UO Second Age

MatronDeWinter wrote:

Ifrit wrote:Because nobody is dumb enough to stand around waiting for the exact moment that a player will check the vendor and transport gold to the bank... hoping that the person will not detect/reveal.

Yes we are

Lol, how did my name get associated with that quote?

Alex21 wrote:One goal era accuracy, stop fighting it, its the way things have to be, if you can't deal with inconveniences then play a different way or something.

Why does everyone continue to say this while ignoring events, trophys, multi-clienting, unique rares and house ownership just to name a few? Without addressing these issues 100% era accuracy is not possible. I know that the trophy system gets brought up everytime a change is made that people don't like. However, that doesn't make the point less valid! This shard is either for 100% accuracy or it is not. Making changes like these vendor changes while citing era accuracy while completely ignoring/making exceptions for the issues above makes no sense. There has to be a better way to qualify whether changes add positively to the community in the form of player interaction, overall era "feel", or community building before deciding on implementation. The hard line answer of "era accurate" seems riddled with hypocrisy. I am bringing this up for the purposes of discussion so please share your views on the matter but leave your insults and defensive responses in the trash talk forum please.

Events, Trophies, and Multi-Clienting are Policies, not mechanics, so your point is null from the start arguing that they are "not era accurate".

Sandro wrote:Events, Trophies, and Multi-Clienting are Policies, not mechanics, so your point is null from the start arguing that they are "not era accurate".

Unique rares and the trophy point system is just policies? That is definitely debatable. Second, house ownership is definitely a game mechanic. Era accuracy would be 1 house per account, not one per character.

Server events are a policy decision, not era accuracy as stated several times in the past here. The events that happened on production shards varied from one server to the next making it impossible to actually replicate unlike game mechanics that existed globally on each shard(excluding seige perilous). Also, the argument about "automative" events is invalid since events such as the Trinsic invasion was completely automative itself. The rewards in itself falls into the same category.

Please review some of the "unique rares" or "rewards" that were a part of the Catskills shard here.

UO Second Age is just another shard that is aiming to replicate the same game mechanics that existed in '99 with its own policy decisions no differently than each shard that existed back then.

We are not aiming to replicate one particular shard by social engineering each aspect of that shard. This task in fact would actually be physically impossible unless you have some blue prints for a time machine.

One house per account is out of our target date range.

We have been through this about a billion times, houses became one per account with UO:R, 6 months after our cut off date.

Shea wrote: Era accuracy would be 1 house per account, not one per character.

Nope,
1 per character.
I had 7 houses on 2 accounts in T2a

Faust wrote:Server events are a policy decision, not era accuracy as stated several times in the past here. The events that happened on production shards varied from one server to the next making it impossible to actually replicate unlike game mechanics that existed globally on each shard(excluding seige perilous). Also, the argument about "automative" events is invalid since events such as the Trinsic invasion was completely automative itself. The rewards in itself falls into the same category.

Please review some of the "unique rares" or "rewards" that were a part of the Catskills shard here.

UO Second Age is just another shard that is aiming to replicate the same game mechanics that existed in '99 with its own policy decisions no differently than each shard that existed back then.

We are not aiming to replicate one particular shard by social engineering each aspect of that shard. This task in fact would actually be physically impossible unless you have some blue prints for a time machine.

One house per account is out of our target date range.

Solid arguments for those issues. Can someone please reference the note saying that it changed from 1 house per character to per account in UO:R? And what is the common excuse for multi-clienting these days?

One House Per Account

The target cut off date for this shard is November '99.

Faust wrote:One House Per Account

The target cut off date for this shard is November '99.

Thanks. And what is the common excuse for multi-clienting these days?

Multi-clienting isn't something that can easily be fixed. The only way this can currently be done is by limiting one connection per ip address. However, this eliminates legitimate players on a LAN from being able to play. There is no way to tell if a player is on a LAN complicating the matter. I am going to stop at this point since getting into this process becomes more technical the further it gets into the discussion. Please feel free to search this topic if you feel the need to understand the limitations and reasons behind it. There are plenty of "multi-clienting" topics that should make this process fairly easy for you to find.

Ultimately, there is no solution under any circumstances to eliminate multi-clienting. There has been some proposals such as "pay to play subscriptions" for additional accounts for example. This solution is probably the only one that would actually reduce the majority of the multi-clienting but it's very impractical or unrealistic.

@topic

http://wiki.uosecondage.com/?title=1998_Patch_Notes

Mini-update on all shards Dec 31 1998 12:55AM
...
The "vendor replace" command was removed.
...

.

LifeForce wrote:@topic

http://wiki.uosecondage.com/?title=1998_Patch_Notes

Mini-update on all shards Dec 31 1998 12:55AM
...
The "vendor replace" command was removed.
...

.

Nice find!

LifeForce wrote:@topic

http://wiki.uosecondage.com/?title=1998_Patch_Notes

Mini-update on all shards Dec 31 1998 12:55AM
...
The "vendor replace" command was removed.
...

.

Aye, aware of this. Vendor Replace is something OSI put in to fix an issue with vendors, we put it in for the same reason. This allows people to remove the custom clothing from their vendors. We did not plan to leave this feature on indefinitely either.

While vendor replace is active, this should also be active:
The "vendor replace" command was tweaked so that when you replace the vendor, any gold you have not collected goes into your bank. If you are a murderer, it goes into your backpack.

12/23/98 patch notes