Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'UHall' started by Manticore, Aug 4, 2012.
This is a really good idea.... a really good idea. It's like an epic level good idea.
You can't place keeps in Malas. 18x18s are a dime a dozen. Most dropped their 18x18s in Malas to move to Fellucca.
Show me a keep spot in Fellucca thats not in the swamps or an area with aggro spawn near a moongate or nicer area.
I think most of us are "fine" with it, but you clearly can see why its something people who play only on siege will not feel super great about. We want more players, obviously, but we also don't want our shard filled up with empty houses for years. There are a lot of ways to help improve the population, and yes storage is a big issue, but its not the only one.
I mean we could get more players with tram and insurance no doubt, but that trade off is not a good one for us. I think an extra house possibility COULD be great... but they need to think it through as to how its implemented.
I really feel the best solution to housing is too let people have multiple houses, but they cannot go over a combined house size of 24x24 with the exceptions being a castle. A play can choose to have 4 7x7 houses or one big house. The biggest thing that uo has lost is the small house. People worked so hard to obtain one small house and it was hard to get one a popular shard like Atlantic. I didnt have a house for the longest time though i did place a tower when trammel came out. Sorry for the hijack and I feel that Siege should be separated from the other shards as it really is a different game and a player should be able to have a house their while maintaining a house on another shard. Think about why Siege was created in the first place as it was created for veteran players looking for a new challenge and i don't think its fair those players have to give up everything just to play that shard.
It's an inadequate response to those who wanted a classic shard, but it's a response nonetheless. Still, if we can have a house on Siege, what's to stop us from having a house on every shard? Open those floodgates. Basements, multiple houses, customizable castles.
I know a lot about housing and I never said anything about placing keeps in Malas... you said "You need to also remember that if someone has a dexxer, they don't want to run to middle of BFE to go to their house. Did you find a spot near a moongate at all? " You didn't use the word keep in your entire post. The issue isn't that everyone should get a keep the issue is available housing.
When you start a newbie char on Siege your only choice is Brit so I ran East from there and found 4 keep spots before I was even halfway to the x-roads. O spawn, nice locations.
Just a "real time" reaction from a prodo-shard active guild:
When we heard about this at the event, a member of our guild place a house and within a half day of hearing that a member was starting up on Siege and had a home there, we now have 8+ guild members friended to the house and many of them already training their first characters.
This was just on the CHANCE that they will be able to have a home their themselves, so we all wanted to get started on developing our characters there.
NOT EVERYONE will simply place a house for "no reason". The housing issue has been the holdup for my crew and this potential 2nd house has motivated us to try Siege out. Some for the first time, some to knock the cobwebs off their 'half made' character...
2nd house available to us -> our guild will be active on Siege.
Just our 2gp.
I mean if people PLAY on siege then its not a problem. I'd be happy to have a housing problem because there are too many people playing. I'm just worried about holiday players sucking up spots from people who ONLY play siege. You know, people placing a house, playing for a month, then going back to their prodo shard, leaving their siege house there just collecting dust, and maybe they get on and run around a few weeks a year.
If a million people come by for a month lookiloo and place because they can, then leave, it could be a real mess for us who call siege home.
I'm not against the idea, but It has to be done right.
2 day refresh and a link to server time of 3 hours a week of game play. That should stop people like myself from bothering with it again.
Why is everyone so excited? This is going to be a long way off.
And we would love to see more get a home on Siege but we also know, that with 20+ normal shards, it can be more houses than we can handle if there no way to drop not used houses.
If there are no free spot left, because alot placed a house they stopped using first time they got killed and looted, there won't be free spots for new Siege players.
We also have old castles, that never is used, so maybe also primary houses need to be dropped if noone use them for months or at least deed them, then they can replace them if they ever come back. Let them get a moving crates with the items in their new house if it less size than old ones. Then they have time to trash/sell/sort their old crap.
Siege players have been lobbying for changes for years and years while we watched the population errode. It's exciting to have a producer who might actually care.
Agree, I really hope we will see a few important changes to Siege.
1. More char slots
2. A way for new accounts to see Siege on the shard list and make a char without it effect their young status on normal accounts.
3. Recall with randum 5-20 sec delay so it can't be used as escape if attacked
4. Allow Advance Tokens to work on Siege
5. A way for new Siege players to place a second house without it do end up as a ghost house blocking for new houses
Here is why it's a bad idea. You will get people with multiple accounts place multiple houses to the point where there is no free space. Then use that leverage to raise the prices of housing. All it would do is create more of a market for RMT for gold/housing on Siege.
Because people (to be quite honest, I would do it too) would go there and place a house, just in case. Refresh it once a month.... yeah, that's difficult....
It's a bad idea all the way around.
We may be worrying for nothing of course, you can't place houses without the cash to do so, and you can't bring it from other shards.
and then of course, it might never happen. We don't know what technical difficulties might prevent it.
Getting gold isn't that hard.
It's not that easy either for a newbie char with no skills and no kit. There's no quick route to 50 in all skills, no buying skills from npcs and no Haven accelerated gains. Cheapest house is 33000gp.
We saw that happen, when all could place a house on each shard, we had players from other shards camping the IDOC to place a house to sell and then transfer of the money via a broker or sell the gold for RL cash.
If no free house spots, there will be high prices and it will hurt new Siege players and old ones too.
That's only woll from ca 160 sheeps, no skills needed to get the wool and make bolt of clothes and sell them for 350gp each. No skills needed for that, only some time
So are you gonna place a keep and spend 5 minutes running home each day?
I know Freja, I'm trying to look at it from all sides, and keep in mind that what Mesanna wants to do and what the engineers tell her is possible to do may not be the same thing, not to mention it's probably at the bottom of a very long 'to do' list.
We want players in houses, not houses with no players.
If speculators realise that there is at the very least a significant time commitment to placing on Siege they may think twice?
Most brokers I'm aware of (and I admit that's not many because I don't use them) will only trade on shards where they can transfer. Siege gold is mostly traded by players trying to help other players get a foothold on the shard.
To be fair, I've maybe had time to put in a total of maybe 10 hours, tops, since I joined a week ago (Time is limited ). All I did was take the ingots I got from mining in that time, and filled BoD orders, and I've already got close to 15k. That's with a lot of time spent mining, and absolutely no combat skills or looting from monsters.
I say triple (or even quadruple) the cost of all houses on Siege, custom or classic. I'm new there, I plan to stay, and I have no problem paying 100k for a small house. That's my 2gp.
Exactly if the shard fills up with active players and it becomes hard to place because of that reason I would be thrilled. I could deal with a housing space problem if it meant Siege had lots and lots of people running around. But yeah I too worry that we would get people that would come with the desire to play on Siege but that they would decide not to make Siege their primary shard and just end up Siege vacationers that log on once in a blue moon. But yes I think if done right the idea would be great and bring lots of active Siege players. It just needs to be done in a way that discourages people from just coming to place for the heck of it or to try and make gold off the prime spots. Also something needs to be done to insure that houses of people that did come to Siege with the intention of playing here but decided to leave sometime after donlt stay for monthes and even years on end.
Yeah normally they just ignore us lol..so to have a Mesanna come on and say she could do something like that *of course I realize could doesn;t mean she will...* is far better then what we usually get which is silence or an outright no.
Well not sure if I agree with raising the costs for everyone that much. But you know maybe double the amount if its the players secondary house. I think this could be part of the solution to discourage people coming here to just place a house for the heck of it but those that really wanted to come play here as their primary shard I think would be willing to pay extra. Though I donlt think it should be too expensive otherwise even those that want to play on Siege would hesitate. But I think a balance could be found. Of course I think price on its own wouldn;t be a full solution we would still need something to insure that houses abandoned didn;t stay up for years. Because some people even after taking the time to make all that gold would still leave.
People with gold to spare on a non-Siege shard don't have to spend even one minute on Siege trying to make gold. All they have to do is find a broker who is willing to sell them gold for cash or who will trade their non-Siege gold for gold on Siege.
Bleh good point so much for that. Right now I think the best idea I have seen then is perhaps some sort of series of quests to gain loyalty to be able to place.
And how is that any different than what normal shards are like right now
Between all the bugged houses, people logging in every 3 months and I'm sorry to say grandfathered houses. Most normal shards have a ton of houses that you never see anyone enter. I'm currently surrounded by 3 homes that not once have I seen anyone at and from what I can tell they're either bugged or grandfathered. I'd much rather see bare empty land than a bunch of neighboring deserted homes.
Yeah I know I'm gonna get some flack about people and their 300 grandfathered homes. I personally think that all the grandfathered homes need to be dumped. Other than a storage place most of them are never used. We all pay the same fee, why do you get to clutter up the land with all your empty, usually ugly, gatherfathered homes??
Personally I would rather see a skill point cap used as the restriction. A primary house on any shard can be placed without a skill restriction, but a second house... Whether placed on SP by a prod player or placed on prod by a SP player should need a minimum skill point cap to be eligible. IMO once you have met the cap your house(s) should follow the same decay rules currently in place. To further restrict it you could even use only a subset of the skill so you need more than med, focus, herding etc. (make the list of eligible skills something that the average noob is not going to be able to get in 2 weeks if you know what I mean)
Mesanna could clearly define her intentions with a 2-minute post on Stratics, instead of people getting upset, speculating, etc.
I mean, if this were an account issue somebody was having, Mesanna would spend a minute or two to come onto Stratics and say "email me about this".
But this is an issue that could fundamentally change a shard composed of very passionate people, and people are reading all kinds of things into what she has saying, and once again we are getting Ye Olde Silent Treatment from her.
No other MMORPG outside of Mythic has this kind of atmosphere where the producer avoids the community, especially when the producer could clear things up quickly rather than let people get angry/upset.
Wasn't that the name of the stealth-released expansion last August?
There are more Luna house spots than Keep spots next to a moongate. 6 of the fel moongates have no keep/castle spots nearby. If a run home for a Dexxer was a big issue for me I'd put an 18x18 5 seconds from the Umbra gate. But it's not. Back when I played Siege I lived on Ice "Dagger" Island. Many dexxers did too. Keep in mind this was before Crystal Portals and house teleporter tiles. The first open Keep spot I found the other day was 836 tiles or a 1 minute and 47 second run from the Brit moongate. If they did by some miracle (especially after the response from Siege Players in this thread) enact the additional house on Siege I'd probably place a Keep and give a sigh at finally being able to unpack my characters. Moongates wouldn't factor in it at all though.
Why don't you come show me this spot.
Well, Mesanna did imply that it was likely doable because she deferred the first suggestion by saying she would ask the engineers about it. Then she presented her want for the shard as if there was no need to ask the engineers about that.
It's getting almost comedic to me how we keep defending these people. Mesanna wants to do something for Siege, but it's probably at the bottom of a very long 'to do' list... Thank you?
Mesanna says seeing Siege on the shard list isn't fair to new players? Huh? Giving a choice isn't fair?
Freja do tell us if she gets back to you after she consults her engineers so we know it wasn't just a deferral tactic and since your conversation was cut off. Since, you know, revealing a want in place of yours and not waiting for your response is just a little rude.
Let's not hold our breaths though.
seige is empty..u will be able to place a nice big one....everyone will....
Siege is getting both new players and old players back. Last nlght, I saw several new names i the chat. It's sure not emty.
Also my vendors sell faster than I can restock them.
I may make a return to Siege when this becomes active... IF it becomes active.
I doubt it will which to be honest is probably a good thing because unless limits/restrictions are put in place and some way found to make sure abandoned houses donlt just sit there for monthes/years there would be a good chance the shard would fill with ghost houses. However Mesanna was on Siege today and she did ask if we really wanted advanced chars tokens active on Siege. We all said yes so maybe just maybe she will active that again. At the very least it would decrease the time needed to complete a char. I know have seen people say they havre thoguht about going to Siege but donlt because they really dontl want to start a char from scratch all over again.
I believe most game announcements are made in Fel, at the Tents in Minoc.
I suspect Mesanna just said this as a thought and not any kind of plan. Perhaps to generate some discussion on the idea. Of course why she wouldn't just float the idea on the boards for some feedback I do not know.
First she did not announced it, I was asking her for something and she told me no but they was thinging of this. It was not even in the chat but just in a small group of Siege players at an event.
Anyway, Siege may be the best place to ask about changes to Siege as she get to speak with players who active play the shard.
Just like she popped in yesterday and asked in general chat, if we really wanted "advance char token" to work on Siege
On the board is, alot who do not play siege and maybe never will. Siege forum could be used, but ingame, she can easy drop a question, then just save the reply she get and look at them later.
I'm very happy, that she at least do something active to help us. It's first time in many years I had seen as EA rep show up ingame and ask questions. That's really good news.
In this forum, everything about Siege get spammed with alot anti Siege and anti PvP comment.
Hmmm, seems Mesanna suddenly really wants to do something for Siege. The other shards are about to get something that Siege will be left out from and she wants to try to rectify that in advance, methinks. Recitfy that by... allowing us to give $29.95 to EA for a token that can be used on Siege!!!!!
Announcements? Or illicit scheming?
And did you guys say yes or no?
What I would say, is that if you are looking for something to get people to try out Siege, you need to get the perspective of non Siege players. You still need the input of Siege players IMHO, as you do not want to destroy what Siege is, but asking Siege Players what would get others to play Siege does not seem, to me, to be effective communication.
Which is why I suspect Mesanna was just feeling out the Siege players perspective on this idea.
We all said yes to advanced char token.
We do know what make players give up Siege or not wish to join us, as we have seen many start but not stay.
I think this would be a good start for some retention.
I have asked for this for a long time. Limiting housing placement of a second house on any acct should be limited to houses, custom or not, with a smaller foot print.
Yeah I donlt think it would be unfair for instance to limit it to the first page of the tool which I think means the biggest would be a 13/7 of course some might think that too big still but just an idea. Also I am looking at the tool in the ec so might be different in classic. But a size limit and a refresh would help. Of course it wouldn;t prevent all as has been pointed out there would be those that would script the refresh for instance..But if all they can have is a small house they might say why bother? Especially if they arent even going to play there.
As mentioned above... that second house should have a decay timer to it. Let the player decide if the Siege house is primary or secondary. If primary, then the other shard's house gets a decay timer that needs a refresh.
Without this, you will get squatters. Siege has had that before and it was awful.
On a different note... put a limit on the number of Castles and Keeps that are placeable on a facet. Everywhere I go on Siege now... its castle castle castle castle keep castle keep castle... Some 70+ castles !!!! Waaaay too many. You want people to come with second houses... there needs to be a cap and it needs to much much lower than 70. Castles should be special..... very special and RARE.