JohnKnighthawke said:Play Siege. Also, UO survived the pre-Trammel era only due to a relative lack of competition. That no longer is the case now.
Not true at all.
UO created it's true legacy at that point in time, which was crushed and turned soulless by becoming commercialised.
Pawain said:I think they said they were going to update VvV.
How about, instead, bringing back FACTIONS !psycho said:Pawain said:I think they said they were going to update VvV.This is fine by me, if they replace Order versus Chaos with VvV,however I really dont see how VvV fit into the history-theme of UOSometimes going back to the roots is the best.
I agree with you. If they are just going to kind of do what we have now using an "updated VvV" system then essentially we are just going to get more of what we already have; in that case they don't even need a new shard. Sombrerose said:Arnold7 said:Think the worlds you have now are fine. A place for pvp players, a place for pvm players, and for those that like both, the ability to go back and forth. Do not really think you need a new shard. There are already plenty of places for new players to explore. But, do think that you need to rethink your overall attitude towards new players. They need a reason to play, reasonable advancement of their character and meaningful goals. Do not think requiring new players to train for a year before being transferred to a production shard is going to cut it.
I think think it is what the game needs for the same reason. The aging player base are the people that are saying they don't enjoy PvP and they won't play a shard that has non-consensual PvP. If they want to attract a new younger player base then they really need to look at what other games have such huge draws (I don't play Xbox anymore but would say Fortnite and Call of Duty represent a good amount)... these games are based mainly on PvP. Therefore the new shard should really be more PvP zones with chance at Legacy with just a few safety zones where people who don't like that stuff can do more grindy content (small risk small reward). That would be a very unpopular idea among the current player base but that goes back to the question of what the actual point of the shard was for (bring in more people or create another new shard for old players).I think non-consensual PVP on this server is not what the game needs.
I mean, if you want the game to survive more years, you have to attract new players. You can't only rely on you old aging playerbase.
Lady_Storm said:Seth read the latest news from the team in your e mail.
It will not be ether tram or fel but a new land with a way to catch up from start to be able at the end to merge to a prodo shard and keep up with the rest of us or at least close enough to have fun.
That is the reason we play UO is to have fun. I dont come in to UO to plot some poor guys death and dry loot him. I play what feels good that day, sometimes its a crafter, other days a tamer with my pets. Other days I go hunting... I can no longer pk or pvp due to my strokes.. just dont have the speed. I dont miss it. I have just as much fun doing other things in the game
Cookie said:JohnKnighthawke said:Play Siege. Also, UO survived the pre-Trammel era only due to a relative lack of competition. That no longer is the case now.Not true at all.
UO created it's true legacy at that point in time, which was crushed and turned soulless by becoming commercialised.
Smoot said:without full pvp, all the problems that pvp solves will still go on. spawn camping. unattended macroing. multibox farming.
i foresee 10-20 character multibox account groups (pvp toggle off) farming mobs for gold, filling the housing with castles within the week, then selling those castles and other items for cash.
Jepeth said:I truly think the Legacy shard concept has a ton of potential and I would offer accolades for what it can bring to the game. https://forum.uo.com/discussion/7382/thoughts-on-our-new-legacy#latest
"Basically UO was ahead of it's time, and the worldwide technology platform to make UO accesible to the masses only became available at the same time as Trammel. WoW was the real game to benefit by coincidence of timing of course, and rolling out a completely cohesive product at exactly the right time.
You can't always believe statistics, or the people who shout the loudest and play the victims all the time."
I'm from the UK, do you know what it was like playing UO in the early days in the UK?
It's not something I could admit to anyone I did. I'd had a couple of major sporting accidents that laid me up for a year, almost paralysed me, I got better in the end, but in the meantime, I got addicted to UO and it's been a huge and fun influence in my life. Although I probably admit, I've done very well in life, but god knows what I could have achieved without UO. 🙂
Playing UO, in the early days, in the UK culture, was like having a mental illness. No-one could comprehend. Being a gamer wasn't a thing, it meant you were a serious loser and nerd, before people like me made those terms really cool and normalised them.
Times, viewpoints, and technology were very different in those days. Competition was a good thing, unlike today, where it's become frowned upon, and the concept of winners and losers is not the done thing, because it suggests everyone is not equal. The truth is, everyone is not equal, nature is cruel, UO at it's finest acknowledged this. UO captured the very real struggle that was life.
I could say the same thing about we already have 25 Consensual shards and all but a few are dead so why should they make another shard similar rules?Bilbo said:Well said @ Lady_Storm
We already have a Non-Con Shard and they refuse to play it so why would we make another Non-Con shard just to appease a select few. If you want PvP then join VvV and kill all the other VvV people, stop asking for more SHEEP
This 100%.Seth said:Back to the original post, my choice is:Non-Consensual with no insurance (exactly like it was pre-Trammel)This is assuming it is less dependent on items and skills.Since it is going to get wiped each year, there is limited time to train and equip the same way as we did on Prodo shard. Starting on a clean shard without transfers will take years to train and equip from scratch assuming its the same type of equipment.So I think for real PVP on legacy to work, it must be1) less dependent on items,2) have shortened training period.If you need insurance, I think might as well play in current shard. We don't lose anything when killed, why another shard.
I think you are missing the main point that the gear now-a-days pretty much is the difference between fighting top level content and low level content. If we were to do away with all legendary armor and go back to the basic NPC/Crafted/GM Armor where it's all replaceable then there is no need for insurance.Bilbo said:As far as non-con PvP with no insurance goes if you think it is so great then please do us all a favor and delete all your prodo shards chars and only play on SP.
That would be fun for about a week.keven2002 said:I think you are missing the main point that the gear now-a-days pretty much is the difference between fighting top level content and low level content. If we were to do away with all legendary armor and go back to the basic NPC/Crafted/GM Armor where it's all replaceable then there is no need for insurance.
Nobody wants to lose an item it took them a month to finally get. If all the weapon & armor is readily available for anyone to get then what is your issue with removing insurance?
i didnt get the impression the whole shard would be wiped once a year.TastyTreats said:Smoot said:without full pvp, all the problems that pvp solves will still go on. spawn camping. unattended macroing. multibox farming.
i foresee 10-20 character multibox account groups (pvp toggle off) farming mobs for gold, filling the housing with castles within the week, then selling those castles and other items for cash.Ok but why would anyone buy a castle that has a 1 year lifespan for cash?Why would anyone waste time multiboxing farming gold that in 1 year will either be lost to the cataclysm or just added to an already outrageous economy on live shards.If done right opt-in PvP can work and still appeal to old time vets. The one issue we would have is appealing to players from free shards with only a seasonal offering. I think they should also add a permanent shard alongside the seasonal one that has no VvV but instead Non Consensual PvP everywhere.
i didnt get the impression the whole shard would be wiped once a year.
if thats true, i dont know why anyone would bother playing there in the first place
they way i understood it, was that after a year of playing on the new shard, the player had the option to transfer to a production shard (but wasnt required to)
Ultima Online: New Legacy is about forging your new Britannian Legacy! While things like the economy and the game world will be reset during the Shattering, players will have an entire year to forge that legacy! In-game items and events will serve as mementos to that legacy that will be experienced by generations to come. This is your chance to write your character’s place into Britannia’s history!
Players will not be able to transfer to the Ultima Online: New Legacy shard. At the conclusion of the Shattering characters will be able to transfer off the Ultima Online: New Legacy shard keeping all their skill, stat, and legacy progress they earned to shards with available character slots. Non-shard bound items and items earned via the Legacy System can also be transferred off.
------------------------------------------------
It is a very popular way to play in other online games. UO is just a few years behind.
keven2002 said:
Btw with over 300 views, only 24 people have voted and it's still over 50% in favor of doing non consensual PvP and no insurance.
Yes people have said it at least 5 times. Many online games have seasons. They are for usually 3 months and that season ends. Server is gone toons go to your toon collection to play the regular game. Diablo III has been doing it for years. Most players play Seasons and not the regular game.Seth said:I keep reminding myself that it is wiped every year - very different concept for a MMO. Does anyone know of any other MMO having such server?
TimSt said:New Legacy will also have PvM. Without insurance your armour and weapons can be taken by a mob. Plus there is this scenario: Get killed deep in a dungeon, walk outside to find a healer, you are without any armour or weapons after you get rezed. If you don't have an undertaker's staff you will need to go back into the dungeon armourless and weaponless to find your corpse. Only to get killed along the way.
It was all part of needing other players.
It was not all meant to be solo'ed.
The main difference 20 years has made to social attitudes, and reflected in UO, is life used to be about teamwork, competition, self improvement and learning real talents - now it's all mememe, having everything given to people for no effort or deservedness and getting by with no real lifeskills. That's why they are called millennials, but of course it's not just them, it's the entire society teaching them to be like that, from their schooling, social media, ground-roots gaming upwards. Interestingly enough, parents see it, and don't agree, but they are swamped by societies red tape and regulations put in place by those who don't have a clue.
Monopoly or Chess don't stand a chance in todays world. 🙂
Oh I heard but did not play Diablo. We should use these successful examples as reference for the Legacy shard. I did not notice any mentions in any recent Legacy thread. There is no need to reinvent the wheels, just need to see what works and adapt to UO.Pawain said:Yes people have said it at least 5 times. Many online games have seasons. They are for usually 3 months and that season ends. Server is gone toons go to your toon collection to play the regular game. Diablo III has been doing it for years. Most players play Seasons and not the regular game.Seth said:I keep reminding myself that it is wiped every year - very different concept for a MMO. Does anyone know of any other MMO having such server?
UO did not come up with this idea first. They are years behind. I think a year is too long.
Many have very quick character building and equipment gathering so you have fun advancing in difficulty and finding better items to replace what you have.
I think when we login to pvp servers, we already consented to pvp ... It will be sad if there is no other players around to pvp.Max_Blackoak said:I find it interesting that the majority of players in this poll voted for non-consensual PvP.
Seems like the very vocal group of players who are against non-consensual PvP are truly a minority, a vocal one but still a minority.
I really hope the devs take this into account.
Wow. Perfectly said and right on the money in my opinion.; couldn't agree more. Seems like many of the people that want to keep it consensual PvP and item insurance really just want a throwback shard for them to keep playing like they do now. IE stick to the solo approach (or their current home shard guild maybe) to amass a bank/house full of "stuff" (and whatever legacy only "stuff") to transfer over to their home shard to add to their already massive amount of "stuff"....Cookie said:TimSt said:New Legacy will also have PvM. Without insurance your armour and weapons can be taken by a mob. Plus there is this scenario: Get killed deep in a dungeon, walk outside to find a healer, you are without any armour or weapons after you get rezed. If you don't have an undertaker's staff you will need to go back into the dungeon armourless and weaponless to find your corpse. Only to get killed along the way.
It was all part of needing other players.It was not all meant to be solo'ed.
The main difference 20 years has made to social attitudes, and reflected in UO, is life used to be about teamwork, competition, self improvement and learning real talents - now it's all mememe, having everything given to people for no effort or deservedness and getting by with no real lifeskills. That's why they are called millennials, but of course it's not just them, it's the entire society teaching them to be like that, from their schooling, social media, ground-roots gaming upwards. Interestingly enough, parents see it, and don't agree, but they are swamped by societies red tape and regulations put in place by those who don't have a clue.
Monopoly or Chess don't stand a chance in todays world. 🙂
I also find it pretty interesting too that majority of people want non consensual / no insurance. I thought for sure it would be lopsided with everyone wanting to keep it consensual & item insurance based on what people have said... but I think it's really just been a handful of the same people being against the Non Con PvP & no insurance (but are just very vocal and active on the boards). I do hope @Kyronix & @Mesanna see this poll and realize there are more people that are in favor of Non Con PvP / no insurance (or something that more closely resembles that).Max_Blackoak said:I find it interesting that the majority of players in this poll voted for non-consensual PvP.
Seems like the very vocal group of players who are against non-consensual PvP are truly a minority, a vocal one but still a minority.
I really hope the devs take this into account.
I find it a very reduced majority as numbers 1 and 2 basically need to be added up as both being 100% consensual...Max_Blackoak said:I find it interesting that the majority of players in this poll voted for non-consensual PvP.
Seems like the very vocal group of players who are against non-consensual PvP are truly a minority, a vocal one but still a minority.
I really hope the devs take this into account.
I just looked at it 3 times and the count went up by 3 so yes your 7 views counted as 7Tim said:Opt in polls such as here have no real world meaning. Was the 27 people who bothered to "vote" just one person with 27 accounts? Did the majority of potential voters even know the poll was being done? A much more interesting number is what percentage of player have even signed up to see any of this.
By the way does anyone know if I check back here 7 times to see the new comments is counted as 7 "view" or just 1 person viewing?
As I thought just a big echo camber. Let's just hope the team is basing their decisions on better numbers and info than can be gathered here.Bilbo said:I just looked at it 3 times and the count went up by 3 so yes your 7 views counted as 7Tim said:Opt in polls such as here have no real world meaning. Was the 27 people who bothered to "vote" just one person with 27 accounts? Did the majority of potential voters even know the poll was being done? A much more interesting number is what percentage of player have even signed up to see any of this.
By the way does anyone know if I check back here 7 times to see the new comments is counted as 7 "view" or just 1 person viewing?
I am just saying that, given the very low number of votes, other then a curiosity thing whatever majority should not be taken into account by the Developers when deciding upon what type of direction they should take for the New Legacy Shard....keven2002 said:700+ views and only 27 votes... there should be way more votes but people aren't bothering; I'm not sure it came from a Dev it would get more of a response but at the end of the day we have over 700 views so people are looking at this thread but aren't taking the poll.
You seem to suggest we would just assume those non voters are all in favor of consensual PvP and full insurance? Oh and those 2 different items are both the same thing... so those votes should be combined... that doesn't make any actual sense. Is that how you think a political election works too? lol.
Regardless of what you say @ popps at this point 55.3% is still the majority of the votes (15 out of 27) even if you think #1 and #2 should be combined (which they shouldn't be bc they are in fact separate). Also if I'm using the same logic as you, then I could say the same exact thing that Non Con PvP is by far the preferred choice and the poll in this thread is bias for consensual PvP because those people that quit due to PvP being nerfed many years ago don't even check the forums.
haha, I might vote differently if the topic is not in the context of Legacy server only. Yeah not to forget the main concern was our existing shard issue.Wess said:I didn't vote. Add a "merge and fix server issues" as an option to vote and lets take a look
Not a bad idea but I think there is some importance to the first season in order to bring as many people into the game as possible. Picking one of them incorrectly which doesn't speak to a majority of people will essentially waste the idea.Aragorn said:i still don’t understand why we need to choose a definite answer for a server running seasonal theme and why can’t we run through all options there, then we know which one is more popular with hard evidence and don’t need to argue here by these 27 people. And again i believe the first few seasons should be shortened to 6 months or even shorter in order to gather more feedback on different things then we can run longer season for what people love.
Why don't they do TWO New Legacy Servers, one all focused on PvP and anything goes and the other, on PvM and no PvP at all ?Aragorn said:i still don’t understand why we need to choose a definite answer for a server running seasonal theme and why can’t we run through all options there, then we know which one is more popular with hard evidence and don’t need to argue here by these 27 people. And again i believe the first few seasons should be shortened to 6 months or even shorter in order to gather more feedback on different things then we can run longer season for what people love.
TastyTreats said:I would prefer a permanent shard with a pure non consensual ruleset so players can police their own server.
TastyTreats said:Why don't they just stick with their current plan and go from there? Consensual PvP with some Non Consensual PvP zones.Let's give them a chance to strike a good balance and hopefully everything works out. As long as the Non-Con zones have a draw similar to powerscrolls that will encourage large scale guild warfare I will be happy with the balance personally.I would prefer a permanent shard with a pure non consensual ruleset so players can police their own server. But for a seasonal shard I can see where they want to try to appeal to everyone and it's a tough line to walk so hopefully they get it right.
I would prefer a permanent shard with a pure non consensual ruleset so players can police their own server.I may well be a pessimist but I simply do not think that players policing fellow players can work at all.
We are talking about the new shard not all of UO.Wess said:I didn't vote. Add a "merge and fix server issues" as an option to vote and lets take a look
If the 50/50 were true:Marge said:What many people fail to realize is there is probably an actual 50/50 split between people that want (like) pvp and people that don't want (HATE) pvp. We are all focused on what we know, who we play with, and the game features that entertain us.. For every person you, the pvper, knows that left to pvp nerfs; we, the other side, know just as many that quit because they got tired of pvpers. ( We also get nerfed because of pvpers [ie the phoenix] ) Both sides believe the developers listen to the the other other side more.Just like we get tired of pvper's running on and on in general chat, we get tired of it in the forums too. Just like with politics, we get tired of talking in circles when nothing the other side says will ever get us to change our minds. Most people I know don't even bother reading the forums - much less voting on a forum player poll.And yes, the 700 views are caused by the 27 people that voted on this poll and are viewing the post each time a new post is written.
So am i, this is not going to be a total rewrite of Ultima, quite honestly it feels like a test bed for removing Fell moving forward. One shard with consensual PVP. Makes sense, half the resources to run the game 1/2 the problems and a year to test it out. Then again thats just tin hat talk.Bilbo said:We are talking about the new shard not all of UO.Wess said:I didn't vote. Add a "merge and fix server issues" as an option to vote and lets take a look
If there was Non Con PvP you would see more PvM ppl getting their PvP toons if they had them. That's how it went when I played pre AOS... get PK'ed on my miner or tamer; log and go back to right with mage or warrior. As it stands now when I'm PvMing in candy land there is no need to get my PvP char (although he's likely very dusty these days).Pawain said:If the 50/50 were true:Marge said:What many people fail to realize is there is probably an actual 50/50 split between people that want (like) pvp and people that don't want (HATE) pvp. We are all focused on what we know, who we play with, and the game features that entertain us.. For every person you, the pvper, knows that left to pvp nerfs; we, the other side, know just as many that quit because they got tired of pvpers. ( We also get nerfed because of pvpers [ie the phoenix] ) Both sides believe the developers listen to the the other other side more.Just like we get tired of pvper's running on and on in general chat, we get tired of it in the forums too. Just like with politics, we get tired of talking in circles when nothing the other side says will ever get us to change our minds. Most people I know don't even bother reading the forums - much less voting on a forum player poll.And yes, the 700 views are caused by the 27 people that voted on this poll and are viewing the post each time a new post is written.
Every once in a while PvP appears in Chat on LS. They have a lot of fun. But, I never see anyone that is PvMing leave and go get their PvP toons. I do see the PvP alts doing PvM.
Maybe you should educate your self about this new shard before saying anymore.Wess said:So am i, this is not going to be a total rewrite of Ultima, quite honestly it feels like a test bed for removing Fell moving forward. One shard with consensual PVP. Makes sense, half the resources to run the game 1/2 the problems and a year to test it out. Then again thats just tin hat talk.Bilbo said:We are talking about the new shard not all of UO.Wess said:I didn't vote. Add a "merge and fix server issues" as an option to vote and lets take a look
BUT, issues in existing UO is very likely to carry over, again, not a total rewrite, some of these issues are decades old. The fact that this test be.. i mean new server is going to pull an already razor thin playerbase into an already thinner population existence then it is now means talking about this test be, i mean new server without considering the effects of all servers at this point would just be ignorance.
My opinion anyway.
Cookie said:"Basically UO was ahead of it's time, and the worldwide technology platform to make UO accesible to the masses only became available at the same time as Trammel. WoW was the real game to benefit by coincidence of timing of course, and rolling out a completely cohesive product at exactly the right time.
You can't always believe statistics, or the people who shout the loudest and play the victims all the time."
I'm from the UK, do you know what it was like playing UO in the early days in the UK?
It's not something I could admit to anyone I did. I'd had a couple of major sporting accidents that laid me up for a year, almost paralysed me, I got better in the end, but in the meantime, I got addicted to UO and it's been a huge and fun influence in my life. Although I probably admit, I've done very well in life, but god knows what I could have achieved without UO. 🙂
Playing UO, in the early days, in the UK culture, was like having a mental illness. No-one could comprehend. Being a gamer wasn't a thing, it meant you were a serious loser and nerd, before people like me made those terms really cool and normalised them.
Times, viewpoints, and technology were very different in those days. Competition was a good thing, unlike today, where it's become frowned upon, and the concept of winners and losers is not the done thing, because it suggests everyone is not equal. The truth is, everyone is not equal, nature is cruel, UO at it's finest acknowledged this. UO captured the very real struggle that was life.
JohnKnighthawke said:What a strange, odd comment to make.
I did have a post before that, that responded to your previous post, that I quoted from and linked it better. But somehow it got lost, I was in a hurry to get out the door, so the linking is not as good as I wanted.
I cannot be bothered either.
LMAO at how little you know about Pre-Tram and PKs. AoS (2003) was not the downfall of PKs It was UOR (2000) that created Tram and if as a Miner or what ever type playstyle other than PvP/Champ Spawn you were doing outside of Tram ruleset was your own fault. As far as your statement of Non-Con forcing PvMers getting PvPer toons out is total BS and the reason UOR came out was to prevent UO from dying, we were closing our accounts and leaving UO and EA saw the writting on the wall and told OSI to fix is NOW so UOR was released and Fel died.keven2002 said:If there was Non Con PvP you would see more PvM ppl getting their PvP toons if they had them. That's how it went when I played pre AOS... get PK'ed on my miner or tamer; log and go back to right with mage or warrior. As it stands now when I'm PvMing in candy land there is no need to get my PvP char (although he's likely very dusty these days).Pawain said:If the 50/50 were true:Marge said:What many people fail to realize is there is probably an actual 50/50 split between people that want (like) pvp and people that don't want (HATE) pvp. We are all focused on what we know, who we play with, and the game features that entertain us.. For every person you, the pvper, knows that left to pvp nerfs; we, the other side, know just as many that quit because they got tired of pvpers. ( We also get nerfed because of pvpers [ie the phoenix] ) Both sides believe the developers listen to the the other other side more.Just like we get tired of pvper's running on and on in general chat, we get tired of it in the forums too. Just like with politics, we get tired of talking in circles when nothing the other side says will ever get us to change our minds. Most people I know don't even bother reading the forums - much less voting on a forum player poll.And yes, the 700 views are caused by the 27 people that voted on this poll and are viewing the post each time a new post is written.
Every once in a while PvP appears in Chat on LS. They have a lot of fun. But, I never see anyone that is PvMing leave and go get their PvP toons. I do see the PvP alts doing PvM.
AMENTim said:The bottom line is.
UO is a game and if to play it the player has to do too much they don't enjoy to get to the parts they do, they will quit and find a game they do enjoy. This applies to PvP, resource gathering or just grinding away at a spawn.
If you carefully read what I wrote I said pre-AOS which is true. Sorry I didn't give you the exact release date. But I'm sure you know what I meant. That said, you obviously are the self proclaimed UO Historian and know everything that is UO but are obviously a Trammy (which is confirmed by you saying "we" were closing our accounts). My statement is 100% true because I'm talking from experience which I was PK'ed while on my tamer or Miner and then grabbing my PvPer (as I said) so take stop getting get bent out of shape little guy; it will all be ok.. things still exist just because they don't happen to you. The Devs already said you won't have to be afraid of the big bad man lurking in Fel ready to kill you because you seem to like to run your mouth when there aren't consequences.Bilbo said:LMAO at how little you know about Pre-Tram and PKs. AoS (2003) was not the downfall of PKs It was UOR (2000) that created Tram and if as a Miner or what ever type playstyle other than PvP/Champ Spawn you were doing outside of Tram ruleset was your own fault. As far as your statement of Non-Con forcing PvMers getting PvPer toons out is total BS and the reason UOR came out was to prevent UO from dying, we were closing our accounts and leaving UO and EA saw the writting on the wall and told OSI to fix is NOW so UOR was released and Fel died.keven2002 said:If there was Non Con PvP you would see more PvM ppl getting their PvP toons if they had them. That's how it went when I played pre AOS... get PK'ed on my miner or tamer; log and go back to right with mage or warrior. As it stands now when I'm PvMing in candy land there is no need to get my PvP char (although he's likely very dusty these days).Pawain said:If the 50/50 were true:
Every once in a while PvP appears in Chat on LS. They have a lot of fun. But, I never see anyone that is PvMing leave and go get their PvP toons. I do see the PvP alts doing PvM.
Exact attitude that will make the population of this new shard drop to nothing and be a failure.keven2002 said:
PS. This is the EXACT reason we need to have Non-Con PvP because I'd love for you to act like that if I ran across you in the game. You would be worth a murder count... and probably even a rez kill.
Carry on Trammy. 🙂
Exact attitude and action in UO back in the day that would get you running to the guard zone too.Pawain said:Exact attitude that will make the population of this new shard drop to nothing and be a failure.keven2002 said:
PS. This is the EXACT reason we need to have Non-Con PvP because I'd love for you to act like that if I ran across you in the game. You would be worth a murder count... and probably even a rez kill.
Carry on Trammy. 🙂
We will not be sheep again. And if PvP is so popular why can't you do it now?
How many items have I sold in the trade forums? Probably can only bring back some deco and titles. I want to try it out. Luckily the devs know the facts about PvP.keven2002 said:Exact attitude and action in UO back in the day that would get you running to the guard zone too.
Don't act like such a smug jerk in the game like you do on these boards and there wouldn't be an issue. It's people like that who are afraid of bringing back PvP like it was 15-20 years ago that are going to make the shard fail... you are only going to log in for more "rares" to bring back to your home shard. It's a very greedy mindset. New players won't be attracted to a game with "rares" that they have to wait X months to pick a new shard to collect/sell their Legacy rares. They need something to keep their attention and letting crap collect dust somewhere is not something that will do that. Sorry you don't like it but it's true.
keven2002 said:
Herd along lamb chop 🙂
Loving your posts, and agreeing. 🙂
I personally, cannot be bothered to waste anymore time here, I am really enjoying ingame atm, we are pvping non-stop, and very active in all game aspects. I just don't have time to be here.
You are correct, it is people attitudes that get them killed, or make them less successful. I used to be a miner, and have no issues at all. I never felt like a victim, I enjoyed the thought process, and going under the radar etc.
There is a HUGE difference between UOR and AoS proving how little you know about UO. It is your attitude that almost destroyed UO to begin with and the very reason EA made UO create Tram and for your info I stopped PvP because of AoS (Age of Shit)keven2002 said:If you carefully read what I wrote I said pre-AOS which is true. Sorry I didn't give you the exact release date. But I'm sure you know what I meant. That said, you obviously are the self proclaimed UO Historian and know everything that is UO but are obviously a Trammy (which is confirmed by you saying "we" were closing our accounts). My statement is 100% true because I'm talking from experience which I was PK'ed while on my tamer or Miner and then grabbing my PvPer (as I said) so take stop getting get bent out of shape little guy; it will all be ok.. things still exist just because they don't happen to you. The Devs already said you won't have to be afraid of the big bad man lurking in Fel ready to kill you because you seem to like to run your mouth when there aren't consequences.Bilbo said:LMAO at how little you know about Pre-Tram and PKs. AoS (2003) was not the downfall of PKs It was UOR (2000) that created Tram and if as a Miner or what ever type playstyle other than PvP/Champ Spawn you were doing outside of Tram ruleset was your own fault. As far as your statement of Non-Con forcing PvMers getting PvPer toons out is total BS and the reason UOR came out was to prevent UO from dying, we were closing our accounts and leaving UO and EA saw the writting on the wall and told OSI to fix is NOW so UOR was released and Fel died.keven2002 said:If there was Non Con PvP you would see more PvM ppl getting their PvP toons if they had them. That's how it went when I played pre AOS... get PK'ed on my miner or tamer; log and go back to right with mage or warrior. As it stands now when I'm PvMing in candy land there is no need to get my PvP char (although he's likely very dusty these days).Pawain said:If the 50/50 were true:
Every once in a while PvP appears in Chat on LS. They have a lot of fun. But, I never see anyone that is PvMing leave and go get their PvP toons. I do see the PvP alts doing PvM.
PS. This is the EXACT reason we need to have Non-Con PvP because I'd love for you to act like that if I ran across you in the game. You would be worth a murder count... and probably even a rez kill.
Carry on Trammy. 🙂