Changes to lockdown system, all non - locked down items to decay in houses
Austin
wrote:
Well this really hurts the pks that are abusing housing. There are a
few guilds on SP that have a small house completely packed, and are
using lockdowns to circumvent the current penalties on not being able
to ban. Not saying that theyre bad for abusing it, as its only smart.
I for one like this plan, although it means ill need to get my ass in
gear and earn my tower :). And our guilds Large house, unless OSI
removes weight limits on secure chests that is.
Austin of Siege Perilous
When I've captured my adversary and he says, "Look, before you kill me,
will you at least tell me what this is all about?" I'll say, "No." and
shoot him. No, on second thought I'll shoot him then say "No."
Eric A. Hall
> Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
Will they increase the number of locked down items per house? I really
don't want my bed to decay but am out of lockable counts.
Austin
Dont worry about addons. They are part of the house once you place
them.
Damocles
Pulled this off the OWO site:
[begin quote]
Phase II - Lockdown
The second phase of our Clean Up Britannia event will change the way
items are stored in houses.
Lockdown will be optimized for interaction with the item decay system.
The specifics changes during this phase will be provided in the near
future.
The Lockdown phase will begin October 11, 1999
Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
Phase III - House Item Decay
The final phase in our Clean Up Britannia campaign will be the
implementation of item decay in houses.
Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
House item decay will begin on October 19, 1999.
Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
[end quote]
Bunk
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:43:29 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>wrote:
>
>
>Well this really hurts the pks that are abusing housing. There are a
>few guilds on SP that have a small house completely packed, and are
>using lockdowns to circumvent the current penalties on not being able
>to ban. Not saying that theyre bad for abusing it, as its only smart.
>I for one like this plan, although it means ill need to get my ass in
>gear and earn my tower :). And our guilds Large house, unless OSI
>removes weight limits on secure chests that is.
>
>
>
>
>
>When I've captured my adversary and he says, "Look, before you kill me,
>will you at least tell me what this is all about?" I'll say, "No." and
>shoot him. No, on second thought I'll shoot him then say "No."
So thats what your secret plan that you've been squirreling money for
is.... :)
Bunk [PAG] of SP
Brian DiNunno
>
> Pulled this off the OWO site:
>
> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
One thing annoying about this for carpenters, tinkers, bowyers, and
tailors : no ability to stock up and store large amounts of leather and
boards. These were one item count things, thus not requiring much
server space, but often way too heavy to place in chests. I guess it
will just mean lots more chests and "shelf" units (plus splitting
stacks) to store these things in. I know, for me at least, this will
increase the item count. For people who operated out of small houses,
large amounts of heavy one-item count stuff looks like its going out the
window.
Not sure if there is a workaround for this (other than further reducing
the weight of boards and leather, so I hope the server performance is
improved at lots and the nightly time warp decreased considerably.
--
Brian DiNunno
gt7...@prism.gatech.edu
http://r50h124.res.gatech.edu/main.html
Xigam
<bdin...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> One thing annoying about this for carpenters, tinkers, bowyers, and
>tailors : no ability to stock up and store large amounts of leather and
>boards. These were one item count things, thus not requiring much
>server space, but often way too heavy to place in chests. I guess it
>will just mean lots more chests and "shelf" units (plus splitting
>stacks) to store these things in. I know, for me at least, this will
>increase the item count. For people who operated out of small houses,
>large amounts of heavy one-item count stuff looks like its going out the
>window.
This is me.. I'm SCREWED.. actually, being and Alchemist, I get it
from both ends.. I can't store my heavy empty bottles in a 1 item
stack on the floor anymore and every GOD DAMN potion I make takes up
an item.. right now potions are OVER HALF of the items in my house
(yes I counted), and POTIONS ARE THE ONLY ITEMS I HAVE IN UNLOCKED
DOWN CONTAINERS.. the only items I have on my floor is ingots,
bottles, wood, and blank scrolls (which weight more than wood I
think). Maybe a few hides.. oh, and a bear rug..
WTF, WHY can't they make potions stack! THAT WOULD DECREASE SO MANY
ITEMS!
I guess I'll save up and get a 2-story all to my self.. that's a good
use of game space..
- Xigam
Xigam
Have you ever lifted a blank scroll? Ingots are lighter... I think
wood logs are too (now)..
- Xigam
>Its about time...... I just wish they would reduce the weight of
>feathers. 4000 feathers is 400 stones. My feather comforter
>in RL, has far more than 4000 feathers in it, and I can carry it over
>one arm. :P With 10 characters in the house and all Archers, we use
>a LOT of feathers.
>
>--
>IceLady
Ted Kaiser
> Up Britannia"? All it seems to do to me is "Clean Up Your House".
"Come on everybody let's clean up the house!"
-- Bear in the Big Blue House
I think I need to rip the song from my kids audio tape and post on the web.
Or at least, get it into a format that I can plug into UO. :O
Katherine
wrote:
>Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
>locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
Hmmm...this sounds as if items in a locked down (not secure) chest
will decay. That doesn't sound right...
Katherine, Journeyman Healer
Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
jgd1
Damocles wrote:
> Pulled this off the OWO site:
>
> [begin quote]
>
> Phase II - Lockdown
>
> The second phase of our Clean Up Britannia event will change the way
> items are stored in houses.
>
> Lockdown will be optimized for interaction with the item decay system.
> The specifics changes during this phase will be provided in the near
> future.
>
> The Lockdown phase will begin October 11, 1999
>
> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>
> Phase III - House Item Decay
>
> The final phase in our Clean Up Britannia campaign will be the
> implementation of item decay in houses.
>
> Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>
> House item decay will begin on October 19, 1999.
>
> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>
> [end quote]
The whole point of this as described is to save server back up time. Who
cares? Just tell me WHEN the server is going down and WHEN it's going back
up. So I don't play for hours for nothing. Then start the back up at the
SAME_TIME_EVERYDAY like about 5 am. Why is the game down on a Saturday
morning at 10 am? I don't really care if the server is down for two hours.
As it is now I allow a 6 hour window of not playing cause I hate it when
it doesn't save and I've wasted my time. Their not doing anything for us,
they're just making it easier on them (OSI). Lucky
Otara
Otara
Eric A. Hall
> So it will make house macroing harder as well - a nice side benefit.
The backpack item-count and weight limits do a pretty good job of that
already. You can only make so many of each item before you have to empty
it all out.
Unattended crafts macroing is a lot harder than unattended spar/heal.
Xigam
I agree; a message would be great.. just KNOWing if it was going to be
saved or not would be great.. I mean.. if you KNOW it's going to be
saved or not you can keep playing and not get pissed off... if you
KNOW it's not going to be saved, you could do all sorts of stuff you
wouldn't normallyl do....
Of course, the other option for speeding up the servers besides taking
items away from players is to buy a faster backup system.. but that
would require them to spend some of their 1 million a month profit on
upgrades..
- Xigam
Bunk
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:43:29 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>wrote:
>
>>locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>
>will decay. That doesn't sound right...
>
>Katherine, Journeyman Healer
>Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
Report I just heard from a reliable source says that they are
increasing the number of secure containers per house. Also, non
secure containers won't be lockdownable, so storing stuff in them
would be kinda pointless sense the container will decay. The main
effect I see this having is that you just wont be able to wall off
half your house and store endless amounts. Also, it will put some
limits on people trying to macro produce things in their house
overnight, as whatever they produce will decay.
Bunk [PAG] of SP
Bunk
>
>
>Damocles wrote:
>
>> Pulled this off the OWO site:
>>
>> [begin quote]
>>
>> Phase II - Lockdown
>>
>> The second phase of our Clean Up Britannia event will change the way
>> items are stored in houses.
>>
>> Lockdown will be optimized for interaction with the item decay system.
>> The specifics changes during this phase will be provided in the near
>> future.
>>
>> The Lockdown phase will begin October 11, 1999
>>
>> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>>
>> Phase III - House Item Decay
>>
>> The final phase in our Clean Up Britannia campaign will be the
>> implementation of item decay in houses.
>>
>> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>>
>>
>> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>>
>> [end quote]
>
>The whole point of this as described is to save server back up time. Who
>cares? Just tell me WHEN the server is going down and WHEN it's going back
>up. So I don't play for hours for nothing. Then start the back up at the
>SAME_TIME_EVERYDAY like about 5 am. Why is the game down on a Saturday
>morning at 10 am? I don't really care if the server is down for two hours.
>As it is now I allow a 6 hour window of not playing cause I hate it when
>it doesn't save and I've wasted my time. Their not doing anything for us,
>they're just making it easier on them (OSI). Lucky
>
>
have complained that multi hour backup times cut into the times they
can play.
Bunk. [PAG]
Xigam
>
>Unfortunately, not everyone is in the same timezone, and many people
>have complained that multi hour backup times cut into the times they
>can play.
>
Shoudln't they try making potions stack, just to see how many items
that would get rid of? In my house it would reduce 700 items into 3..
- Xigam
Rob
(and thereby, I assume, 'refresh') every item in the house to prevent
decay. Which is another issue, if you 'Handle' or 'Move' something,
that **SHOULD** refresh it no? or is everything just going to last
two weeks?... oh, wait, houses don't even last two weeks... er, anyone
have any info on the time frame of the decay?
Kheldar, Atlantic
Otara wrote:
>
> So it will make house macroing harder as well - a nice side benefit.
>
Erinn
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:51:01 GMT, ka...@mhn.org (Katherine) wrote:
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:43:29 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
>>>locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>>
>>Hmmm...this sounds as if items in a locked down (not secure) chest
>>will decay. That doesn't sound right...
>>
>>Katherine, Journeyman Healer
>>Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
>
>Report I just heard from a reliable source says that they are
>increasing the number of secure containers per house. Also, non
>secure containers won't be lockdownable, so storing stuff in them
>would be kinda pointless sense the container will decay. The main
>effect I see this having is that you just wont be able to wall off
>half your house and store endless amounts. Also, it will put some
>limits on people trying to macro produce things in their house
>overnight, as whatever they produce will decay.
>
>Bunk [PAG] of SP
Last report I saw (about 2 hours ago on COB Dev Board) was that they
may just go ahead and remove the weight limit from secure containers
and bank boxes.
--
Erinnyes Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Erinn, Grandmaster Alchemist, Moonglow, Atlantic
Antium, Master Tailor, Moonglow, Atlantic
Cricket, Master Miner, Delucia, Atlantic
Otara
>Lol! I see people setting up EZMacro on their mules just to 'HANDLE'
>(and thereby, I assume, 'refresh') every item in the house to prevent
>decay. Which is another issue, if you 'Handle' or 'Move' something,
>that **SHOULD** refresh it no? or is everything just going to last
>two weeks?... oh, wait, houses don't even last two weeks... er, anyone
>have any info on the time frame of the decay?
>
>Kheldar, Atlantic
And in my crystal ball, I see a few people getting banned for doing that, and
other people dropping the idea :).
I'll bet its less than a day.
Otara
Bunk
>
>> So it will make house macroing harder as well - a nice side benefit.
>
>already. You can only make so many of each item before you have to empty
>it all out.
>
>Unattended crafts macroing is a lot harder than unattended spar/heal.
You obviouslt haven't seen the macroes set up where the guy
mines/fishes x times, then drags whatever is in his pack out and
places it on the ground. The weenies allways seem to find a shortcut
around things that are only meant to improve the game for everyone.
Bunk [PAG]
Eric A. Hall
> >The backpack item-count and weight limits do a pretty good job of
> >that already. You can only make so many of each item before you have
> >to empty it all out.
> You obviouslt haven't seen the macroes set up where the guy
> mines/fishes x times, then drags whatever is in his pack out and
> places it on the ground.
That's something else entirely. If you have UOA and tell it to stack
stuff, it will put stackable things into a pile by your feet without you
having to do anything. I fish like this, with fish by my feet, so that
my pack never fills. I also mine like this, letting the big ore fall to
a pile by my feet so that I can break it down on the deck (can't break
it down in my pack, too much weight).
This doesn't work with craftables for two reasons. First of all, you're
using resources that are IN your pack, not in a wall or in the sea. Your
pack will only hold so much weight, so there's a fixed limit right there
on how much craft macroing you can do.
The other reason it doesn't work is that most of the craftable items by
far are not stackable. In fact, I only know of one that is (lockpicks).
Since they are not stackable, they cannot be automatically moved to a
pile at your feet. Nor can they be easily macro-dragged out of your pack
since they are unique items. Every dagger has to be found, clicked and
dragged separately. This puts a real bug on long-term craft macroing.
Besides all that, there are gain mechanisms that depend on success. Make
five of something, make five of something else. If you fail you don't
gain any skill. It just isn't possible to create a macro that says
"create this item five times, and don't count failed attempts" unless
you're using something like UO AutoPilot and have a lot of time on your
hands for writing complex scripts.
jgd1
Bunk wrote:
> On 30 Sep 1999 14:08:25 PDT, jgd1 <jg...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Damocles wrote:
> >
> >> Pulled this off the OWO site:
> >>
> >> [begin quote]
> >>
> >> Phase II - Lockdown
> >>
> >> The second phase of our Clean Up Britannia event will change the way
> >> items are stored in houses.
> >>
> >> Lockdown will be optimized for interaction with the item decay system.
> >> The specifics changes during this phase will be provided in the near
> >> future.
> >>
> >> The Lockdown phase will begin October 11, 1999
> >>
> >> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
> >>
> >> Phase III - House Item Decay
> >>
> >> The final phase in our Clean Up Britannia campaign will be the
> >> implementation of item decay in houses.
> >>
> >> Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> >> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
> >>
> >> House item decay will begin on October 19, 1999.
> >>
> >> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
> >>
> >> [end quote]
> >
> >The whole point of this as described is to save server back up time. Who
> >cares? Just tell me WHEN the server is going down and WHEN it's going back
> >up. So I don't play for hours for nothing. Then start the back up at the
> >SAME_TIME_EVERYDAY like about 5 am. Why is the game down on a Saturday
> >morning at 10 am? I don't really care if the server is down for two hours.
> >As it is now I allow a 6 hour window of not playing cause I hate it when
> >it doesn't save and I've wasted my time. Their not doing anything for us,
> >they're just making it easier on them (OSI). Lucky
> >
> >
> Unfortunately, not everyone is in the same timezone, and many people
> have complained that multi hour backup times cut into the times they
> can play.
>
> Bunk. [PAG]
OK I don't know how the back up works. Either there's someone at each server
(which I kinda doubt, but maybe) who needs to working the early morning shift.
Or there's someone at a main frame somewhere that controls all the servers. If
that's the case run it 24 hrs a day. Might need 4 people on a swing shift or
something. Actually the whole thing could be automatic. I don't care as long as
it gets fixed. The current method is absurd. I don't see any reason why each
server can't go down at an appropriate hour for that time zone. I don't care
when it even goes down if I knew WHEN that was. I'm just so tired of wasting so
much time. I wasted 3 hours of work last night that was in a normally safe time
to be included in the back up. If I ever do drop the game this will be the
straw that breaks the camels back. Or them screwing up housing, which ever
comes first. Lucky
Michael Williamson
>
> Last report I saw (about 2 hours ago on COB Dev Board) was that they
> may just go ahead and remove the weight limit from secure containers
> and bank boxes.
>
This is confirmed. The UO In Development page says those weight limits
will be removed, leaving 125 items as the only limit.
Eric A. Hall
> Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
I agree. The only thing it will do is force people to move reagents off
the floor into a secure.
Richard Cortese
news:19990930224449...@ng-bj1.aol.com...
> >Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
> >removed.
>
> Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
takes as much data storage area as 10,000 apples from a back up perspective.
IOW: They would prefer you store a stack 50,000 ingot in your bank box or
house rather then 10 empty backpacks.
>
>
> -Queso
> "All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
> -Alexandre Dumas
> http://members.aol.com/lordqueso/main.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
pric...@my-deja.com
> Shoudln't they try making potions stack, just to see how many items
> that would get rid of? In my house it would reduce 700 items into 3..
Ummm... quick question? Why do you have 700 potions lying around your
house? In another post you said you had an alchemist character. So do I.
And I can't imagine why you need that many potions. Why don't you just
sell them, or give them away, and keep just enough for your own personal
use. It's not like you can't make more if you run out... I agree that
stackable potions would be very cool, but I don't really see the problem
here.
And, as I understand it, reducing the number of items in the game isn't
just to shorten backup times, but more importantly to reduce lag.
Incredibly high item counts are one of the major causes of lag. And that
affects a whole lot of people.
Just something to think about.
-Marta
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Lord Queso
>removed.
Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
Alex Mars
resale (remember vendor weight limits?).
-Agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Reg LeCrisp
wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:43:29 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>wrote:
>
>Its about time...... I just wish they would reduce the weight of
>feathers. 4000 feathers is 400 stones. My feather comforter
>in RL, has far more than 4000 feathers in it, and I can carry it over
>one arm. :P With 10 characters in the house and all Archers, we use
>a LOT of feathers.
>
>--
>IceLady
They're doing something even better Icelady. They are getting rid of
the weight limitations in secured containers and your bank box. Us
craftsmen that just need to store large quantities of heavy raw
materials have it made in the shade. :)
Reg LeCrisp - Atlantic
Reg LeCrisp
wrote:
>>Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
>>removed.
>
>Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
>
>
>-Queso
>"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
> -Alexandre Dumas
Not really, a stack to 10,000 ingots is only one item. It takes up
the same amount of server storage as 1 ingot.
Reg LeCrisp - Atlantic
Tyler Novak
Lord Queso <lord...@aol.comREMOVEME> wrote:
>>Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
>>removed.
>
>Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
We've always had hording. I have this huge pile of ingots sitting in
my house right now. Last time I checked it was 5 digits.
Who cares? I spent all the time running around mining near my house to
get those ingots. They're sitting on the floor in my house. They
aren't loaded unless someone comes up the steps. Also as far as the server
cares it's one item and not 13,000 items. So there is no lag increase and
no database bloat. No more bloat than if I had 1 ingot.
The only change here is that now I can have thaty pile in a secure container
and open my house up as a public forge. Something I've been wanting to do for
a while.
--
Tyler Novak -----E-mail----- harl at upl dot cs dot wisc dot edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
44 Magnum: The ultimate point-&-click user interface.
Tyler Novak
Xigam <xi...@removethisjunk.yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 22:56:45 GMT, bu...@home.com (Bunk) wrote:
>Shoudln't they try making potions stack, just to see how many items
>that would get rid of? In my house it would reduce 700 items into 3..
Amen! Preach on Xigam. This act alone would eliminate so many items.
http://cob.xrgaming.net/devboard/messages/5027.html
Read it. Love it. Harass OSI until they put it in.
Just in case the article isn't there anymore I'll sum it up.
It'a a way to cut down item bloat of potions without having stackable
potions. The idea is that you have large potion containers for crafters.
There is the bottle, large bottle, pitcher, and barrel. When you create
potions you can just throw it into the barrel have have a Big o' Tub o'
Healing(tm). Then as your vendor or character runs short on potions you
can fill bottles from the barrel. The pitcher is just a smaller barrel.
The large bottle is just a 5 dose potion. You can fill smaller
containers from larger containers and pour smaller into larger.
OSI has said that stackable potions are a problem. Have we been givin
a reason why they are a problem?
--
Tyler Novak -----E-mail----- harl at upl dot cs dot wisc dot edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps your next clone will do better.
Brandy
time. We typically go through 100 Total refresh in 3 or 4 days, 100 gheals
in a week, 100 greater agilitys in 2 weeks and 100 deadly poisons in 2 or 3
weeks. So I get on with my alchemist about once a week and grind out enough
for the next week. Stacking potions or implementing Sie Mungs barrel idea
would make a HUGE difference in the number of items in my house.
Brandy (WE, LS)
<pric...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7t15ka$28m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
>
> > Shoudln't they try making potions stack, just to see how many items
> > that would get rid of? In my house it would reduce 700 items into 3..
>
>
rattran
shields, 240 candles, etc that people keep in boxes that raise backup
time. Each non stackable item is a seperate item to back up. A pile of
50000 ginseng (Hi SUN!) is 1 item. Same as 1 candle. If a small house
gets, say 2 secures in the new sceme, and 20 lockdowns, thats 270
items total. 125 per chest, 20 piles locked. Plus 125 in bank. 395
That's it. I went through my house last night, I don't consider myself
a hoarder, but I had well over that limit. When I figured out how many
chests I needed if I could lock down stackables I came up with one.
Everything else I will be able to lock into nice piles.
As for alchemy, stackable potions would be nice, but with locked down
bottles and regs, you can keep mixins available easily.
The biggest downside is my free shovel bag will no longer be
available. Sorry Chaos Shrine Miners on LS :(
-Detlef Sierck on SP and LS
On 30 Sep 1999 20:29:15 PDT, "Eric A. Hall" <eh...@ehsco.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
>
Lord Queso
>>Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
>>removed.
>
I just read my own post. God damnit, now I have to see how stupid I am.
-Queso
"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
-Alexandre Dumas
Lord Queso
>It'a a way to cut down item bloat of potions without having stackable
>potions. The idea is that you have large potion containers for crafters.
>There is the bottle, large bottle, pitcher, and barrel.
I love this idea.
Kerry Jane
>OSI has said that stackable potions are a problem. Have
>we been givin a reason why they are a problem?
Lesser & Greater versions of the same potion are the same color. Basically,
that's the big reason.
KJ.
Ted Kaiser
> a reason why they are a problem?
IMHO, it may be because the base item type of a potion is it's color. For
each color, the potion has a qualifier: lesser, normal, or greater. Perhaps
the reason they can't stack is because the program would have to ignore the
qualifier to stack based on color. I would think customers would rather
deal with several individual greater heals than a stack of lessers. Then
you will ask, "If that is the case, why don't they fix it?". Well, some of
the simplest appearing things are the most difficult things to fix,
especially in an established code base.
Quaestor
> Have you ever lifted a blank scroll? Ingots are lighter... I think
> wood logs are too (now)..
They are that way so you can do some heavy writing.
Quaestor
> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:43:29 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
> wrote:
>
> >Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> >locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>
> Hmmm...this sounds as if items in a locked down (not secure) chest
> will decay. That doesn't sound right...
But it is. Otherwise you still have many small houses with 6 - 12,000 items
in them.
Quaestor
> Damocles wrote:
> >
> > Pulled this off the OWO site:
> >
> > Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> > locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>
> One thing annoying about this for carpenters, tinkers, bowyers, and
> tailors : no ability to stock up and store large amounts of leather and
> boards.
It turns out this is not true. I guess my suggestion email arrived just in time to
find them publishing yesterday, that weight limits will be removed from bank boxes
and secure containers.
SO, one secure container == 125 piles of 60k objects.
If each weighs 1 stone, that is
125x60k = 7500k, or 7.5 million stones of stackable stuff.
I think most crafters are going to be able to struggle along with that.
But if they don't get with it and make potions stackable, the alchemists have had
it. They work so hard to keep those damned pk and thieves. Maybe they will do
something for legitimate characters?
Quaestor
> >Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
> >removed.
>
> Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
But it will Decrease item count, and that is the only problem. The shear
number of regs or arrows in a stack is not a factor in the game, as proved by
the megatons of this stuff that has been horded for 2 years already.
This will (all problems aside) be a good thing, improving server performance,
reducing backup times and errors, increasing play time, decreasing timewarps,
and allowing OS to consider expanding the world using some of the resources
liberated. I'd put a SWAG (Scientific Wild-Assed Guess) that backups will
shrink by 80% as the result of this. That's a good thing as long as it does
not cost us anything substantial. I can give up my collection of burnt out
and useless wands.
Alchemists may have to file a lawsuit to get potions stackable.
Quaestor
> The other reason it doesn't work is that most of the craftable items by
> far are not stackable. In fact, I only know of one that is (lockpicks).
> Since they are not stackable, they cannot be automatically moved to a
> pile at your feet. Nor can they be easily macro-dragged out of your pack
> since they are unique items.
Use the Item Type feature.
Quaestor
> Lol! I see people setting up EZMacro on their mules just to 'HANDLE'
> (and thereby, I assume, 'refresh') every item in the house to prevent
> decay. Which is another issue, if you 'Handle' or 'Move' something,
> that **SHOULD** refresh it no? or is everything just going to last
> two weeks?... oh, wait, houses don't even last two weeks... er, anyone
> have any info on the time frame of the decay?
I was going to mention this, and then realized it is just going to get a lot more
people banned for macroing.
Quaestor
> >
> >>Latest word: The weight limit on secure containers & vaults will be
> >>removed.
> >
> >Well, thats dumb. This will increase hoarding, not get rid of it.
>
> I just read my own post. God damnit, now I have to see how stupid I am.
This time I am Forced to agree with you.
<nudge><nudge>
:-)
Quaestor
> On 30 Sep 1999 14:08:25 PDT, jgd1 <jg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> I agree; a message would be great.. just KNOWing if it was going to be
> saved or not would be great.. I mean.. if you KNOW it's going to be
> saved or not you can keep playing and not get pissed off... if you
> KNOW it's not going to be saved, you could do all sorts of stuff you
> wouldn't normallyl do....
A couple weeks ago they announced that this was coming. Of course, it will not
be extremely useful, since a backup can still go bad.
Oh, another benefit of shorter, more reliable backups will be a reduction in
the time for dupers to work. All dupes depending on backup situations should
be hampered even more now, relieving us legal players of the inflation from
duping.
> Of course, the other option for speeding up the servers besides taking
> items away from players is to buy a faster backup system.. but that
> would require them to spend some of their 1 million a month profit on
> upgrades..
That still leaves the question, why should we pay to maintain equipment to
store millions of items that are never touched or used? Houses are full of
them, loot, crafted stuff, whatever, and most of each backup and restore is
concerned with this totally meaningless data.
There are really only two kinds of players that have anything to complain about
with this cleanup: alchemists and jerks. Alchemists because potions still do
not stack, and jerks because they will no longer be able to have those
lagmonster places carpeted with scraps of cloth, gold coins, keys, etc, beyond
the lockdown limit. I'll side with the alchemists, and laugh at the jerks.
Quaestor
> The whole point of this as described is to save server back up time. Who
> cares? Just tell me WHEN the server is going down and WHEN it's going back
> up. So I don't play for hours for nothing. Then start the back up at the
> SAME_TIME_EVERYDAY like about 5 am. Why is the game down on a Saturday
> morning at 10 am? I don't really care if the server is down for two hours.
> As it is now I allow a 6 hour window of not playing cause I hate it when
> it doesn't save and I've wasted my time. Their not doing anything for us,
> they're just making it easier on them (OSI). Lucky
Your answer is in your own question. By making it easier on them they are
making it easier on us. By reducing the time and size of backups, they reduce
the chance of a backup failing to get 100% perfect results, thus increasing
the chance that the last (short) backup before shutdown will work. We should
no longer have to quit playing 2 to 3 hours before shutdown. With shorter
backups, it will take less time to bring a server back online, so server
downtime will be shorter.
I prefer to play at times when fewer players are on, because of my lousey
connection. It helps quite a bit. Currently, LS should be down from 3am PST
to maybe 3:30. I have to give it from 1 am till 5 or 7, 6 hours a day, and
more on weekends because they do not have any idea what a schedule is. At the
very least, this cleanup should give me 3 to 5 more hours a day at the times I
prefer to play.
Also, this should reduce the lag from passing houses. That was supposed to
happen when data form stuff in houses was no longer passed untill you entered
the house (including steps), but it seems to me a lot of it is still there.
If they would also reduce the number of vendors in buildings that would help
too.
Quaestor
> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 22:56:45 GMT, bu...@home.com (Bunk) wrote:
>
> >
> >Unfortunately, not everyone is in the same timezone, and many people
> >have complained that multi hour backup times cut into the times they
> >can play.
> >
>
> Shoudln't they try making potions stack, just to see how many items
> that would get rid of? In my house it would reduce 700 items into 3..
Unfortunately, making potions stackable is not quite as simeple as it would be
if you or I had designed the game. Potions' strength is determined at the
time they are made, and this data makes each bottle unique. They would have
to remove that code, and recode so the strength is determined (just as
randomly) at the time of use, the way arrows are done. This would take some
work, and they just do not believe it is necessary. They apparently do not
play alchemists, or players who use potions, I guess.
There should be a total of 8x3=24 types of potions, 8 each of lesser, regular,
and extra strength. Like anything else of this sort, these should all stack
with their kind. There is absolutely no benefit to the game from having them
not stackable, and a great many problems.
Quaestor
> I don't see any reason why each server can't go down at an appropriate hour for
> that time zone.
In the past a great many dupes have depended on the dupers knowing when backups
were taking place. What matters to the players is not when the server goes down,
but when they do the backups, and (this is sad) they Will Not accept doing the
backups After shutting the server down, or give us a warning Before shutdown so we
can get to a safe place to log out.
With the massive item reduction that is coming, maybe this will change. With
backups taking a few minutes instead of half an hour, they should be able to give a
5 minute warning, then shut down access, THEN backup, service, restore, and get the
server up again in 20 minutes, instead of the 4-6 hours it currently takes.
jgd1
Quaestor wrote:
Do you really think we're gonna see a 20 minute back up because of this? I'm not trying
to be a wise guy. I'll just have to see it to believe it. All I know is I collect
rares, If I give up a bunch of my really cool stuff, and everything is as messed up as
it is now. Well ..well ..I'm gonna be upset. I'm sure no wants that ;) Lucky
Katherine
wrote:
Now where did I put that GM katana... *rummages in pack*
Katherine, Journeyman Healer
Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
Apollyon
I don't have a house yet so I'm unclear on this.
Can you stash 50 merchants in your house and use them for storage?
Ariel of Hokuto
Damocles wrote:
> Pulled this off the OWO site:
>
> [begin quote]
>
> Phase II - Lockdown
>
> The second phase of our Clean Up Britannia event will change the way
> items are stored in houses.
>
> Lockdown will be optimized for interaction with the item decay system.
> The specifics changes during this phase will be provided in the near
> future.
>
> The Lockdown phase will begin October 11, 1999
>
> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>
> Phase III - House Item Decay
>
> The final phase in our Clean Up Britannia campaign will be the
> implementation of item decay in houses.
>
> Once in effect, house item decay will affect all items that are not
> locked down, placed in a secure container, or were placed by a GM.
>
> House item decay will begin on October 19, 1999.
>
> Details on this phase will be posted in the upcoming days.
>
> [end quote]
Bunk
wrote:
>How does this effect contract merchants in houses?
>I don't have a house yet so I'm unclear on this.
>Can you stash 50 merchants in your house and use them for storage?
>
>Ariel of Hokuto
>
>
but if you do the house has to be public. Also, everything on a
vendor must be priced, and the vendors charge you a daily fee based on
the prices of what they are carrying. I suppose with some creative
use of lockdowns you could use some inaccessable vendors to store
things, but I know I'm not about to bother.
Bunk [PAG]
Xigam
wrote:
>But if they don't get with it and make potions stackable, the alchemists have had
>it. They work so hard to keep those damned pk and thieves. Maybe they will do
>something for legitimate characters?
*you notice Xigam struggling to not post something about how potions
don't stack*
- Xigam
Xigam
wrote:
When they first started, NOTHING stacked..
I realize it would take work for them to do it, but it's not like the
are coding on a stone tablet.. It's not IMPOSSIABLE just hard..
I once suggested that they change the alchemy routine to use parts of
the magic scroll routines, so that potions were treated as magic
scrolls and new magic 'spells' were created for the potions, so that
they functioned like the potions (not interuptable, use no mana, dont'
freeze ya).. But I really don't know how their code works.. I just
know that it is POSSIABLE for them to change it.. hard sure..
If they are not going to do this, maybe they could at least make GH's
heal 20-30 instead of 9-30..
- Xigam
Eric A. Hall
> scrolls and new magic 'spells' were created for the potions, so that
> they functioned like the potions (not interuptable, use no mana, dont'
> freeze ya).. But I really don't know how their code works.. I just
Scrolls use mana; they don't use regs. They also do in fact freeze you
in place. I don't know about the interruption part but I would assume
they can be interrupted.
> If they are not going to do this, maybe they could at least make GH's
> heal 20-30 instead of 9-30..
A gm mage can restore 50 hp with greater heal.
jx...@po.cwru.edu
>
> > scrolls and new magic 'spells' were created for the potions, so that
> > they functioned like the potions (not interuptable, use no mana, dont'
> > freeze ya).. But I really don't know how their code works.. I just
>
> Scrolls use mana; they don't use regs. They also do in fact freeze you
> in place. I don't know about the interruption part but I would assume
> they can be interrupted.
Yep, scrolls can be interrupted.
-Smedley, Ex-GM Scribe
Uwe Fischer
37F8FE61...@pacbell.net...
> How does this effect contract merchants in houses?
> I don't have a house yet so I'm unclear on this.
> Can you stash 50 merchants in your house and use them for storage?
Yes you can, but there are 2 problems to solve: The merchants get money
from the worth of wares stocked in them. So you should chose a price of 0
for a stocking merchant. And if you have merchants, you can´t lock your
house and everyone can buy the goods for your price of 0. So you have to
hide the merchants behind a line of locked down Tables or in a locked room
of a big house, so that noone can access them.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Bunk
supporting you.
Bunk