Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualQNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:18 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world with two copies. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than many others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system while blocking a PK's escape possibilities (recall/gate), which they also did later on. Allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge even as blue.


Blessed items I would never have done. Neither insurance. Both go against the risk vs. reward system, that made UO so exciting.

#5QNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:17 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world with two copies. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than many others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system while blocking a PK's escape possibilities (recall/gate), which they also did later on. Allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge even as blue.

#4QNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:16 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world with two copies. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than many others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system, allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue etc. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge even as blue.

#3QNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:15 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world with two copies. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than many others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system, allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue etc. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge.

#2QNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:14 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world with two copies. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system, allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue etc. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge.

#1QNAN

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:11 PM

The area around the city Britain in UO was quite big. It had a forest and extended all the way out to the mountains, where miners could mine in safety..

I would have created a bigger safe zone, also with a few dungeons etc. A player could live safely there while "growing up" (the PK problem was to a large degree, that it scared away newbies), it would even be possible to build houses here, but at some point the yields would be meager compared to the "unsafe" world. Sure, he could continue living there, if he wanted to, but there would be serious incentives to venture outside, where the rewards were bigger.
I would make special ore only drop in the unsafe area. I would have created special wood as well, also only dropping in the unsafe area. That way also harvesters and not only adventurers would have had incentives to venture out.

I would not have doubled the world. I would not have made two different rulesets. I would have kept everything in the same world, as it was in UO before Trammel. I do know, that it was probably not possible to expand the original world because of how they had built it (one enormous file with all assets that could not be expanded), but given free hands in this thought experiment, that is what I would have done. Alternatively, if I have to talk within realism, I would have made a new original landmass in the same way they made T2A and used that instead.


Statloss solved to a large degree PK'ing. It was a harsh punishment and only the most hardcore would PK after that , as it was easy to get wiped out in a connection loss, or just a connection hiccup (even monsters in dungeons were dangerous in that case). In my opinion PK'ing was definitely down to an acceptable level after statloss got put in.
A player knowing what he was doing was due to the fast recalling almost invulnerable to PK's. The times I got PK'ed myself as an experienced player, was when I tried to fight back, just for fun. I don't remember having not been able to escape if I really wanted to.
I was a quite experienced PvP'er (and also a passtime PK'er, though it was a fairly small occupation), so maybe I just knew better than others what to do. But then again, isn't a game supposed to be challenging?

Another way to fight PK'ing is to make a systems allowing the players to fight back. A good tracking system, allow players to take revenge later, even if the PK is blue etc. Another possibliity would be to chain the characters of an account together (family system maybe?), and then let them all suffer from the reputation of the PK character. Then a player would not be able to hide on another character, as also this one would be open for revenge.

PARTNERS