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

Combining T2A

Discussion in 'UHall' started by TheJunglist, Oct 20, 2009.

  1. TheJunglist

    TheJunglist Guest

    Since there is no housing in t2a, it would be amazing if there were some way to have the shards "combine" when you enter t2a. Have some sort of system to control item trading to prevent xsharding items easily, and a cool down of 3-5 minutes to leave t2a once you enter.

    But, you could say, put all of the East Coast shards together only on the t2a side, same for West, Euro, and Asian shards.

    This would increase the amount of players/playing time by a huge margian.

    Anyone, feel like commenting on this idea?
     
  2. Hildebrand

    Hildebrand Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    1
    They would never do that.

    I'd like to see it leveled... magincia style. Get rid of all those confusing, winding trails. Put up some consentual PvP arenas. Where you opt-in for 1v1, or 1 v 2, or 2v2, etc.
    Also plop some housing there too.

    Problem is... there are two facets to worry about, so forget it.
     
  3. Jhym

    Jhym Guest

    ... are you just spouting random ideas or something?

    T2A is a facet and thus can't be reworked like you are suggesting. In any case, they have absolutely NO reason to combine any shards in this manner. At all.
     
  4. Petra Fyde

    Petra Fyde Peerless Chatterbox
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2001
    Messages:
    30,882
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    I would imagine, since the shards are on different servers, this would be next to impossible to implement
     
  5. Viquire

    Viquire Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    3,456
    Likes Received:
    507
    Yeah, no.

    This is a very useful subserver on any shard, either facet.
     
  6. Lynk

    Lynk Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    6,032
    Likes Received:
    145
    I like the idea, though I don't even really see a need to limit the cross shard trading. Nothing wrong with moving items from server to server, imo.

    As Petra said though, I don't think this would be possible to implement.
     
  7. Vaen Swiftar

    Vaen Swiftar Guest

    Everyone who is saying that it is impossible is wrong. They could easily set something up like this. EASILY. I wouldn't mind some sort of system where the shards could fight each other.
     
  8. Restroom Cowboy

    Restroom Cowboy Visitor

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    3,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not possible. Not easily possible. Impossible.
     
  9. Green Mouser

    Green Mouser Guest

    I think what some are failing to see is that this Dev team is trying/implementing many creative ideas, including player suggestions. There has been LOTS of posting about under populated shards. IMHO I see them doing something to ease cross shard traffic and modifiying the Lost Lands sounds like one of the easier proposals I have heard of.

    The naysayers are a little short sighted I think.
     
  10. Vaen Swiftar

    Vaen Swiftar Guest

    Wrong sir. It is definitely not impossible by far.
     
  11. Viquire

    Viquire Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    3,456
    Likes Received:
    507
    OK I'll bite.

    Lets suppose for a second that the idea of a nexus for the shards has merit.

    T2 has two separate facets one of which is useful for attaining powerscrolls through champ spawns. And lets face it no one wants to go through and redo the whole map to allow for housing in a shared area. It's lunacy.

    On the other hand, consider Illsh.

    Much larger than T2 and holding an abundance of largely unused structures that could be tweaked for different activities.
    IF:

    Dungeons and dungeons only were made accessible to the red players through gateways connecting to fel areas

    AND

    A multiple instance was created for the wield, so more than one group could run Dreadhorn at a time

    I would be in favor.
     
  12. Lynk

    Lynk Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    6,032
    Likes Received:
    145
    I'd rather keep the classic dungeons separate. I couldn't handle 100 people in despise. T2A is big enough, not as much of a choke fighting place.
     
  13. It's technically difficult no doubt but not impossible, basically copy a character to one server and reroute the player so they will all login on the same server with a copy of their character, update the character to the server of origin when logging out again.

    It would probably be too costly, not only a lot of man hours of programming but also hardware, more bandwith (having to copy player data over and over) and perhaps more risk of players finding new ways to dupe. Trying to come up with a story that fits the new LL in UO lore would be a challenge also. But other than that, a fighting zone where players from all shards could battle together would be a really nice addition.
     
  14. Viquire

    Viquire Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    3,456
    Likes Received:
    507
    I may not have communicated my intent very well. Of course this is all academic, but entrances from fel into the dungeons and allowing access for reds only in the dungeon areas of Illsh, similar to the entrances to the champ areas in the Abyss. Of course this would/should require a reason for them to be there.

    Alternately entrances could be open to all through the gates, though this makes Dreadhorn a non mirrored pvp only peerless. I'm sure the players would be up in arms immediately, and the amount of choke fighting at gate entrances would probably keep all the non pvp players away. So the thought of opening the whole land mass to everyone is not acceptable, and opening only parts of the landmass to reds would require a bit of remapping and some encounter creation.

    I think the team has other things on their plate that are much higher on the priority list.
     
  15. Gowron

    Gowron Guest

    How about just keep Reds confined to their own shards....
     
  16. Viquire

    Viquire Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    3,456
    Likes Received:
    507
    like I said. Its all academic anyway.

    reds can use xfers. If we had a nexus why should reds not get to participate.

    See, I knew it. I don't have a single red char, never have in all my ten years. But I have known lots of folks with red chars and some of them are far more upstanding individuals than the most self centered blue players I have known.
     
  17. Scarst

    Scarst Lore Master
    Governor Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,235
    Likes Received:
    91
    I can see it now Delucia tram full of people spamming sales!

    If EA did this not only would if be a waste of time trying to work out bugs with deleted characters (that you wouldn't get back) It would screw up the economy of all shards. Even only linking east coast to east coast and such would result in massive inflation in some of the shards. Like Atlantic seems to be 50% more expensive than Catskills.

    They would also lose a lot of the revenue made by selling shard transfer tokens as a lot are sold to people x sharding to sell crap and make profit and then inevitably sell gold and start the cycle again. I'm not advocating this just saying that's how it is.
     
  18. Vaen Swiftar

    Vaen Swiftar Guest

    The point is that there would be a no-trade and no-drop code left in place. In such a combined area, you wouldn't drop anything to the ground except for cursed items. You would lose no insurance from dying. It would be JUST for PvP.
     
  19. Scarst

    Scarst Lore Master
    Governor Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,235
    Likes Received:
    91
    That's a waste of T2A as it is the place for champion spawns including the only place you can get the skull of enlightenment and if you can't move things around as in trade or dropping things on the ground champion spawns wouldn't work right. The UO code is a tangled mess with things in it the dev's can even figure out how to get out such as the random npc's appearing with player names.

    Saying they can remove just trade from an area is like saying i can remove the head from my body and float around still living.

    Something like this would be insanely hard to pull off with out a hitch the hitch being deleted characters. Adding in the inability to trade would make it impossible.
     
  20. Vaen Swiftar

    Vaen Swiftar Guest

    Scrolls are cursed. So they would still drop.
    Skulls are insurable. So they still won't drop.

    So there's no problem there.

    It's also not impossible to disallow trading in an area.
     
  21. Green Mouser

    Green Mouser Guest

    How would it screw up the economy? It would balance it out more than screw it up. ATL wouldnt be able to get 10-50 mill for weps and armor that sell for a fraction of that on other production shards. Other shards would be able to increase their prices a little to fill the vacuum.

    Loss of revenue would easily be corrected with the offer of other products for us to buy. Why include housing in this proposal? Leave housing alone IMHO.

    Why would the facets be affected? You have the lost lands as a Nexus (as another poster stated) all the shards can meet or even cross into other shards through this "Nexus". It is perfectly viable. Plus seeing how they are tracking things by account now and not names there will be accountability for wrong doers.

    Still see this as a win.
     
  22. Lord Gabriel

    Lord Gabriel Guest

    would'nt this simply destroy what UO is all about? The idea I got when I started playing was that the original world was destroyed /copied when the gem or immortality was shattered and now we are all "living" on seperate facets of what remains of the gem. If we were to somehow implement 1 subserver being common to all shards, that would imply that we were able to somehow piece the gem of imortality back together. It would be not only a programming nightmare, but also a huge flaw in the basic lore of UO.
     
  23. TetraMcCloud

    TetraMcCloud Guest

    Making ilsh into the nexus would make more sense than t2a since it only consists of one facet. as a some else said make the dungeons the pvp areas, ilsh has enough of them; make corresponding fel legacy dungeons the entrance into those.

    As for the wield, wouldn't any reds be attacked by all the fey at the entrance, couldn't that level the playing field for the pvm people out there. Although we would probably see a decrease on the amount of sampires soloing dreadmare and people farming swoop.

    They would have to totally revamp ilsh, the dungeons, and probably paragons to have a reason for people to be here. This also can lead into the next expansion with jukas and meers as a character class.

    As far as the ultima story with the gem of immortality and all that, didn't they break that when they handing some of the shards out on each one of the shards. That just leaves us open for lots of headache. But without that you could create a story where someone tried to rejoin the shards, but failed leaving the connected all at one point, ilsh, easy to pull off since there is not player housing or significant difference between shards, if any; and easier than t2a because it's only one facet.

    The other side to this would be that it probably would be difficult linking the shards like this. As well as taking out the need for transfer tokens, cuz lets face it trying to stop trading like that would be irrational. But if they took the hit on their money from the shards tokens, i think they would find a lot of people would enjoy this, and probably bring them more money.

    Just my 2 cents
     
  24. Vaen Swiftar

    Vaen Swiftar Guest

    I believe British, with a shard of the gem of immortality (which you can get in game), was able to shard-hop. So, that's kind of a moot point now.
     
  25. insanepete

    insanepete Guest

    the only way this would work without massive changes to the game would be to link siege and mugen and not by merging t2a but by linking the two shards. think of the lag if all the prodo shards population were jumping onto one shard to pvp :S
     
  26. Dermott of LS

    Dermott of LS UOEC Modder
    Stratics Veteran

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

    This isn;t going to happen:

    1. T2A is NOT a facet, it is a section of the dungeon server that exists in BOTH the Felucca and Trammel facets, thus EVERY SHARD has 2 T2A areas.

    2. Simply transferring characters between shards with items intact has been a duping NIGHTMARE (even to the more limited extext it is done right now due to being a pay service). Open it up for free and at-will and all hell breaks loose.

    3. The UO server structure is simply NOT set up for cross-shard interaction in this manner. UO and DAoC are different systems entirely and would have to be redone (probably both server AND client thus no more 2d and even any newer client would have to be rebuilt... again).
     
  27. jfkeach

    jfkeach Guest

    IT could be done. Its a computer. But there are two main reasons it aint going to happen.

    1. They sell Transfer tokens. Good cash crop for them. Would be a loss of revenue.
    2. It would cost a little for Development Resources.

    Simply put, it would be fairly easy enough to do. But they would have to spend some money to do it, and lose part of their revenue in the doing. In other words, Aint Gonna Happen.
     
  28. JC the Builder

    JC the Builder Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,154
    Likes Received:
    708
    It isn't a facet but T2A has its own server separate from the dungeon area. So it could theoretically be shard by multiple shards as if it were a facet.

    The Lost Lands do have several things going for it including no housing, no recall/gating, only a few entrances, etc. Players already switch servers all the time when they cross a server line or switch facets. I'm not saying it would be easy, but it should be possible.

    Also the people claiming this would be an easy change are kidding themselves.
     
  29. TheJunglist

    TheJunglist Guest

    The people saying it is pointless, probably do not PvP often. Which is fine, but t2a is a pvp area. Always has been.

    If you want more players back in the game, and the game to be more active. Something should be done to bring about more action is all.
     
  30. Goodmann

    Goodmann Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    1,124
    WORST THREAD EVER
     
  31. girana

    girana Adventurer
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    i really love this :)

    :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
     
  32. OxAO

    OxAO Guest

    This isn't a bad idea for a new expansion. in order to avoid cross shard trading of items without a character transfer they could set it up so you can only go into the area naked and dress at a new bank that can only be accessed in this land (you call T2A it could be any land)

    Maybe they could have specific items that can go back with you from these combined lands. but in general you go as you come naked.
     
  33. RaDian FlGith

    RaDian FlGith Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,442
    Likes Received:
    323
    What really needs to happen with T2A is that its original purpose is finally lived up to. The whole reason that there are empty spaces within that area AND a lack of wander healers is because, as Designer Dragon put it, it was specifically designed as a frontier experience where players would have to join together and heal each other and be there for each other, and it would be largely without the support of guards or healers.

    Unfortunately, soon after the release of T2A, Designer Dragon left for SWG, and the following design team either couldn't make it work or just simply chose not to. But it was originally designed to be exactly that.

    Of course, Fel would be a different story, but in Trammel, it could still be used as intended. The only thing the DevTeam would have to do is make a slight adjustment to how housing bases work in that the house plot would have to ensure its base was above the highest curve in the ground, and then the front stairs would have to extend in a manner that allowed entrance to the house. Not really a huge deal (I mean, SWG even placed awesomely into a very hilly environment, so possible... just needs programming), but would require some update to the housing system.

    In the end, it would be an interesting part of an overall revamp of T2A which, to me, could also herald an escalation of the Terathan/Ophidian war and perhaps introduce the Solen faction into it. There's so much untapped potential story-telling and history in this area (not to mention an implied tunnel between the Ophids and the Terathan Keep that is useless to us humanoids) that it would be nice to see it the subject of an update.

    Just my thoughts, but I'd prefer them than to ever see cross-shard anything. Hell, I don't even like battlegroups in Warcraft.
     
  34. Hildebrand

    Hildebrand Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    1
    this... Shard vs Shard