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

Classic Shard Question

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Acebeans, Feb 6, 2011.

  1. Acebeans

    Acebeans Guest

    Yes, there are still many of us that still want a classic shard and we aren't going to quit asking until we know 100% it's not going to happen.

    The last thing I saw about it was "shard of the dead" or something like that, has there been any news since then?

    Just browsing the first couple of pages I wasn't able to find anything but what I was able to find was a lot of complaining. Whats going on with the game? What's the current state?

    Maybe, it will finally happen?
     
  2. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    Shard of the Dead had absolutely, positively, nothing at all to do with a classic shard. Not even remotely.

    Everyone is still awaiting some sort of message from the UO producer, a message that is now 5 weeks overdue (from the original due date).
     
  3. popps

    popps Always Present
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    Messages:
    13,445
    Likes Received:
    461
    What really finds me puzzled, is that while on one side I hear requests of Ultima Online to go to its classic roots, then I also hear requests from other players of Ultima Online to go free-to-play.

    I find the 2 things not compatible, IMHO.

    I also do not favour to play an Ultima Online that has become so much dependant on items and their modifiers and I would much prefer to be able to play an Ultima Online more dependant on skills, rather than items and tons of modifiers which, to my opinion, only unbalance the game enormously and make design more difficult and time consuming than it could, IMHO.

    Still, since the game needs to be maintained with some sort of revenues, if it went free-to-play what items could be sold for revenues (to make it up for enough large revenues to maintain the game, further develop it and ensure profits) if a Classic Ultima Online means diverting from an item based game and go back to the old Ultima Online that was more based on skills ?

    I am much more in favour of the current subscription based form of revenue, especially, if there is any possibility of Ultima Online diverting from being item based and move back to give to skills a heavier role as it once was.

    That's at least my opinion.
     
  4. Ganondorf00

    Ganondorf00 Guest

    Wait for the video or a message to be released soon. They missed the deadline a few times but it's not that hard to do and they are paid to work, so i expect them to do something or some ea manager will fire them :p Not necessarly the video but they sure are working on something 8h/day, or else why would ea pay them.
     
  5. ----------insert wasted breath here-------------
     
  6. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    Wow.

    Really?

    Hum, then this post: http://vboards.stratics.com/1850844-post278.html doesn't exist at all, right? Hmm. Straight from the producer's "mouth."

    Morgana, you SERIOUSLY need to get a grip on reality. In fact, I do believe it was you who was substituting her own opinion on what Cal said in a private message and got it completely wrong. (Edit: Just so you don't forget: http://vboards.stratics.com/1878867-post281.html)


    I've sunk your battleship, again.
     
  7. Dermott of LS

    Dermott of LS UOEC Modder
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,320
    Likes Received:
    528
    ...

    we aren't going to quit asking until we know 100% it's not going to happen.

    And even then it STILL won't stop, because it never has even when given a clear "never gonna happen" answer in the past, why would it stop now?

    The "Classic Shard Question" may very well be the UO equivalent of "Are we there yet?".
     
  8. Ganondorf00

    Ganondorf00 Guest

    I'll take a "it won't happen right now maybe in the future" as a negative and move on.
     
  9. i attempted to play shard of the dead in hopes of 'classic game-play' but there was absolutely nothing that offered that. it was just a shard that you got an advanced character token, increased skill gain, and minimal resources. the only thing that felt 'classic' was everyone was no insurance. yes, everyone was on the same level in terms of items/gear/skill and that the only town with guards was britain (which isn't classic), but all of the new skills were still active, and all of the new features just made it a siege mockery shard with an on-going vampire wars.
     
  10. Acebeans

    Acebeans Guest

    Thanks for the responses. Hopefully some clarification will come soon. If you do a bit of searching on the web you'll see something that is coming out in the very near future that will indicate just how successful a classic shard could be.

    Anyways, I'm not trying to spark a debate or anything just thought I would mention that.

    Other than that, what's the state of the game right now? Reading a couple pages I see a lot of people are very unhappy etc, what is going on?
     
  11. Ender

    Ender Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,548
    Likes Received:
    548
    I do recall someone, somewhere saying that the reactions to and activity on the Shard of the Dead will have some effect on the decision of whether or not a classic shard would be worth the investment.

    My internet is way, WAY too flaky right now for me to go search through posts, that would take hours.
     
  12. cool :blushing:

    You WILL need to be a bit more specific though ...
    The current population of the forums ... have not seen anything of that nature ...
    and they ain't exactly google virgins ...

    just saying :scholar: The actual "state of the game" is likely to ONLY be found >in the game< and not here on the forums ...

    some folks (*gasp*) tend to exaggerate their views ... ie.
    see for yaself!
    Mythic Entertainment | Ultima Online - Play the 14-Day Free Trial!

    yw.
     
  13. ----------insert wasted time here-----------
     
  14. >I< certainly think they could put up a test shard WITHOUT any consideration of any such "test/focus group" ... it's a "tradition" of sorts ... and as explained by the devies themselves ... an opportunity to "have some fun"

    >I< also believe that "minor" items are added to the game >WITHOUT< the benefit of trial/test/focus review ...
    Gifts
    should be all I need mention ...

    The WHOLE "classic shard" GAFFE ... was created by George Vanous ...

    quit failing to acknowledge your errors
    ignorance is no defense
    and feigning ignorance IS TROLLING ...

    yw.
     
  15. Trebr Drab

    Trebr Drab Guest

    Cal was the one that brought up the idea of discussing a Classic Shard. I find it rather suspicious that he's since been wounded by a chair leg.
     
  16. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    You mean the focus group that you aren't supposed to be talking about, and where the few others who actually bothered to post pretty much told you the same things you get here?

    Good one, Morgana. Please, post more that you can't actually talk about. Continue to rail against something the producer PUBLICLY stated, trumping anything you could post. Keep bashing your head into the wall of reality, maybe someday you might gain a clue. :wall:

    Shard of the Dead wasn't even remotely classic, remember the first one came after your nemesis, AoS. Oh noes!



    Shard of the Dead features:
      • No guards or justice-zones, except the city of Britain
      • Dark Towers of Death guarded by hordes of undead minions
      • Glass Swords of Shattering(one-hit kill)
      • Accelerated skill and stat gain
      • One Advanced Character Token per guest
      • Permanent worldwide darkness
      • Kill and death stat tracking
      • No item insurance or blessed items, except spellbooks and runebooks
      • Double gold on most monsters
      • Vampire wars
    No item insurance is the closest the shard came to classic, which you damn well know isn't close enough.

    Please, go to your free shard and take your propaganda spin doctoring with you.
     
  17. HD2300

    HD2300 Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    10
    MLF, thanks for confirming that George Vanous took the fall for EA's deceptive "the new Classic shard" marketing of the SOTD. 'Dont believe anything unless its in the publish notes' indeed.
     
  18. Acebeans

    Acebeans Guest

    I do appreciate it but I haven no desire at all to play UO the way it is now. Not trying to say it's not a good game or anything like that, it is just not for me. I thought that maybe something major had happened but that obviously isn't the case.

    I think it would be against the forum rules for me to mention or link what I am referring to. Just think of the most successful private shard ever, which was widely covered even in magazines etc. It's basically a re-launch of that with new features aimed at solving the issues with pking griefing etc but without opening up a new facet. You would really just have to read about it yourself but it's certainly expected to exceed the amount of players on an EA shard.

    If it's allowed I have no problem linking it but I'm sure it isn't.
     
  19. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    If it draws currently subscribed players away from existing shards, including Siege and Mugen, rather than bringing back actual players who quit and who had de-activated their accounts, then it's not a success.

    It's simply shuffling players around, and it's dividing up the remaining communities even more.

    One thing I haven't seen addressed, and maybe I missed it, would be if it was a truly classic shard, what the thoughts were on people coming back and activating their accounts and being willing to actually create and train new characters. If they allow people to buy tokens and transfer their characters and stuff over, then it won't be a classic shard by any stretch of the imagination.
     
  20. Acebeans

    Acebeans Guest

    Everything you are asking will be demonstrated in less than a week.

    Yes you are right, so transfers etc would have to be blocked. It would be to be an entirely new shard with old school rules etc so transfer wouldn't make sense.

    fayled: I responded to your post but it was submitted to an admin for approval?
     
  21. Dermott of LS

    Dermott of LS UOEC Modder
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,320
    Likes Received:
    528
    ...

    The question is NOT what happens with a classic shard in "less than a week", but 3 months, 6 months, 1 year down the road.
     
  22. Orgional Farimir

    Orgional Farimir Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    760
    Likes Received:
    265
    I started out wanting a classic shard, but now I am on the fence about it. Yes I would love no arties, no insurance, no power or stat scrolls, the old style PvP, and the old community we had, but I like all the new features as well. The locked skill arrows, checks and rune books, champ spawns, peerless, and the new monsters and land masses. With all the new things to do in game I don't know if I could live with just the legacy dungons. I would love for champ spawns to be integrated into a classic shard, but they aren't "classic" in my book and what would be the point of them with out the power scroll drops? I don't know if I would have to go and buy a horse after I die or if I die in PvP have to fight the rest of the battle on foot.
     
  23. Acebeans

    Acebeans Guest

    I think that blessed rune books, skill arrows etc just enhanced the game play but didn't actually change the game mecanics, combat so on.

    IMO rolling out a classic shard with only one facet, old school combat would be the best way to go. As everyone progresses on the shard maybe you could open up champ spawns and special dungeons all that good stuff. I'm sure they would have to be tweaked to work with old school combat and all that but I don't think anyone would object to more PvE options.

    Games have the change but no one that wants a classic shard was upset about more PvE options. It was trammel and the itemization, insurance all that stuff but to keep a game interesting things have to change and more content has to be released to keep people interested. Completely changing the game entirely is what classic UO folks didn't want.
     
  24. ------------insert waste of effort here-------------
     
  25. Nothing nefarious going on Acebeans, likely just your post count.
     
  26. Dermott of LS

    Dermott of LS UOEC Modder
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,320
    Likes Received:
    528
    ...

    Were *you* a part of that focus group? Hmm...I wonder who here was...let me think...

    I have never confirmed or denied my participation, or lack thereof, in it.

    The bolded above from this very thread would be pretty damned close to confirming it (if in a non-direct way).
     
  27. Trebr Drab

    Trebr Drab Guest

    I agree with you. And when Draconi posted that poll asking if people would accept Classic with compromise, it overwhelmingly agreed to that. I think lots of players probably want many of the newer features, as long as they don't conflict with the Classic (read: Pre-AoS) style.

    I also think, but it's really hard to tell, that many would like to remove Trammel's rule set, and add a justice system to limit PKing. But this is a much more volatile question than the Pre-AoS question.
     
  28. ------------insert wasted minutes of my life here---------------
     
  29. Martyna Zmuir

    Martyna Zmuir Crazed Zealot

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    632
    LOL :lol:

    Seriously, get over yourself. Get over being wrong. Get over having no proof of your specious claims. Get over the fact that others CAN back things up with posts you would rather ignore. Get over the fact that you have been the single biggest troll on this board since Cal foolishly mentioned a classic shard.

    Go back to your free shards.
     
  30. HD2300

    HD2300 Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    10
    I congratulate you on breaking free from being a full time unpaid marketing tool of EA Mythic et al.
     
  31. Beer_Cayse

    Beer_Cayse Guest

    save yer breath. while I would also like a classic (pre-AOS) shard of some type, it was well known that SOTD was NOT of that genre. Some folks will refuse to see that only because it makes them feel good.
     
  32. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    Therein lies the problem.

    When you have people who say "I want a classic shard, but I want this from 2000, and I want this that was added in 2001 and so on" you're no longer talking about a Classic shard.

    You are talking about a shard that masquerades as a Classic shard, but has some changes that make things much more convenient.

    Part of what made UO so challenging in '97 - '99 was that things weren't convenient. We weren't coddled. We had a completely different mindset that dictated how we traveled, how we fought, how the craftspeople did their thing, how we related to one another, and so on.

    To me, this should not even be up for debate, because any "classic" shard cannot have Trammel. You should start calling it a "renaissance shard" at that point, because that's what it is. Getting a lot of peoples hopes up about a "classic" shard and then having them find out it has Trammel, they won't even bother.

    If you have a Trammel on a so-called classic shard, you're dividing players up geographically on the shard, and you're making it easy for people to PVE or craft and resource gather, and so you've essentially lost a lot of what was the essence of UO prior to Trammel.

    At that point, Siege/Mugen are "classic" shards and this shard is simply a Renaissance shard. You're going to disappoint a lot of people who are not going to hang around, and the resources would have been better spent working on Siege/Mugen and making those more appealing to the old school crowd.

    That's assuming there are even enough resources to manage three different rulesets. It seems like there are barely enough resources to deal with what we have. A classic shard has a little appeal to me, but I think before adding such a shard or a new landmass elsewhere, the heart of the game needs to be worked on - bug fixes, client work, etc.
     
  33. Trebr Drab

    Trebr Drab Guest

    I had started calling it a "Classic Based" shard.

    But a rose by any other name, and all that.

    This should not be a problem. The Devs are going to get complaints no matter what they do, or don't do. That goes with the territory. But it's a no-brainer that a "Classic" shard would be better with many of the changes that have been done to make things better. To fix issues. To add content. What they need to recognize is the spirit of what the Classic shards was, and go for that. That's the tough part.

    And to be honest, I wish they'd make this change for the entire game, not just do a shard. They need to unify UO, not add more separate games that are hard to keep up with. But I know that's not likely at all. Just my thinking.
     
  34. grig_since98

    grig_since98 Guest

    I'd like to touch on what Woodsman brought up, namely, what exactly is a classic shard? From what I've read, I see as many definitions of a classic shard as people who advocate a classic shard. Is classic T2A only? Does classic mean everything before UO:R? Or perhaps classic is everything through SA but without artifacts and the Trammel rule set? I believe the classic shard lobby needs to collectively determine what exactly a classic shard means, which is something I imagine to be impossible, as it is my personal opinion that "I want a classic shard" really means "I want to play the UO that I personally enjoy best". You simply can't provide a version of UO that has what everyone wants, as sometimes different features are mutually exclusive.

    What bothers me about the about the Classic shard argument, and I realize I'm going to step on some toes here, is that it shines a light on what I feel is the endemic conservatism and pervasive, unreasoning antipathy to change that is part of the UO community. To me, a classic shard in its purest definition implies, by definition, that NOTHING past the defining publish or date of the shard has any value whatsoever, and that you can't add features to that server at all? What do you have to look forward to in that situation? I have not seen many arguments in favor of a classic shard that don't ultimately boil down to a soggy mass of " UO should be how it was before AoS/Trammel/Insurance, or whatever messed it up. And much like boiling down your turnip greens, what is left doesn't have much substance.

    Seriously, has no feature been added to the game that is worthwhile? Nothing? I believe most people would have aspects of UO that they would prefer weren't as they are. Personally, I don't feel that UO is about questing, and I find it irritating that I have to quest now to do certain things in the game. On the other hand, unlike many older players, I really like the changes in items that AoS brought to the game. However, I realize that some people might really like the Heartwood quests, and not care for AoS at all. The variety of opinions is the point of it, it is not reasonable for me to expect EA to make a server that has everything I want without consideration of what other players may like.

    Would it be worth reviewing what a classic shard, in the purest sense, would entail. Lets use T2A era as a mile marker. A variety of interdependent skills? No, scratch that. If some of you recall, pretty much everyone was a GM in weapon skills, magery, and tactics, because that was the only real effective template. What motivation was there to play a specialized character like a mage. UO, where you can be what you want to be, that is, if you want to be a 7x old school GM or suck. What about colored ores and the attendant variety that adds? Well, depending on which publish you cut it off at, just iron for you. What about being able to walk from town to town without being killed and robbed by someone who will manipulate the notoriety system to make you look like the bad guy? Nope, that wouldn't be classic. Lets not have any safe storage outside your bank box, so that anyone with GM lockpicking and some time can just take everything in your house.

    To sum up the last paragraph, I personally don't see the appeal of taking 10 years of features out of the game.

    I personally believe that even some of the supporters of classic shard are thinking of nostalgia and not consequences. I don't have any surveys, or any evidence of opinion that isn't anecdotal, but I think all the evidence needed to show that UO:R well received is in subscription numbers and the numbers of players that stopped going to Fel. Clearly, players voted for Trammel with their virtual feet.

    For some of us, UO 1997-2000 was an almost magical time, in ways that often went beyond the game. However, while those years were fun, they're gone now. The UO of that time is never coming back, even if you create a server that replicates the rules exactly.
     
  35. Surgeries

    Surgeries Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    6,107
    Likes Received:
    92
    This was an excellent, and well written post, in my opinion.

    As Ziggy Marley's grandmother used to tell Ziggy as he sat in her lap:

    "Dese is da Good Ol' Days!"

    And as the wordsmith Mr. Anderson so eloquently states:

    "Once I used to join in, every boy and girl was my friend
    Now there's revolution but they don't know what they're fighting
    Let us close our eyes, outside their lives go on much faster

    Oh, we won't give in, we'll keep living in the past"
     
  36. grig_since98

    grig_since98 Guest

    Thank you. A compliment and a Tull reference, my day is going better already.
     
  37. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    I feel the same way. I felt Trammel was a mistake.

    I don't feel that offering non-PVP options was a mistake mind you - history quickly proved that it's the way to go.

    Where the mistake happened was splitting the shards virtually in half. You have a West Brit Bank in Tram and one in Fel. You have a Tram Minoc and a Fel Minoc, and so on.

    You are creating twice as many cities, but at that point you've really started to cut down on the number of people who are interacting with one another. We all knew people that once Tram opened up, they moved to Tram and they were there to stay, as well as people who stayed in Fel and refused to budge. Post-UO:R, it wasn't too much of a problem. You were pretty hard pressed to find major cities on the larger shards that weren't busy on either the Tram or Fel side.

    Fast forward to now, and we've since added three major landmasses for more housing, and associated cities, and we've still got the Fel/Tram thing, and we've got lower populations. Players are too scattered at this point.

    I argued at the time on UO.com or here or somewhere else, that either they should just have a toggle on each character for PVP (similar to what was considered for UO2) and add a dedicated land mass for housing, or they should just open new shards that are non-PVP, and make it easy for players to transfer. When UO:R firmed up, and we saw what was coming, I felt that Tram should not have the cities or the banks. Use Tram for housing, don't have a Tram version of T2A, etc. just have PVP toggles on characters, and keep everybody together.

    I thought it would be confusing to later players who came along, and also I thought it was too divisive. I felt in a way that Fel residents were being punished. I didn't want to see dead trees around my house (I know there were hacks to replace the trees within the client). They were basically telling us that PVP was dead, literally, as in the PVP side was dead, with dead trees, etc. around. I know, people said that the dead trees would instantly clue somebody in that they were in Fel, but a simple PVP toggle would have been a more elegant solution. Then again, a simple PVP toggle would have gotten rid of the need to divide players up.

    I also felt that if you have a shard with 8,000 players, and 5,000 were in Tram and 3,000 were in Fel, that you wouldn't have much interaction, and you might as well just say that it's not a shard with 8,000 players, it's a PVP shard with 3,000 players, and a non-PVP shard with 5,000 players, and sometimes they interact and sometimes they don't.

    I do understand why it was done. It was much cheaper and easier for them than firing up a whole lot of new shards. Servers were a lot more expensive back then, and your support costs rise dramatically the more you start adding in. Would they really be able to keep 40-50 shards going if they had rolled new shards out that were non-PVP, rather than adding Tram? From a cost point of view it's going to be a lot easier to make the case to keep 25-30 shards open than 40-50 shards open. That's all radically changed since then, but at the time, it was a lot more expensive and support-intensive.

    From a maintenance and efficiency (cost) point of view, Tram made sense.

    From the point of view of a community, it didn't make sense in the long run. To me it would be better to have a PVP toggle on the characters, and have everybody using one West Brit Bank or one Minoc or whatever, or to have PVP or non-PVP shards. It's telling that other successful MMORPGs around that time and that came along later on, made that an easy decision for players.

    I'm sure somebody will argue with me that if the active playerbase was 2-3 times as large as it is now, that it wouldn't be an issue, that we'd see a lot more activity, but I still think it was a bad idea to split the cities up into Tram and Fel.
     
  38. Trebr Drab

    Trebr Drab Guest

    Ahh, the old "living in the past" argument.

    I prefer to think of it as "learning from experience". But then, that would require thinking, something you guys evidently seem to think isn't possible for those of us who don't agree with you.

    The explanations have been given many times. You refuse to hear them, accept them, or acknowledge they exist. That's fine with me.

    But explanations aside, common sense and experiences and thought unaccepted, the simple fact that people want it isn't going to go away just because you guys keep hammering away at this baseless argument.
     
  39. old gypsy

    old gypsy Grand Poobah
    Professional Stratics Veteran Campaign Patron PITMUCK

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    5,834
    Likes Received:
    5,272
    What you have mentioned would have been so much better. After Trammel was created, some old and wonderful player-run towns and establishments languished and died. Numerous role-playing guilds tried to hang on, but finally disappeared (or may as well have).

    Today I regret the split, although I welcomed it at the time. I often wish there was a way to consolidate the original lands back into one again.
     
  40. copycon

    copycon Guest


    It is true that "classic" has no true definition. But, I believe that a "close enough" adaptation would be enough to quell the majority of players who desire a certain aspect of UO that no longer exists. As vague as that sounds, there are certain "key" features that make or break a "classic UO" ruleset. Specifics can change, but those "key" features remain the same across all descriptions.

    Those "classic UO" features have been heavily studied and the results are easily discernable with any amount of research into current adaptations (player run shards), so that nut is not as difficult to crack as some make it out to be.

    Any further comment beyond that is irrelevant though due to the lack of any communication or acknowledgement from the current development team.

    To answer this in as few words as possible, no, I don't think so.

    There have been arguments to reverse certain changes to the game, but I believe those arguments have long since faded. I don't believe anyone expects Mythic to revert changes that were made to production shards. I do believe however that it is reasonable for Mythic to provide a different shard with a ruleset as closely accurate to a certain era as possible. In that case, there is no impact to existing shards and players who prefer UO in its current form can continue to do so. That way, both sides have what they want and players have a choice to go their separate ways. At that point, the only problem becomes maintenance, and that can be solved with delegation of responsibilities within the team. It is a win/win.

    True, some players preferred Trammel, but their reasons were many. At the time, UO was in turmoil because there were many different types of players who were joining, and the world was only so big. Some players were established while others were just starting. Some players were bloodthirsty, and some just wanted to chop wood, and there was a clash. Also, the vast majority of new players were just getting their feet wet into the MMO gaming environment, so many of the experiences were new to them.

    The thing to understand is, most of the players who preferred UO pre-Trammel had the carpet taken out from under them when the game was changed to appeal to a larger demographic. Since then, the demographics have changed, the players have changed and the MMO market has become saturated. It is clear now that the desires of the larger demographics have changed, and UO meets few of them.

    There is one consistent factor though, and that is that many of us who preferred "classic UO" are still here and still desire UO as it once was.

    Agreed. Some are, and some aren't. Some past aspects can be recreated, and some can't. But the fact remains that there are many former players (like me) who desire it, and there is only 1 way to bring us back.
     
  41. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    A very good post, you made the point better than I did.

    If you move too far forward with things that were added to the original UO, you rapidly reach a point where it makes more sense to work with Siege and Mugen.

    If people start picking and choosing what they want and don't want with a classic shard, then they don't actually want a classic shard.

    What they want is a custom shard.
     
  42. grig_since98

    grig_since98 Guest

    DAoC has classic shards, last time I played, at least. Does anyone know how well they worked out? I know they had significant player populations.

    I wouldn't be opposed to them opening a classic shard personally. After all, the regular shard would presumably still be there, so Its not like I'm being *forced* to play on a classic shard.

    What I am concerned about is the effects that a classic shard would have on current shards. Because of the nature of MMOs, you as a player are affected by other players, even if you don't directly interact with them ( economy, player events, etc). So if a significant number of people left my server for a classic shard, it would affect my game play, so I'm less sympathetic for people being allowed to "play how they want to play" when it affects my server. Though I haven't played on Siege ( yet! ), I'm particularly concerned about the effects of a classic shard on Siege/mugen. I think it is a shame that Siege has such a low population, as my understanding ( from siege players) is that the economy is more balanced and the world "feels" more immersive than regular shards.

    I would also be concerned about the expenditure of resources for creating a brand new shard. Of course, I feel the same way about clients. If I had my way, I'd say dump the classic client and actually make the EC better. So far, the modding community has gone above and beyond in making the EC worth using. The fact is that a significant chunk of the player population doesn't want to switch from classic client.

    I may have just not seen it, but does there exist any sort of consensus on what a "classic" shard actually is? For instance, the meditation skill. Is that "classic" or not. What about treasure maps? Are all artifacts gone or just some? Will it include Malas or other places, or will it strictly be Brit.?
     
  43. Beer_Cayse

    Beer_Cayse Guest

    Gimme a server name ... I just came out of a 14-day DAOC trial. In all honesty, there were 3 that were prominent:
    Gaheris - coop server/PvE
    Pendragon - PvP, incl. realm members
    Ywain - RvR; this is a cluster of 10 servers Ywain1 thru Ywain10

    From what I could garner on VNBoards - DAOC General, the game has also taken a downturn on population. Also, support according to some. If you had a prior DAOC account and could recall the account details, older characters might be recoverable from "archived servers".