking.

 

[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 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. 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 scenero..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

 

[Charlton]

A BIG NO for both me and my wife. We're both around 50 years old and have no desire to play a game spending our time being ganked by juveniles. I'm talking maturity levels not age, so don't get upset with that statement.

This is such an old dead horse issue... But no, the day UO goes full on PvP again is the exact same day we cancel out of UO for good and go back to EverQuest or World of Warcraft where decency and maturity is still considered a viable playing style.

 

[FrejaSP]

A BIG NO for both me and my wife. We're both around 50 years old and have no desire to play a game spending our time being ganked by juveniles. I'm talking maturity levels not age, so don't get upset with that statement.

What do age have to do with this?

Are you calling me immature because I, a woman, age 54 love fel ruleset and have a red RP char?

If you look at the Siege community, you will find alot around 50 years. Some do PvP, some do PvM or crafting but they did still choose Siege over the other shards. I believe the avg age on Siege is 30+

It's fair enough, you do not like PvP and never would play on an all PvP shard but you do not need to trash talk the ones who enjoy the fel ruleset.

It's sounds very immature to me!

 

[Arch Magus]

Definitely voted YES here.
Some of my friends would also be playing if that were the case.

Dammmn, that's a close poll, yes?