UO Second Age

for the record, whenever there use to be pk/pvp houses set up back in t2a uo:r..

when you got banned, it would be by character basis... not the entire account.

Also there were ban limits to which monsters and animals counted... There would be entire sittings of removing peoples names.. not accounts and monsters from a ban list in pvp houses.

Never really even gave that any thought, but now that I am -- to the best of my memory you are 100% correct.
I remember feeling bad for people who saved up for months to get a house, and only being able to afford one in the swamps that had a ban list that looked like:
a snake
a slime
Techyugev
a ogre
a snake
a slime
Techyugev
a ogre
a snake
a slime
Techyugev
a ogre
a snake
a slime
Techyugev
a ogre

and not realizing why they can't ban that PK until it's too late

You should repost this on the Suggestions & Era Accuracy board, I also remember this and I'm pretty sure this has come up in IRC in the past, dunno if a formal post was ever made on the Suggestion/Era Accurate board

May 25th, 1999 - http://wiki.uosecondage.com/?title=1999_Patch_Notes wrote:House bans of players will now be by account instead of by character. All current players you have in your ban lists will still be banned, but it will not automatically convert them to account bans--you will need to reban them for their whole account to be banned.

Our cut off date is November '99 making this feature accurate for the shard.

The link to the patch notes is a great place to start at when looking for an era accuracy issue.

House bans have a limit of 50 like many other data arrays such as item id, guild menu, etc...

The only thing that isn't era-accurate about the current system, is that monsters are automatically removed from your ban list after X amount of time. I don't recall this ever being the case, especially in T2A.

I never realized that happens in game but you are right if this is true bojang.

lfjdaslfjlJlLJKDJFLSAJFKLALSDFJAJKSLFSALFKJLJKjklasdfjklaskdf;jasfjkjerjo43890fdasjdflafssas

ASDJLFJKASFLASDFSJAF!

Anon, it's just a game.

mrbojangles wrote:The only thing that isn't era-accurate about the current system, is that monsters are automatically removed from your ban list after X amount of time. I don't recall this ever being the case, especially in T2A.

I agree that this is incorrect. I'm not sure how OSI handled this, they get deleted on UOSA, becuase the creature no longer exists :/

Serials are also reused, so it'll take some thought as to how to correct this one.

That actually makes a lot of sense now that you mentioned it Derrick.

This would be a bit of a problem after understanding the issue.

Perhaps, a part of the problem is the fact that an npc disappears after 20 hours which wasn't patched in until after our cutoff date. This wouldn't necessarily fix the problem of course but it would help it out some correcting an accuracy issue at the same time.

When the mob is deleted and the serial is no longer associated with that NPC, could there just be a place holder on the list thats not associated with anything but counts towards the 30?

The problem is that the serial is the unique ID that tells each mobile apart in the world. However, a serial can be re-used when it no longer exists if I am not mistaken. This means you could ban Player A but if Player A was deleted from the world the serial could be handed over to Player B which is a new playermobile that was created. This means Player B would be banned from the house even though he never was. This scenario is a bit unrealistic but very much possible. This is more likely to happen with an NPC though. Since this unique Serial ID erases any trace of the previous ban it simply vanishes from the array list that stores the banned mobiles. This makes it very difficult to replicate this but definitely not impossible since OSI obviously was able to do it.

When I realized that the mobs were removed from the list I felt like an ass for telling people friended to my house not to ban only remove thyself on them.. I've almost entirely broken my habit of not banning anything but players.

I hope Derrick never figures out a solution.

It's going to be tricky, but I've got some ideas. It's going to require a new list that stores just names.

This will also solve the problem of a players name change being reflected on ban lists.