Strong Boxes

[Xenome]

http://update.uo.com/design_20.html
Came out in Nov 23, 1999. Certainly is T2A era accurate!

Vote if you support enabling strong boxes for co-owners.

[MatronDeWinter]

This just allows you multiple secures. You could have every character on your 2 other accounts make a room of secure boxes.... I vote a strong no

[Xenome]

(It does say test center on the link I sent...)
http://www.uo.com/cgi-bin/newstools.pl?Article=1381

There is another good link talking about the changes though.
"The next phase involved changing the way secure and lock down containers worked. Some house types were given additional secure containers and lock down totals to allow players to keep their most valuable and useful items. To further allow players to store items, the weight restrictions from bank boxes and secure containers were removed, allowing players to store a full 125 items in them. As a final enhancement, co-owners were added to the housing system. Each house can now have up to eight co-owners. These co-owners can place strongboxes that allow them to store up to 25 items per strongbox, for a total of 200 additional items per house. These changes went into effect on November 23rd (CST). For more information about the specifics of secure containers and lock down numbers, click here."

[MatronDeWinter]

CUB part 3 was horrible. This was staging everyone for item-decay in houses. All of the extra lockdowns and secures were specifically for this. This is the absolute worst period in uo-housing and is specifically setting up for the changes made in UO:R. Not T2A-esque imo.

[Pro]

I'd say no simply on the fact that on OSI you had to pay for accounts so it was fairly impossible to abuse this without paying $$ where as on here I accidentally make an account every time i mistype my user name ;[



also barrels should be stay as they are

[Silverfoot]

Wouldn't this depend on what housing system we are using? I believe the one currently on the shard is from when t2a first came out in late '98, while the one in late '99 was when everything switched to lockdowns only. Probably the reason co-owners got their own secure containers. I could be wrong about that though, too lazy to look it up right now. :S

[noxmonk]

It falls within the timeframe we are trying to emulate and is more accurate than razor and the party/guild system we currently use and so many people enjoy.

I voted for era accuracy.

[Eulogy]

IMO strong boxes are UO:R.
There has been discussion on other implementations that fall into the target timeline that were instated as clearly staging up towards UO:R.

[noxmonk]

IMO strong boxes are UO:R.
There has been discussion on other implementations that fall into the target timeline that were instated as clearly staging up towards UO:R.

If you're against era accuracy, then no would be the vote I guess. Unless we're picking and choosing even when it falls within the specified date timeline, in which case I wouldn't say that the shard truly strives for accuracy and the mission statement would be incorrect.

[noxmonk]

http://wiki.uosecondage.com/index.php?t ... 11/23/1999

We have runebooks, potion kegs, and as far as I know every other change from this patch, save the strong boxes.

[Eulogy]

A yes vote is a vote for more secure housing.
A no vote means you aren't a newb.

Making more sense now?

Learn not to get your house looted.

[Sylvester]

I would much rather strive for everything closer to the pre-t2a type era than closer to the UOR era to be honest. Strong boxes are the "easy uo" way to me. Voted no.

[Silverfoot]

It falls within the timeframe we are trying to emulate and is more accurate than razor and the party/guild system we currently use and so many people enjoy.

I voted for era accuracy.

Yes, but it should be one housing system or the other, not pieces from both housing systems.

[Xenome]

It falls within the timeframe we are trying to emulate and is more accurate than razor and the party/guild system we currently use and so many people enjoy.

I voted for era accuracy.

Yes, but it should be one housing system or the other, not pieces from both housing systems.

I agree wholeheartedly. I was in the process of writing another thread (that timed out) about picking a "CUTOFF" date for the shard to end this muttering about what is "era accurate" verses what the majority wants or feels is "era accurate". I read somewhere that this shard should be "late T2A" -- which is vague in itself. What is late T2A?

CUB part 3 was horrible. This was staging everyone for item-decay in houses. All of the extra lockdowns and secures were specifically for this. This is the absolute worst period in uo-housing and is specifically setting up for the changes made in UO:R. Not T2A-esque imo.

IMO strong boxes are UO:R.
There has been discussion on other implementations that fall into the target timeline that were instated as clearly staging up towards UO:R.

Ooohhh and add to it, all these opinions about "staging for UO:R". DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED PEOPLE! I DID NOT ONCE READ... "This publish was released to prepare for the upcoming expansion, UO:R." Once again, your opinions are stated. Now maybe moonstones (Late Feb 2000 Pub) I could understand... but give me a break people. Don't try to pull a "it's common sense" either, I need to see it in writing.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion of era accuracy. By the books my suggested change are era accurate. There are 18 +/- months of changes in T2A. This leaves a lot of subjective opinions and depending on who you talk to, some are accurate and some are not?

I will say if the strongboxes aren't going to get implemented, maybe I should start another era accuracy thread to enforce bank box stone limits too, since that was pre-CUB (read the news notes in Nov 1999 if you disagree). Needless to say, I won't even mention bank checks (that have been mentioned here) that are present on the shard, implemented in March 2000 (about 1 month before UO:R and 4 months after this CUB era, VERY LATE T2A!). Secure pet trading and house trading (in the trade window) came out in late Feb 2000. What about the good old axing the trashcan instead of the current but WAY later teleporting ability? What about the stealing system in town when things magically pop back into your bag after a thief gets whacked?!?!? There are a lot of mixed parts here as you can see.

Some of you want the later T2A luxuries (and will even argue to the grave about it, even things OUT OF ERA) but will not support things that happened prior to or after your liking. Talk about pick and choose. If this is a majority wins situation then I don't want to be part of this shard anymore since my opinion will feel that it is against it's own objectives. I don't really care about the strongboxes as much as I care about the overall objective of playing on a true era accurate shard.

I'm not saying this to spit in the faces of the developers, the staff, the community, the contributors, etc... I have complete respect for the work and time invested in this masterpiece. It is beyond my capacity to make something as you guys have done so well and my kudos again to all of you. I just want to hit the nail on the head and contribute my thoughts in an intellectual manner... and directly stated as so:

FOR ALL FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY, PLEASE PICK A T2A CUTOFF DATE FOR PATCHES/PUBS AND PUT AN END TO THE DEBATES!

I know that it will NOT be an easy task and it will require even more work, but I strongly encourage and support it. I'm sure others will too as per my conversations in IRC over the weekend and some of the others who briefed on it in this thread and others as well.

(edited quote, missed "to")

[Hemperor]

Didn't bother reading all the replies.

Silverfoot has this one right, two different housing systems and I know Derrick is pretty strongly against the more recent one.