Suggestion: Add a Siege Perilous server.

[GuardianKnight]

I feel that UO was dull without a choice of joining a server with a slightly different play style.

The only things different about t2a and siege perilous were the pk rules and recalling. And while i have no doubt it would steal most of the main server's population, it would test to see if people really love t2a more than everything else or we all came here just because it was the closest thing to a normal server we could get.

Not to put this place down but it's just too limited and the point of UO was that it evolved into something....that was the dream anyway. Future patches fixed bugs and promised innovation and balance. Being that we are cut off here at a certain era, we are limited to a never changing limited UO. When you realize that even ultima online is being set to be too limited, the whole purpose of the game fails.

[tekai]

I would be in favor of

Siege "no recall" friday's


that wouldnt even be inaccurate techancally.

[GuardianKnight]

I would be in favor of

Siege "no recall" friday's


that wouldnt even be inaccurate techancally.

I would like to see pks in guard zones and tamers at full power on said Siege fridays.

Would give me reason to login.

[Ooompa Loompa]

I feel that UO was dull without a choice of joining a server with a slightly different play style.

The only things different about t2a and siege perilous were the pk rules and recalling. And while i have no doubt it would steal most of the main server's population, it would test to see if people really love t2a more than everything else or we all came here just because it was the closest thing to a normal server we could get.

Not to put this place down but it's just too limited and the point of UO was that it evolved into something....that was the dream anyway. Future patches fixed bugs and promised innovation and balance. Being that we are cut off here at a certain era, we are limited to a never changing limited UO. When you realize that even ultima online is being set to be too limited, the whole purpose of the game fails.

A seige Shard would be awesome. But There were MANY things besides just recall and pks that set Seige apart. ROT skill gain, NPCs would not buy from players, theives could join theives guild at any point (as long as they could afford it), one char per account, and NPC shopkeepers charged 2 or 3 times the amount for their wares. These are the major things I can think of off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are many more.

[Chance]

I feel that UO was dull without a choice of joining a server with a slightly different play style.

The only things different about t2a and siege perilous were the pk rules and recalling. And while i have no doubt it would steal most of the main server's population, it would test to see if people really love t2a more than everything else or we all came here just because it was the closest thing to a normal server we could get.

Not to put this place down but it's just too limited and the point of UO was that it evolved into something....that was the dream anyway. Future patches fixed bugs and promised innovation and balance. Being that we are cut off here at a certain era, we are limited to a never changing limited UO. When you realize that even ultima online is being set to be too limited, the whole purpose of the game fails.

A seige Shard would be awesome. But There were MANY things besides just recall and pks that set Seige apart. ROT skill gain, NPCs would not buy from players, theives could join theives guild at any point (as long as they could afford it), one char per account, and NPC shopkeepers charged 2 or 3 times the amount for their wares. These are the major things I can think of off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are many more.

DO WANT PLEASE!

/signed

I've been saying this for a long time now, but I would *love* to see a SP 'clone' that is handled with the care & attention to accuracy that Derrick & Co put into UOSA.

[MustardCat]

Want SP server!

[Elisud]

I don't think this server has a playerbase large enough to divide amongst two shards without being detrimental to both.

Secondly, what made Seige so great (amongst other things) was the ruleset and mechanics that were designed to create interaction and good gameplay....Having one character per account...rot skillgain...not having every single char recalling all over the map?...What it did was force people to play the game, to go out, run across the map, consistently play in order to advance and interact/depend on other players for goods.

How would any of this work with multiclienting, the abundance of third party features, and afk macroing?

Only one char per account? Use a second, third, or fourth account.

Cant recall....gate character.

What I think many people so fondly miss about playing uo 'the way it was' was this interaction, this going out and playing the game, always with goals in sight....needing to work hard and play day after day in order to gm a skill. While Seige's rules helped better define this, I think this shard's relaxed rules has done the opposite, to where this style of gameplay is not practical or even possible....Making the gameplay here more similair to how it was, eliminating the many features that are completely inaccurate should be the first step towards a more exciting game that we remember, not adding Seige rules for people to find ways of getting around.

[Panthor the Hated]

I think Elisud makes a good point. This could potentially hurt UOSA's active player base in the short run. However I believe that having the ONLY t2a SP accurate server would draw many new players and given how many people have 3 clients running at a time I suspect plenty of people would play both.

I hope this does happen, though derrick would need a lot of help obviously. Maybe someone else should just get started on this on their own / with their own resources instead of resting our dreams on derrick's shoulders.

The remainder of Elisud's points are purely arguments for limiting razor and number of accounts. Both I support but do not think they are relevant to "should we do this?"

[GuardianKnight]

Being that a siege shard just has slight differences, it shouldn't take much effort to adjust the ruleset. I imagine just putting a limitation on the characters /accounts on the shard would work. Kinda like we aren't allowed to have elves here.

I always assume that it takes so long to get patches finished here as being due to having to be so picky and accurate all the time. Not something you would have to do with Siege.

[Panthor the Hated]

Being that a siege shard just has slight differences, it shouldn't take much effort to adjust the ruleset. I imagine just putting a limitation on the characters /accounts on the shard would work. Kinda like we aren't allowed to have elves here.

I always assume that it takes so long to get patches finished here as being due to having to be so picky and accurate all the time. Not something you would have to do with Siege.

GK, this is not as simple as you seem to believe. The Good/Evil system would be a bitch to make from scratch I suspect.

I get the impression you either didn't play Siege or you played it briefly, however the rules were strikingly different. It's far from impossible but it will take serious effort to make an accurate Siege shard.

[GuardianKnight]

Panthor i played it for years....i just quit for 11. This T2A crap is rotting the brain.

[Ooompa Loompa]

I should add to my original post. While I would love to have a Siege server, I don't think that Derrick will implement this anytime soon, if ever. With the current server's population it's really not practical anyway. I have searchned and searched online and have yet to find a Siege server. In all honesty if I did find one that was T2A or even UOR accurate (or close to it) I would probably leave this server.

[Elisud]

The remainder of Elisud's points are purely arguments for limiting razor and number of accounts. Both I support but do not think they are relevant to "should we do this?"

Obviously, my arguments do refer to the present shard and the problems we currently have with razor, afk macroing, and multiclienting, but it is in regard to the idea of a Seige server that I bring them up. What I mean to say is how would the many features in Seige really make a difference with such relaxed rules? Yes reds would be allowed in towns and people couldnt recall out of field pvp, but beyond that, the many features that made Seige unique would be pointless.

Whats the point in having rot skill and stat gain when we can stay logged in macroing 24/7 w/out being kicked? Why have 1 char per account when we can have multiple accounts...why limit recall to mages when everyone would just make gate chars?

I really don't see how such a server would really be that much different than what we already have here when so many of it's features would be overridden by the relaxed rules in place.

[Panthor the Hated]

I should add to my original post. While I would love to have a Siege server, I don't think that Derrick will implement this anytime soon, if ever. With the current server's population it's really not practical anyway. I have searchned and searched online and have yet to find a Siege server. In all honesty if I did find one that was T2A or even UOR accurate (or close to it) I would probably leave this server.

I feel the same way. I love UOSA but I really miss the t2a(ish, up to UO:R) SP and would quickly drop UOSA if I found a good SP clone.

[dexter4321]

UOSA is what it is if you don't like it find something else. Or go make your own SP server.