[Proposal] Additional Ultima Online House Code
In the same way that there is 'Ultima Online 7th character space code' or 'Ultima Online bank hosting and storage upgrade code' as an add-on, I propose 'Ultima Online additional house code'.
The reason for this proposal is for those who for example have their private house and additionally want a store or castle for the guild.
The code would be only one additional construction per account and not cumulative, being in total 2 constructions.
I would like this proposal to be valued as it may be useful for some people.
Comments
According to your theory that players have two accounts for having 2 builds, there may be cases, but these players keep more than one account for the advantages of a subscription account and they are aware that an Endless Journal account would totally limit their experience, including access to their bank, where they would have everything blocked if they exceed a number of items.
Therefore, players who have 2 or more subscriptions would continue to keep their accounts to avoid limitations and what would happen would be that those who want an additional build would buy this code.
Therefore, revenues would increase in a guaranteed way, not decrease.
I certainly do not need a 4th acct, I will not be paying for one, so as per what the OP is proposing, broadsword will get some extra revenue from me for this code
great suggestion, it will also help to make the lands less barren
depending on cost of course
link it to the master or main acct so it cannot be used to keep a closed acct house up but benefit a paid subscription acct
Of course, this code I propose is valid only for accounts with subscription and not cumulative, which means that it could only be 1 additional build per account being total 2 as limitation (therefore you could not activate this code/add-on more than once in the same account, resulting in 'This add-on is already activated').
EJ accounts cannot build houses, be or be added as a friend in a house (secure disconnection), use house storage or even be the chest with access to all, etc... so this code would not work with EJ.
And if the subscribed account expires with this extra house add-on, after the grace period, if you have 2 buildings, the 2 buildings will be collapsed.
if this ensured players didn’t have to spend excess of 1P for an 18x18 in Atlantic I will help them pack for pastures new myself
just take a look around Atlantic. How many plots are 4 sale or 4 sell
Inflated prices by one or two who are NOT there for the good of the players I certainly will not miss
with regards to the person you mention, I seem to remember there were a series of YouTube videos showing what a great community champion they are, you ever watch them ?
You are the second user to repeat again that the company would lose money, as if implying that they exclusively pay a subscription to have a build.
Don't those players use the characters on those accounts, the bank, etc...?
I would like to remind you that if one of these players with more than 20 items in their bank, stop paying subscription, when the account becomes EJ in an automated way, the bank is blocked and they can not take out a single item inside.
Not to mention all the limitations of EJ, do you really think that there are players who exclusively pay money for a build without using the account for anything else (special metals, gems, etc...)?
It could be looked at it in another way, to my opinion...
Subscriptions are a long term income, for a game as old as Ultima Online and with the competition that there is out there from other games, realistically, how many chances there might be that a relevant number of existing, subscribed players might want to subscribe "additional" accounts in order to accomodate their increased housing needs ?
I hear continuously of UO players with multiple accounts "reducing" the number of their subscribed accounts, not increasing them...
So, one could think, that the realistic chances of existing UO players subscribing "additional" accounts on top of what they have, might be quite slim...
Instead, by permitting a one time purchase of the right to own a second UO house, would be a lot more appealing to existing UO players and would provide to the game a significant additional one time revenue which could help fund an expansion, a revamp of the Classic Client or other Development time used to enhance UO so as to hopefully attract "new" players and their "new" revenues from subscriptions...
Bottom line is, with the current status quo, at least to my opinion, the chances that existing UO players might want to open up new subscribed accounts to increase their housing options look to me very slim and scarce... a few might still do it but the largest majority of the current UO players ?
Conversely, the chances of increasing revenues, even if with a one time purchase, from making available a one time purchase for a second UO home, would be quite high, at least to my opinion.
Better "some" additional one time revenues, perhaps and hopefully even consistent, or no or very scarce additional long term revenues ?
@Mesanna , @Kyronix ?
I leave an open question:
Are there any players reading the forum who honestly and transparently, only have a subscription to maintain their terrains without using characters or bank their active accounts?
I don't want rumors, I heard there is a player, they say there is a player who pays subscription for terrain, etc... I want first person, real experiences.
I am going to submit this proposal to the company and I want honesty, not rumor speculation or legends of players paying per subscription to maintain terrain without using anything else from their accounts.
https://forum.uo.com/discussion/10211/additional-house-on-other-shard/p1
Never be afraid to challenge the status quo
Never be afraid to challenge the status quo
the code can be used to place a house
you CANNOT use it to offload another house
you cannot trade the plot or sell it to others
all ways to abuse game mechanics blocked
it is a bonus to a paid acct. One per master acct
Never be afraid to challenge the status quo
I already sent this afternoon the proposal to the company, so they will value and study if it is beneficial or not.
This study and evaluation should be done internally by the company.
NOTE: It is the second user that says 'This suggestion of the OP', I want to clarify that I am a user like you, I am not Operator or similar, if you refer to that, I do not know how it originated but in case of that confusion, clarify that I am a user like you and in any message sent by me I indicate otherwise (I use translator and there are translations that I do not understand well, excuse any confusing or erroneous expression).