Letter to OSI - Housing and Newbie Problems
Kevin Goddard
feedback from other players, and maybe some other people to join me in
writing a note to Origin to get them to wake up.
I played UO a year ago, when it was fresh and new. The lack of game
balance, the repetition, and the fact that hacked mega-characters
spoiled the game drove me away. Almost 10 months later I decided to
pick up the game and check out the new Lands. Though the repetition was
still there, the game seemed to be more balanced, and in the Lost Lands,
I had at least a fighting chance. I was content to stay there, hunt
cows and deer, and later try out the local undead and orc forts. One of
my goals when I picked up the game was to get a house and build a
Grandmaster blacksmith/miner.
I soon realized it would be impossible to make Grandmaster unless I
could get a house near a mountain so that I could mine near the saftey
of my own home. So I focused on that goal first.
Apparently I started the game right before the "housing patch" was
implemented, but I was only able to purchase a house during the second
phase (I got one from the Paupua architect). Only then did I find out I
could not place a house anywhere, and even after the patch, I would
never be able to place a house in the Lost Lands. I EARNED my house. I
spent hours a day hacking up cows, tailoring their hides, and selling
the products.
So I figured, fine, if Origin is going to implement a new housing
policy, they will at least make it retroactive. I mean how fair is it
that I bought a small forge house only to not get the forge? OSI would
at least remove everyone else's forge, right? And if OSI says that I
have to have 5 tiles in front of and behind every house, then they will
apply that to all the houses and move them so they fit, right?
WRONG on both counts. Not only did I spend more for features I did not
get, I could not place the house in the Land I wanted, or in the only
land I can. Try to place a house anywhere decent on Chesepeke. The one
time I placed it, I ended up next to Pkillers and thieves (ie east of
Britian), had my Key stolen and was chased twice. So I deeded it and
decided to try to find someplace else.
Once I found a spot that was suitable, I found that I could not place
the house still. I counted 20 tiles between the North and South houses
and 20 tiles between the East and West houses. When I asked for help,
the ever so helpful consuler just repsonded that they cannot help place
houses.
Let me end this by saying I am extremmly displeased with the route
Origin has taken in making the game harder and harder for new players,
while favoring the older ones. But not to be just a complainer, here is
my solution to the housing problems on the older servers:
1. Allow housing in the lost lands on a length of stay basis coupled
with a age of character basis. If the character is fairly new, has no
houses, and lives in Dulcia (like mine do), allow them the first chance
to place a house in the Lost Lands. An older character more then likely
has a house in the original lands, and if he does not stay in the Lost
Lands that much, he would not need to put a house there any way.
2. If you bought a deed before the final housing patch (which I
understand is not even out yet), you should get the original house in
that deed. Complete retroactive removal of housing addons is unfair,
but semi-retroactive removal (ie you deed your old house) is even worse.
3. Provide an advancment gate that will allow ONE character per account
advance to 70's or 80's in his/her three original skills, plus giving
them 2000gp. Something like this existed on the Test Center way back
when. This will enable new players the chance to have at least one
character that is of sufficent skill to stand his/her own in the lands.
I sincerly hope you will take my suggestions to heart.
Thank you for your time,
Kevin Goddard
Damocles
<dra...@draddog.com> wrote:
>1. Allow housing in the lost lands on a length of stay basis coupled
>with a age of character basis. If the character is fairly new, has no
>houses, and lives in Dulcia (like mine do), allow them the first chance
>to place a house in the Lost Lands. An older character more then likely
>has a house in the original lands, and if he does not stay in the Lost
>Lands that much, he would not need to put a house there any way.
No, no, no! Keep the damned houses out of T2A. I and many others enjoy
a land without the gross-overpopulation effect that is present in the
old world.
>
>2. If you bought a deed before the final housing patch (which I
>understand is not even out yet), you should get the original house in
>that deed. Complete retroactive removal of housing addons is unfair,
>but semi-retroactive removal (ie you deed your old house) is even worse.
It's very cheap to get the add-ons, there are many vendors selling
them and they run around 1K each.
>
>3. Provide an advancment gate that will allow ONE character per account
>advance to 70's or 80's in his/her three original skills, plus giving
>them 2000gp. Something like this existed on the Test Center way back
>when. This will enable new players the chance to have at least one
>character that is of sufficent skill to stand his/her own in the lands.
It would also provide an unbelievable abuse system for the hordes of
idiots. I shudder to see the world after something like this went in.
Kevin Goddard
> Agreed. And let's hope the new housing replenishment rules can get
rid
> of some of the houses in the old lands!!
Either or, I just think it is unfair that after all my honest work I
cannot place a house. Origin should either loosen the new
rules, provide more land mass, or stop selling houses. I like the new
lands like they are, but I also read on the packaging that new "player"
towns was one of the new features.
> 1. Advance newbie char.
> 2. Hand off gold to friend.
> 3. Delete advanced char.
> 4 Repeat as needed.
My idea is more of a one time use. You can advance one character for
your account period. If you decided you did not
like the character, then tough, you do not get another use at the
advancement gate. Let's take away the extra gold and
just raise the stats a bit, would it be fair then? You can't trade off
stats. This is not any different then Macroing a skill and
there are those who macro skills into the 70's and 80's still playing.
The point I was trying to make is a player can now
play and not run everytime he sees another PC coming in fear that he
will be slaughtered by that person.
Kevin "Draddog" Goddard
GHQOKC
been saving for the moment the housing patch would take effect and we could
finally buy our pride and joy: a two-story stone and plaster house. 173,000
gold later we had it. <Sigh> After days of endless searching (over 20+ hours) I
cannot find a place on the whole shard for it to drop!!! I have tried probably
over 5,000 times but it will not drop. PLEEEEASSSEEEE do something OSI. What we
thought would be a fun and exciting time of house decoration and stocking has
turned into a complete nightmare.
(30K!!! to anyone who can find me a spot the damn house will fit!)
Giles Gallant
Templar Knights, -A- ORDER
Atlantic Shard
Teremin
wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Dec 1998 19:18:52 -0500, Kevin Goddard
><dra...@draddog.com> wrote:
>
>
>>1. Allow housing in the lost lands on a length of stay basis coupled
>>with a age of character basis. If the character is fairly new, has no
>>houses, and lives in Dulcia (like mine do), allow them the first chance
>>to place a house in the Lost Lands. An older character more then likely
>>has a house in the original lands, and if he does not stay in the Lost
>>Lands that much, he would not need to put a house there any way.
>
>No, no, no! Keep the damned houses out of T2A. I and many others enjoy
>a land without the gross-overpopulation effect that is present in the
>old world.
>
Agreed. And let's hope the new housing replenishment rules can get rid
of some of the houses in the old lands!!
>>
>>3. Provide an advancment gate that will allow ONE character per account
>>advance to 70's or 80's in his/her three original skills, plus giving
>>them 2000gp. Something like this existed on the Test Center way back
>>when. This will enable new players the chance to have at least one
>>character that is of sufficent skill to stand his/her own in the lands.
>
>It would also provide an unbelievable abuse system for the hordes of
>idiots. I shudder to see the world after something like this went in.
>
>
1. Advance newbie char.
2. Hand off gold to friend.
3. Delete advanced char.
4 Repeat as needed.
Strife
MarkTheShark
seems to understand is a Terminated Account ( lack of revenue).
>Let me end this by saying I am extremmly displeased with the route
>Origin has taken in making the game harder and harder for new players,
>while favoring the older ones.
This seems to be true to a large extent, but honestly I haven't been
able to figure out why some good ideas get in, and lots of bad ideas.
>3. Provide an advancment gate that will allow ONE character per account
>advance to 70's or 80's in his/her three original skills, plus giving
>them 2000gp. Something like this existed on the Test Center way back
>when. This will enable new players the chance to have at least one
>character that is of sufficent skill to stand his/her own in the lands.
>
While this seems like a good idea on the surface, it would mean that
anyone could make a newbie character that's instantly strong enough to
join a PK group :)
Now, the players have to macro macro macro...
Mark
Chung
big house in a prefered location. I have easy find a good spot for a
small clother's house (11kgp) on 1 year ago. Then I going to work for
a bigger house - Tower. At the end, I bought last week at 400kgp,
after housing phase 3. But I spend 4 days, walk around the whole
world and all island, still can't find any space for it.
The world is too small. OSI should enlarge the world at least 10
times more. Or, put all house underground, only a hole/door on the
floor. So, Only one tile space for all house type.
>I played UO a year ago, when it was fresh and new. The lack of game
>balance, the repetition, and the fact that hacked mega-characters
>spoiled the game drove me away. Almost 10 months later I decided to
>pick up the game and check out the new Lands. Though the repetition was
>still there, the game seemed to be more balanced, and in the Lost Lands,
>I had at least a fighting chance. I was content to stay there, hunt
>cows and deer, and later try out the local undead and orc forts. One of
>my goals when I picked up the game was to get a house and build a
>Grandmaster blacksmith/miner.
>Once I found a spot that was suitable, I found that I could not place
>the house still. I counted 20 tiles between the North and South houses
>and 20 tiles between the East and West houses. When I asked for help,
>the ever so helpful consuler just repsonded that they cannot help place
>houses.
Some area near dungeon or inside guard area cannot place house. Area
not perfect flat gress land cannot place house.
>Let me end this by saying I am extremmly displeased with the route
>Origin has taken in making the game harder and harder for new players,
>while favoring the older ones. But not to be just a complainer, here is
>my solution to the housing problems on the older servers:
I don't think new player in UO is harder than before, remember 1 years
ago, I earn 11k for small house was very hard need 50 playing hours
for bore tailor job, but now, I can easy earn it within 10 hours.
>1. Allow housing in the lost lands on a length of stay basis coupled
>with a age of character basis. If the character is fairly new, has no
>houses, and lives in Dulcia (like mine do), allow them the first chance
>to place a house in the Lost Lands. An older character more then likely
>has a house in the original lands, and if he does not stay in the Lost
>Lands that much, he would not need to put a house there any way.
>
No, even I can't find place, I prefer no building in Lost land. I
feel run and hunting in lost land is attractive without any additional
house. If housing allow in lost land, only specific location should
allow.
>2. If you bought a deed before the final housing patch (which I
>understand is not even out yet), you should get the original house in
>that deed. Complete retroactive removal of housing addons is unfair,
>but semi-retroactive removal (ie you deed your old house) is even worse.
>
Your request is logical, but more job have to do by OSI to divide
pre-patch and post-patch house deed. And house add-in is not
difficult to get now.
>3. Provide an advancment gate that will allow ONE character per account
>advance to 70's or 80's in his/her three original skills, plus giving
>them 2000gp. Something like this existed on the Test Center way back
>when. This will enable new players the chance to have at least one
>character that is of sufficent skill to stand his/her own in the lands.
Agree, starting skill should be 200 point for max 6 skill, but each
skill should max 50 initially. It is more fare to old player, they
spend lot of time to rise it. It is meaningless to give 2000gp or
200gp or 20kgp. Skill is much more important than gold.
Chung, Baja
Jonathan Aitken
>No, no, no! Keep the damned houses out of T2A. I and many others enjoy
>a land without the gross-overpopulation effect that is present in the
>old world.
Most of whom are of course, older more experienced palyers, who have had their
chance and made their choices.
There are plenty of areas that are literally deserted every time I've been there
- virtually no animals, nothing. The bottom area in particular.
>It would also provide an unbelievable abuse system for the hordes of
>idiots. I shudder to see the world after something like this went in.
>
I'd have to agree - maybe the age of the account could be linked to it? First
two months or something like that? Anyone dumb enough to forgo the time
honoured cheat methods of macroing, etc by buying a new account, cant be all
that dangerous.
Otara, Napa
Damocles
Aitken) wrote:
>phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles) wrote:
>>No, no, no! Keep the damned houses out of T2A. I and many others enjoy
>>a land without the gross-overpopulation effect that is present in the
>>old world.
>
>Most of whom are of course, older more experienced palyers, who have had their
>chance and made their choices.
I've never owned anything larger than a small house with any of my
characters, and I've been playing for fifteen months.
>
>There are plenty of areas that are literally deserted every time I've been there
>- virtually no animals, nothing. The bottom area in particular.
So once we find an area of true wilderness we should immediately fill
it with houses?
You're the one who hates pkillers...more housing means more pkillers,
especially since in T2A the houses would have to be in specific areas
outside guard zones.
Damocles
>They have got to do something about the placement of houses. My wife and I had
>been saving for the moment the housing patch would take effect and we could
>finally buy our pride and joy: a two-story stone and plaster house. 173,000
>gold later we had it. <Sigh> After days of endless searching (over 20+ hours) I
>cannot find a place on the whole shard for it to drop!!! I have tried probably
>over 5,000 times but it will not drop. PLEEEEASSSEEEE do something OSI. What we
>thought would be a fun and exciting time of house decoration and stocking has
>turned into a complete nightmare.
It should be hard to place a two story house. The land you enclose
with that house is forever lost to all other players. I for one am
glad that OSI made it so that they can't just be plonked down
anywhere, and hope they don't back down on it.
Thales (Ifurita)
wrote:
>It should be hard to place a two story house. The land you enclose
>with that house is forever lost to all other players. I for one am
>glad that OSI made it so that they can't just be plonked down
>anywhere, and hope they don't back down on it.
>
I disagree. My partner and I have 1 house that we share. Our old
house went away, so we bought a new Large Brick house. He has 2
characters that would use it, I have 4.
I think having one large house shared between 6 characters is fine --
certainly better than having 6 small houses which is what I think is
going to happen since we cannot place the Large House.
That being said, I also realise that Manwe and I are the exceptions,
not the rule. Most groups have multiple houses per account and just
like being able to say "Oh, yeah, all 4 of my mules have towers...this
is the only char with a castle." Okay...that was an exaggeration.
But certainly not much of one.
OSI - Umm...how about 2 houses per account...and only one can be
private?
Thales aka Ranger Ifurita of the Skara Rangers
Jonathan Aitken
>>Most of whom are of course, older more experienced palyers, who have had their
>>chance and made their choices.
>
>I've never owned anything larger than a small house with any of my
>characters, and I've been playing for fifteen months.
Which was _your_ choice. new players dont ahve the option.
>>There are plenty of areas that are literally deserted every time I've been there
>>- virtually no animals, nothing. The bottom area in particular.
>
>So once we find an area of true wilderness we should immediately fill
>it with houses?
Thers till plenty of other wilderness areas that cant have houses in them. They
could even set aside some areas as parks :).
>You're the one who hates pkillers...more housing means more pkillers,
>especially since in T2A the houses would have to be in specific areas
>outside guard zones.
I reserve hatred for far more serious things - they're just a pain I'd rather do
without. I've seen enough PK's there already to not really be all that worried
about that particular issue.
Otara, Napa
Otara, Napa
TheNum...@hotmail.com
ghq...@aol.com (GHQOKC) wrote:
> They have got to do something about the placement of houses. My wife and I had
> been saving for the moment the housing patch would take effect and we could
> finally buy our pride and joy: a two-story stone and plaster house. 173,000
> gold later we had it. <Sigh> After days of endless searching (over 20+ hours)
I
> cannot find a place on the whole shard for it to drop!!! I have tried probably
> over 5,000 times but it will not drop. PLEEEEASSSEEEE do something OSI. What
we
> thought would be a fun and exciting time of house decoration and stocking has
> turned into a complete nightmare.
>
>
> Giles Gallant
> Templar Knights, -A- ORDER
> Atlantic Shard
>
>
Try putting your house on an island. If you can't find a rune to an island,
buy the smallest available ship and sail to one. You can pick up a map at
your local cartographer, which is usually in the same shop as the shipwright.
(ships, as far as transportation goes, this is about the only use for them.
Map's only use is to plot a course for ships. These are two things that
DEFINATLY need some use added to them.)A small ship costs about 12k. Really,
you should search for a rune before you buy the ship. Also, you may want to
look for a looted/abandond/orphaned ship that is unlocked to sail to over
there. THERE ARE LOTS OF THESE just look around.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Andy Neely
(Damocles) wrote:
> So once we find an area of true wilderness we should immediately fill
> it with houses?
It seems to me that we're missing more "civilized" areas that PCs can
build in. It's illogical that
current cities are packed with shops only and that I can't walk ten paces
in the middle of the
wilderness without having to dodge between other player's houses.
A better mix in the cities with much more dense housing (some sort of city
block grid with
some restrictions on location and maximum size -- i.e. only smaller
houses) seems to make
a lot of sense. Let's encourage moving the sprawls to the cities.
I also like the idea of a lot more land to roam in general. :-)
-Andy.
ne...@frii.net
Daylieen
<neely-05019...@epimetheus.frii.com>...
perhaps the designers come from areas where space isn't an issue and urban
sprawl isn't a concern. I think the same apply to the LA developers of Sim
City who managed to make the simulation produce a variety of LA's (no
reliable city centers and no place of interest within walking distance of
any other place)
--
'VENDOR BUY BANK GUARDS'