about the proposed changes
Milllo
more extreme changes? Everyone has gotten used to things and the game is
enjoyable now. Certainly there are problems, but there are also workarounds.
Instead of the changes mentioned on the osi site I would like to see more
character balance. It is still very easy for three gm mages to wipe out 3 gm
warriors. Reasons for this include:
easy to get 100/100/25 str/intel/dex
impossible to get 100/25/100 because healing skill uses intel
resist magic is too weak, some spells cant be resisted
parry is too hard to raise
magic users can kop out of a battle if it goes bad
Make it so that warriors stand a chance and dont need to use magic and you
will see less magic used. All the other problems (housing, pks, jerks etc)
can be worked around, but balance is a game issue.
Grey OSB, LS
Cmdr_Pooky
the face of a mage, the mage is screwed. I have been attacking a mage
before and they would cast crap on me left and right. In AD&D and GURPS if
a mage gets hit they lose that spell hence the mage being screwed. In UO,
it is a disadvantage to be a warrior and walk around outside of the guarded
areas. If a mage is at a distance and pops me that is fine, but when I am
consistently hitting them with my sword they should go down.
Just my rant.
--
Cmdr_Pooky
--
Recent evidence suggests that a barrel full of monkeys is not even half as
much fun as previously claimed, and is in fact rather horrifying.
Milllo <jste...@biochem.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:7svtdd$pas$1...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu...
Cobbler
to have people get rid of "excess items" to clean up the servers,but
to have thngs decay if not in a secure box or locked down is
ridiculous.This will not only affect the PK's who horde items in their
houses,but also the guilds who store stuff to outfit their members,i'e
reagents,food,bandages for the healers etc.Is OSI going to change
magery so that we no longer require reagents?That would be a nice
solution :) I normally store reagents for the lean times myself,sewing
kits,food items,some cloth for bandages for my healer,arrows etc.I
don't store much armor these days unless its very nice quality magic
stuff.same with weapons.I spring clean once every 6 weeks or so,just
to keep up with things.I started doing that about 6 months ago when I
was running out of space to store just the necessities.I was amazed at
how many items of defense I found :)Promptly sold it all at the
armorer and banked the gold *shrug* Thats just me though,does anyone
else do this regularly?Anyways,Sunsword,does this also mean that
anything in "locked down" chests will decay as well?If so,whats the
use of having locked down chests?This may also put player run vendors
out of business,potion vendors,scroll vendors,arrow vendors etc.Alot
of people,myself included,get on sometimes,just to work so to
speak,that way the next time they get on,they dont have to spend time
getting supplied up to go adventuring.Don't get me wrong,I can
definately see some good points with this,but the bad points can be
kind of drastic.Why not see what the trash barrel thing brings?Maybe
do it once every 6 months and see how it works out?Or better yet,make
it to where theres not so much junk on monsters :) In place of
junk,put gold or something we can use,like gold.That would help clean
up some.Just my 2 cents....
The Kind Cobbler
GM Tailor/Aspiring Mage
Catskills
Eric A. Hall
> This will not only affect the PK's who horde items in their houses,
> but also the guilds who store stuff to outfit their members
Yeah, I agree that the most noticable impact item decay is going to
bring about is the end of reagent-hoarding. There won't be players with
thousands of each reagent in their houses anymore.
I also agree that items in locked-down chests should not decay. I need
to keep a couple of hundred regs on hand for emergency purposes, and
that's all that will fit in a single chest. I don't think anybody needs
to keep thousands of them, but we should be able to use our 20 lockdowns
for non-decay chests.
Resident of Yew
There are just too many people who have lost control of their hoarding.
They can't even keep track of things they are hoarding. Besides you still
get to keep everything in a locked down or secure container. That is alot
of stuff!!
I am all for this idea. With the skill management changes and now this, the
future is looking bright for UO.
Cobbler wrote in message <37f48e03...@news.jacksonville.net>...
Ted Kaiser
> They can't even keep track of things they are hoarding. Besides you still
> get to keep everything in a locked down or secure container. That is alot
> of stuff!!
"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."
Items will decay if placed in a locked down container. For them to NOT
decay, the container has to be SECURE.
Since a simple house can only have one secure container, it is not a lot of
stuff.
Alex Mars
house with one secure container. This house is also an alchemy lab with
various supplies stored there.
-Agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Milllo
with an alchemist/scribe and a smith to support us. There is no way we can
run the guild with only 400 stones of storage. This change will cause a big
decrease in item number by causing many guilds to leave the game.
Alex Mars <alex...@aol.comspamnerf> wrote in message
news:19990930141253...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
Opium
> more extreme changes? Everyone has gotten used to things and the game is
> enjoyable now. Certainly there are problems, but there are also workarounds.
>
> Instead of the changes mentioned on the osi site I would like to see more
> character balance. It is still very easy for three gm mages to wipe out 3 gm
> warriors. Reasons for this include:
> easy to get 100/100/25 str/intel/dex
> impossible to get 100/25/100 because healing skill uses intel
> resist magic is too weak, some spells cant be resisted
> parry is too hard to raise
> magic users can kop out of a battle if it goes bad
My warrior HAS good healing and anatomy and 100/100/25...
from time to time he resists paralysation...
raising parry to 70 is easily done with some stacked polar bears...
every warrior can afford 30 skillpoints to recall from scrolls...
If the 3 warriors use the right tactics they have a good chance vs the
3 mages. Try casting while a dex monkey is beating you with a kryss
or katana.
> Make it so that warriors stand a chance and dont need to use magic and you
> will see less magic used. All the other problems (housing, pks, jerks etc)
> can be worked around, but balance is a game issue.
IMHO it IS well balanced now. My GM mage would have 50% chance vs my GM warrior.
Milllo
Opium <w...@cares.com> wrote in message > My warrior HAS good healing and
anatomy and 100/100/25...
> from time to time he resists paralysation...
> raising parry to 70 is easily done with some stacked polar bears...
> every warrior can afford 30 skillpoints to recall from scrolls...
>
> If the 3 warriors use the right tactics they have a good chance vs the
> 3 mages. Try casting while a dex monkey is beating you with a kryss
> or katana.
>
> > Make it so that warriors stand a chance and dont need to use magic and
you
> > will see less magic used. All the other problems (housing, pks, jerks
etc)
> > can be worked around, but balance is a game issue.
>
> IMHO it IS well balanced now. My GM mage would have 50% chance vs my GM
warrior.
and if your mage started to lose he could back off and recall away, so the
mage still wins.
Lord Queso
>mage still wins.
The vast majority of warriors out there can do the same thing if they want.
Any of them who don't have made the choice not to, the option is always there.
-Queso
"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.
-Alexandre Dumas
http://members.aol.com/lordqueso/main.html
Opium
> warrior.
> mage still wins.
30 magery is a must even for "pure" warriors, better 70. If anyone flees the
battle we have a tie.
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS/ATL, SBR/rtd)
>The disconns have been fixed and most of the worst bugs removed, so why make
>more extreme changes? Everyone has gotten used to things and the game is
>enjoyable now. Certainly there are problems, but there are also workarounds.
Cause the lag is horrible at times.
>Instead of the changes mentioned on the osi site I would like to see more
>character balance. It is still very easy for three gm mages to wipe out 3 gm
>warriors. Reasons for this include:
>easy to get 100/100/25 str/intel/dex
>impossible to get 100/25/100 because healing skill uses intel
So, why does every warrior have it?
>resist magic is too weak, some spells cant be resisted
No, your magic resist is too weak. Or are you worried about the
weaken and clumsy spells?
>parry is too hard to raise
Actually, it's relatively easy to raise these days, and you know it.
>magic users can kop out of a battle if it goes bad
Carry a scroll?
>Make it so that warriors stand a chance and dont need to use magic and you
>will see less magic used.
Warriors kick ass, that is if you know how to develop, equip, and
play one. Or why is it your mage died to my warrior?
>All the other problems (housing, pks, jerks etc)
>can be worked around, but balance is a game issue.
The balance is fine, 'cept archery which needs a tweak. Lag from too
many objects effects everyone.
Corwin
Milllo
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS/ATL, SBR/retarded) <cor...@wind.atlantic.com> wrote
in message news:37f3b8f6....@news.mnsinc.com...
> Grey,
>
<snip>
> Warriors kick ass, that is if you know how to develop, equip, and
> play one. Or why is it your mage died to my warrior?
>
Three reasons:
I suck
CB had already whittled me down so it was 2 on 1 not 1 on 1
I didnt kop out
If I had koped out there is nothing you could have done. I wanted to see
what would happen if I tried running and what happened is I died. The way
for a mage to fight a warrior now is to try to mana dump, if that fails then
kop. End result is mage wins either way.
Katherine
wrote:
>Items will decay if placed in a locked down container. For them to NOT
>decay, the container has to be SECURE.
Well, nuts. So now instead of keeping my bolts of cloth and stacks of
leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the floor and
throw away the boxes. And I'll probably get rid of all the chairs, so
that I'll have more lock-down spaces for things like leather and wool.
My nice tidy little house is suddenly going to look cluttered and
unlivable.
I wouldn't mind this decay thing a bit if I could keep the stuff in
the locked boxes, but losing everything in the lockdowns is going to
make it kind of difficult to keep my vendor stocked. It also means I
won't be giving away free cloth, food, and armor to newbies any more,
since I won't have extras on hand to give...
Katherine, Journeyman Healer
Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
Eric A. Hall
> Well, nuts. So now instead of keeping my bolts of cloth and stacks
> of leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the floor
> and throw away the boxes.
Lots of those kinds of things can't be locked down. I am almost certain
that leather, wood and ingots cannot be locked down.
Also, sadly, my "house plant" is going to be lost. It's a crystal ball
(which can be locked down), combined with a green pile of wool and a red
bale of cotton (neither of which can be locked down).
I don't think they've given this adequate thought. Let's hope they belay
this and the "super rares" trash barrel for a while.
Opium
> leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the floor and
> throw away the boxes.
It's even worse. Since when is it possible to lock down stacks of items?
Xigam
Are you sure it's stuff inside locked down containers? The way I
understand it is anything NOT in a locked down container or NOT locked
down decays.. (which still sucks for alchemists)
- Xigam
Xigam
<jste...@biochem.purdue.edu> wrote:
>Three reasons:
>I suck
humm..
>If I had koped out there is nothing you could have done. I wanted to see
>what would happen if I tried running and what happened is I died. The way
>for a mage to fight a warrior now is to try to mana dump, if that fails then
>kop. End result is mage wins either way.
KOP is not winning..
The my warrior fights mages is to try and hack 'em up, if that fails,
then he KOP's..
The end result is I die (and lose), he dies (I win), or one of us
KOP's (the person who KOP, I consider the loser unless outnumbered).
Of course, one time we both died at the same time (two mages, two
exlposions, both died while cast heal.. lol.. that was funny.. we
both laughed, and then some guy named Pubic Hair looted the two of us.
- Xigam
Xigam
>I don't think they've given this adequate thought. Let's hope they belay
>this and the "super rares" trash barrel for a while.
They haven't.. I am considering orgianizing an online protest.. what
does everyone think? Get about 100 people to meet on Lake Superiour 1
or 2 times a week a the Brit bank and form a protest line of spammers?
Anyone good at at this type of thing feel free to take the idea and
run with it.. I am seriously considering putting a major effort into
it.. because (and we know little because we are just customers, lol)
of the way this sounds it's going to be, and because of OSi's past
track record.. if it goes it the way it seems to be it might force me
to quit as well.. and I really don't want to quit.
- Xigam
Xigam
>If the 3 warriors use the right tactics they have a good chance vs the
>3 mages. Try casting while a dex monkey is beating you with a kryss
>or katana.
Try killing a warrior while his buddy slaps 6 second 50 pts heals
bandages on him..
- Xigam
Bunk
Ok, heres another rumor....
You will be able to lockdown stacks of stackables, and they will only
be usable by friends of the house.
Bunk [PAG] of SP
Bunk
ROFL Thats not fair man. I don't normal luagh at moronic names, but
the double death already had me snickering, and the name "Pubic Hair"
was just to much. I must be in a good mood, that name would normally
just annoy me.
Bunk [PAG]
Katherine
>I don't think they've given this adequate thought. Let's hope they belay
>this and the "super rares" trash barrel for a while.
I don't think so either. I imagine they're thinking of those houses I
occasionally see that are filled floor to ceiling with wooden chests.
If I could keep the stuff that's in my locked down boxes, I'd have
more than ample space for everything I could possibly want to keep.
And boxes are currently only about half of my locked-down items.
And what about critters in houses? I see houses with a veritable
menagerie of wild animals in there. If they're so concerned about
clutter in houses, perhaps they should have animals automatically
disappear out of them within half an hour of going wild. (At least
that would get this damn rabbit out of my house...he keeps hiding
under the chair so I can't catch him...)
Katherine
>> Well, nuts. So now instead of keeping my bolts of cloth and stacks of
>> leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the floor and
>> throw away the boxes.
>
>It's even worse. Since when is it possible to lock down stacks of items?
Oh, nuts again. I've never had to try it, didn't know it wasn't
possible. How am I going to save up leather for my tailor to practice
on?
Bunk
>Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
Well, considering they are adding more secure containers, and
allowing stackables to be locked down, i think this will all work.
You may only have half of you lockdowns as chests, but if they let
stuff in the chests on decay, all the hoarders will use all of their
lockdowns for chests, and the hoarding problem wont change.
As far as animals go, it is the policy to not leave untamed animals in
houses. If you see a dozen sheep in a house not tame, a gm will
remove some or all of them. Ive heard reports of a large house that
had in the range of 50 untame sheep. The gm apparently removed all
but 2 of the sheep, and all but 2 of the x-thousand wool inside the
house.
I personally would like to see a limited capacity Stable addon for
houses..
Bunk [PAG]
Uwe Fischer
lock down stackable items like regs, cloth, leather, bolts,
boards or ingots. If they keep it this way, it will be impossible
to run a decent craftsman, because you canę store the materials.
This will be the end of player run economy. PvP and monster
bashing just for fun is the only thing what would make sense in
UO. UO will loose itę depth. The first decaying item in my house
will be the forelast thing, that I will ever see from OSI. The
last thing will be the cartons of the ultima-series if I throw
them into the trashcan. And if UO2 is out, I will remember this
view of customer service and hope for Middle Earth.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Katherine <ka...@mhn.org> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
37f9d11b...@news.rdu.bellsouth.net...
> Well, nuts. So now instead of keeping my bolts of cloth and
stacks of
> leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the
floor and
> throw away the boxes. And I'll probably get rid of all the
chairs, so
> that I'll have more lock-down spaces for things like leather
and wool.
> My nice tidy little house is suddenly going to look cluttered
and
> unlivable.
>
> I wouldn't mind this decay thing a bit if I could keep the
stuff in
> the locked boxes, but losing everything in the lockdowns is
going to
> make it kind of difficult to keep my vendor stocked. It also
means I
> won't be giving away free cloth, food, and armor to newbies any
more,
> since I won't have extras on hand to give...
>
Uwe Fischer
immediately use it up. This will be all the craftsmens and
vendors dead.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Katherine <ka...@mhn.org> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
37fe02fd...@news.rdu.bellsouth.net...
> Oh, nuts again. I've never had to try it, didn't know it
wasn't
> possible. How am I going to save up leather for my tailor to
practice
> on?
>
Uwe Fischer
secure from decaying. Not locked down containers.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Xigam <xi...@removethisjunk.yahoo.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
37f9e63c...@news3.ibm.net...
Eric A. Hall
> Don't you people ever read anything?
> They are changing the coding. You WILL be able to
> lock down ALL stackable items.
Well, this was a recent modification to the strategy. I'd like to think
that this is a positive effect of our commentary on the problems. Now we
just need to work on some of the other aspects.
BTW, how many more secure containers are we going to get? If it's just
one more container, then that won't hardly be enough. I haven't heard
enough of the new details to say yea/nay as of yet.
> It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem with
> this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
Anybody that makes non-stackables will suffer from this. Tailors,
tinkers, carpenters and smiths all have to bang out hundreds of items
for skill advancement, and none of those skills offer stackable items
except for lockpicks (this is a first! tinker actually has an
advantage).
Richard Cortese
news:7t0bn8$6nl$1...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu...
> my guild is screwed also. We have 10 people operating out of a small house
> with an alchemist/scribe and a smith to support us. There is no way we can
> run the guild with only 400 stones of storage. This change will cause a
big
> decrease in item number by causing many guilds to leave the game.
recall off the master key while it is in the secure container.
There are some problems with refreshing the boat since you have to have a
key on you to do it. Makes it slightly dangerous since you can get PKd and
have the key stolen. What I do is just keep a copy key in the hold of the
boat. When I want to refresh the boat, I just pick up the key, rattle the
gangplank, then drop the key back in the hold.
You do have to trust everyone that is friended to the house, since now they
can not only loot the secure chest, they can steal the boat and change the
locks, but it is a good system.
Richard Cortese
UT had an interesting perspective on it. Since his goal as a PK was to kill,
he regarded someone being able to KOP as a loss for him. To each his own.
Richard Cortese
news:37F4B454...@ehsco.com...
>
> > Don't you people ever read anything?
> > They are changing the coding. You WILL be able to
> > lock down ALL stackable items.
>
> Well, this was a recent modification to the strategy. I'd like to think
> that this is a positive effect of our commentary on the problems. Now we
> just need to work on some of the other aspects.
>
> BTW, how many more secure containers are we going to get? If it's just
> one more container, then that won't hardly be enough. I haven't heard
> enough of the new details to say yea/nay as of yet.
you need?
I mean you put piles of 50,000 ingots, 15,000 ginseng, 6,000 bottles, 60,000
pieces of cloth, in your current secure container, you still have room for
121 *other* things.
Sounds pretty attractive to me.
>
> > It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem with
> > this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
>
> Anybody that makes non-stackables will suffer from this. Tailors,
> tinkers, carpenters and smiths all have to bang out hundreds of items
> for skill advancement, and none of those skills offer stackable items
> except for lockpicks (this is a first! tinker actually has an
> advantage).
Until they give the rate of things deteriorating, we don't know. If for
example they last 3 days on the floor of a house, it will have no impact for
a real craft person.
Eric A. Hall
> > BTW, how many more secure containers are we going to get? If it's
> > just one more container, then that won't hardly be enough. I
> > haven't heard enough of the new details to say yea/nay as of yet.
> Given the weight limit is gone, just exactly how many secure
> containers will you need?
I have 10 chests in my house right now, and one secure set of bones.
Five of the chests are used between seven different players, each of
whom store things like runes, gold, backup clothes, armor and weapons,
and lots of other personal items. There are well over 200 items in those
five chests, very little of which is stackable.
My main player has a thing for body parts, for example, and wants to
have a "dungeon room" in his tower if he ever gets the money up for it.
So over the months he has collected stuff like bones, organs and severed
limbs from shipwrecks. He has close to 100 items in his "dungeon bag"
alone, so there's no way he can share a chest with six other characters
who would also have to dump everything into a single secure container.
One extra container just wouldn't cut it.
This raises another interesting question, actually. If I pull up a
sunken treasure chest, will it decay before I have a chance to sort out
the contents and sell off the items? Am I going to lose the paintings
and pillows? THAT WOULD SUCK!
The other five chests hold regs, food, potions, recall scrolls and other
stuff that is shared between the residents. Most of those items are
stackable so they will probably all fit into one super container.
Jadesfyre
> tinkers, carpenters and smiths all have to bang out hundreds of items
> for skill advancement, and none of those skills offer stackable items
> except for lockpicks (this is a first! tinker actually has an
> advantage).
I am a tailor who has been making many items for the sake of skill
advancement. I have a house and some gold in my bank box. If i'm too lazy
to run into town to make some gold off of the items I make, I will just put
the items into the corpses of the dead hidebearers.
I share a home and have a pile of gold in the bank. What the heck would I
need with tons of stuff and a gazillion pieces of gold?
Oh, and my carpenter destroys what she makes with an axe when she's out for
skill advancement.
I think we'll all have plenty of storage. My only concern would be for
people like my friend, who has a big library of books. I don't want to see
the day where he has to toss his unique collection.
Jadesfyre
Who thinks, less is more....
Eric A. Hall
> What the heck would I need with tons of stuff and a gazillion pieces
> of gold?
My GM Merchant (I love saying that) craftsman wants a large brick so he
can open a store with all of the items. They are really expensive.
Everything he makes goes into the bank.
Katherine
<fisch...@cityweb.de> wrote:
>You cannot save anything up. You have to buy/hunt/loot it and
>immediately use it up. This will be all the craftsmens and
>vendors dead.
But I can't immediately use it up. My tailor has no combat skills;
she's been focussed on developing tailoring (takes so long to develop
one skill I didn't want to waste time doing something else with her).
I go out and hunt up a hundred hides or so, drop them in a crate, and
then log on as her to work on them. If I'm unfortunate enough to try
this during peak hours, it can sometimes be five or ten minutes before
I can get back in.
But fortunately it looks like they're making stackables so that you
can lock them down, so at least THIS isn't a problem...although there
are certainly others...
Katherine
>Well, considering they are adding more secure containers, and
>allowing stackables to be locked down, i think this will all work.
>You may only have half of you lockdowns as chests, but if they let
>stuff in the chests on decay, all the hoarders will use all of their
>lockdowns for chests, and the hoarding problem wont change.
Yeah, I saw that on Stratics this morning--that will work; if I can
make three or four chests secure instead of just one that will also
let me store everything I need to keep for any length of time.
However, I also noted that they are also instituting a rule of one
house per account. I think that's going to make it a lot harder for
newer players like myself to get houses--the only reason I have one at
all is that a guild member with two of them sold it to me. If I'm not
mistaken that's how several others in the guild got houses as well;
our more experienced players acquire them and sell them for us.
It's also going to make the rumored move into the non-PvP area a bit
tricky. Regardless of whether I want to go there or not, I'm surely
not about to sell my house if I'm unable to have another one ready to
move into.
Could also be a problem for small guilds, where everyone already owns
a house and no one is willing to sacrifice his house to become "the
guild house."
>As far as animals go, it is the policy to not leave untamed animals in
>houses. If you see a dozen sheep in a house not tame, a gm will
>remove some or all of them. Ive heard reports of a large house that
>had in the range of 50 untame sheep. The gm apparently removed all
>but 2 of the sheep, and all but 2 of the x-thousand wool inside the
>house.
Hehe...I guess my one little wild rabbit isn't a serious problem. I
just wish he'd get out from under the chair so I could kick his fuzzy
little butt outside. Then again considering how many monsters are
generally lurking around, he probably doesn't WANT his fuzzy little
butt kicked outside.
>I personally would like to see a limited capacity Stable addon for
>houses..
I would like to see that as well. Just have room for two or three
pets per account, should be ample I think.
Corwin of Amber (WE/LS/ATL, SBR/rtd)
>> play one. Or why is it your mage died to my warrior?
><snip>
>Three reasons:
>I suck
'nuff said.
>CB had already whittled me down so it was 2 on 1 not 1 on 1
>I didnt kop out
You'd run 10 screens away from CB, he wasn't a factor when you died.
>If I had koped out there is nothing you could have done.
Interrupting your spell casting is slightly more than nothing.
>I wanted to see
>what would happen if I tried running and what happened is I died.
Less running, more healing perhaps.
>The way
>for a mage to fight a warrior now is to try to mana dump, if that fails then
>kop.
Only if the mage has no other way to fight.
>End result is mage wins either way.
Interesting definition of win.
jgd1
IceLady wrote:
>
> Don't you people ever read anything?
> They are changing the coding. You WILL be able to
> lock down ALL stackable items. Wood, hides, bottles, regents,
> feathers, etc.. They are also increasing the number of SECURE
> chest, and taking away the weight limit on them and your bank
> box.
There will be a limit to lock downs and secure chests. 10 secure chests?
Great! 1 extra? Sucks... Don't you people ever think about anything you
read?
>
>
> If that's not enough room for all your junk then I understand
> why there is so much LAG........
Or it's because OSI won't spend the money on better machines ... or the
biggest problem is the connection route. Funny when I get on at 2 am
there's no lag to be found. But all the same stuff is everywhere.
>
>
> It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem with
> this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
And anyone that can see past their nose.
>
>
> --
> IceLady
> --
> Before you criticise someone, walk a mile in his shoes. Then,
> when you do criticise that person, you'll be a mile away and
> have his shoes.
Lucky
Quaestor
> Make it so that warriors stand a chance and dont need to use magic and you
> will see less magic used. All the other problems (housing, pks, jerks etc)
> can be worked around, but balance is a game issue.
It seems to me that the indispensable magic spells for a warrior are GHeal,
Cure, Nightsight, Recall, Magic Trap, Magic Lock, Unlock, and Spell Reflection.
Of these, some can be provided by substitution, but some require magery to use
scrolls. Magic Lock and Unlock (for thief-proofing) can be avoided IF you use
UOE.
Still, the game would be better for those who wish to play a non-magery
character if they would provide ways to thief-proof (like remove pvp stealing
from the game), avoid or otherwise deal with paralyze, make spell reflect items
work on a per-use basis, and allow a (costly) device for Recall (a wand or
something).
Quaestor
> I agree with the magery problem. If a warrior in any other game gets into
> the face of a mage, the mage is screwed. I have been attacking a mage
> before and they would cast crap on me left and right. In AD&D and GURPS if
> a mage gets hit they lose that spell hence the mage being screwed. In UO,
> it is a disadvantage to be a warrior and walk around outside of the guarded
> areas. If a mage is at a distance and pops me that is fine, but when I am
> consistently hitting them with my sword they should go down.
Disruption, and avoidance of discruption, are too simplistic. The only thing
that makes some spells easier to disrupt is higher level which makes them take
longer to cast. If Teleport and defensive stuff (GHeal) were hard to disrupt,
but attack spells were easy, things would be more balanced.
As is, against a GM tac GM wrestler, you better have 100 str, 100 dex, 100
swords, 100 tac, and a DP katana, or he is going to wreck your day.
Quaestor
> I think these new changes are going too far.I can understand wanting
> to have people get rid of "excess items" to clean up the servers,but
> to have thngs decay if not in a secure box or locked down is
> ridiculous.This will not only affect the PK's who horde items in their
> houses,but also the guilds who store stuff to outfit their members,
Read the part where bank boxes and secure containers will have no weight
limits. You will be able to store millions of bandages in your bank box.
That is better than a guild house horde.
Quaestor
> my guild is screwed also. We have 10 people operating out of a small house
> with an alchemist/scribe and a smith to support us. There is no way we can
> run the guild with only 400 stones of storage. This change will cause a big
> decrease in item number by causing many guilds to leave the game.
The alchemists are screwed (let's get a lawsuit filed, to make them take
stacking potions seriously?). The rest should be ok if they can deal with
sharing a single stack of each thing. And there is a rumor that the number of
secure containers may be increased.
Quaestor
> Well, nuts. So now instead of keeping my bolts of cloth and stacks of
> leather in a nice tidy box, I have to lock them down on the floor and
> throw away the boxes.
When lockdowns first came in you could lock down stackables, but the stacks
could still be sued by anyone. Then they changed it, so stackables cannot be
locked down.
BUT with weight limits removed, you will be able to store a million bolts in
your box (your secure container - I didn't mean to make a sexist comment
<nudge>).
Quaestor
> Also, sadly, my "house plant" is going to be lost. It's a crystal ball
> (which can be locked down), combined with a green pile of wool and a red
> bale of cotton (neither of which can be locked down).
Depending on the gm on at the time, you might getthem to lock such things
down. It would not hurt the game any, so there's no reason why not.
> I don't think they've given this adequate thought. Let's hope they belay
> this and the "super rares" trash barrel for a while.
Actually I'm hoping they kick it off a bit earlier. Not the decay date, but
the barrel => tickets date.
And I sincerely hope they reduce those ticket prices. I already feel like a
jerk, having to try and horde enough junk in the next few weeks to get a
500,000 gp item.
Quaestor
> Ok, heres another rumor....
>
> You will be able to lockdown stacks of stackables, and they will only
> be usable by friends of the house.
Turns out the damned fool (me) who started that rumor was not up on the
changes. you cannot lock down stacks anymore. However, you will be able to
lock down monsters, water tiles, and the words of harrassers. Soon, house
co-owners will be able to Remove Thyself, Ban, or Lock Down unwanted guests.
<nudge>
Quaestor
> It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem with
> this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
AH! Here's the workaround for alchies:
Load up your bank box (soon able to hold tons of regs and bottles). Go to
Vesper, the city of love and kindness *choke* *choke*. North of the bank is
an alchy shop. Find one of the alchemists wandering a little too close to the
bank and trap him with four crates each containing 400 stones of stuff, and
guarded by your dragon (can we still do that?). Then macro making and selling
potions, while conversing with all the wonderful folks you find there.
*ahem*
HEY OS! MAKE POTIONS STACKBLE!
Quaestor
> Given the weight limit is gone, just exactly how many secure containers will
> you need?
>
> I mean you put piles of 50,000 ingots, 15,000 ginseng, 6,000 bottles, 60,000
> pieces of cloth, in your current secure container, you still have room for
> 121 *other* things.
>
> Sounds pretty attractive to me.
121 is nothing to an alchy or tailor. Nothing to a smith. Of course, since no
one macroes anymore *choke* *choke* they should just go sell or put on vendor.
Right.
Quaestor
> I have 10 chests in my house right now, and one secure set of bones.
> Five of the chests are used between seven different players, each of
> whom store things like runes,
I have once again forwarded my idea for the Runebook to Sunsword. This,
eliminating runes from the game, over time will reduce the item count by
(SWAG) a million items per shard, and make life easier for everyone.
> This raises another interesting question, actually. If I pull up a
> sunken treasure chest, will it decay before I have a chance to sort out
> the contents and sell off the items? Am I going to lose the paintings
> and pillows? THAT WOULD SUCK!
Make a macro to keep opening the chest, and don't get caught using it?
Rob
Does that mean you can Lock Down a house thief and just use them for
target practice too? Cool
Kheldar, Atlantic
Eric A. Hall
> > Also, sadly, my "house plant" is going to be lost. It's a crystal
> > ball (which can be locked down), combined with a green pile of wool
> > and a red bale of cotton (neither of which can be locked down).
>
> Depending on the gm on at the time, you might getthem to lock such
> things down.
Actually, now that stackable items will be lockable-downable (?), the
wool and cotton should both be fixable.
Richard Cortese
news:37F55F17...@Skara.Brae...
since I don't keep much in my houses, 'sides if anyone comes in, I may need
the room for killing them.
But it seems like if you locked down a few things and item decay isn't too
fast, you could *cough* tailor all night and just collect the items off the
floor or something the next day.
I think it is all going to come down to just how fast they have items in a
house decay. I don't even think they know yet.
I really think the decay is not going to be that fast, can you imagine
bumping a pile of ore 20 screens to your forge, only to have it decay while
you were perusing the smelting menu?
Cobbler
wrote:
That was posted after I made the original post :)
The Kind Cobbler
GM Tailor/Aspiring Mage
Catskills
Quaestor
> LoL... Sounds good Quaestor...
> Does that mean you can Lock Down a house thief and just use them for
> target practice too? Cool
To heck with that, lock them down and practice stealing from them! THEN kill
them!
I can see a crowd of counselors and gm's standing around while he bitches and you
explain, and refuse to unsecure him!
Quaestor
> I really think the decay is not going to be that fast, can you imagine
> bumping a pile of ore 20 screens to your forge, only to have it decay while
> you were perusing the smelting menu?
Worse things have happened. Remember not long ago when you would say Vendor
train Forensics and if you didn't give him the money is less than a second he
just treated it as a gift?
(Forensics?)
jgd1
OrionCA wrote:
> On 01 Oct 1999 16:56:56 PDT, jgd1 <jg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >Or it's because OSI won't spend the money on better machines ... or the
> >biggest problem is the connection route. Funny when I get on at 2 am
> >there's no lag to be found. But all the same stuff is everywhere.
> >
>
> Should follow the discussions (rants, flames, tantrums, etc.) about
> this over on Crossroads of Britannia (http://cob.xrgaming.net). One
> of the Dev Team is fielding questions/ducking bricks and point this
> out: Just since May item count on all servers has doubled. Number of
> active players has only gone up a little.
>
> You can't keep up with that, I don't care if you run Crays in
> parallel. Item count has got to be reined in.
>
> >>
> >>
> >> It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem with
> >> this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
> >
> >And anyone that can see past their nose.
>
> Would you like a little cheese with that whine?
> --
> Overheard at Starbucks one day:
> "I leave at 3PM! Only a lunatic would get
> on the road during rush hour in LA!"
Sure IceLady does bring out the best in me :) Seems like when there's a
valid point the name calling starts. I'll take your argument as meaningless
when you cut and paste to one sentence taken out of context to make a "I got
ya insult". I'm sure you impressed everyone LOL Would you like a cunning
spell for you dumb a$$? ;) Lucky
Richard Cortese
news:rnH1N3wBfI0=a8ke3jjgKvn=Am...@4ax.com...
> On 01 Oct 1999 16:56:56 PDT, jgd1 <jg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >Or it's because OSI won't spend the money on better machines ... or the
> >biggest problem is the connection route. Funny when I get on at 2 am
> >there's no lag to be found. But all the same stuff is everywhere.
> >
>
> Should follow the discussions (rants, flames, tantrums, etc.) about
> this over on Crossroads of Britannia (http://cob.xrgaming.net). One
> of the Dev Team is fielding questions/ducking bricks and point this
> out: Just since May item count on all servers has doubled. Number of
> active players has only gone up a little.
Seems like more items then ever are stackable now. There are a lot of
illegally placed houses since May, but it would seem like there hasn't been
enough to double item count.
There are fewer trade people in the game then ever before, fewer vendors
too. I am trying to think of items that are non stackable that wouldn't be
sold ASAP; I come up dry.
I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold pieces or
other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
intentionally.
gil
> I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold pieces or
> other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
> intentionally.
Are you saying that perhaps the doubling of item count this summer may
be partly or largely due to the recent duping?
rend
gil'lomion LS
Quaestor
> Seems like more items then ever are stackable now.
Lockpicks? Anything else? What else has been made stackable in the last year?
> There are a lot of illegally placed houses since May, but it would seem like
> there hasn't been enough to double item count.
Suppose they increase it by 50%, and the rest comes from lagmonster-owners?
> I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold pieces or
> other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
> intentionally.
A lot of it is.
Zaphkiel
>Richard Cortese wrote:
>
>> I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold pieces
>or
>> other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
>> intentionally.
>
>Are you saying that perhaps the doubling of item count this summer may
>be partly or largely due to the recent duping?
>
Possibly. I'm more inclined to think that SOS bottles and treasure maps
had something to do with it.
--Zaphkiel
Katherine
wrote:
>Lockpicks? Anything else? What else has been made stackable in the last year?
Sewing kits could be. My tailor buys them by the gross.
Uncle Milty
>
>OrionCA <ori...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:rnH1N3wBfI0=a8ke3jjgKvn=Am...@4ax.com...
>> On 01 Oct 1999 16:56:56 PDT, jgd1 <jg...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Or it's because OSI won't spend the money on better machines ... or the
>> >biggest problem is the connection route. Funny when I get on at 2 am
>> >there's no lag to be found. But all the same stuff is everywhere.
>> >
>>
>> Should follow the discussions (rants, flames, tantrums, etc.) about
>> this over on Crossroads of Britannia (http://cob.xrgaming.net). One
>> of the Dev Team is fielding questions/ducking bricks and point this
>> out: Just since May item count on all servers has doubled. Number of
>> active players has only gone up a little.
>Has anyone come up with a reason why or the nature of the items?
>
>illegally placed houses since May, but it would seem like there hasn't been
>enough to double item count.
>
>too. I am trying to think of items that are non stackable that wouldn't be
>sold ASAP; I come up dry.
>
>other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
>intentionally.
>
>
Sandals, shoes, boots, thigh boots, magical fish (what, 4 different kinds?).
For every 12 MIB's a GM fisherman pulls in, there's ~125 sets of footwear and
~125 sets of small fish. Not to mention ~3000 fish to cut up into 12000 fish
steaks. (Numbers based on what's laying on the deck of my ship).
Then there's the loot from the chests. Shells, bone piles, skulls, other
worthless stuff. Tons of leather gloves. GM made weapons and armor are better
than most of the junk found in the chests. Nobody ID's the stuff to find out
what it is, and they won't throw it away, on the outside chance that there's
vanq weapons.
I sell the footwear, and the magical fish. If it's not "Might or better" or
"Hardening or better", the weapons and armor go, too. That still leaves tons
of stuff that the NPC's won't buy, and I won't throw away because it might have
some value.
Do away with the worthless crap from fishing, and a big part of the problem
would be solved.
I'd like to see eating made necessary for survival. It would give my GM chef
and these 180,000 cooked fishsteaks a purpose.
Richard Cortese
> Richard Cortese wrote:
>
> > Seems like more items then ever are stackable now.
>
year?
switched from furs which IIRC didn't stack and replaced them with hides
where appropriate. Bandages always stacked, but now they auto stack so there
isn't even an interim where you are creating extra item count. Not sure, but
I thought clock frames never stacked before, they do now. They have also got
those single sets of ribs combining to form piles ~most of the time; I don't
think mongbat combines with anything yet.
>
>
> > There are a lot of illegally placed houses since May, but it would seem
like
> > there hasn't been enough to double item count.
>
lagmonster-owners?
>
>
> > I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold
pieces or
> > other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
> > intentionally.
>
Richard Cortese
> Richard Cortese wrote:
>
> > I mean if all the extra items in the game happen to be single gold
pieces or
> > other stackable, then at least we have a clue someone is doing it
> > intentionally.
>
> be partly or largely due to the recent duping?
it is happening this time, but if you look at some of the history behind
dupping, every method that didn't count on server back up seemed to count on
lag.
For instance, that stacking 60,000 coins in your bank box to produce lag.
There was also a purported dupe that required you light a bunch of torches
to produce lag.
I have always suspected that the campfire lighters around banks fell into
two catagories: Plain jerks trying to ruin your stats, and dupers using the
lag.
I can remember when the road out of Moonglow was lined with tents and they
had 1-2 vendors each <before vendor limits>. Ditto for the road by the
Vesper Cementary, wall to wall houses and vendors.
You make that same walk now, you may find 3 houses south of Moonglow and
less then a dozen vendors between the Vesper xroads and the Vesper bank.
It may not be duping, it could be a goofy macro skill for strenght or
something that requires you to have stacks of items vs piles. For instance,
carve a pile of 10,000 logs and you get 10,000 shafts in ~6 seconds, but
make a stack of 125 logs in 80 packs so you can fletch them one at a time
and you will end up with a nice strength and dex gain.
But it probably isn't fletching, that is bugged w/o a cheat. Maybe cooking
or something.
There may be more then one reason for it happening.
>
> rend
> gil'lomion LS
Bunk
>On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 20:49:57 -0700, Quaestor <Range...@Skara.Brae>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>Katherine, Journeyman Healer
>Ciaran, Lia Fail Empire (Atlantic)
variable, which is why they don't make them stack. Then I remembered
that they made lockpicks stack, so I don't know what I'm talking
about. Oh well.
Bunk [PAG]
Uwe Fischer
IceLady <Ice...@mindspring.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
37f4ae82...@news.mindspring.com...
> Don't you people ever read anything?
I read everything about UO, I can get, every day!
> They are changing the coding. You WILL be able to
> lock down ALL stackable items. Wood, hides, bottles, regents,
> feathers, etc.. They are also increasing the number of SECURE
> chest, and taking away the weight limit on them and your bank
> box.
Yust for your information, Icelady: I wrote my posting before
there was any information about those changings.
> If that's not enough room for all your junk then I understand
> why there is so much LAG........
I have one bankbox filled with my money, my house key and my
runes (120 pieces), nothing else. I have one secure container
filled with 1 of each scroll (8*8=64 + 8 bags, one for each
circle = 72 pieces) and some regs. With one secure, there will ve
no room for my weapons. And they increase the number of secures
for MOST houses, not for ALL. I hope, they do it for the small
ones. Thats all I have.
> It looks like the only people that are going to have a problem
with
> this is the Alchemists that make up 100's of potions at a time.
Everyone, who has to store unstackable items (as Craftsmen and
shopkeepers) has a problem with it. These changes will be the
death of most player-run vendors. Remember me.
>
> --
> IceLady
> --
> Before you criticise someone, walk a mile in his shoes. Then,
> when you do criticise that person, you'll be a mile away and
> have his shoes.
Nice signature. Remember it sometimes before hacking on people
without knowing their situation.
Regards
Grizwood, Seneschall (MTB), Drachenfels
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/autumnvision/
Uwe Fischer
Richard Cortese <rico...@netmagic.net> schrieb in im
Newsbeitrag: rv9nv2...@corp.supernews.com...
> Given the weight limit is gone, just exactly how many secure
containers will
> you need?
>
> I mean you put piles of 50,000 ingots, 15,000 ginseng, 6,000
bottles, 60,000
> pieces of cloth, in your current secure container, you still
have room for
> 121 *other* things.
121 Things are not so much if you have a decent collection of
runes and some weapons and armour.
> Sounds pretty attractive to me.
> Until they give the rate of things deteriorating, we don't
know. If for
> example they last 3 days on the floor of a house, it will have
no impact for
> a real craft person.
This would be no impact for anybody. You could simply move
arround yor 398 bagpacks all three days. If you leave an item on
the ground outside your house, it decayes in a couple of hours. I
expect the same in house.
Dundee
<rico...@netmagic.net> wrote:
> Hides, remember back when you always ended up with 2 stacks? They also
> switched from furs which IIRC didn't stack and replaced them with hides
Funny thing: The furs *did* stack, but there were something like six
different kinds of furs.
Baffling, really.
Katherine
>I'd like to see eating made necessary for survival. It would give my GM chef
>and these 180,000 cooked fishsteaks a purpose.
I wouldn't want it to be a survival issue--I remember being a new
player and having a very difficult time scavenging for gold; if it
were possible for the characters to die of starvation I would have had
to give up. Even if I'd been able to feed myself regularly enough to
live I would have had nothing left over to invest in character
development. (I recall shortly after meeting Dove, I mentioned I had
to go scrounge up some money so I could do something--feed a horse I
think--and she said "You should tell us when you need money, Kath" and
dropped 1000 gold on me. I nearly choked. When you're a new char and
don't have a money-making skill or mule, that's a LOT.)
However, I could see making food more necessary than it is now.
Perhaps some sort of temporary stat loss, a la the spells that
monsters cast on you, or the fatigue-loss that occurs when you're
overweight. "You are too hungry to cast an eighth-circle spell."
Don't hinder movement--poor people should always have the option of
running!--but do give us some indication of when we're hungry. Right
now the only way to tell that you need to eat, is to try eating and
see what the message says. Perhaps instead a little message: "You are
getting very hungry." And ten or fifteen minutes later, "You are
extremely hungry. You are losing strength." "You are too weak from
hunger to equip that weapon!"
That should make your fish steaks a useful commodity, even without
actual death.
Quaestor
> Don't hinder movement--poor people should always have the option of
> running!--but do give us some indication of when we're hungry. Right
> now the only way to tell that you need to eat, is to try eating and
> see what the message says. Perhaps instead a little message: "You are
> getting very hungry." And ten or fifteen minutes later, "You are
> extremely hungry. You are losing strength." "You are too weak from
> hunger to equip that weapon!"
>
> That should make your fish steaks a useful commodity, even without
> actual death.
Why not put everyone in a permanent state of poison? We have enough
disadvantages, thank you.
Xigam
wrote:
>Depending on the gm on at the time, you might getthem to lock such things
>down. It would not hurt the game any, so there's no reason why not.
Try paging as a female charactor.. Sometimes you get better luck with
the GMs that way.
- Xigam
Xigam
>>Lockpicks? Anything else? What else has been made stackable in the last year?
>
>Sewing kits could be. My tailor buys them by the gross.
That would be SWEET.. Just in case anyone has missed it.. potions
don't stack and should.. also, I don't think pie's stack.. fruit,
meat, or apple..
- Xigam
Xigam
>
>I sell the footwear, and the magical fish. If it's not "Might or better" or
>"Hardening or better", the weapons and armor go, too. That still leaves tons
>of stuff that the NPC's won't buy, and I won't throw away because it might have
>some value.
Where do you sell magic fish?
- Xigam
Xigam
wrote:
I think that you might go broke doing this, it takes more to make a GH
than NPC's pay for 'em. Hell, PC's don't pay enough either.. hehe.. I
will be raising prices on my alchemy vendor after the patch. I'm going
to try and get more alchemists to follow..
- Xigam
>Load up your bank box (soon able to hold tons of regs and bottles). Go to
>Vesper, the city of love and kindness *choke* *choke*. North of the bank is
>an alchy shop. Find one of the alchemists wandering a little too close to the
>bank and trap him with four crates each containing 400 stones of stuff, and
>guarded by your dragon (can we still do that?). Then macro making and selling
>potions, while conversing with all the wonderful folks you find there.
>
>*ahem*
>
>HEY OS! MAKE POTIONS STACKBLE!
>
Xigam
With the skill locks, it should be easier for more charactors to feed
themself.. I wouldn't want to see people falling over from not eating,
but it should do something.. I also beleive that it helps when casting
magic spells eventhough OSI says no.
- Xigam
>On 3 Oct 1999 13:23:14 GMT, no_r...@email.net (Uncle Milty) wrote:
>
Uwe Fischer
37F90E8E...@Skara.Brae...
> Why not put everyone in a permanent state of poison? We have enough
> disadvantages, thank you.
Sorry Quaestor, but I am unable to see any disadvantages in eating. I
allways eat until quite full, because the skills are raising faster this
way and I hit more often. I know, that members of the Dev Team stated
something else, but for me it seems so. You have to feed your pets every
now and than or they go wild. Noone complains about that. I would like to
see the dead of starvation in UO. It would make it more of a roleplaying
game and would give any Cook a profitable profession.
Uwe Fischer
UGn5N6Cl53+RgH...@4ax.com...
> One possibility is to open a 2nd or 3rd player vendor so you can stock
> more frequently.
Now I run 2 vendors. One with armour and one with weapons. My aim is to
run a big shopping center with vendors for everything. And if they limit
the number of secureable to low, you can run some vendors behind a line of
locked down tables with prices of 0 as "secure chests" for stocking. I
know that. But I want to run a shopping center and donĀ“t want to produce
my goods "just in time". So I need storeroom for the goods.