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.
Discussion in 'UO Siege Perilous' started by Tazar, Apr 16, 2013.
Link to Producer's Letter post
So... Please discuss and vote.
I say bring it on. People call everything griefing, we should be used to it.
I'm up for it. but if they wanted to cut the grief, they could give us a Tram with fel ruleset, Like Mugen, even if it did get me all itchy.*scratches*
Don't you think we are spread thin enough as it is?
I am curious as to what sort of griefing is being imagined.
you just hate walking between victims on a serious note, I do agree we are spread thin, but if they want to keep the grief down, it is an option. (I guess, I could be wrong)
First get rid of factions hehehehehe
Yeah we really don't need more land.
I am curious as well, i guess they could mean that player A, who is in minax, becomes Gov. of Britain. then SL steals Brits Sigil and takes over Brit and places a bunch of Guards around Brit, so therefore the new Governor cannot govern their own town *chuckles*
hell yea bring it on
I am guessing that Combat-voting is one thing. Possibly some form of conflict between the benefits of factions (Faction vendors) vs. the benefits of town council. Possibly some of the things the council can promote for the town can be also used for to grief others. I guess we'll have to see.
Makes sense. Sounds like it could even liven up factions and PVP some.
Har! Maybe the Devs should empty the faction coffers and make the various factions earn the silver to place faction guards. Faction guards are relatively easy to kill and avoid at any rate. Any other griefing ideas?
I can't see how exactly the two systems could lead to griefing, except that faction governors could have problems if another faction held their town. But I am voting yes regardless.
I voted yes.
I read the City Elections info and can´t think of any specific griefing scenarios that would be "too much". I mean, as it is, we can already kill and dryloot each other (not that I consider that griefing). How could an election system top that?
Come on folks. Let's be creative! How are we gonna grief each other? Factions is so twisted, strained and just out right broken there is no need to even "own" a town. How absolutely Machiavellian can we get?
Are we, as a small shard, not capable of handling our own "griefers" ? You can make a griefer stop griefing, but it takes a whole lot of people to make it happen.
Well a faction Finance Minister and the Governor both access the city treasury. So I am wondering for each for 2 million (unless changed) the Governor spends to open a trade deal with an npc guild can it be taxed by a faction minister up to 3xs normal price???
I guess the only thing I can think of i killing people who try to vote? But that would only work with factions. I dunno, I just don't see how people would "grief" others.
Either way I vote yes. Not being hermetically sealed off from any potential "negative" interaction with other players is part of the core siege experience.
I voted yes! I see no reason not to have it. On a side note, vote for ducky!
I think this sort of thing goes on all the time in the real world - you get the so called elected officials of a town, but then they end up having to deal with the 'shadow' government around them - whether that be gangs or militias, etc. Sometimes a workable truce is struck in order to strengthen a town, other times it's out and out conflict between the two groups. (I voted yes for it.)
The bottom line for us in-game is that there might be some unexpected consequences from all of this and if that happens we need to all try to remember not to point fingers at the devs - I think that aside from the griefing we give each other, that is some additional griefing they are surely worried about. (Which is a good reason to make us vote on it here so they can point to it if/when we grief at them.) I mean, here they are, trying to do their job and sincerely wanting us to enjoy this game that they work so hard on and yet it is the devs that get blamed for anything and everything that goes wrong. And they know that we have some players that will grief about everything and others who appreciate what they do, but still, the criticism has got to hurt emotionally at some level. (Many years ago I was married to an app developer so I've seen some of this stuff from the other side and it can be heartbreaking to work hours and hours [days and days] on something only to be told by those you are trying to please that it's crap - and sometimes it might be crap, but sometimes it isn't crap.)
IMHO, I think it says a lot that they *do* listen to us (especially 'us' as a small community) the way they do and they are willing to put themselves in the griefers' line of fire to try and give us the things in the game that we want or think we want. But I think that we all know the foregoing and that 99% of us really do appreciate what they do and how they listen. So HUZZAH to the devs! Thank you for, once again, walking into the line of fire to try and give us what we want.
p.s. eh eh, multiple edits on this post for me - trying to make certain I say what I am really trying to say. Sometimes the devs do fall on their faces; but sometimes they do exactly what we want and then we are ungrateful 'problem' children, lol. From the 'outside' (other shards) we probably do look like we whine a lot to get what we want. And maybe sometimes we whine, but I think we can also be a good thing for the devs (if the whining isn't too extreme) - we challenge them (often) to think even more outside the box than they usually do. We've all seen devs that couldn't handle it. I am very pleased that the devs we have currently try as hard as they do to take the challenges we toss at them. And our new players who have now seen Siege from the 'inside' should now have an understanding of why we, the players, fight so hard for this shard. Okay, off of the soapbox before the crowds light the kindling they've been stacking around it....
It's ok by me.
I don't think faction town pricing is going to affect the price of the benefits from being a Governor, but we won't know until it's put in. I think the griefing is more or less by using faction guards and such, which is no big deal if you're smart and know how to avoid them. People on Siege seem to think if you get PKed, your being griefed. IF a thief steals something from you, they think they are being griefed. Don't believe me? Look at how many people cried about the Valentines Roses or The Eggs. People need to realize that none of the above is griefing and its called playing the game and if those are things you hate, Siege is not for you.
For anyone who nay says on factions, you obviously don't understand them. Its typical for people to dislike something they don't understand or can't handle being a part of.
I vote yes, I love the ideas that this system brings to the game and would really enjoy seeing it on our shard.
Have not been playing much, do not know much about this council system, but from what I have read here I would have to agree with Rumpy. I can not tell you how many times in my past I have been called a "griefer" just for klling someone then re-killing them over and over after they had cussed me out and called me a griefer for pking them. Hell, I even remember being on the other side of that back when I first started the game and thought "pks ruin the game"...really kinda funny now considering I have spent way more time as a "pk" than as a so-called "good citizen".
I'll be voting yes as soon as I can get to a computer.
I think they should go ahead and install trammel, recall and turn off the young player restriction on siege. It baffles me why peaople create a charactor on an advanced player versus player server and all they want to do is everything but player versus player. I think maybe a free transfer to a production server for those who just want titles and such? There has to be alternitives to destroying the rule set that makes siege perilous.
@the risk of sounding like Kelmo... You need to learn some Siege history, it was never the 'advanced pvp server,' it was the Veteran server. It evolved into one of the premier PvP servers in its hayday mainly because of the full loot rights. People flocked to Siege for a number of reasons... 1 Char per account, Crafters actually had a reason to exist other than repairs, Full loot PvP, no vendor buybacks, etc. All of which are still valid reasons people play today. Just because you focus on PvP doesn't mean that someone else's reason for playing Siege is invalid or somehow less than yours... but then again if you wish to continue to promote the stereotype about L337 pVpR5, then by all means continue.
Anyways, back on topic, I voted yes.
I was the exact same way Tibs, #*&(^!#%( PKs! then picked up the Damien Striker account and joined J-D and had some of the most fun I have had in game as DS and then Hera. These days I'm on the other side now and mostly do PvE because I don't have the time to maintain a decent PvP presence, but I certainly don't whine if I'm dropped as it's all part of the game.
First time I met you hera was on an island doing a T-map and J-D raided us, we were left with nothing and stranded on an island. That is the part of siege I would love to preserve. No one complained in the party of 8 that died that night. Do it tonight and see what happens.
I don't understand the "griefing" opposition. I vote for something new.
Give it a go....Lets see what happens??
It may work and increase the population and non-active players.
This is SIEGE PERILOUS!!!
Bring it on!! If you don’t like griefing, pking, thieving then go back to prod shards. If you get your panties in a wad when someone gives ya some chatter grief, go back to prod shards. IF you can't handle UO as it was meant to be, get the hell off Siege and stop your cryin.
Yeah or at the very least getting it might keep us from losing more people. I know if I was a newer player here and saw that we weren't getting a pretty major content addition and that this wasn't the first time. Well I would ask myself if I really wanted to stay on a shard where I get less content but still pay the same amount as everyone else? I mean the second house when it actually comes will likely bring in a lot of people. Heck the announcement of it in the past brought in a lot of people. The issue is we still need to keep them after they come.
I may have misunderstood your initial message I replied to. . . yes, absolutely, Siege has always been risk...
On the same side-note: My first law I will pass as govenor: It is obligatory to eat duck twice a week!
Only if it is Canard à l'Orange!
I prefer pressed Duck.
We pay monthly fee's too. We should get the Governer's. Siege has its own way of dealing with griefers that seems to be effective.
Is everyone missing the big picture here?
"Fey Slayers" added to dungeon loot...
Looks like now I have to play again to collect Fey related stuff...
I started playing here because I don't want all the same crap I can get from a A-Typical prodo shard. I voted NO, because this is SIEGE PERILOUS.
I voted no, but only because I would hate to see the dev team try to jam in a system that doesn't seem to fit Siege's background and history. (There wasn't a choice on the poll that really fit this reason for voting "no.") I would rather see them wait to see what issues crop up with the Trammel version of the system on the other shards and then work with folks who really know Siege's history and players to come up with a variation that truly fits Siege.
As far as the backstory for the system goes, Lore Denin proposed something here that might be worth your time to read and comment on: http://stratics.com/community/threads/uo-com-producer-letter.298120/#post-2263748 . This is just one person's ideas on how to do a town council system on Siege. I'm sure others who enjoy role playing, writing, and creating player-run events could come up with some additional or alternative ideas if they put their minds to it. (Where's Raptor? How about some of the folks in Gilfane? I'm sure there are others that I don't know about.)
If the only new benefits players would get out of a town council system are the trade agreement buffs that only last for a day after you visit the town stone (as long as a city's treasury has received sufficient donations to keep the agreement in place), the ability to periodically sit down at a council meeting (assuming Siege has an active EM to run the meetings), and give your buddies/enemies city titles, I don't really understand what the rush is to jam onto Siege a system that was designed with the Trammel ruleset in mind. I'm in favor of holding off for a bit and asking the devs to put a little extra thought and effort into making a system that really fits Siege. Not something that really doesn't make much sense on a shard that has no Trammel facet and that was always supposed to be something different from all the other shards.
These are the buffs that the new system offers via the trade agreements:
Guild of Arcane Arts: +5% Spell Damage Increase
Society of Clothiers: +1% Resist bump to all resists
Bardic Collegium: +1 Faster Casting
Order of Engineers: +3 Dexterity Bonus
Guild of Healers: 5% Bandage Healing Bonus
Maritime Guild: +2 Hit Point Regeneration
Merchant’s Association: +2 Mana Regeneration
Mining Cooperative: +3 Strength Bonus
League of Rangers: +3 Intelligence Bonus
Guild of Assassins: +5% Swing Speed Increase
Warrior’s Guild: +5% Hit Chance Increase
Are all of these appropriate for Siege? Could some of them be tweaked? Are there others that would make more sense and/or be more useful and maybe even act as an incentive to get more people to play and be active on Siege?
Maybe if we could get the dev team (maybe they could get Kate Flack to come along too?) to agree to have a few meetings scheduled at different times to accomodate Siege's players who come from so many vastly different time zones to get some input and to toss some ideas at us. Maybe they'll even tell us what they have in mind as a replacement for factions and listen to any concerns Siege players might have about losing their own unique version of factions, with the Hero/Evil rules.
I will vote yes, because the folks I have played with for over 10 years want this.
Lets not forget that Stratics does NOT represent the populous of Siege as a lot of players do not use Stratics. Also the influence of people who do not play the server. They can't merely make a decision based off a Stratics post.
Thats my 2 cents worth.
I voted yes. I have been a continuous multi account holder on Siege for 9+ years now (UO 12yrs.+months). In all honesty I would have quit UO entirely, if Siege didn't keep a decent pace with the prodo shards. I certainly would not have enjoyed being stuck in time and have had only felucca to roam. I enjoy changes and the small difficulties they bring. So for me I'll take whatever comes with having the full content of this publish. So I say quit shaking the dice and let'em roll and accept what comes up! Cya later!
I believe this poll does indeed reflect the general opinion of this shard.
I do not even know what that sentence means.
There has been much more feedback to Mythic on this subject than this single thread on Stratics.
I know your old, but the sentance is english. Peole who dont play Siege come to Siege forums and vote on poll just cause they might play Siege. Do Ki need to be more clear?!
Also, typos for tablet typing!
I voted on bringing back the ninjitsu mirror image guard whack bug.
Looking at the people who have voted thus far, there are only about four names that I do not recognise as regular members of the Siege community (which is not to say that those aren't).