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

Punkbuster Poll: The Siege Opinion

Discussion in 'UO Siege Perilous' started by Beatrice Quill, Jun 30, 2006.

  1. EA have stated their intention to add the anti-scripter tool called Punkbuster to Ultima Online.

    EA have also stated that they intend to have at least one shard that will not have Punkbuster functionality on it - in other words, 'The Cheat Shard'.

    EA have indicated that this will NOT be a new shard.

    There are strong indications that this intended dumping ground for cheats, hackers, and scripters will be either Siege Perilous or Mugen.
    One example can be found here..

    It is very likely that this course of action would cause major changes to our experience of the game.
    This is the 'hard shard'. The shard that people come to for the challenge.
    This proposal would utterly destroy Siege as we know it. There is nothing remotely 'hard' about running scripts, or tools designed to make gameplay easier.

    So far, we, the customers who make use of the Siege Perilous shard, have not been consulted. We might be at a later date, but so far, we have not.

    So, in the interests of helping our friends at EA, I propose we gather some information.

    I do realise that this is not a foolproof method.
    I am aware of things like board alts, and that not every Siege player posts or reads here.
    However, since I don't have the ability to create an in-game poll, or email every player who has logged onto Siege in the last few months, I have to make do with what I've got.

    So, here's a poll.
    With some luck, Wilki will be kind enough to pass the figures on to those who make the decisions, at least, until a more official survey of our opinions is taken. This one will run until the end of August - by which time I'm sure we'll have a clearer picture of EA's intentions.

    This poll assumes that Punkbuster is a fact of life, that it will appear on nearly all shards, and that EA will indeed leave it off at least one existing shard.

    I do ask that you keep this thread within the terms of the RoC. If it is locked or deleted, then so are our chances of being heard.

    Mods, assuming this poll doesn't violate the RoC in some way, please would you sticky it? After all, Punkbuster will affect every single one of us, one way or another.

    Thank you.
     
  2. Patty Pickaxe

    Patty Pickaxe Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,955
    Likes Received:
    8
    TY for the poll, Bea! Maybe we should put a similar poll on UoHell to get some input from the prody shard players. We can find out from that crew how many ppl would actually considering playing Siege if it became PB free.
     
  3. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    "Calelena - *TamerCat* One of my many questions is...Are you plaining on
    letting people transfer to the non Punkbuster server? Or will you make it so no
    one will be able to go to it. Like if I want to leave the non punkbuster server will
    I be allowed to do so? And what is the non punkbuster server going to be, if you
    could say that.
    MrTact - Well, first we have to decide which server or servers will be non-PB.
    That will obviously affect our decision concerning the answer to that question.
    MrTact - Our initial thinking is that we might allow players to transfer TO non-PB
    shards, so they could continue to play the characters they've built up should
    they choose not to make use of PB.
    MrTact - However, it's pretty clear we would not allow characters on non-PB
    servers to transfer to PB servers . . . except if we were to convert an existing
    shard, we might allow it for a window of time prior to the full rollout . . . unless
    maybe we choose Siege to be non-PB.
    MrTact - As you can see, it's not a simple question to answer.
    MrTact - But we will be evaluating this throughout the beta testing process, and
    listening to the feedback from the community."

    ____________________________________________________________________
    MrTact - Our initial thinking is that we might allow players to transfer TO
    non-PB shards, so they could continue to play the characters they've
    built up should they choose not to make use of PB.
    ____________________________________________________________________

    This looks like it would require at least two major changes to Siege's basic design;

    1. The addition of character transfers.
    2. The opening of additional character slots.

    If the character transfers are "one-way" that could be a good thing overall.
    I can't see a scripter that has made an ebay living off a prod shard thinking
    it's a good idea to transfer to Siege. If I were a scripter I don't believe I would
    want to be herded to a shard with all the other scripters in UO. It would be very
    easy for EA to assign a lot of proactive GMs to one shard.... keeping a special
    eye on transfers.

    Tact seems concerned about letting people use the characters they have worked
    on. Notice he used the plural there "characters". I would just remind him that
    those of us that have paid for an extra account to have a crafter FOR YEARS
    won't care for that at all.

    Cheers!
     
  4. Kat SP

    Kat SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    I would just remind him that
    those of us that have paid for an extra account to have a crafter FOR YEARS
    won't care for that at all.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I can certainly agree with that! I haven't been playing here for YEARS, but I certainly have developed a crafter on an existing account that would have otherwise been closed.

    Even if they were to allow us multiple characters on each of our accounts, ALL of our characters are currently on seperate accounts and there is no way to merge them into one. =/

    Furthermore, I am curious if they would be allowing standard character transfers with tons of items in tow? I cannot imagine that an influx of gold, rares or other items would be good for the economy here on Siege.

    IF Siege is chosen as a non-PB shard, I am very concerned about possible changes coming down the pike.

    Note that I am "curious" and "concerned". I am not about to start flipping out over the possibility of any of this. One thing has become crystal clear to me and that is that no one at EA gives a flip about what we want or need. I am almost at the point of not caring about any of this anyway.
     
  5. The question on a punkster free shard is moot sonce it is part of the punkster TOS. I can't say I want to play with punkster on my system but certainly don't want to play on a shard that welcoms cheaters - we have enough now, thank you.
     
  6. Ton80

    Ton80 Guest

    I compare this whole thing with punkbuster to bless deeds. A whole lot of talk. A bunch of upset account holders. A lot of ranting and raving. And it won't happen for another 2 years. In my opinion (which means absolutely nothing really) this has a very slight chance of getting through anytime soon. They just anounced the whole Mythic thing yesterday. Seems they are going to have their plate quite full for a while with that. So I don't see this PB thing coming to ANY shard in the near future.
     
  7. i sort of agree with you there. This development team has a history of big talk and big ideas with very little, if any action. (ie..the latest pvp revamp and profencies).

    My guess is this mythic thing will throw everybody for a loop and there may be bigger things in the wind than PB. I just cant see EA maintaining 2 out of date MMORGs (Daoc &amp; UO) when they can close one and shift that team to developing warhammer.
     
  8. majorwoo

    majorwoo Guest

    <blockquote><hr>


    EA have indicated that this will NOT be a new shard.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    This hasn't been determined yet, though I'll admit I'm probably as worried as you are about them picking Siege.

    Even Mr Tact:
    MrTact - However, it's pretty clear we would not allow characters on non-PB
    servers to transfer to PB servers . . . except if we were to convert an existing

    So there is still hope they pick some place besides Siege - I just wish there was more :-(
    shard
     
  9. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    I think Siege would be the ABSOLUTE worst choice for scripters to flock to.
    Hunting scripters would become the new national pass-time I am quite sure.
    An all Fel shard, that you can't transfer from would seem to me to be the
    world's worst choice for a place to try to make cash off a game.

    As far as people transferring here with all their stuff... I'm torn on that.
    It would be great to have a lot of new people, and the economy might suffer
    at first but would level out after a bit. I'd gladly give up everything I have in
    the game to see 200-300 new players on the shard. And if they were already
    skilled, rich, and confident... that wouldn't hurt a thing... it would just mean
    more fun, and more loot sooner.

    my 2gp

    Cheers!
     
  10. TerryFyde

    TerryFyde Guest

    I know its been said before, but making a shard just for cheaters is as pathetic as the &lt;insert own foul language if required&gt; cheaters. My question is simple "why do EA not fix what is wrong in the game before embarking on grandiose expansion ideas?"

    Currently i feel Uo is surviving in spite of EA's best efforts not because of them.

    Catch the cheaters and ban 'em. Fix whats broke. Then "improve"/add content to the game. Competence rather than money grubbing for the bean counters will actually increase revenues and add to this games profitable life for EA.

    Nuff said. Rant over.
     
  11. Guest

    Guest Guest

    If they were to allow transfers TO Siege but not off... then I think it should still remain ONE character and they have to come over naked with just gold.
     
  12. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    If they were to allow transfers TO Siege but not off... then I think it should still remain ONE character and they have to come over naked with just gold.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I disagree, Sevi. I think they should come over naked with no gold. There are people with hundreds of millions in gold in their bank boxes. That sort of infux of gold dumped on to the shard is going to have a huge impact on the economy and I highly doubt it would be a positive one.

    Even if they chose to leave Siege as is, but PB-Free.. its going to ruin PvP.. it'll be necessary to cheat to compete. And, I have no desire to install hacks just so I can continue to PvP. [​IMG]
     
  13. absimiliard

    absimiliard Guest

    I'm gonna have to agree with Spyder on this one. If they allow transfers I would hope they don't allow equipment or gold to come over with the character. A mass influx of gold and/or equipment could very well break our economy.

    Now personally I don't care much as I don't PvP and lead a non-PvP guild. For the likes of THB a broken econ mostly would mean less furniture for our houses. Okay, less value on the arties in the lvl 6s. Oh, and less we could buy with the gold from the chests. Hmm, actually, even for non-PvP sorts like myself it would be wicked annoying.

    For PvP-ers it could be crippling, instead of merely "wicked annoying".

    I haven't yet decided what to do if they make us the non-PB shard. I can say that my initial instinct would be to close up shop and close both of my accounts. I guess it would depend on how the rest of THB feels. If they wanted to stay I probably would stay instead of abandoning them, if they left I don't see a lot to hold me here.

    Lindisfarne the Sig-Less Wonder
    "I wonder if I'd stay if Siege became the non-PB, cheater's-shard?"
    "hmmmmmm"
    *Goes off quietly to ponder the dilemma*
     
  14. GonthraX

    GonthraX Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    If they were to allow transfers TO Siege but not off... then I think it should still remain ONE character and they have to come over naked with just gold.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I disagree, Sevi. I think they should come over naked with no gold. There are people with hundreds of millions in gold in their bank boxes. That sort of infux of gold dumped on to the shard is going to have a huge impact on the economy and I highly doubt it would be a positive one.

    Even if they chose to leave Siege as is, but PB-Free.. its going to ruin PvP.. it'll be necessary to cheat to compete. And, I have no desire to install hacks just so I can continue to PvP. [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I think they should be able to come with no gold but with their gear. Them being able to PBD one thing isn't going to upset the balance here. We already have just as good weapons, jewels and artis as on a Prodo shard. Them comming with 500+ mill WOULD unbalance things as it would be gold that appears in our economy much akin to scripting.

    As for cheats in pvp? I've said this a thousand times but why not say it agian. There's CEO Medic for dexxers and SpeederXP for speedfiends. That's about the end of it now. Sure there were wand cycling scripts when you could do that and there are auto follow scripts etc but none of them are really used as they just create more problems for you then you already have (if you're a bad pvper looking for help from a script). I could care less if some one uses CEO Medic to apply their bandaids and disarm their shield to drink pots, it's not doing anything for them that a skilled player with macros can't do better. I could care less if some one uses speeder for reasons I won't get into. This isn't the day of scribe pen spamming, special toggling for extra swings, divine fury stacking, or Gear or Adreneline. There's nothing out there to my knowladge that will give you a huge advantage in the field or is an "I win" button.

    Cheating in pvp isn't the problem, cheating in PvM and crafting is.
     
  15. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Bea,

    I did not take the poll because I can't answer correctly. Sorry.

    I would like for Siege to be PB free, but would probably stay even if we had to use PB.

    If Siege becomes PB free, I will stay as long as they do not change our ruleset. If they change our ruleset to allow the transfer of mulitiple chars per account, and allow it to become the "cheaters shard", I will quit UO. I have no interest in playing another shard, even if its new. And I have no interest in remaining on Siege if it is no longer Siege.
     
  16. Guest

    Guest Guest

    In regard to transfers onto Siege from other shards, I also think the gold would be much more harmful to Siege. If they have every Doom arti, and Tokuno major arti, they still are likely to run around with only 1 like everyone else on Siege.

    Oh...and they should have any special "item blessed" items, and "unbalancing for Siege" CBD'd items in their possession processed accordingly in the transfer...

    I do not think the script farmer types that make RL gold from their activities in the external sales market (ebay, private selling forums, etc.) would flood to Siege, because there is no profit future like the current market. Although resource gathering/PvM scripters (a/k/a cheaters) are a much bigger problem as you say GonthraX, I really feel that if Siege became the ONLY non-PB shard alternative, the "cheaters" Siege would wind up with most likely are the ones that have the most potential to spoil actual fun - the PvP wannabes that need their "aids" to win, and want to win at all costs.

    And to be fair, keep in mind that not everyone who objects to Punkbuster has something to hide or uses cheats in any way.

    -Skylark

    P.S. I also do not want to see radical changes to the Siege "unique" ruleset take place, such as additional character slots.
     
  17. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    And to be fair, keep in mind that not everyone who objects to Punkbuster has something to hide or uses cheats in any way.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Very true. The honest players that would object to PB are probably the same
    people who refuse to give out their social security number in RL. They'd probably
    fit right in here. lol

    Cheers!
     
  18. This is a mute point, because if they do allow transfers into siege, chances are they will conform siege to the production shard players transfering in, rather than the players conforming to the siege ruleset.
     
  19. Guest

    Guest Guest

    That's what I think too, Castor.

    So as it may seem gracious of Mr Tact to want to allow those who wish to move from a PB production shard to keep the characters he/she has worked so hard to develop, I sincerely hope he also sees the importance of keeping Siege the same shard that we have all worked hard to develop.

    I do not know why we should accept any transfers at all. Let others come to Siege as Siege players: no transfers, only one character per account, no advanced skills, and use ROT to become a member of our community. If they don't want to accept PB on their current shard, they should be the ones to have to sacrifice something, not us.
     
  20. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    I sincerely hope he also sees the importance of keeping Siege the same shard that we have all worked hard to develop.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I couldn't agree more.

    <blockquote><hr>

    I do not know why we should accept any transfers at all. Let others come to Siege as Siege players: no transfers, only one character per account, no advanced skills, and use ROT to become a member of our community. If they don't want to accept PB on their current shard, they should be the ones to have to sacrifice something, not us.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Exactly. If the cheaters want to go to a PB-Free shard so they can continue to cheat.. they shouldn't be chauffeured in and their luggage carried right up to the doorstep for them. It makes absolutely no sense to cater to the people that should be perma-banned.. not given the red carpet treatment on to our shard. *gets disgusted with the whole idea all over again*
     
  21. Aker

    Aker Guest

    I think instead of just hoping, we ought to get an email list going. I would love to see the look on their face whenever we got an email to create a large protest thread.

    "Ok maybe it'll be seige"

    followed by a post of 200 or more Seige players sying how bad of an idea it is and how horrible they are for even thinking of it.

    We should unionize. Lord knows the trammel people basically do. [​IMG]
     
  22. <blockquote><hr>

    I think instead of just hoping, we ought to get an email list going. I would love to see the look on their face whenever we got an email to create a large protest thread.

    "Ok maybe it'll be seige"

    followed by a post of 200 or more Seige players sying how bad of an idea it is and how horrible they are for even thinking of it.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    What did you think I was planning to do with this poll? [​IMG]

    But, we've been here before, with other issues.
    EA will 'notice' polls here, and sometimes they're enough to get them to start looking at their own methods of gathering information, but they won't take them as gospel. And nor should they. Stratics posters do not represent the entire Siege community.

    But what we CAN do is keep things civil - at least that way there's a better chance that they'll listen to us - and, as I'm trying to do here, get our 2gp in the door BEFORE they do anything - because the PBD issue showed us exactly what we're facing if we try to do it afterwards.

    My feeling is, if the other shards get PB, we should get PB. Enough with the red-headed stepchild stuff already! But, going off on a rant, much as I'd love to, isn't going to get results.
    Starting with "Here's an initial survey of the feelings of the Siege players" just might.

    The poll's a start. It's the first more-or-less united statement we've made about PB, and you can be sure I'm going to be jumping up and down and waving until Wilki notices it. *waves to Wilki* But until I hear that PB's been scrapped, or that Siege is being treated the same as the other shards, I'm in there, fighting. Politely but firmly.

    I agree with you about the unionising thing. Present a united front and we just might get somewhere. If not... well, this is only plan 'A'.

    *wonders what the reaction would be if Europa or Chessy had been mentioned as 'possibles' for PB-free*
     
  23. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    you can be sure I'm going to be jumping up and down and waving until Wilki notices it.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I think the mini-skirt will be the key to our success here.

    [​IMG]

    Cheers!
     
  24. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    The poll's a start. It's the first more-or-less united statement we've made about PB, and you can be sure I'm going to be jumping up and down and waving until Wilki notices it. *waves to Wilki* But until I hear that PB's been scrapped, or that Siege is being treated the same as the other shards, I'm in there, fighting. Politely but firmly.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I'm not being polite... and I'll be pancakes about it on my show daily until Wilki and Tact notice. *eyes the tube of preparation H nervously* I'm not interested in yet another round of Siege players being treated like an initiation during their first night in prison. [​IMG]
     
  25. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Bea,

    I guess my objection to your poll is that it does not ask if I would be willing to accept changes to Siege in order to be PB free.

    Other than that, the poll is a fine way to start.
     
  26. Pyrite, apart from the fact that I can't edit the poll now that it's up - let me make sure I understand what you're saying:

    You want PB to stay off Siege - but feel that they should change Siege if that was to be the case?

    I don't understand what that would achieve. What sort of changes did you have in mind? Making Siege a production shard? Allowing more than one character? Or something else?

    Changing Siege, in order for it to become the PB-free shard, would destroy Siege even more than just making it the PB-free shard, in my opinion - but everyone's entitled to their views (hence the poll). I'm just not sure I've understood yours correctly.

    Sorry if I'm having a blonde moment, but I don't get it.
     
  27. Guest

    Guest Guest

    *resists urge to comment on blonde moment*
     
  28. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>


    I'm not being polite... and I'll be pancakes about it on my show daily until Wilki and Tact notice. *eyes the tube of preparation H nervously* I'm not interested in yet another round of Siege players being treated like an initiation during their first night in prison. [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Must I create a char named Bubba before the initiation process begins?
     
  29. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Must I create a char named Bubba before the initiation process begins?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    You sound excited about that idea, my friend. That scares the hell out of me! [​IMG]

    Seriously.. Cybernickel.. I can't imagine how this would benefit you in any way if we were infiltrated with people with millions of gold and all the scripters stealing your business. This would certainly drive you out of business on Siege, no? You were the first one I thought about when they suggested that character transfers were an option. I don't want to see you or your business suffer as a result. Same goes for DTA or Waka who all thrive in the vendor business. [​IMG]
     
  30. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    If they were to allow transfers TO Siege but not off... then I think it should still remain ONE character and they have to come over naked with just gold.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I disagree, Sevi. I think they should come over naked with no gold. There are people with hundreds of millions in gold in their bank boxes. That sort of infux of gold dumped on to the shard is going to have a huge impact on the economy and I highly doubt it would be a positive one.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    You are correct. I didnt even think about how filthy stinking rich the people on proddy shards are. The MOST I ever had at one time was 15 mil which was spread out over 4 accounts. So it didnt even occur to me that people have hundreds of millions. [​IMG]

    Ok! Naked... no money. If you want to be transferred onto Siege then strip down, enter the disinfecting shower and step through the pearly gates. Oh and be prepared for Cheapsuit to be waiting at the gate for all of the naked people to step in. hehe.
     
  31. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Ok! Naked... no money. If you want to be transferred onto Siege then strip down, enter the disinfecting shower and step through the pearly gates. Oh and be prepared for Cheapsuit to be waiting at the gate for all of the naked people to step in. hehe.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I think that would make Cheapsuit very sad...I think he wants to be the only one naked at the gate. [​IMG]

    -Skylark
     
  32. Ton80

    Ton80 Guest

    I believe I just got a new signature!!

    Thanks Skylark!
     
  33. Revvo

    Revvo Slightly Crazed
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    59
    I think it wouldn't be too bad for siege, all the real scripters (i mean the big ones who employ people etc) will probably stay on prodo for many reasons, one is they will be the ones who will be willing and able to "beat" punkbuster and will benefit from being part of a smaller group of scripters especially as the value starts to rise. Also Trammel is a huge incentive for scripters to stay put as the saying goes "time is money" and most scripters will be unwilling to spend alot of time dead and having to fully re-equip unlike the insurance and relative safety of trammel. What siege will get is alot of "punk" kids who will very quickly get fed up with being killed and will actually provide good sport as they flip out over being killed day in and day out. Also alot of the things obtained by scripters (mainly museum hand in rewards) have very little use and value on a shard where only one item can be blessed, it just wont be worth there time.

    The only real worry would be allowing people to transfer here with all there items and gold, items not such a problem as mentioned before but the value of gold would be crushed and some items would become insanely hard for the average siege player to afford (imagine all the trammies coming here and realising they need the sammi helm and legs and start paying ten million each or something insane) I don't care either way if they allow siege to stay punkbuster free as long as they dont allow transfers too siege, but i do think they should allow people to transfer off for a short time before "closing" siege to transfers again permenantly, the last thing we need is 100 members from a prodo guild zerging champspawns 24/7 just to transfer everything back off to prodo.
     
  34. Jason619

    Jason619 Guest

    Just replying to the thread in general. As of now you can't transfer in/out of siege so why would they allow it after PB is up? I would imagine they would pick a prod shard since siege is an outside-the-box shard. I just joined this shard and love it so I hope they don't ruin it. That naked/empty bank idea is a good idea, would probably deter alot of cheaters from comming here too since they couldn't bring their fortunes. If they did allow transfers here I don't think alot of people would move here because they are attached to thier items. Most prod shard people have uber 12-50 mill Gp suits and would probably not want to risk losing it.
     
  35. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    As of now you can't transfer in/out of siege so why would they allow it after PB is up? I would imagine they would pick a prod shard since siege is an outside-the-box shard.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    "Calelena - *TamerCat* One of my many questions is...Are you plaining on
    letting people transfer to the non Punkbuster server? Or will you make it so no
    one will be able to go to it. Like if I want to leave the non punkbuster server will
    I be allowed to do so? And what is the non punkbuster server going to be, if you
    could say that.
    MrTact - Well, first we have to decide which server or servers will be non-PB.
    That will obviously affect our decision concerning the answer to that question.
    MrTact - Our initial thinking is that we might allow players to transfer TO non-PB
    shards, so they could continue to play the characters they've built up should
    they choose not to make use of PB.
    MrTact - However, it's pretty clear we would not allow characters on non-PB
    servers to transfer to PB servers . . . except if we were to convert an existing
    shard, we might allow it for a window of time prior to the full rollout . . . unless
    maybe we choose Siege to be non-PB.
    MrTact - As you can see, it's not a simple question to answer.
    MrTact - But we will be evaluating this throughout the beta testing process, and
    listening to the feedback from the community."
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    They ARE indeed speaking of Siege and of transfers in the same conversation,
    however I am not exactly sure of the meaning of Tact's comment here.. it's kind
    of vague:

    "MrTact - However, it's pretty clear we would not allow characters on non-PB
    servers to transfer to PB servers . . . except if we were to convert an existing
    shard, we might allow it for a window of time prior to the full rollout . . . unless
    maybe we choose Siege to be non-PB."

    Now that I've read that statement several times... I kind of take it to mean that
    if they choose Siege that transfers will be a non-issue, because transfers are
    not available to Siege. And in that case... mentioning Siege may just have been
    a way to not answer the question, and move on to the next one. *shrug*

    Cheers!
     
  36. Grot

    Grot Guest

    Irregardless of my opinion of Punkbuster, I will seriously consider leaving UO alltogether. This is probably the first time I've ever considered this option. I won't go to a shard other than Siege, nor will I play on a PRS shard. But I can not see any good whatsoever in opening the doors on Siege to everyone who has no desire to play fairly. It's not the environment I want to be in.

    If my opinion of punkbuster ends up being that it is a danger to my computer or data, I'd much rather move to whatever is deemed the PB free shard, than advocate opening Siege, my UO home, to the masses of cheaters. If I did that, it'd be by starting fresh. No character transfers to or from Siege should ever exist.

    Siege is intended to be a difficult shard, but as has been seen in the past, it's also one where we seek balance. Making it a Punkbuster free shard would be the exact opposite of creating balance. It would be welcoming inbalance and exploitation.

    In short. The PunkBuster free shard should be a NEW shard, where people from all shards can go if they wish, knowing the consequences, not where those consequences would be forced on the people of the existing shards who have played by the rules.
     
  37. Ginsu-SP

    Ginsu-SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Irregardless of my opinion of Punkbuster, I will seriously consider leaving UO alltogether. This is probably the first time I've ever considered this option. I won't go to a shard other than Siege, nor will I play on a PRS shard. But I can not see any good whatsoever in opening the doors on Siege to everyone who has no desire to play fairly. It's not the environment I want to be in.

    If my opinion of punkbuster ends up being that it is a danger to my computer or data, I'd much rather move to whatever is deemed the PB free shard, than advocate opening Siege, my UO home, to the masses of cheaters. If I did that, it'd be by starting fresh. No character transfers to or from Siege should ever exist.

    Siege is intended to be a difficult shard, but as has been seen in the past, it's also one where we seek balance. Making it a Punkbuster free shard would be the exact opposite of creating balance. It would be welcoming inbalance and exploitation.

    In short. The PunkBuster free shard should be a NEW shard, where people from all shards can go if they wish, knowing the consequences, not where those consequences would be forced on the people of the existing shards who have played by the rules.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    AMEN
     
  38. Patty Pickaxe

    Patty Pickaxe Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,955
    Likes Received:
    8
    I have to agree with what so many others have already said. I dont think they should allow transfers. Like Pyrite said, if they dont want to play with PB then make them start over.

    But since more than likely EA would only find it "fair" to allow transfers, then they should allow ONE char per account and just a backpacks worth of items (no gold). Im saying it should be just 125 items bc do we really want all the resources AND items to come over? Wouldn't flooding the market with ingots, leather, boards, etc. be just as bad for the economy as gold? So with a limit of 125 items, would they choose to bring their resources (which they could farm again) or would they choose to bring their vet rewards, BLESSED 7ae gifts, and arties? I guess in reality they could bring both, but at least there wouldnt be mulitple packies of stuff.

    And to avoid people transferring back and forth, once you transfer here you're stuck. once you transfer off, you're stuck. There's no "open window" for transfers on and off.

    Im reaching a Queen Zen-length post here so I will stop!
     
  39. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    In short. The PunkBuster free shard should be a NEW shard, where people from all shards can go if they wish, knowing the consequences, not where those consequences would be forced on the people of the existing shards who have played by the rules.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Well said
     
  40. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    Wow Grot.. Just Wow. You wrapped that nutshell up very well. I hope EA is listening to posts such as yours. But, I doubt it. [​IMG]
     
  41. <blockquote><hr>

    the last thing we need is 100 members from a prodo guild zerging champspawns 24/7 just to transfer everything back off to prodo.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    This would be about the only thing that would unite the siege vets together ... if that did happen I would open the waka vent to TnT, OTF, REV, VmP and SMG ... and say together that we will raid every last spawn these people try to do 24/7 ... until of course we pissed each other off and decided to attack each other again ... so tops this would work is like a day.
     
  42. Guest

    Guest Guest

    So you just want a reason to let me back in vent. You are one sly dog.
     
  43. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Pyrite, apart from the fact that I can't edit the poll now that it's up - let me make sure I understand what you're saying:

    You want PB to stay off Siege - but feel that they should change Siege if that was to be the case?

    I don't understand what that would achieve. What sort of changes did you have in mind? Making Siege a production shard? Allowing more than one character? Or something else?

    Changing Siege, in order for it to become the PB-free shard, would destroy Siege even more than just making it the PB-free shard, in my opinion - but everyone's entitled to their views (hence the poll). I'm just not sure I've understood yours correctly.

    Sorry if I'm having a blonde moment, but I don't get it.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Am sorry to have confused you, Bea.

    I will play Siege if it gets PB. When it was first announced I was totally against downloading it on my pc, but my son who knows a lot about security told me he could keep my personal information secure, so that is no longer a worry to me.

    I will also play on Siege if we do not get PB as long as they do not change the Siege ruleset.

    What am I afraid they will change?

    Mr Tact has already stated they will need to allow transfers- that's the first change. Then they will need to address how many characters per account will be allowed on Siege. There goes our one character per account rule. The next thing we will hear is that Trammies what a PB free shard too! Oh dear- maybe they will just go ahead and add Trammel to the Siege. But jeesh, what about all those production shard arties that get transfered over from production shards but can't be worn on Siege because there is only the one Siege blessing? Maybe it will be time to add insurance to Siege too.

    Where will it stop?

    I just think if Siege becomes the non PB shard, the productin shard people will demand so many changes that we will no longer be SIEGE. I just hope the developers do not sacrifice Siege in order to give the anti- PB crowd a place to play.

    I know you can't change this poll but I suggest your next poll be:

    "What ruleset changes would you accept if Siege were to become the PB free shard?"
     
  44. Kat SP

    Kat SP Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    This would be about the only thing that would unite the siege vets together ... if that did happen I would open the waka vent to TnT, OTF, REV, VmP and SMG ... and say together that we will raid every last spawn these people try to do 24/7 ... until of course we pissed each other off and decided to attack each other again ... so tops this would work is like a day.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Count me in! That would be friggen hilarious. [​IMG]
     
  45. Fidessa

    Fidessa Guest

    Imagine a hord of new players coming to Siege specially because it is PB free. All of them want to join NEW and will leech of the shard to get wealthy here in the end in a bad way. Yes course 90% of them won't make it here, but the 10% who does will sicken Siege even more.

    Player justice on the shard is dead. We can't even handle the cheaters/scammers we have at the moment in an old fashioned Siege way. Sure some of us will find cheaters and will kill them, but then they move on to an other spot and at is EASY on Siege to be at a spot without seeing anyone all day.

    Then there comes the question do I as a honest player, who is disgusted when I hear about players who do not play fair and who doesn't wanna even associate with thoose, play on a shard which new blood only will be thoose who choose Siege by far most because it is the cheating shard? No, I love UO, but this Siege PB free is the only thing in all thoose years what will make me quit.

    UNLESS they make Siege a pre-AoS shard then I would stay, because then many many will return to Siege and THEY will make player justice, what we were proud of, be no more history but the future.
     
  46. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    This would be about the only thing that would unite the siege vets together ... if that did happen I would open the waka vent to TnT, OTF, REV, VmP and SMG ... and say together that we will raid every last spawn these people try to do 24/7 ... until of course we pissed each other off and decided to attack each other again ... so tops this would work is like a day.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Count me in too.
     
  47. Cleopatra

    Cleopatra Guest

    Bea,

    My opinions and objections to having PB on the only shard I have ever played since it's inception 6 accounts for me now and going on for 9 years of play, maybe 8 on SP? it's close..I was here when we got wiped (Siege had been up about three weeks, we were initially just a test, so if anyone knows the timeframe... ) may be moot points; all to do with my personal, company information, which over the past 10 years I have always had on the same comp (different comps as I renewed them, but you get the gist)........ a few on-site pictures being stored on my laptop and never having any trouble or issues. Again,, however as I said here last week, I am not willing to allow a 'game' access to all of the info on my computer.

    There are issues here, you have to remember who is the provider of cash and who is the recipient. The recipient (EA) can always charge more for the service he/she provides to his/her customer(US) , he can not invade his customers privacy to make his profit, if he did...........said profit belongs to the customer or part of.

    Think about it.
     
  48. Quentico

    Quentico Guest

    They should just make the Test Center "Shard" Punk-buster free. You can already cheat there plus they have a "regular" population that plays on there as their home shard.

    Lord Quentico
    Flame Guardian
    TSR - The Seeker's of Righteousness
     
  49. Oh, I agree, Shalimar. There are many, many, reasons why various people don't want PB at all. But, by the same token, there are many, many threads all over the place addressing that.

    That's why I said: <blockquote><hr>

    This poll assumes that Punkbuster is a fact of life, that it will appear on nearly all shards, and that EA will indeed leave it off at least one existing shard.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    The pros and cons of PB can be found all over the place - mostly U.Hall.
    BUT - a united voice of those who appear likely to be on the receiving end of their 'non-PB' idea was nowhere to be found. Which is why I put this poll up.

    Pyrite, thanks for clarifying that. Quite honestly, I'd rather find that Siege did NOT become the PB-free shard, than think about what changes I'd be willing to put up with - because I personally feel that if Siege did become 'happy scripter land', I'd be looking for the nearest exit. But, it's a valid point.

    To those who think they'll be able to happily slaughter scripters if Siege becomes the land-fill, consider this scenario: Scripting is now legal. The rest of the ToS stands. If you kill the same scripter over and over and over, can YOU be banned for harrassment? Just thought I'd toss that one out there. Stupider things HAVE happened in the past, after all.

    <center>[​IMG]</center>
     
  50. Mandolin

    Mandolin Guest

    I love the Sig, Bea... says it very well..