STOP the Events Drops Shard Bounding folly!

keven2002

I think there is a lot of misconception about "things going to ATL to jack up the price". I often find it to be the exact opposite actually.

When I jump around to various shards and I need something like a bag of sending or orange petals the prices are almost always higher outside of ATL (makes sense because ATL has more supply). 

Most recently I decided to rework my warrior a bit on Origin for the Deceit event instead of transferring my sampire (haven't used this char in a very long time & suit is severely outdated). I don't have any 120 skills on him or "standard" items (like soldier medal) so I decided to try to bring him up to par with modern game advances. Almost everything I searched for was either more expensive than ATL or not available. Everything from like 120 macing/swords to level 3 primers were all more on Origin than ATL, along with the soldiers medal and jumus wasn't available. I ended up just putting the rebuild on pause because it would make more sense to transfer the stuff from ATL (or transfer to ATL to use a bunch of level 3 primers and transfer back).

I don't really care either way about Shard Bound because I see the pros and cons. I do, however, think that a lot of people also overlook the total event participation when talking about Shard bound vs not . If the event items were not shard bound; I'd spend even less time doing the event because I wouldn't need items for each shard I jump around to. I would think that the aim of the Devs is to increase participation of the event so the SB items help achieve that in most cases. 

mizchif

popps said:

Ivenor said:

SRiner said:

It's interesting that so many from Atlantic aim to get the shard bound lifted so that more items can travel there. It would also cause other shards to suffer from the same botting problems seen on Atlantic. Why limit yourself to botting one shard when you can bot any shard and still take them wherever you see profit. I can't speak for a lot of shards, but Great Lakes has a healthy population that allows for trade in most items and still plenty of people to play with. I only wish that EM event items would be changed to shard bound as well. 

Wrong tree to bark, fella: my HS is Europa, I go to ATL only because there I can find the stuff that on my HS is NEVER available for sale.

And WHY stuff often is not available on Low Population Shards ?

Because, lacking the Shard Bound restriction, farmers of those items on Low Population Shards MOVE them to Atlantic for profit....

If those items where also Shard Bound, they would NOT be moved to Atlantic and players of those Low Population Shards would then be actually able to find them on those Low Population Shards, without the need to have to look for them on Atlantic....

Believe me when I tell ya nobody is farming cuffs or halos or minax sandals or jumu or scrolls to bring to atlantic they sell cheaper there than shard of origin.I bring stuff from atlantic to sell on low pop shards. As for shard bound I been selling my drops for 2 mil per and taking gold to atlantic where ya can buy for 1 mil per. Do some research nobody bringing stufff to sell on atlantic  for even less gold, other than EM items which I believe should be shard bound

Arnold7

Shard bound was in acted after he last invasion event because players that could travel from shard to shard farmed invasion spellbooks on various shards and then sold them on Atlantic were they sold fast for high prices.  At the time I had a grand master mage and about 10 million gold after playing for a year or so.  I checked vendor search several times a day and over the course of the event did not see more than a dozen of the invasion slayer books come up for sale.  Most sold in the one to three million dollar range so I did get to buy a few of them.  Long time players openly talked about making millions on Atlantic selling the books there.  Even today you can still buy any invasion book you want on Atlantic at a reasonable (?) price while on the other shards all you will find is some overpriced junk (assuming you find the same crap on other shards as you do on mine).

Creating two classes of players, one that could travel from shard to shard and the other that could not is what led to shard bound.  The decision to create two classes of players may have seemed like a good reward for the veteran players that qualified for it at the time since most UO players fall into that category, but it led to the problems UO has today.  The only way I see shard bound being lifted is for UO to provide moongates to other shards so all players can travel.  Last time that was suggested there was lots of opposition to it.

Think there should be a way to make personal equipment account bound so players can travel with equipment they use and won’t sell.

Grimbeard

Arnold7 said:

Shard bound was in acted after he last invasion event because players that could travel from shard to shard farmed invasion spellbooks on various shards and then sold them on Atlantic were they sold fast for high prices.  At the time I had a grand master mage and about 10 million gold after playing for a year or so.  I checked vendor search several times a day and over the course of the event did not see more than a dozen of the invasion slayer books come up for sale.  Most sold in the one to three million dollar range so I did get to buy a few of them.  Long time players openly talked about making millions on Atlantic selling the books there.  Even today you can still buy any invasion book you want on Atlantic at a reasonable (?) price while on the other shards all you will find is some overpriced junk (assuming you find the same crap on other shards as you do on mine).

Creating two classes of players, one that could travel from shard to shard and the other that could not is what led to shard bound.  The decision to create two classes of players may have seemed like a good reward for the veteran players that qualified for it at the time since most UO players fall into that category, but it led to the problems UO has today.  The only way I see shard bound being lifted is for UO to provide moongates to other shards so all players can travel.  Last time that was suggested there was lots of opposition to it.

Think there should be a way to make personal equipment account bound so players can travel with equipment they use and won’t sell.

This is why shard bound until equipped then account bound makes sense...

Merlin

Overall, I think 'Shard Bound' should be done away with entirely.  It's definitely been a factor in me keeping characters on Atlantic that I've invested alot of time and effort into building a suit and whether or not I decide to bring one of my more viable characters to a non-Atlantic shard.

At the very least, I think that there should be a shard bound and non-shard bound option for the event drops.   Do something similar to what has been done to the Boots of Escaping - shard bound are 30 points, non-shard bound are 50 points.    OR give us a store option to wipe shard bound from an item.   There are a few items that I'd happily pay some Sovs for to remove the title.    Any option to remove this is better than none. 

Ivenor

Merlin said:

Overall, I think 'Shard Bound' should be done away with entirely.  It's definitely been a factor in me keeping characters on Atlantic that I've invested alot of time and effort into building a suit and whether or not I decide to bring one of my more viable characters to a non-Atlantic shard.

At the very least, I think that there should be a shard bound and non-shard bound option for the event drops.   Do something similar to what has been done to the Boots of Escaping - shard bound are 30 points, non-shard bound are 50 points.    OR give us a store option to wipe shard bound from an item.   There are a few items that I'd happily pay some Sovs for to remove the title.    Any option to remove this is better than none. 

That's not exactly my point: SB must be eliminated for the collectible Armor Sets pieces Drops that one use as currency to buy the Event Rewards. In this way anyone can use his drops to buy Rewards on any Shard he choose, move his entire collection where he want if he wish and move to his HS any piece he need to complete his collection that he bought on another Shard, exactly as it is now for Cult, Kotl, Enchanted, Fellowship and Minax drops...

Merlin

Ivenor said:

Merlin said:

Overall, I think 'Shard Bound' should be done away with entirely.  It's definitely been a factor in me keeping characters on Atlantic that I've invested alot of time and effort into building a suit and whether or not I decide to bring one of my more viable characters to a non-Atlantic shard.

At the very least, I think that there should be a shard bound and non-shard bound option for the event drops.   Do something similar to what has been done to the Boots of Escaping - shard bound are 30 points, non-shard bound are 50 points.    OR give us a store option to wipe shard bound from an item.   There are a few items that I'd happily pay some Sovs for to remove the title.    Any option to remove this is better than none. 

That's not exactly my point: SB must be eliminated for the collectible Armor Sets pieces Drops that one use as currency to buy the Event Rewards. In this way anyone can use his drops to buy Rewards on any Shard he choose, move his entire collection where he want if he wish and move to his HS any piece he need to complete his collection that he bought on another Shard, exactly as it is now for Cult, Kotl, Enchanted, Fellowship and Minax drops...

I understand your point, but my position is that I'd like to see Shard Bound removed entirely.  I don't see how this has helped local economies, if anything, it has made it more difficult for dedicated players to use a viable character on more than one shard if they want some of the top tier items that are now offered.  

Skett

Eliminate shard bound completely please ! 

username

Simple solution:
Shard bound rewards = X points,
Account bound = 0.5X points.
The snowflakes can keep their 'booming economy' on their dead ass shards and gatekeep gouge with tradeable items. Everyone wins.

popps

Sliss said:

Petra_Fyde said:

Inflation has one cause, player greed. players set the prices, not the devs. 

No, actually it's quite the opposite. As you yourself have admitted any given player has zero effect on the prices. You can set whatever "nongreedy" prices you want, but the items will be bought and resold at market price. Prices are set by supply and demand. And those are directly decided by the devs.

The problem is, to my opinion, that Atlantic has one type of a population and items availability and, therefore, Atlantic's demand/offer prices gets balanced to Atlantic's equiibrium between demand and offer there.

All of the other Shards, with a different demand/offer ratio as compared to that of Atlantic, deserve to have, to my opinion, a demand/offer ratio of their own and not be forced to follow that of the Atlantic shard.

Shard Bound items, to my viewing, permit to shards other then Atlantic to have their pricing different to those on Atlantic since the demand/offer ratio in them is not that of Atlantic, and rightfully so.

Riner

Cookie said:

Riner said:

                   It isn't that the items go poof when they go to Atlantic but rather that it opens up all shards to face the same corruption which is happening in mass on Atlantic. Another thing which is left out of the Atlantic shopping central hub idea is not everyone has free access to shard transfers. So instead of building the community on other shards you, further encourage new players to set out on Atlantic. Being the largest population server does have its advantages but also comes with many negative aspects. This is one if you wish to play on Atlantic you must struggle with the masses to earn your rewards. Just as you have to pay inflated prices for housing, excessive lag, or face the other negatives of overcrowding. I choose to live on a less populated shard for the many benefits which it has to offer. I do not want the problems which plague Atlantic to travel there in order to make it easier for someone to buy items from these events. 
           If this was going to present an opportunity for merely for people that normally live on a shard to fill the demand of larger shards once their own needs were met, I'd be all for it. The problem is what is being asked is that less populated dungeons be opened up to players and bots to farm and profit elsewhere. This does little to benefit the less populated shards but pushes the problems of overcrowding outward.
                  I agree that for players who wish to play their characters on multiple shards that shard bound gear presents a problem. I would rather a compromise for this being that a player has the option to buy a potion from the UO store to account bound an item which is currently shard bound. Thus, it can travel with the characters after it has been earned on a shard. 

I'm going to counter some of your thinking a little

This concept of "corruption" - who is more or less corrupt?

Do you really think your quiet little shard is "less" corrupt, or does it just seem less, because you see less of it with less players?

On a worldwide scale - without going into detail, or being political in any way, and this isnt to take the politics any further, but there is a World Cup going on, with the inevitable clash of cultures. One culture has guns and executes criminals, another country is full of lager louts and drug addicts, another country treats women and gay people badly and executes people - but who is MORE "corrupt"? Or do they just have different issues.

{" If this was going to present an opportunity for merely for people that normally live on a shard to fill the demand of larger shards once their own needs were met, I'd be all for it. The problem is what is being asked is that less populated dungeons be opened up to players and bots to farm and profit elsewhere. This does little to benefit the less populated shards but pushes the problems of overcrowding outward."}

Cultures should potentially mix, and be opened up, that way, we find a better balance.
Your argument could be seen as being a little selfish - I want my little area to remain a paradise, while the rest of the UO/worldwide problems stay away from my front door - we have a phrase for that in the UK - NIMBY's - Not in my Backyard. Often people who want Wind Power, but are not prepared for the windmills to be placed in their area.

The reason I draw parallels to Real Life, are because these UO issues are direct parallels with macro-economics, and macro socioeconomics - as many have picked up on.

I won’t argue that my position on this is selfish. I like the events on my shard the way they are. We have a consistent amount of people playing in the event dungeons without the over crowding which plagues Atlantic. There are numerous threads complaining about the cheating and over crowding on Atlantic and dropping shard bound would allow them to move outward like a plague of hungry maggots. What possible incentive could there be for me to want to have my shard so infected? I’m alright with making event items account bound regardless of the mechanism but if you want to collect drops or items to sell do it where you see the market. 

I simply have to attend an EM event on drop night to see what a horrible idea this is. People who consistently play on our shard constantly facing literally 100’s of toons hoping to get a drop to take to Altalntic to sell. Bringing with them lag and sucking the enjoyment out of the event. If these items were also shard bound I assure you that those events would be much more enjoyable too. 

Is this selfish most assuredly, just as those who wish to be able to move event items around to raise a profit someplace are being selfish. 

keven2002

popps said:

Sliss said:

Petra_Fyde said:

Inflation has one cause, player greed. players set the prices, not the devs. 

No, actually it's quite the opposite. As you yourself have admitted any given player has zero effect on the prices. You can set whatever "nongreedy" prices you want, but the items will be bought and resold at market price. Prices are set by supply and demand. And those are directly decided by the devs.

The problem is, to my opinion, that Atlantic has one type of a population and items availability and, therefore, Atlantic's demand/offer prices gets balanced to Atlantic's equiibrium between demand and offer there.

All of the other Shards, with a different demand/offer ratio as compared to that of Atlantic, deserve to have, to my opinion, a demand/offer ratio of their own and not be forced to follow that of the Atlantic shard.

Shard Bound items, to my viewing, permit to shards other then Atlantic to have their pricing different to those on Atlantic since the demand/offer ratio in them is not that of Atlantic, and rightfully so.

You do realize that this essentially makes these non-ATL shard prices (aka "their own prices as you describe) higher than ATL right? I'm guessing you disregarded the post someone made where they said they are selling their drops on LS for 2m each and transferring that money to ATL where they are buying items for 1m each... so to put it plain and simple - the shard bound on these other shards creates higher prices for those shards compared to ATL... not less.

ForeverFun

Join a guild on your shard -- there are always guild members that will do shard xfers for free/nearly free in the larger guilds.

I did an experiment - claimed a popular 50 item archlich drop on a less populated shard, and sold it for 2x what that item was selling for on Atlantic.  Bought two 50 point archlich drops on atlantic with the proceeds.  This isn't universally true, but it's relevant in the context of shard bound.

Eliminating shard bound for ToT style event rewards would be fine.  Please apply it retroactively to the inventory of ToT reward drops in each shard database, too, for extra credit.

Note some people won't play atlantic as the lag and ping times are much worse than other shard options,.

Thanks!

Yoshi

“The one biggest thing that absolutely needs to be shard bound is power scrolls, nothing else really matters, shard bound it or not it’s not important.

but power scrolls are still not shard bound…

It’s a completely pointless argument you’re all having about the ToT rewards/drops while ignoring the white elephant in the room”

cobb

I hope for the next event or two, we can skip Shard Bound.  I think it is stupid to have Shard Bound items only for every single event. Gets old rather quick. Need a bit more variety.

popps

keven2002 said:

popps said:

Sliss said:

Petra_Fyde said:

Inflation has one cause, player greed. players set the prices, not the devs. 

No, actually it's quite the opposite. As you yourself have admitted any given player has zero effect on the prices. You can set whatever "nongreedy" prices you want, but the items will be bought and resold at market price. Prices are set by supply and demand. And those are directly decided by the devs.

The problem is, to my opinion, that Atlantic has one type of a population and items availability and, therefore, Atlantic's demand/offer prices gets balanced to Atlantic's equiibrium between demand and offer there.

All of the other Shards, with a different demand/offer ratio as compared to that of Atlantic, deserve to have, to my opinion, a demand/offer ratio of their own and not be forced to follow that of the Atlantic shard.

Shard Bound items, to my viewing, permit to shards other then Atlantic to have their pricing different to those on Atlantic since the demand/offer ratio in them is not that of Atlantic, and rightfully so.

You do realize that this essentially makes these non-ATL shard prices (aka "their own prices as you describe) higher than ATL right? I'm guessing you disregarded the post someone made where they said they are selling their drops on LS for 2m each and transferring that money to ATL where they are buying items for 1m each... so to put it plain and simple - the shard bound on these other shards creates higher prices for those shards compared to ATL... not less.

Not at all.

The issue, to my opinion, on shards other then Atlantic, is that players who would like to price items more cheaply to help out their Shard, do not do it because of buy_low/sell_high resellers who purchase items on lower population Shards cheaper, to then move them onto Atlantic to sell them higher for a profit.

If there was the ability for players to tag items as "shard bound", I think that we'd see more largely available cheaper and shard bound items on commission vendors on low population shards.

Ivenor

Merlin said:

Ivenor said:

Merlin said:

Overall, I think 'Shard Bound' should be done away with entirely.  It's definitely been a factor in me keeping characters on Atlantic that I've invested alot of time and effort into building a suit and whether or not I decide to bring one of my more viable characters to a non-Atlantic shard.

At the very least, I think that there should be a shard bound and non-shard bound option for the event drops.   Do something similar to what has been done to the Boots of Escaping - shard bound are 30 points, non-shard bound are 50 points.    OR give us a store option to wipe shard bound from an item.   There are a few items that I'd happily pay some Sovs for to remove the title.    Any option to remove this is better than none. 

That's not exactly my point: SB must be eliminated for the collectible Armor Sets pieces Drops that one use as currency to buy the Event Rewards. In this way anyone can use his drops to buy Rewards on any Shard he choose, move his entire collection where he want if he wish and move to his HS any piece he need to complete his collection that he bought on another Shard, exactly as it is now for Cult, Kotl, Enchanted, Fellowship and Minax drops...

I understand your point, but my position is that I'd like to see Shard Bound removed entirely.  I don't see how this has helped local economies, if anything, it has made it more difficult for dedicated players to use a viable character on more than one shard if they want some of the top tier items that are now offered.  

With this obviously I agree wholeheartedly!!!

Ivenor

popps said:

keven2002 said:

popps said:

Sliss said:

Petra_Fyde said:

Inflation has one cause, player greed. players set the prices, not the devs. 

No, actually it's quite the opposite. As you yourself have admitted any given player has zero effect on the prices. You can set whatever "nongreedy" prices you want, but the items will be bought and resold at market price. Prices are set by supply and demand. And those are directly decided by the devs.

The problem is, to my opinion, that Atlantic has one type of a population and items availability and, therefore, Atlantic's demand/offer prices gets balanced to Atlantic's equiibrium between demand and offer there.

All of the other Shards, with a different demand/offer ratio as compared to that of Atlantic, deserve to have, to my opinion, a demand/offer ratio of their own and not be forced to follow that of the Atlantic shard.

Shard Bound items, to my viewing, permit to shards other then Atlantic to have their pricing different to those on Atlantic since the demand/offer ratio in them is not that of Atlantic, and rightfully so.

You do realize that this essentially makes these non-ATL shard prices (aka "their own prices as you describe) higher than ATL right? I'm guessing you disregarded the post someone made where they said they are selling their drops on LS for 2m each and transferring that money to ATL where they are buying items for 1m each... so to put it plain and simple - the shard bound on these other shards creates higher prices for those shards compared to ATL... not less.

Not at all.

The issue, to my opinion, on shards other then Atlantic, is that players who would like to price items more cheaply to help out their Shard, do not do it because of buy_low/sell_high resellers who purchase items on lower population Shards cheaper, to then move them onto Atlantic to sell them higher for a profit.

If there was the ability for players to tag items as "shard bound", I think that we'd see more largely available cheaper and shard bound items on commission vendors on low population shards.

       

Cookie

popps said:

keven2002 said:

popps said:

Sliss said:

Petra_Fyde said:

Inflation has one cause, player greed. players set the prices, not the devs. 

No, actually it's quite the opposite. As you yourself have admitted any given player has zero effect on the prices. You can set whatever "nongreedy" prices you want, but the items will be bought and resold at market price. Prices are set by supply and demand. And those are directly decided by the devs.

The problem is, to my opinion, that Atlantic has one type of a population and items availability and, therefore, Atlantic's demand/offer prices gets balanced to Atlantic's equiibrium between demand and offer there.

All of the other Shards, with a different demand/offer ratio as compared to that of Atlantic, deserve to have, to my opinion, a demand/offer ratio of their own and not be forced to follow that of the Atlantic shard.

Shard Bound items, to my viewing, permit to shards other then Atlantic to have their pricing different to those on Atlantic since the demand/offer ratio in them is not that of Atlantic, and rightfully so.

You do realize that this essentially makes these non-ATL shard prices (aka "their own prices as you describe) higher than ATL right? I'm guessing you disregarded the post someone made where they said they are selling their drops on LS for 2m each and transferring that money to ATL where they are buying items for 1m each... so to put it plain and simple - the shard bound on these other shards creates higher prices for those shards compared to ATL... not less.

Not at all.

The issue, to my opinion, on shards other then Atlantic, is that players who would like to price items more cheaply to help out their Shard, do not do it because of buy_low/sell_high resellers who purchase items on lower population Shards cheaper, to then move them onto Atlantic to sell them higher for a profit.

If there was the ability for players to tag items as "shard bound", I think that we'd see more largely available cheaper and shard bound items on commission vendors on low population shards.

Hi Popps,

You are being given absolute facts and figures, by quite a few very knowledgeable players in this game - that prove the opposite to your argument, and you are ignoring them, and keep progressing with completely unsubstantiated opinions. Most people can see it is wrong, this is one of those, where you need to sit back and listen, and take in what they are saying.

In the very example you are talking about here, the items ARE shard-bound. Yet they are priced twice as much. This is not because those shard players are scared of them being resold to another shard, because they ARE shard-bound already. The point being here, Shard-bound is not working like you think it does.

And you will also know, I'm not one of your trolls, I've often sided with you in certain debates.

Cookie

Riner said:

Cookie said:

Riner said:

                   It isn't that the items go poof when they go to Atlantic but rather that it opens up all shards to face the same corruption which is happening in mass on Atlantic. Another thing which is left out of the Atlantic shopping central hub idea is not everyone has free access to shard transfers. So instead of building the community on other shards you, further encourage new players to set out on Atlantic. Being the largest population server does have its advantages but also comes with many negative aspects. This is one if you wish to play on Atlantic you must struggle with the masses to earn your rewards. Just as you have to pay inflated prices for housing, excessive lag, or face the other negatives of overcrowding. I choose to live on a less populated shard for the many benefits which it has to offer. I do not want the problems which plague Atlantic to travel there in order to make it easier for someone to buy items from these events. 
           If this was going to present an opportunity for merely for people that normally live on a shard to fill the demand of larger shards once their own needs were met, I'd be all for it. The problem is what is being asked is that less populated dungeons be opened up to players and bots to farm and profit elsewhere. This does little to benefit the less populated shards but pushes the problems of overcrowding outward.
                  I agree that for players who wish to play their characters on multiple shards that shard bound gear presents a problem. I would rather a compromise for this being that a player has the option to buy a potion from the UO store to account bound an item which is currently shard bound. Thus, it can travel with the characters after it has been earned on a shard. 

I'm going to counter some of your thinking a little

This concept of "corruption" - who is more or less corrupt?

Do you really think your quiet little shard is "less" corrupt, or does it just seem less, because you see less of it with less players?

On a worldwide scale - without going into detail, or being political in any way, and this isnt to take the politics any further, but there is a World Cup going on, with the inevitable clash of cultures. One culture has guns and executes criminals, another country is full of lager louts and drug addicts, another country treats women and gay people badly and executes people - but who is MORE "corrupt"? Or do they just have different issues.

{" If this was going to present an opportunity for merely for people that normally live on a shard to fill the demand of larger shards once their own needs were met, I'd be all for it. The problem is what is being asked is that less populated dungeons be opened up to players and bots to farm and profit elsewhere. This does little to benefit the less populated shards but pushes the problems of overcrowding outward."}

Cultures should potentially mix, and be opened up, that way, we find a better balance.
Your argument could be seen as being a little selfish - I want my little area to remain a paradise, while the rest of the UO/worldwide problems stay away from my front door - we have a phrase for that in the UK - NIMBY's - Not in my Backyard. Often people who want Wind Power, but are not prepared for the windmills to be placed in their area.

The reason I draw parallels to Real Life, are because these UO issues are direct parallels with macro-economics, and macro socioeconomics - as many have picked up on.

I won’t argue that my position on this is selfish. I like the events on my shard the way they are. We have a consistent amount of people playing in the event dungeons without the over crowding which plagues Atlantic. There are numerous threads complaining about the cheating and over crowding on Atlantic and dropping shard bound would allow them to move outward like a plague of hungry maggots. What possible incentive could there be for me to want to have my shard so infected? I’m alright with making event items account bound regardless of the mechanism but if you want to collect drops or items to sell do it where you see the market. 

I simply have to attend an EM event on drop night to see what a horrible idea this is. People who consistently play on our shard constantly facing literally 100’s of toons hoping to get a drop to take to Altalntic to sell. Bringing with them lag and sucking the enjoyment out of the event. If these items were also shard bound I assure you that those events would be much more enjoyable too. 

Is this selfish most assuredly, just as those who wish to be able to move event items around to raise a profit someplace are being selfish. 

I get your point of view, and there is a lot of honesty there, and I was certainly not saying you are selfish

You are pretty much saying, I like my quieter shard, and playstyle.

I am saying, in the context of the overall game - dropping shardbound, would help the majority of the playerbase - just not some of the players such as yourself.

We have an opposing opinion, and that is fine

cobb

Currently on lower population shards, the new Shard Bound rewards are selling for double the price compared to Atlantic.  I would say that is definitely not helping the smaller shards.

Arnold7

For players that can travel, shard bound can cut seriously into their profits.  If I could move from shard to shard and take bots with me, I would not hesitate to do so.  But under the current rules I will never be able to travel from shard to shard so shard bound is fine with me.  I do pretty well, at least by my standards, selling shard bound drops and rewards on my shard.  I don’t know how to use bots by the way.  

Did not play these drop kind of events before shard bound so don’t know what it was like then.  Know that during the last event bots collected eggs on my shard but did not see any in the dungeon.  Don’t know which shard they came from so can’t say that this was a result of shard bound but it very well may have.

JenniferMarie

"To Shard Bound or Not To Shard Bound ..."

keep arguing about it, and the Devs are gonna give you want you want but not in the way you expect.

username

cobb said:

Currently on lower population shards, the new Shard Bound rewards are selling for double the price compared to Atlantic.  I would say that is definitely not helping the smaller shards.

Course it's helping pad their wallets. No wonder the dead shard players don't want change 

Ivenor

JenniferMarie said:

"To Shard Bound or Not To Shard Bound ..."

keep arguing about it, and the Devs are gonna give you want you want but not in the way you expect.

  Probable... 

popps

Cookie said:

popps said:

Not at all.

The issue, to my opinion, on shards other then Atlantic, is that players who would like to price items more cheaply to help out their Shard, do not do it because of buy_low/sell_high resellers who purchase items on lower population Shards cheaper, to then move them onto Atlantic to sell them higher for a profit.

If there was the ability for players to tag items as "shard bound", I think that we'd see more largely available cheaper and shard bound items on commission vendors on low population shards.

Hi Popps,

You are being given absolute facts and figures, by quite a few very knowledgeable players in this game - that prove the opposite to your argument, and you are ignoring them, and keep progressing with completely unsubstantiated opinions. Most people can see it is wrong, this is one of those, where you need to sit back and listen, and take in what they are saying.

In the very example you are talking about here, the items ARE shard-bound. Yet they are priced twice as much. This is not because those shard players are scared of them being resold to another shard, because they ARE shard-bound already. The point being here, Shard-bound is not working like you think it does.

And you will also know, I'm not one of your trolls, I've often sided with you in certain debates.

I would assume, that the Developers have access to a whole lot more data as compared to the players....

While players can bring up few examples of Shard Bound items pricing to support their different opinions (those who want to say that Shard Bound items are priced higher on low population Shards as compared to Atlantic and also those who want to show how, instead, Shard Bound items are priced cheaper on low population Shards as compared to Atlantic), we need to keep well in mind that the Developers, I imagine, have access to any and all prices for items across all Shards.

Thus, the Developers have access to that global, comprehensive picture which hardly players can have, lacking all of the data whereas the Developers can monitor, not just for an instant but across a reasonable length of time and across any and all Shards, whether Shard Bound items serve the purpose to help out the economies of the Shards they were generated on.

Frankly, I need to trust more the Developers who have the global, comprehensive picture and not just for an instant, but across a good length of time, as compared to what individual players who lack all of data may assess....

Not to mention, that players might be more interested in promoting their particular style of gameplay while the Developers, instead, need to be interested in the entire game well being...

Consequently, I honestly need to side with the Developers and their choice of enforcing Shard Bound items.... if they are doing it, it must be for very good reasons which they can well assess while we, as players, lacking the global picture and data, cannot.

Ivenor

popps said:

Cookie said:

popps said:

Not at all.

The issue, to my opinion, on shards other then Atlantic, is that players who would like to price items more cheaply to help out their Shard, do not do it because of buy_low/sell_high resellers who purchase items on lower population Shards cheaper, to then move them onto Atlantic to sell them higher for a profit.

If there was the ability for players to tag items as "shard bound", I think that we'd see more largely available cheaper and shard bound items on commission vendors on low population shards.

Hi Popps,

You are being given absolute facts and figures, by quite a few very knowledgeable players in this game - that prove the opposite to your argument, and you are ignoring them, and keep progressing with completely unsubstantiated opinions. Most people can see it is wrong, this is one of those, where you need to sit back and listen, and take in what they are saying.

In the very example you are talking about here, the items ARE shard-bound. Yet they are priced twice as much. This is not because those shard players are scared of them being resold to another shard, because they ARE shard-bound already. The point being here, Shard-bound is not working like you think it does.

And you will also know, I'm not one of your trolls, I've often sided with you in certain debates.

I would assume, that the Developers have access to a whole lot more data as compared to the players....

While players can bring up few examples of Shard Bound items pricing to support their different opinions (those who want to say that Shard Bound items are priced higher on low population Shards as compared to Atlantic and also those who want to show how, instead, Shard Bound items are priced cheaper on low population Shards as compared to Atlantic), we need to keep well in mind that the Developers, I imagine, have access to any and all prices for items across all Shards.

Thus, the Developers have access to that global, comprehensive picture which hardly players can have, lacking all of the data whereas the Developers can monitor, not just for an instant but across a reasonable length of time and across any and all Shards, whether Shard Bound items serve the purpose to help out the economies of the Shards they were generated on.

Frankly, I need to trust more the Developers who have the global, comprehensive picture and not just for an instant, but across a good length of time, as compared to what individual players who lack all of data may assess....

Not to mention, that players might be more interested in promoting their particular style of gameplay while the Developers, instead, need to be interested in the entire game well being...

Consequently, I honestly need to side with the Developers and their choice of enforcing Shard Bound items.... if they are doing it, it must be for very good reasons which they can well assess while we, as players, lacking the global picture and data, cannot.

   

Don't forget to put your tongue back inside your mouth when you have finished...

Urge

popps said:

A bunch of stuff 

Or you could make a new character on other shards, use vendor search there and gather your own facts. 

Riner

I do find the doom and gloom of the game ending due to shard bound items humous. Other games have lasted as long without any cross-server trading. Why it should condemn UO to a lingering death, yet other games manage to live on is a mystery to me. 

Ivenor

Riner said:

I do find the doom and gloom of the game ending due to shard bound items humous. Other games have lasted as long without any cross-server trading. Why it should condemn UO to a lingering death, yet other games manage to live on is a mystery to me. 

Because "Vuolsi così colà dove si puote ciò che si vuole / e più non dimandare." (Dante Alighieri's "Divine Comedy", Inf. V 22-24).

I.e.: aren't the PLAYERS that want to end UO.