[Era Accuracy] Bank Checks

[Naljier]

"They came in with the House and Animal Trade windows, which are both also very close to UO:R and have been discussed in other threads for abolishment as well." Derrick

ya he did, you read it

[Faust]

There is a clear difference between the removal of the trade window and secure animal/house trading involving the window.

[Wise]

I rather like this idea, while being inconveinant it does add a feel to the era that is well lost, I think there can be a great deal of fun involved with being the 3rd party for a trade, and $$$ would defintely provide such a service if this was ever implimended!!


Matron also makes a VERY good point about patches, while its argued for convienance its seems pretty moot, the fact that this is allowed yet everything else from the same patch and even the patch before it are gawked at like its the devils work.

I support these changes!

[Pro]

Don't fix it if it isn't broken?

[Daltrey]

I also support abolishing bank checks. While this would hold no benefit for me, and would actually make things less convenient, I think it's been clearly shown that they should not be here.

It's kinda like the blessed runebook thing. Personally, I'd love to see them blessed, but the fact is that they don't belong here if the goal is era accuracy.

[Wise]

guess that means derrick can wipe everything else off his list that is not an ingame bug.... I mean just cause its not era, doesent mean it needs to be fixed right?


CONGRADULATIONS DERRICK! your list of "era" things that need to be changed is officially void and nul! Take a vacation, relax!


Seriously though, this makes sense, House ad-on deeds got changed when you re-deed them, previous to this they wernt broken why fix it? Herding changes, runebook weight changes, every pvp change ever made, I mean thats a terrible argument.

[Naljier]

sorry to say but some of these issues are good changes needed in order to facilitate easier player interactions due to the limited
mechanics during t2a

bank checks were needed to facilitate large trades

housing and pet trade windows were needed to facilitate those trades

both were put in during t2a so keeping them would not technicaly violate any 'mantra' we have about keeping with t2a era accuracy

runebooks seem to be allowed however even tho i dont beleive they are era accurate, but i wont object because of the convienence and simplicity
they provide as opposed to everyone haveing dozens of individual runes everywhere. that has to eat up alot of server memory keeping up with them.
UNBLESSED runebooks i have no objection to

[noxmonk]

True, the banning was a policy, however many of razors mechanics are not era accurate mechanics. The ability to do certain things was not possible. As far as a game mechanic, I'd like my z axis client side please.

[Faust]

I would be glad if Derrick loaded up the script that forces Razor to collaborate with the server to remove particular features that did not exist with the utility program.

[kill drizitz]

im partial on this. but if checks were removed, scams would be much easier. i used one on osi that was dependent on the weight of the gold, where the gold would drop to your feet because it was too heavy. i forsee this happening a lot.

on the plus side, player vendors will be used more ferquently and more should pop up because it would probably be the only "secure" transaction type. using brokers though on a freeshard seems like a terrible idea. i wouldnt trust anyone to help in a transaction with money/houses.

[Faust]

Checks/Secure trading simply takes an element out of this era that is missing right now implementing it with an element that did not exist.

[BlackFoot]

wipe it all
it would bring about more player interaction by bringing another dimension of t2a back.. the third party trade group

[Daltrey]

I think that scammer-brokers would be rare. No one would trust a broker who didn't already have a strong reputation, which takes a long time to build up and would be completely ruined by one scam. There isn't a single "big score" that would be big enough for a broker to destroy his/her reputation and lose all future business.

[BlackFoot]

aye the community is small enough that if somone was dishonest everyone would knwo pretty fast

[Charles Darwin]

During the T2A time period, programs such as razor, euo, and uoe were considered illegal and you could swiftly be banned for using them. We should all have to use UOConnect or editing of the hosts file(if that's how it's still done), to connect to the shard and all others would be banned. That's era accurate.

This is an exhausting argument. Razor has become a cornerstone of the current Free Shard landscape and overwhelmingly dominates the market for third party assist/and connection utilities.

About a month ago I had a random desire to play UO again, and on my search of classic, era emulating shards, with support for RP, I discovered UOSA. Why did I choose UOSA over the others? Most other shards required modification of my UO files, or downloading UOG, to connect to their server. This was out of the question, and not user friendly in the slightest. It's important to remember noxmonk, that because you are comfortable with editing program files, doesn't mean the majority of UO players are. Razor is a smashing success for ease of use and diversity in regards to connectivity to free shards around the globe, and arguing to abolish these programs is, in my opinion, out of the question. Trying to hash out a FAQ section on the Second Age website for computer illiterate users to modify their UO files will not assist in bringing in the casual player who could otherwise easily use Razor to explore the possibilities of UOSA. I think the argument of abolishing Razor to lean towards era accuracy, at the expense of easily attracting new members, is not worth it. And the razor argument should be saved for another thread.

The problem is, that you cannot simply take a poll.

Watch the outcome of this one...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=7505&start=0
The majority (and deciding factor) will always vote the option that benefits them. As thieves are an obvious minority, loss is expected.

Now, I'm not so sure this is the greatest example of how polls are ineffective. Look at this recent poll, that dictated changes in our latest patch here, you even put in you .02 in this thread. http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=7212 Maybe the staff takes an approach similar to one such as this for bank check changes? Or do you guys feel that a "test" period for something this encompassing is naive?

I also don't see thieves benefiting over any other player with the abolishment of bank checks. You can't steal an entire pile of 15k, and if you imagine yourself scamming somones gold via a bust house trade, or a shady mass resource deal - Well, that is something any player could pull off... That is with the right amount of deceit and manipulation Which I'm all about!

I don't know how Derrick or any other staff member feels about polling the player base upon login, but that is something I was suggesting when I mentioned polling the shard about this topic. Lets face it, not everyone is involved in the forum discussions, and this is a change that will have resounding effects upon UOSA. Whether or not these alterations could benefit the shard or not, has yet to be seen. But I would like to come out and say it one more time, I am for these changes.

Also thank you Kavian for clearing this up... I think this pretty much answers the question we are all debating.

Just to give an answer to the time frame question, the aim of UOSA is to replicate the game during late 1999. Generally speaking, 99% of our patches will be from the October to December 1999 time frame, with the exception of only a couple of deliberately chosen patches outside of that time frame due to some of the realities of freeshards as a whole. Naturally, with that particular time frame as our goal, things such as secure pet and house trading as well essentially all of the post-2000 changes are going to be avoided.

Oh, and what exactly would eliminating secure pet and house trading do? I give my deed or pet up first, in exchange for gold after? Or vice versa? Thanks everyone, good discussion!