posting a new thread on a website i viewed GMS please halp!

[kevin-theidocghost]

Alchemy Message

Alchemy messages will appear in the lower left of the UO play window of the alchemist. Other players will not see the messages.



House Type Secure Containers Lock Downs Total Items
All Small Houses 3 425 425
Brick Houses 8 1100 1100
Large Patio Houses 8 1100 1100
Both Two Story Houses 10 1370 1370
Towers 15 2119 2119
Small Stone Keeps 18 2625 2625
Castles 28 4076 4076

Secure containers do not have weight limits

http://www.uoguide.com/Publish_1

all referanced there someone please help me to understand this

A co-owner may not be a co-owner of another house.

so we shouldnt be aloud to be coowned to two houses

[Abbot]

Alchemy system messages should be happening,

small houses should have 3 secures,

and secures should have unlimited weight.

[kevin-theidocghost]

i may be misunderstandin this statement

You will also be able to lockdown containers and the items inside of them

but we should be able to lock down items inside a locked down container

[Kaivan]

Let me clear up this information.

For alchemy messages, this part of the November 23, 1999 patches should be in place. As of now, we are still operating on a mix of pre-T2A and T2A mechanics, including still displaying the grinding messages to players, which was removed on November 10, 1998. Needless to say, this is an area we should make significant changes in regarding the messages from alchemy.

As for the next two issues, they are directly related to housing. Publish 1 marked the beginning of the concrete changes from the old T2A housing system to the new housing system via a series of mechanical changes to houses. To offer a brief comparison, the housing system that existed before Publish 1 had these features:

• No co-owners.
• Could not lock down "generic items" (stackables, namely).
• Secures and bank boxes had a 400 stone weight limit (excluding gold for bank boxes).
• Each house had a limited number of secures (see the 1998 patch notes for how many for each house type).
• Other characters on an account are considered friends of a house, provided they do not own a house of their own.

After Publish 1, during the transition period (called "Phase II") these were the mechanics in place:

• Co-owners exist (no co-owner can own a house, etc.)
• Generic items may be locked down.
• Items in locked down containers are automatically locked down when placed within them.
• Secures and bank boxes no longer have a weight limit.
• Each house has an expanded number of lock downs and secures.
• Other characters on the account are considered implicit co-owners of other houses on the account, even if they own their own house.

Largely, we have steered away from Phase II housing and have made its exclusion the only exception to our cutoff date of November 23, 1999. This is due to the fact that Phase II housing was only meant to exist as a transitional phase between Phase I and Phase III housing, which enabled item decay houses, and reduced the number of items in the world (which was the intended goal of the entire project). Of course, in this stead, we have not fully implemented the mechanics to produce true T2A housing (co-owners exist, no bank box weight limits, etc), and this is another area that we should make improvements on.

[kevin-theidocghost]

thanks kaiven also the coowners not being able to be coowned to two houses is that something that can be implemented
and the secures not having weight limits would be great to have implemented if at all possible

[Kaivan]

As I said before, the overall objective is to remove all changes to housing associated with the November 23, 1999 patch. This means removing co-owners entirely, among other things.

[kevin-theidocghost]

thanks much

[Arsen]

no co owners, r u kidding me?

do we know have to logg out our chars just to logg onto the owner to release a table or trash barrel so we can enter our home?
rofl it cant get any worse

[GuardianKnight]

They may remove co owners but I was under the impression that we grandfather things in from previous patches. So if you are a co owner, you should still be one after the future patch. That is, if things go as they usually do after a change happens.

[Kaivan]

Certain things have been grandfathered in the past, and others have not. I can't say that this would be one of the things that are grandfathered, but the scope of the necessary changes, assuming they are implemented, would probably make any grandfathering impractical.

[Telamon]

.

[Kaivan]

If you re-read what I said, I was advocating for the removal of all changes related to housing that were introduced with the November 23, 1999 patch. Runebooks and Kegs, and nearly all of the other changes from Publish 1 will remain untouched.

This specific position is the suggested stance for one significant reason: The changes to housing produced an environment that was only intended to exist for a short time; specifically until the January 24, 2000 patch when item decay was enabled in houses and on boats, severely decreasing the total storage space within a house. The rest of the changes do not share this trait.

[tanmits]

Publish 1 has tons of features that would kill this server if not left in. The skill lock system, for instance!

[RoadKill]

Publish 1 has tons of features that would kill this server if not left in. The skill lock system, for instance!

Skill locks are totally bogus and shouldn't exist, totally breaks the way UO worked (a dynamic character rather than a set-and-forget system). I do believe skill and stat locks will remain because the actual GUMPs ingame have the locks on them and Derrick would have to release a GUMP update so Staff wouldn't receive 100s of pages a day from players asking why the skill/stat locks aren't working even though they've toggled them.

[Corbin]

Publish 1 has tons of features that would kill this server if not left in. The skill lock system, for instance!

Skill locks are totally bogus and shouldn't exist, totally breaks the way UO worked (a dynamic character rather than a set-and-forget system). I do believe skill and stat locks will remain because the actual GUMPs ingame have the locks on them and Derrick would have to release a GUMP update so Staff wouldn't receive 100s of pages a day from players asking why the skill/stat locks aren't working even though they've toggled them.

I wonder how many would quit because they couldn't keep their 7x GM because trolls run through towns starting fires to raise camping.