Things you would have liked to see in this update/newsletter

usernameusername Posts: 693
edited February 19 in General Discussions
  1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
  2. More long standing bug fixes (I have reported several over the years and *cricket*)
  3. One additional veteran reward, generically useful (non-fail repair station?)
  4. One additional veteran reward, ethereal mount
  5. Feature to CC, at least one. Suggestion: disable spell particles, disable field animations, updated targeting system. Ok that last one is a long shot dream.
  6. Feature to EC, at least one. Suggestion: autofollow. Apparently they don't have this why? And I don't use the EC so EC users chime in!
  7. Fix vendor search down every other search on Atlantic
  8. Quest line to parallel/go along with Spring Event
  9. Roadmap for the summer and beyond
  10. A finite date for ToL
I would really like to see more of a focus on both slowly adding features to both of the clients and fixing long term bugs. Would make it bit more meaty instead of the bare-bones one we received and compliment the areas they decided to address. 
This discussion has been closed.

I will be slow to reply because I cannot log in/stay logged in to the forums.
Make this your signature if you are tired of Vendor Search being broken, over 4 years and counting.
Vendor search rendered useless after Publish 106 – Forsaken Foes on August 14, 2019.

Comments

  • CookieCookie Posts: 1,257
    edited February 19
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances

    This conversation has to start with Enhanced Client, the original cheat client, that everyone else is only trying to match.

    So until the Original Classic Client, which looks and plays better, can match EC, like many 3rd party Classic clients do, you are only killing off the entire game if you do something about them.

    PvP has actually got to a place where Clients are matching, which is why you don't find actual PvPers complaining about the 3rd party programs.

    The only people complaining, are those who don't play, or don't pvp.
  • usernameusername Posts: 693
    edited February 19
    I understand the EC may have features the CC doesn't that may give it an advantage, but since it's officially supported and not illegal, I don't follow how it's a 'cheat client'. Anyone can download it freely without any risk. Can you explain for someone that's never used the EC outside of using it's long book title feature?

    The reason those people complain is because they can't PVP against those illegal tools and decide not to, not the other way around!

    Unless you have any proof that removing these clients would 'kill the game' I offer to you that removing these clients would 'save the game' as people that don't feel like cheating and losing their accounts to 3rd party programs to PVP, would PVP, and massive amounts of players that have quit due to them would come back. See, it works both ways.
    This discussion has been closed.

    I will be slow to reply because I cannot log in/stay logged in to the forums.
    Make this your signature if you are tired of Vendor Search being broken, over 4 years and counting.
    Vendor search rendered useless after Publish 106 – Forsaken Foes on August 14, 2019.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 1,257
    edited February 19
    username said:
    I understand the EC may have features the CC doesn't that may give it an advantage, but since it's officially supported and not illegal, I don't follow how it's a 'cheat client'. Anyone can download it freely without any risk. Can you explain for someone that's never used the EC outside of using it's long book title feature?

    The reason those people complain is because they can't PVP against those illegal tools and decide not to, not the other way around!

    Unless you have any proof that removing these clients would 'kill the game' I offer to you that removing these clients would 'save the game' as people that don't PVP, would, and massive amounts of players that have quit due to them would come back. See, it works both ways.

    he reason those people complain is because they can't PVP against those illegal tools and decide not to, not the other way around!

    No, 3rd Party Clients, are only matching EC. Most people using them, tried to pvp against EC for years on Classic, it cannot be done.

    Just like, Mages, cannot drop Parry. It is physically impossible to pvp in the current climate without Parry. Parry can only be dropped - if they balance PvP to allow Parry to be dropped. Some people cannot see this point - CovenantX.


  • CookieCookie Posts: 1,257
    edited February 19
    Unless you have any proof that removing these clients would 'kill the game' I offer to you that removing these clients would 'save the game' as people that don't PVP, would, and massive amounts of players that have quit due to them would come back. See, it works both ways.

    If they fixed Classic Client, to match Enhanced, millions of pvpers would come back.

    If they banned 3rd party clients, right now, the entire game would shut down.

    My proof is, that I've never stopped pvping, through all the crap, I know most pvpers old and new.
  • usernameusername Posts: 693
    edited February 19
    I guess it's not worth discussing the specific topic as we can't. I would like to delve further, but nevermind. Unfortunately the cope of these clients for PVP, well, they extend way beyond that as you've surely seen at the ToTs.

    I would still like to see our clients get updates to bring them up to part with features the PVP community requests. Wouldn't that be an ideal solution? OH right, back to 'we get nothing and like it'. Nevermind that too. 

    Really sad the more I think about it, hope I can be out of this game soon. Already closed 2 accounts last year.
    This discussion has been closed.

    I will be slow to reply because I cannot log in/stay logged in to the forums.
    Make this your signature if you are tired of Vendor Search being broken, over 4 years and counting.
    Vendor search rendered useless after Publish 106 – Forsaken Foes on August 14, 2019.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 1,257
    edited February 19
    username said:


    Really sad the more I think about it, hope I can be out of this game soon. Already closed 2 accounts last year.
    We had 10 players join the game from a freeshard, the second they even mentioned pvp balancing. :)

    I would still like to see our clients get updates to bring them up to part with features the PVP community requests. Wouldn't that be an ideal solution? OH right, back to 'we get nothing and like it'. Nevermind that too.

    In the PvP thread, that Kyronix is working from, I mentioned a wishlist of items that it would be really good if Classic could have. I know this wishlist already exists, and would improve life in Classic.

    And to be fair, I've just read my list back - and they have hit 3-4 of the points straight off.

    That is why this is not a fail, they have started something - yes, the next steps maybe more tricky.


  • usernameusername Posts: 693
    edited February 19
    I hope they add the improvements you asked for and then some, but, I'm not holding my breath. I'm sure one of them is a new targeting system which all players would enjoy and benefit from.
    This discussion has been closed.

    I will be slow to reply because I cannot log in/stay logged in to the forums.
    Make this your signature if you are tired of Vendor Search being broken, over 4 years and counting.
    Vendor search rendered useless after Publish 106 – Forsaken Foes on August 14, 2019.
  • GrimbeardGrimbeard Posts: 1,991
    More details on spring event locations and rewards 
  • CookieCookie Posts: 1,257
    edited February 19
    username said:
    I guess it's not worth discussing the specific topic as we can't. I would like to delve further, but nevermind. Unfortunately the scope of these clients for PVP, well, they extend way beyond that as you've surely seen at the ToTs.

    This specific point, yes, I get it, I'm probably there doing it, alongside many players I know.

    PvM - ToTs - I'm going to ask, what does it matter?

    End of the day, PvM is to gear your characters. 
    For PvPers, they are gearing their characters for PvP - the PvM part is only a 1st stage, of many stages of preparation.

    It is only natural, to want to play parts in more efficient ways, or every player, can chose how they want to play it, there is no reason to be stressed how other players are playing. Play your way, if you like what others are doing, play their way.

    The only people I know, who have a real grievance against some of this behaviour - are those who were farming to make lots of gold off other players, due to scarcity of items. I'm going to be honest - those players are at the bottom of the list of players I care about. I'd rather see players able to get the gear they need to play their characters, than generate rare 500m items.
  • looploop Posts: 302
    edited February 19
    I don’t PVP, but I agree with Cookie that outright banning the use of third party clients would be bad for the game right now. Third-party clients provide quality of life improvements and automation capabilities that surpass both CC and EC. Until the official clients match these features, people will favor third-party ones. There is some benefit to Broadsword in this regard: they can let the community fill in the gaps with respect to client-side updates, more people are able to enjoy the game with less tedium, players can have a modern experience while still keeping the old artwork, etc.

    Third-party clients do make it easier to perform actions which negatively impact the game, sure, but these actions should be bannable regardless of the client. As they say, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

    As far as the newsletter is concerned, the devs have finite time and resources. For this one, they chose to focus on PVP updates as a follow-up to the solicitation of player feedback. Additionally, they did give an approximate time for NL, and this is good enough for me, personally. I would rather they project a time and curtail expectations rather than set a deadline in stone.
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    edited February 19
    I would like to see more QoL added to the CC, a EC's UI added to the CC.  The player base is getting older and UO needs to reduce the number of clicks it takes to do things.  I can fully understand the use of non official clients (I do not condone them) and IMHO there have been some very good points made for their use. 
    I would gladly use the EC if and only if I could use the graphics from the CC, yes I understand that zoom and maybe a few other functions would not be usable.
    An added feature I would love to see with the CC is when you first log in is that whatever you are wearing is auto saved to Dress #1 Hands #1, I keep forgetting to save these every time I log in and cuss the first time I die.  Not sure if the EC does this auto or not.
    I am also curious as to why the EC does not have the auto follow.  I use this all the time with my crafters/gathers.  How do EC users get their pets to follow them.
    GOOD thread @username
  • vortexvortex Posts: 200
    Id love auto follow in the ec and get memory leaks fixed in ec. Haven't checked if it just pincos but I go from using about 380megs ram to 900 in 30 mins of playing time and have to restart before it crashes at the worst time possible.
  • creampiecreampie Posts: 81
    over 90% of the player base dont pvp so every patch based on pvp isn t optimal to keep people paying subscription new event does and new contents.
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    creampie said:
    over 90% of the player base dont pvp so every patch based on pvp isn t optimal to keep people paying subscription new event does and new contents.
    You are right they are a minority of the player base but next to rares collectors they are the majority of spenders in the player base and a lot of PVMers make a lot of gold from them.  It has been a while for a PVP update.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 2,145
    username said:
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
    2. More long standing bug fixes (I have reported several over the years and *cricket*)
    3. One additional veteran reward, generically useful (non-fail repair station?)
    4. One additional veteran reward, ethereal mount
    5. Feature to CC, at least one. Suggestion: disable spell particles, disable field animations, updated targeting system. Ok that last one is a long shot dream.
    6. Feature to EC, at least one. Suggestion: autofollow. Apparently they don't have this why? And I don't use the EC so EC users chime in!
    7. Fix vendor search down every other search on Atlantic
    8. Quest line to parallel/go along with Spring Event
    9. Roadmap for the summer and beyond
    10. A finite date for ToL
    I would really like to see more of a focus on both slowly adding features to both of the clients and fixing long term bugs. Would make it bit more meaty instead of the bare-bones one we received and compliment the areas they decided to address. 
    I think there could be an endless debate on the whole client thing and it seems like Mesanna has left it intentionally vague. I think that being the case it's a lot of debate on course of action and potential ripple effects. Given the sensitivity on that I'll leave that there.

    The things I agree emphatically about are the last few items. This game has been rinsing/repeating for long enough and I think it's time (and low enough effort) that older content Doom/Cora/Shadowguard/etc get some attention.... and actually be accountable for it. The bare minimum for a project team to provide is a roadmap; otherwise it's easy to claim XYZ is being done when in reality it's ABCDEF. This isn't to say that they aren't working on other things but sign up for something and be accountable; if a deadline is missed that's fine let people know what was encountered. I think you will find majority of people would be understanding.

    I'll see what the spring event has in store before making judgement but I am a little leary of a boat version of anything ToT or hunting because I'd think that makes it even easier for a bot train to just sit their 8 or so accounts on the same boat and ride around. We'll see though.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,041
    edited February 19
    An announcement stating that they will give you a criteria of warnings then ban if using any client that does not log in with CC or EC.  Add ons after log in are fine IMO.  Like Pincos, the map programs, UO Assist.

    Whether they actually monitor it or not.

    @username ; you don't get trolls if you make a thread with specific ideas, advice or tips, etc. You will when you post with venom in the title or post.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,041
    edited February 19
    Better idea.

    Announce that they are going to have a method to approve additional 3rd party programs by submission of approval from the creator of the program to an email that goes to Mesanna.

    Then go thru the ban criteria if players use non approved ones.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • CovenantXCovenantX Posts: 893
    username said:
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
       at this point, just that alone would be the best publish UO has ever seen.
     


    Remove or change casting focus & poison immunity it reduces the need for "Player Skill" it's garbage. rant2 Bring timing back and eliminate chance in pvp!
    ICQ# 478 633 659
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    CovenantX said:
    username said:
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
       at this point, just that alone would be the best publish UO has ever seen.
     


    YES And if they could bring the CC up to par with the EC then there should be no reason why they could not do it.
    OFF TOPIC as the EC is modable is there a way to mod the graphics to look like CC
  • MariahMariah Posts: 2,969Moderator
    CovenantX said:
    username said:
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
       at this point, just that alone would be the best publish UO has ever seen.
     


    YES And if they could bring the CC up to par with the EC then there should be no reason why they could not do it.
    OFF TOPIC as the EC is modable is there a way to mod the graphics to look like CC

    The EC has the ability to have a player produced user interface, it doesn't have the ability to mod the whole thing.
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    Mariah said:
    CovenantX said:
    username said:
    1. Addressing/disabling/banning of 3rd party clients, part of PVP balances
       at this point, just that alone would be the best publish UO has ever seen.
     


    YES And if they could bring the CC up to par with the EC then there should be no reason why they could not do it.
    OFF TOPIC as the EC is modable is there a way to mod the graphics to look like CC

    The EC has the ability to have a player produced user interface, it doesn't have the ability to mod the whole thing.
    TY  Didn't think so.  Doing an option of a CC graphics would be a big step into getting to one client and cutting into the illegal clients.  
  • shootgunshootgun Posts: 288
    edited February 20
    I am adding an anecdotal evidence, most of my guild likes the functionality that comes with EC. Every single one hates the graphics though.

    Whose idea was it to change a decade old blue beetle to black?
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    ^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^
  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,247
    Can't believe this had some good ideas and then just died.
Sign In or Register to comment.