Please stop putting this Picture in my mind.

TimTim Posts: 712
edited September 9 in General Discussions
This is not intended to insult anyone.

Once again someone on an other thread brought up consolidating the shards which pops an image into my mind again. The image is that of the kid no one wants to play with standing in a park by himself saying "If they closed the other parks then they would play with me." I'm not saying that is fare to that person or anyone else but that is what pops into my mind.

Regardless of the merits of the idea.
If we wanted to play on a high population shard we would. Changing or starting new on a different shard isn't that hard even for a new player.

The same applies to most of the ideas about getting more player into Fel. 

So please before you hit that post button with something about either idea think. Will your idea be seen as a doable solution to a problem or just I want more people (or victims) to play with.

PS If someone with some skill wants to come up with an graphic for this that I can steal I would appreciate it

edited to correct spelling (again)

Comments

  • YoshiYoshi Posts: 1,995
    "i like when people think their post is just so important, that instead of putting it in the thread it relates to, it deserves a thread of it's own"
    Posts on this account have been pre filtered from personal comment or opinion in an effort to suppress conservative views in order to protect the reader.
  • SkettSkett Posts: 574
    If they consolidated shards what happens to shard bound items. 
    Biggest reason I don’t change shards is because of shard bound items. 
  • Arnold7Arnold7 Posts: 931
    Think there are, at least on my shard, far more inactive players paying for their accounts than active ones.  See many more houses than I do players.  Based on the number with unstocked vendors, it appears a fair number of these houses are still standing because the owners are using an automated payment system.  Don’t think UO could handle relocating all these houses to surviving shards if they consolidated.

    Think the better solution is too allow all players to play on the shard of their choice and then when they are done take the bus back, or whatever, to their home shard.  Or, based on my experience on my shard, not Atlantic, simply encourage players to try out different shards where you have 5 to 15 players working one of the special events.  I have played in a number of these now fighting paras and other stuff and found that it only takes around 10 players playing at the same time to handle most advesaries  and that is including the boss.  Maybe not such a good idea if it brings scripters to my shard.  Maybe, keep EJ accounts from traveling to other shards then at least UO would have some income from players that decided to travel.
  • SethSeth Posts: 2,746
    Tim said:
    This is not intended to insult anyone.

    Once again someone on an other thread brought up consolidating the shards which pops an image into my mind again. The image is that of the kid no one wants to play with standing in a park by himself saying "If they closed the other parks then they would play with me." I'm not saying that is fare to that person or anyone else but that is what pops into my mind.

    Regardless of the merits of the idea.
    If we wanted to play on a high population shard we would. Changing or starting new on a different shard isn't that hard even for a new player.

    The same applies to most of the ideas about getting more player into Fel. 

    So please before you hit that post button with something about either idea think. Will your idea be seen as a doable solution to a problem or just I want more people (or victims) to play with.

    PS If someone with some skill wants to come up with an graphic for this that I can steal I would appreciate it

    edited to correct spelling (again)
    Agree with you, the player should just decide for himself and not for the whole community. Consolidation will never happen as it instantly reduces the subscription rate.
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 
    ESRB warning: Some Blood. LOTS of Alcohol. Some Violence. LOTS of Bugs
  • TimTim Posts: 712
    Yoshi said:
    "i like when people think their post is just so important, that instead of putting it in the thread it relates to, it deserves a thread of it's own"
    If I had put it in that thread it would be off topic and a personal attack on an individual.
  • gaygay Posts: 212
    edited September 10
    @Tim The argument you're making is that you're settled into where you feel at home. And unfortunately the problematic state of the game honestly trumps that completely. So when I mention consolidation I invest zero thought into your single player expectancy of an MMO that's outlived the need for 26 servers.

    Why do we not get houseable land masses anymore? Because 90% of that landmass goes to waste across the majority of servers.
    Why is RMT such a problem right now? Because farming is done on servers where not enough players exist to police the servers.

    Yes, I understand very well that each server is rich with it's own history of players and communities that came to be, some of which even have unique areas dedicated to those players and communities. However the majority of those communities were at best active for a few years, before the the founding members eventually moved away from the game and the community itself died out. And yes, player monuments are special, but they can be recreated, and new communities can be formed out of players being brought together. It's time to make new histories.

    And if bringing what is left of our game together can be achieved without any actual loss to the player outside of a house plot, then that's an acceptable trade. And to say it shouldn't be brought up because some people like small servers is a honestly a greedy and self involved outlook. At the end of the day, this game is supposed to be an MMO.
  • poppspopps Posts: 3,278
    edited September 10
    gay said:
    @ Tim The argument you're making is that you're settled into where you feel at home. And unfortunately the problematic state of the game honestly trumps that completely. So when I mention consolidation I invest zero thought into your single player expectancy of an MMO that's outlived the need for 26 servers.

    Why do we not get houseable land masses anymore? Because 90% of that landmass goes to waste across the majority of servers.
    Why is RMT such a problem right now? Because farming is done on servers where not enough players exist to police the servers.

    Yes, I understand very well that each server is rich with it's own history of players and communities that came to be, some of which even have unique areas dedicated to those players and communities. However the majority of those communities were at best active for a few years, before the the founding members eventually moved away from the game and the community itself died out. And yes, player monuments are special, but they can be recreated, and new communities can be formed out of players being brought together. It's time to make new histories.

    And if bringing what is left of our game together can be achieved without any actual loss to the player outside of a house plot, then that's an acceptable trade. And to say it shouldn't be brought up because some people like small servers is a honestly a greedy and self involved outlook. At the end of the day, this game is supposed to be an MMO.
    Why is RMT such a problem right now? Because farming is done on servers where not enough players exist to police the servers.

    No, to my opinion, "policing" cannot be the solution to real money trades simply because it contributes to being a cause to this issue.... what "policing" does, is only permit the creation of a Monopoly for those few players who control those spawns and, thus, can create a Monopoly of those items and thus artificially inflate prices thus boosting inflation in the economy of the game...

    If at all, Shard transfers and empty Shards have actually helped reducing the ridicolous high inflation on certain items because they permitted the increase of the "offer" for those items... first coming from Japanese Shards where Powerscrolls where being farmed and then, later on, for their being farmed on empty Shards.

    Increased offer, reduces the cost and thus fights inflation and breaks Monopolies so, it is a GOOD thing, IMHO.

    The "policing", instead, reduces the offer of items because it permits the creation of Monopolies from those few players who, "policing" those spawns, effectively control them and, thus, limit the offer of those items thus artificially having their prices sky rocket.

    THIS, is what causes the issue of Real Money Trades.... most players do not have countless time to play a game and farm for gold needed to buy high end items necessary for gameplay whose cost is artificially high because of the "policing" of spawns that created the conditions for Monopolies....

    So, what do they do if they still want to play the game and get those items ?

    They resort to Real Money Trades and use their real money to purchase those high end items and gold..... and when players see that can make real money off of the game, of course that we then see also players cheating, duping, multi-boxing and AFK scripting.... the ability to make real money, to my opinion, is a hell of a good reason for that in-game behaviour which we know causes so much problems to the game and other players....

    Therefore, whatever Design mechanics limit the offer of items and create the conditions for in-game Monopolies and causes players to have to spend countless of their time in the game to get a high-end item is what "promotes", to my opinion, in some players, the willingness to use their real money, rather then their limited time, to get those items and that gold.

    If items where more readily obtainable, with much less time needed to get them, that is, if their offer was increased, I am of the opinion that we would hardly see any players wanting to spend their real money to purchase gold or items in the game.

    So, to my opinion, "policing" spawns is NOT the answer but, rather, the cause to the issue of Real Money Trades because it creates Monopolies, limits the offer for items, and forces players to extremely time consuming grinding to put together the enormous piles of gold needed to purchase those items.

    Just look at what happened with Powerscrolls before the great loss of players, where spawns were actually "policed" actively on pretty much any and all Shards.... their price, related to the UO cost of living, was outrageous as compared to what they cost now that they can be farmed on empty Shards....

    Make gold and items, included high end items, more readily available, and thus have the game be much less of the "time sink" that it is, and players, I am of the opinion, will much less feel the need to have to spend their real money to purchase gold or items in the game thus taking away the real money trades which, to my point of view, is what may motivate some players for an in-game behaviour that so much hurts the game.... duping, cheating, AFK scripting, multi-boxing etc. etc.

    If one can get anything in the game with a resonable and acceptable investment of time in the game, what would be the point of spending one's own real money on it ?
  • Petra_FydePetra_Fyde Posts: 1,138
    The developers have stated frequently that they will not be merging shards. So when someone airs the idea on forums I just ignore it. It's not going to happen.
  • On my shard we greet returning players from pre Tram or pre AoS still. Or after many years absence atleast. They are happy to find a bunch of people at Brit W bank at 7 every night , Just for a chat or  what happened after they left. Help if needed to find their old accounts and how to catch up. Where to read guides .. Even to find a guild right away.  I know this helps if you want to get people to stay and resub. Imagine to come back and your shard was gone.

  • dvviddvvid Posts: 781
    Merging shards is an absurd idea when you think of housing alone. 
  • Arnold7Arnold7 Posts: 931
    To be honest think a lot of players have had their houses where they have stood for years and I don’t think they would look too kindly at UO’s just dumping them someplace else assuming UO is capable of doing that.  Think also a lot of players have invested a lot into making their houses look great and do not think many would be very enthusiastic about doing it all over again a second time.  And, think dvvid has a good point about housing.  Have a character on Atlantic now and really find all the housing there jammed into every available space really takes away from the ascetics of the game.  Just too much in a limited amount of space.

    Think having a more even distribution of players over all the shards would improve UO but don’t think consolidation shards is the way to accomplish that.


  • McDougleMcDougle Posts: 3,741
    See it's the Permanency that keeps UO alive but couldn't we leave housing alone and create dungeon shards(2 1"fel 1 tram) and shopping shards with gates on our home shards ..
    Acknowledgment and accountability go a long way... 
  • TimTim Posts: 712
    edited September 11
    Thanks a lot. Now I have someone in a indoor basketball court saying it was intended to be played indoors with this set of rules and all other hoops should be taken down stuck in my head. 

    UO is first and foremost a "sandbox" game. The developers have always just provided a world for us to play in. They have never said you have to do this or that and there is no "end game" win. So if anyone else wants to tell me how I must play the game you'r going to have to pay me for my time. My rates start at $10,000 an hour.

    The facts of the matter are 
    1. Broad Sword has said repeatedly no to merging shards.
    2. Anyone who has done any programming can see many many problems with the idea. Housing being the most obvious and probably the easiest to fix.
    3. It would be expensive in time and money to bug swat, prevent duplicating items and other cheats. That's before you add in the pissed off players who may just quit.
    4. Not merging cost nothing. 
    So my original post.

    Two other points

     I'v been playing 20+ years and have never seen the Fel champ spawns "Policed" just various groups trying and usually succeeding in cornering the market. Usually linked up with a gold selling web site.
     
    The idea of quick easy moon gates between shards probably have item 2 issues in spades. My understanding is the shards have separate and very complicated data basses. Copying a player from one to the other can't be easy. I'm amazed shard tokens work as well as they do.

    edited for spelling
  • FeigrFeigr Posts: 355
    Wouldn't hurt to have a second Atlantic.  Doesn't need any dev help.  Just as a community agreeing on another shard to zerg.
    ---
    Chesapeake - Warrior Feigr, Craftsman Brokkr, Tamer Slatra, Rogue Nidingr, Bard Galdr
  • PawainPawain Posts: 6,956
    Feigr said:
    Wouldn't hurt to have a second Atlantic.  Doesn't need any dev help.  Just as a community agreeing on another shard to zerg.
    Atlantic is the Island of Misfit Toys, they can't even get a star on their Artisan tree.  So getting the Misfits to agree on another shard wont happen.
  • SethSeth Posts: 2,746
    edited September 12
    Tim said:
     
    The idea of quick easy moon gates between shards probably have item 2 issues in spades. My understanding is the shards have separate and very complicated data basses. Copying a player from one to the other can't be easy. I'm amazed shard tokens work as well as they do.
    I don't think moongate between shards is necessary. Character transfer should remain a privilege for 14-year-old account holders. Shard-bound items are against that original design. 

    If the Dev team is thinking of the next big project after NLS, I would vote for a cross shard trading system. Years ago, there was already a website that could perform vendor search for all shards without even login in via game client. 
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 
    ESRB warning: Some Blood. LOTS of Alcohol. Some Violence. LOTS of Bugs
  • TimTim Posts: 712
    I wasn't commenting on if easy movement between shards was a good or bad idea just my option the it was not technically posable without a lot of reprogramming.

    Also the only difference between Atlantic and all the other shards is the large number of people who decided they like playing there. And of course the fact that the gold sellers decided to make it their home base.

    PS bringing up "original design" in todays game is like saying the original design of the US constitution was for only white male land owners to have the vote.  >:)
  • I would never play on Atlantic, mainly/alone.
    I will never play on another consolidated shard. Ever.
    It's like a crazy house, but worse.
  • SethSeth Posts: 2,746
    The original storyline tells us the shards are what is unique to Ultima Online and they shall never be combined into one.

    Mondain the wizard captured the world of Sosaris in the Gem of Immortality. The Avatar (aka The Stranger / The Traveler from the Stars) shattered the Gem of Immortality into numerous shards. Each server is considered a Shard of the shattered gem. In each shattered remnant of the gem dwells a perfect likeness of Sosaria. Britannia that was once Sosaria now exists as a thousand worlds each with its own peoples, history and destiny

    --- 
    They should change idoc rules and stop decay for the houses of active players who have been around for a certain number of years, say 10 years. Or very soon all history will be lost.
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 
    ESRB warning: Some Blood. LOTS of Alcohol. Some Violence. LOTS of Bugs
  • poppspopps Posts: 3,278
    Seth said:
    The original storyline tells us the shards are what is unique to Ultima Online and they shall never be combined into one.

    Mondain the wizard captured the world of Sosaris in the Gem of Immortality. The Avatar (aka The Stranger / The Traveler from the Stars) shattered the Gem of Immortality into numerous shards. Each server is considered a Shard of the shattered gem. In each shattered remnant of the gem dwells a perfect likeness of Sosaria. Britannia that was once Sosaria now exists as a thousand worlds each with its own peoples, history and destiny

    --- 
    They should change idoc rules and stop decay for the houses of active players who have been around for a certain number of years, say 10 years. Or very soon all history will be lost.
    They should change idoc rules and stop decay for the houses of active players who have been around for a certain number of years, say 10 years. Or very soon all history will be lost.

    I support this. 
  • TimTim Posts: 712
    Tim said:

    PS bringing up "original design" in todays game is like saying the original design of the US constitution was for only white male land owners to have the vote.  >:)

  • SethSeth Posts: 2,746
    edited September 18
    Tim said:
    Tim said:

    PS bringing up "original design" in todays game is like saying the original design of the US constitution was for only white male land owners to have the vote.  >:)

    Sorry i lost you somewhere up there. Are you saying we should forego the original design intent and merge the shards?

    This is a game, not a country. 
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 
    ESRB warning: Some Blood. LOTS of Alcohol. Some Violence. LOTS of Bugs
  • TimTim Posts: 712
    I'm saying that "original design intent" has very little to do with what the game has evolved into in the last 25 years. Just saying that it has changed beyond what the original developer could of imagined at that time.

    If they had had any idea what the game was going to become we wouldn't be stuck with container that can only hold 125 items and max stack of 60k.  To be fare almost all of us were using dial up at the time.
  • SethSeth Posts: 2,746
    Ok, anyway I agree with your original post.
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 
    ESRB warning: Some Blood. LOTS of Alcohol. Some Violence. LOTS of Bugs
Sign In or Register to comment.