1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Campaign for fel Shard/s (with insurance)

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Mervyn, May 12, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mervyn

    Mervyn Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    372
    I would like a few shards (one in europe) that is felucca rule-set only with item insurance still. Ilshenar, ter-mur, and malas would also be present under felucca rule-set.

    The shards should be transferable within themselves however not transferable between trammel rule-set shards.

    This way we could attract more players without affecting the current trammel players. I would play one of these shards, I'm sure I wouldn't be alone. Please could you post your support (or outrage)!
     
  2. Warpig Inc

    Warpig Inc Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    397
    Without a long history and discussions already on the subject. A Football Bat is still a bad ideal.
     
    LordDrago likes this.
  3. Meatbread

    Meatbread Journeyman

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    230
    Yeah these would totally be super populated. :rolleyes:
     
  4. Mervyn

    Mervyn Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    372
    Lets say they were fairly dead (which i don't think they would be), it wouldn't affect you if you don't play it. There are lots of "dead" shards out there, why would this be a problem with you?
     
    Rusko likes this.
  5. Lord Frodo

    Lord Frodo Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,827
    Likes Received:
    2,319
    Are you just asking for a Siege Perilous / Mugen style shard for the Europa/Drachenfels players?
    Do you think there would be enough support for such a shard?
    Being on the West coast I ping SP at around 100ms and west coast shards at around 25ms. SP is on our Esat Coast so it is more for them then us on the West coast.
    What is your ping to Mugen?
    Is Drach close enough to Europa (ping wise) for both of you to play this shard.
    Is Drach and Europa on the same server? If so then they should be able to (equipment wise) to support this.

    If the equipment can support this then I see no reason why it could not be done, they could just copy SP or Mugen over and then wipe it so it is clean.
    As far as your request for shard xfer to the other non-tram shards, sorry there is no xfering to or from those shards and yours would be no different.
     
  6. Ezekiel Zane

    Ezekiel Zane Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,556
    Likes Received:
    113
    That actually seems like one of the more reasonable requests along these lines that I've ever seen.

    Not asking for a classic, pre-pub or retro shard and not asking to add insurance or change Siege/Mugen.

    Would probably be better to start with just one shard though, east coast and see how it goes.
     
  7. Petra Fyde

    Petra Fyde Peerless Chatterbox
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2001
    Messages:
    30,889
    Likes Received:
    5,175
    If I'm understanding right, he's asking for not just one, but several new shards, one of which would be in Europe. Each with Felucca ruleset and insurance.
    Physically, Drachs and Europa are in the same location - Dortmund
     
  8. funkymonkey

    funkymonkey Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    960
    Likes Received:
    162
    wouldnt it just make the current shards even less populated?
     
  9. Tazar

    Tazar Guest

    And also pull more resources from development of the current shards as the team would then have to keep up with 2 clients and 3 different code sets for the normal shards - the Siege/Mugen rules - and now the shards proposed above...

    It is not a good idea...
     
  10. GalenKnighthawke

    GalenKnighthawke Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,641
    Likes Received:
    1,163
    Ah, another custom shard thread, this time with another custom shard idea variation.

    Let's see here....Firstly under the terms of the traditional proponents of custom shards, insurance is one of the problems, not the solutions. So you have managed to create a new argument for why this is a bad idea, and that being your proposal contradicts the ideology under which it's proposed in the first place. Secondly, time and time again we have seen evidence that Felucca is a lifestyle most players do not want to participate in. There has been an unending stream of incentives to get people there and all have failed int he long run. And why? Because Felucca is a failed business model, a lifestyle most people don't want, pick your analogy.

    No amount of prettying things up ("and this time there's insurance!" or "and this time there's no insurance!") is going to change that. Fel had its chance in pre-Trammel days, and the result was Trammel.

    Thirdly we have the fact that this would be yet another rules set that they have to support. That makes three shard-based rules sets, innumerable rules sets specific to various facets and locations, two clients.....

    And, for the Love of God, when will someone realize that Trammel was released in about the year 2000 and if it was going to kill the game it'd have kind of done it by now.

    -Galen's player
     
    Martyna Zmuir and Meatbread like this.
  11. Don't Tread on Me

    Don't Tread on Me Lore Keeper
    Professional Stratics Veteran Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    866
    Likes Received:
    248
    Yeah, I think that would be the result. If somehow the devs could figure out a way to fairly change a couple of shards to fel only I think this would be a good idea, but other than that... more shards is not in the works right now for UO I don't think.
     
  12. kelmo

    kelmo Old and in the way
    Professional Stratics Veteran Alumni Dread Lord

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,379
    Likes Received:
    4,698
    Yet another rule (sub) set for the understaffed UO Dev team to contend with... No.
     
  13. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    Not a good idea.

    For reasons, read this thread.
     
  14. hen

    hen Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,709
    Likes Received:
    420
    A rubbish idea.
     
  15. Sevin0oo0

    Sevin0oo0 Guest

    As much as I'd like to see something done, as a toon that's not killing, essentially innocent, should get a little love, BUT, at the same time, I have to think about that script bot, that should Not be afforded Any protection, ever. Maybe within a cheat-free game, but I don't see it currently as a viable option.
     
  16. Vlaude

    Vlaude Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    57
    I'd play on a shard like that but would prefer no insurance.
     
  17. Symma

    Symma Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,600
    Likes Received:
    85
    If Felucca on normal shards can't attracted players, I'm not sure what this would do differently.
     
    LordDrago and Meatbread like this.
  18. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    Why insurance? Why not add some risk to your PvPing?
     
  19. Obsidian

    Obsidian UO Forum Moderator
    Moderator Professional Premium Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,143
    Likes Received:
    780
    I actually like Mervyn's idea. I tried playing Siege Perilous for about 6 months. In the end I decided it was not for me solely because of insurance. Everything else about Siege was fine with me. I found that I like to amass gear. That is my personal goal whenever I play. In the end, it wasn't as much fun for me as I found myself hiding in my house or only adventuring when I would likely see no one in an effort not to loose my gear to a PK or a Peerless encounter that just proved too much. I would much prefer the danger of a fel ruleset with the knowledge that my gear is safe even if I get beat in a PvP situation.
     
  20. Meatbread

    Meatbread Journeyman

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    230
    Adding new shards isn't going to magically create new people who want to play them. It would still be the same ghost town haunted by the same half-dozen buttmonkeys as Felucca always is. Except there you wouldn't even have occasional blues sneaking over from Trammel to try and do a champ spawn.
     
  21. Viper09

    Viper09 Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    6,680
    Likes Received:
    824
    So, a new Siege shard, except it has insurance. Not a bad idea but shards are spread thin as it is. Creating a Siege w/ insurance shard wouldn't necessarily draw back old players or bring in newer ones, there is no reason that it would, it just doesn't sound unique enough. All it is is the same PvP but with the option to engage in it in different areas. What that means is that unless everything is coordinated the odds of finding someone will be significantly less that on the normal production shards. Unless everyone is just going to hangout at Yew gate like usual or choose to PvP around Luna instead. Sure there will be new PvM areas to fight over but that's about it.

    If UO had more players I could see this working but ultimately it would just spread out the players even more than it already is.
     
  22. Vlaude

    Vlaude Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    57
    I think what they should really do is make more character slots per account on Siege. I know not everyone agrees with that but that's why I haven't played there more. The one character per account is a killer for me.
     
    Lord Frodo and Don't Tread on Me like this.
  23. EricVT

    EricVT Adventurer
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    3
    Would this shard also be up only during your own personal peak hours so that you could keep an eye on all the champ spawns?
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  24. Redxpanda

    Redxpanda Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    116
    Doesn't sound like something i would be interested in but hey, if they can pull it off, go for it.
    Normal Skill gain and insurance with just one facet doesn't sound like it will cause much more server load.
     
    Mervyn likes this.
  25. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    Couple glaring problems with this idea:

    Even more shards with hardly anybody left on the current ones.

    If they did make these shards (which they never will) Where's our motivation to start over on these shards and leave the shards we've been playing for 10+ years? We can play in a Fel ruleset right now without starting over on a different shard.

    Yet another ruleset for the understaffed Dev team to handle.
     
    Sevin0oo0 likes this.
  26. Sevin0oo0

    Sevin0oo0 Guest

    Insurance in Fel?, sounds like it belongs in the "Trammelization of Fel" thread I started. While trying to sum up ideas in that to make a fresh start, that's where I had to stop, does insurance only belong in Tram? I'm AM going to back peddle and say (whoever it was) the mentioning of insurance for everybody But Reds might work, providing other changes accompany it, and I'll bring those up over there. Altho they say it's for the kill, and not the gold/items, maybe the premiums should be double in Fel with the insurance money going to the victor in PVP battles. IRL, it's the Risk level that determines your cost of insurance, Not just the value of the item, and there's more risk in Fel
     
  27. Goldberg-Chessy

    Goldberg-Chessy Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,160
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    In what way possible will these 'clone' shards attract more players?
    Why would any current fel rule-set players give up everything to start over on a clone shard with a bit of extra dead landmass? Just so they can work for months/years to hopefully get what they already have?

    Isnt there a "weird & senseless **** only I will enjoy" forum?
    Go there next time please :)
     
  28. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    This is an important question. It would dictate when I could play such a shard.

    At this point I'm with the crowd that wants to focus on getting new players into UO anyway possible. This shard idea doesn't really do that, since UO has bigger issues with attracting new players.
     
  29. Zyon Rockler

    Zyon Rockler Guest

    Well first off, Good Luck and at least it's a good start for the conversation but this should be done right if it's ever done not just small changes and clones and definately not something that will need extra or different attention.

    I like the Fel rule set concept but I believe there has to be safe areas. I think the areas should be further divided into dangerous Non PvP and extremely dangerous PvP.

    This way, within the PvP areas death can happen to anyone, so that the risk is greatest for the murderer.

    I would use Guard Zones, NPCs to help control areas and protect players. For example: Mines that have guards in them and then mines with just workers in them to mines that are empty with possible spawns, traps and of course PKs.

    So, i'm just saying, PKs would still have the smallest area but they would not have to worry about groups of NPCs or Guards or both but then those areas would be just as deadly to them. I would even set traveling NPCs who would search for Reds and kill them, so that they would too, also feel what it is like to be hunted, what it means to lose.

    In a world like that you also need a balance for a reason to live. You can't just change the rules and expect the game to be new. You have to change the game, increase the land mass to push people away from each other rather than one main road for example, there would be two but create those interesting draw points along each road.

    If there's no change, than the numbers would stay low, in my opinion. Curiousity is a huge part in setting up places on the surfaces, you could have completely random spawns. Like an Evil Mage Tower with Evil Mages and unique drops, perhaps special potions that give an extra cap to your stats and last for a few days.

    And then the next day the tower is gone and it's replaced with a strange cave and eventually the landmass becomes a living, breathing area, full of change and endless possibilities. This should be the main reason for a change in creating a new landmass, so that you could optomize what you could not before because of stagnent objects. For example: Again, roads. Roads could be built by the number of people who use a path, meaning they would not exist at all unless people travel in a direction that created a path but unless this is planned ahead of time, roads would simply just either be stagnent or end up going all over and around different houses.

    Also, if they create a shard that's new, I think there should be huge incentive to go to it. Like, think about all of the characters you could have on all of the shards. Think about all of the bank space, boat space. Wouldn't it make more sense to just play on just one shard and be able to have a reasonable 15 characters. Wouldn't it be better for the player, to be able to have ship hold with 500 items rather than have 500 boats?

    I think organizing the player to focus in one area brings them together with other players because other shards basically build walls between the players. For example: 5 players each play on a different shard. These 5 players play the same multi player game but will never see each other.

    So, because of that I think it should be important or a priority to bring people together and I would lock out the other shards so you would only be able to play on that one shard. So, you could change your main shard to the new shard but then you would not be able to play on other shards. For example: Any new player would begin on the new shard. Old players could make a choice to move to the new shard and would be given many incentives, rule change is not enough.
     
  30. Sevin0oo0

    Sevin0oo0 Guest

    Safe areas where it's not possible to flag (become an aggressor or call guards) in or across a boundary? Could you expand on both a little? thnx
     
  31. Zyon Rockler

    Zyon Rockler Guest

    Check the other post you made. I tryed to explain it there.
     
    Sevin0oo0 likes this.
  32. Ashlynn_L

    Ashlynn_L Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    489
    Actually maybe they should just set up a long term fel-rules shard with no insurance. Nothing more beyond that as it won't require any really special coding if it is just that so it wouldn't take up any resources. Then we can settle the issue once and for all. The devs can look at the population six or twelve months down the line. If it's popular, keep it open and maybe appoint an EM. If it's not, well... leave it open or if it's dead, shut it down.

    Anything more customized than that would require a lot of dev resources which is a bit of a drain right now but I believe the above experiment could work with minimum overheads.
     
  33. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    Is this sarcasm?

    God I hope so.........cause if not, let me tell you there is a shard exactly as u describe. It's called Siege.
     
  34. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    They don't maintain the ONE seperate rules they have running (mainly because they are dead) so thats the real killer. And no, I don't think they would be very populated either. Mainly because the game in general is really low on players, and insurance based fel rules shards is not an idea to drive throngs of people back/draw in new player.
     
    Woodsman likes this.
  35. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Siege has many difference from basic fel other than no insurance.
     
  36. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    Just think of it though...each player on this shard will have a whole landmass to themselves....
     
    Surgeries, Martyna Zmuir and Woodsman like this.
  37. Flutter

    Flutter Always Present
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    21,553
    Likes Received:
    3,840
    Right. We need them to invest time and resources into ANOTHER server. Great idea! We for sure are overpopulated on the shards we already have. Damned if I wasn't just wishing today that we had another few servers for the pvpers to spread out to. Gosh... I was just thinking about how hard it is with push through to even MOVE on the shards we have now since there are SO MANY people playing UO right now. Holy smokes! It's like you totally read my mind. I think you might be the smartest guy in all of UO.
     
    Martyna Zmuir and LordDrago like this.
  38. PJay

    PJay Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    38
    You all say there arnt enough players when quite recently i read a post by petra where Jeff says the number of subs is increasing.​
    Also this would make a place all pvpers can come into one place to pvp i believe you could xshard and as for another set of rules to maintain totally crap would be easy.​
    Tho im not totally sure i support this idea because it would make them neglect fixing bugs (which they dont bother fixing anyway).​
    If it did come to being implemented maybe make it so you have to join a faction so there is an element of risk because i prefer high quality pvp and that means insurance.​
     
  39. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    Yeah I know, but not enough to justify adding a different Fel based no insurance shard.
     
  40. Meatbread

    Meatbread Journeyman

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    230
    UO's population isn't what it used to be, but that in itself doesn't really mean anything. No MMO has ever existed that wasn't below peak subscriptions by the time it was half this age. The main issue is that UO can't/won't merge shards due to the housing issue. Even the WoW forums are routinely full of "Waah my server is DEAD!" threads because that game also refuses to merge servers, albeit for different reasons.

    But yes, even if they can't merge shards, opening new ones is CERTAINLY not what is needed.
     
  41. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    None of us have really seen this in-game though.​
    Plus didn't Jeff say this around the time the housing timers were finally turned back on and people had to renew their subscriptions to keep their houses from falling?​
     
  42. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Don't buy it. Why would we be getting new subs? What has changed? Nothing. There hasn't even been any new substantial content since friggin' high seas (which was precious little), going on 2 years ago. More advertising? Nope. Cost change? Nope. Nothing. Don't buy it. ​
    lol... wanna place bets on that? I bet you a billion irl dollars that people on ANY new shard will be crying out for change and balance within the month. Then like siege when they ignore the complaints for years... and, well, see siege. ​
     
  43. Winker

    Winker Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299
    Likes Received:
    624
    What Merv fails to see is that not everyone wants to PvP. I am a PvPer through and through but even I can see that a majority of the current subscribers just don’t want to PvP regardless of how much land you give them.

    Those who PvM wont use it, as the thing they hate more than anything else is losing there hard earned loot to reds. Even the PvPers would champ in tram if they could get the scrolls there and pvp would revolve around Yew gate only.

    So the reality is that no matter how big the land mass is. the majority of the current subscribers don’t want PvP at any price.

    Old Pvpers who have left for what ever reason come and go, then come and go again and again and again.

    UO is too time consuming for most people, to get anywhere you need to put in at least 14 hours a week and to feel like your actually winning you need to put in 20+ hours.

    It’s the grind that drives people away. Just when you think you have gotten the grind out of the way. They change everything so, you're back to grinding all over again. Too much work is needed to just to maintain your account, the fun is lost and people leave.
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  44. Cirno

    Cirno Purple Pony Princess
    Stratics Veteran Alumni

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    961
    Likes Received:
    224
    That's not exactly right.

    If I PvEer was farming some manner of Fel "boss" for hours, and finally got the artifact they wanted, and then were killed/looted, then that applies.
    But mostly, people who aren't there for PvP don't want the structure of their activities to be dictated at the whims of someone who wants to dictate their activities through PvP.
    The result is the same, though.

    Also, without "sheep", many "wolves" wouldn't use it, either.
     
    Mervyn likes this.
  45. Mervyn

    Mervyn Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    372
    A lot of people are saying devs shouldn't invest time in this, won't it take 10 mins to set up the servers?
     
  46. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    Shhhh! Haven't you noticed by now that BioWare Mythic producer-types like their smoke-and-mirrors spin doctoring? Don't look behind the curtain, the Wizard died of malnutrition 9 years ago... :eyes:
     
  47. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    The way this game is run?! Seriously? Add about 4 zeros to your 10 min time estimate, then quintupple it for the span of time it would take them to even pretend to tackle the myriad bugs it would launch with.

    Rather suprised this thread hasn't been locked...
     
  48. Mervyn

    Mervyn Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    372
    Why would it be more buggy than a "normal" server? just copy and paste a normal sever (minus trammel) and have fel ruleset, why should it take more than 10 minutes?

    It amazes me how much someone can oppose to something when it will not affect them if they do not play it.
     
  49. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    Never said that it should take longer, nor that it would logically contain bugs. But...seriously...what game have you been playing recently? One with a budget? One with a Dev Team bigger than 7 people? One that can put out a well-tested, relatively clean publish? UO's history doesn't back this kind of endeavor with likely success.


    As others have stated, Siege hasn't been well supported over its lifespan. Honestly, how do you think a 3rd ruleset would be supported for the handful of people who might theoretically play there? Alternate ruleset shards, barring the already-existing Holiday shards, will never happen again.

    UO's population is already spread far too thin.
     
  50. Mervyn

    Mervyn Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    372
    Trammel is why this game has a low population in general, no insurance is why Siege has a low population.

    Mervyn offers you players, why have you forsaken him?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.