UO Second Age

AWWW The argument is already over??? I wanted to lay into Manfromx verbally too!!!!!

Wasnt even an argument. It's now 9 pages of quite possibly the most civilized discussion of an important in-game issue, bordering on ideology, that I have ever seen in my 11 years now of frequenting game forums.

In the face of clearly stated policy, overwhelmingly civil public opposition, and Im pretty sure staff comments somewhere, Manfromx continues his battle 9 pages later and somewhere along the lines became a subscriber in the process. Your future lies in politics sir.


This thread has defied the laws of internet physics so far.

Manfromx wrote:
This is what I wrote right below what you quoted

Can you sum it up in 500 words or more?

uofuntime wrote:
Can you sum it up in 500 words or more?

You know I can! lol

Oswald wrote:Era accurate is era accurate. It's used to stop other quality of life changes such as bandage cutting, so why would something as big as runebooks make it in?

For the record, and this is in tens of other posts, unblessed runebooks are T2A era, Nov. 1999. Although they possibly should have not been here, this is an issue that was decided long ago and discussed in many many (many) other threads.

The question of little things like armoires is a very good one. We have "fixed" some exploits, and obviously bugs like duping is a shard breaker so that is something we would not emulate; that alone is cherry picking to some extent.

For us to modify anything though, we're doing it on our own judgement of what is best, and I just don't think I have that quality of judgement. 99.5% of the mechanics on UOSA are absolute T2A and I don't think they should be tinkered with, because it does lead to feature creep. When we fix armories, it's just a basis and precedent for additional popular changes.

Most anything inaccurate presently on the shard is due for correction if even yet discovered. The shard has been in development for 3 years now and it may be years more to finish correction of the most minor details, but the corrections sure have become much more minor.

Great post.

Gicod wrote:Wasnt even an argument. It's now 9 pages of quite possibly the most civilized discussion of an important in-game issue, bordering on ideology, that I have ever seen in my 11 years now of frequenting game forums.

In the face of clearly stated policy, overwhelmingly civil public opposition, and Im pretty sure staff comments somewhere, Manfromx continues his battle 9 pages later and somewhere along the lines became a subscriber in the process. Your future lies in politics sir.


This thread has defied the laws of internet physics so far.

He's even more tenacious than I am!

TheEttinKing wrote:To be honest if i could find a shard that was felucca and had all the new stuff i would play it.

I'm with you, for the most part, so long as it's Pre-AoS, hehe.

Faust wrote: This is the first large shard to ever stick to a guideline of t2a accuracy with absolutely no exceptions. All of the other shards that altered the game failed. When you make one modification this creates a bad situation with in the playerbase and the staff. The drama that it creates in the community is unpredictable unlike here. The players here know what to expect and there is very little debate besides what is a accurate or not instead of what will be better or not.

Simply not true. (See my earlier posts in this same thread).

This is why these posts exist, folks. If everything was truly T2A era accurate, you could say "we do not deviate from the path" and the argument would be over. However, the shard has deviated very seriously without any room for disagreement. Until the shard removes purposeful inaccuracies (CTF tournies and trophy systems as opposed to Razor and Ventrilo), any discussion on changing the shard is valid, because it already has occurred in the past and so is eligible to be altered in the future as the precedent has been set.

People cannot praise the shard for keeping a straight course when it hasn't and then get upset when someone comes along and asks for another change.

^^

I like how the guy who said feature creep/slippery slope was BS later came back and used it as an excuse to say that more deviations can be made.

All I said was that screaming "FEATURE CREEP!!!" as an excuse to keep out additions while whistling and looking the other way to certain features on T2A that have NEVER existed (or are "NEA!!11!") on any OSI shard is hypocritical.

Additionally, I never said they could be MADE; I said they provide a precedent to allow (and even encourage) further arguments for additions to the game.

Van Raily wrote: Until the shard removes purposeful inaccuracies (CTF tournies and trophy systems as opposed to Razor and Ventrilo), any discussion on changing the shard is valid, because it already has occurred in the past and so is eligible to be altered in the future as the precedent has been set.

yea just leave it the way it is

Horvik wrote:Oh god please dont add stuff that came after t2a. i know your intentions are good, even i got excited about new updates while playing on osi. At the same time I hated updates, every new that came out made poeple value it in millions just to later drop in price by 2000%. Plus every new item added be it furniture or weapon or mount screws half the shard population over by making their existing items less worth.

Thats why i like the idea of this shard not updating beyond one era. It is like it is, i know if i chose to gm a skill it will be equally good for however long i play, they wont add some uber items and screw over half my gmd skills. Just to few months later realise they are overpowered and nerf them and nerf over everyone that payed millions for them.

Van Raily wrote:All I said was that screaming "FEATURE CREEP!!!" as an excuse to keep out additions while whistling and looking the other way to certain features on T2A that have NEVER existed (or are "NEA!!11!") on any OSI shard is hypocritical.

Additionally, I never said they could be MADE; I said they provide a precedent to allow (and even encourage) further arguments for additions to the game.

Van Raily wrote: Until the shard removes purposeful inaccuracies (CTF tournies and trophy systems as opposed to Razor and Ventrilo), any discussion on changing the shard is valid, because it already has occurred in the past and so is eligible to be altered in the future as the precedent has been set.

You know what? You are totally right there is a lot of contradiction..IMO the answer to that is do away with tourneys (or at least the rewards) and other shakily justified "policy decision" stuff. Your point about these setting a precedent for further changes or additions is a good one, and so far I have heard nothing but questionable reasoning to justify these events under the banner of "era accuracy".

The answer for inconsistency isn't more inconsistency though, I don't want them to add even more stuff like that.

Van Raily wrote:

TheEttinKing wrote:To be honest if i could find a shard that was felucca and had all the new stuff i would play it.

I'm with you, for the most part, so long as it's Pre-AoS, hehe.

Faust wrote: This is the first large shard to ever stick to a guideline of t2a accuracy with absolutely no exceptions. All of the other shards that altered the game failed. When you make one modification this creates a bad situation with in the playerbase and the staff. The drama that it creates in the community is unpredictable unlike here. The players here know what to expect and there is very little debate besides what is a accurate or not instead of what will be better or not.

Simply not true. (See my earlier posts in this same thread).

This is why these posts exist, folks. If everything was truly T2A era accurate, you could say "we do not deviate from the path" and the argument would be over. However, the shard has deviated very seriously without any room for disagreement. Until the shard removes purposeful inaccuracies (CTF tournies and trophy systems as opposed to Razor and Ventrilo), any discussion on changing the shard is valid, because it already has occurred in the past and so is eligible to be altered in the future as the precedent has been set.

People cannot praise the shard for keeping a straight course when it hasn't and then get upset when someone comes along and asks for another change.

See my earlier post regarding policy and era accuracy.

Sorry, if you don't like the unique speical events that were different on each production shard that exist here. UOSA is not replicating any specific shard nor will it ever. The shard is it's own entity as if it was a new production shard being added to the mix. UO Second Age has it's own unique events however different they may be from your production shard experiences.

Era Accuracy refers to the gameplay mechanics and ruleset more than anything else.

Events help keep the server alive after lots of players have capped out, which in turn helps growth, because nobody is going to want to play on a completely barren shard.

The problem is that there is always a tidal force of "change this!!!!!" pushing and the admins have to push back and the best way to do that is with a strict rule of era accuracy.

If you don't like it you can go play on another free shard.

ps. That said I wouldn't mind a change to archery so that it doesn't suck, and a change to bandage making.

Just to clear it up, I didn't come post this because I saw contradictions.

I posted because I wanted to know if houses were considered too much of a departure and if so what constitutes too far.

Like we were saying earlier. Even if this server got it 100% right there is no way to get back the pre-Teamspeak/Ventrillo dialup days of UO. I doubt everyone macroed back then either. I didn't at least. Now I don't mind so much . I also think people have a valid point in bringing up that horses weren't used so much back then either. Just too laggy. Almost makes you want to disable combat on horses to get back the days of everyone running around. That would give us a better feeling T2A but wouldn't be era accurate. There is a real contradiction .

Manfromx wrote:Just to clear it up, I didn't come post this because I saw contradictions.

I posted because I wanted to know if houses were considered too much of a departure and if so what constitutes too far.

Like we were saying earlier. Even if this server got it 100% right there is no way to get back the pre-Teamspeak/Ventrillo dialup days of UO. I doubt everyone macroed back then either. I didn't at least. Now I don't mind so much . I also think people have a valid point in bringing up that horses weren't used so much back then either. Just too laggy. Almost makes you want to disable combat on horses to get back the days of everyone running around. That would give us a better feeling T2A but wouldn't be era accurate. There is a real contradiction .

There's a server that disables horse combat already. Personally I always used a mount so it doesn't bother me that everyone is mounted.