can we get an age of shadows inspired legacy server?

I am here requesting a new shard be developed loosely based on the Age of Shadows expansion. Age Of Shadows has been the foundation of which Ultima Online has been built the last 16 years with most of it's features still functional in game today yes some has changed and been altered and new things added over the course of 16 years but the game at its core is still built on the same AoS model. Because of the fact many components of UO are still the same today as they were 16 years ago makes AoS the most logical choice for a new shard to be based upon, not to mention UO hit it's peak during the AoS expansion era which has carried gameplay for 16 going on 17 years now thats a 17 year window that players have enjoyed the game during that time span 17 years of old veteran players that may have quit due to changes they didn't like or simply took a break only to come back to see their friends have moved on or found it to difficult to get back into due to over complicated changes. This is a 17 year window that the game should attempt to capitalize on by putting the developmental time in to providing players the opportunity to take it all back to the start of Age of Shadows. Current players like myself are increasingly frustrated with a lot of changes that have occurred lately this is a chance for UO to fix some of the things that have destroyed the community aspect of UO players past and present long to play the game when it was group oriented just a bunch of people going out hunting monsters and collecting gold no one was overpowered on a sampire or had 5 slot pets that eliminated the need to group to do content. Crafters were vital members of the community providing some of the best equipment available.

If we have any hope of attracting actual new players this is the best chance we got. Making a legacy AoS server will drive nostalgia in veterans and intrigue new players, the idea of a fresh start and new economy 15 years after the last server was launched (Origin) is critical for the game and finally with Endless Journey this provides the perfect Trifecta to lure players to Ultima Online.  New players need to log in for the first time and see hundreds (thousands?) of players starting out at the same time they need to randomly encounter people while running through the woods or adventuring into dungeons and actually see people enjoying the game. They need to see a vibrant world filled with other fellow adventurers not log into any shard but Atlantic and feel like they are in a single player game.  Players will get hooked on UO by actually playing with other people just like everyone here did the development team just needs to provide the server that will bring together new, returning and current players together so people can start friendships that will last a lifetime or reconnect once again with long lost guildmates. I am not trying to imply it will be necessarily easy to accomplish but I don't feel it would be overly difficult or time consuming to have a functional AoS era inspired server up and running.

I think the best way to launch a legacy server would be to break it up into updates. Going back through the publishes and determining what changes have happened that have no impact on the Age of Shadows feel (there is a lot) like gold changes, veteran rewards, virtue system, vendor search heck even city elections *as long as no trade deals* to name a few that can stay in the game. Figure out what critical features would need to be restored or removed to fit the timeline which would be things like the loot system, skills, landmass and playable races and removal of VvV. Next if any major systems were to require substantial reworking but not necessarily needed upon launch of a server could be considered 'update' patches a month, year or even 5 years after the launch of servers things like Bulk Order Deeds and Factions obviously BOD's would be pretty important to get in but it makes a lot of sense to have a delay between features as it will allow people time to enjoy the game without feeling overwhelmed trying to do everything at once. And finally compile a list of smaller changes that have happened over the years like changes to skills or casting focus and poison immunity, weapon swing speeds, spell changes and other smaller issue's that the devs can fix over time whether in a main update or just slowly over time with regular shard updates. This way would allow the dev's to have a playable server online quicker and then be able to provide content updates for current shards to keep everyone happy before going back and working on secondary system updates for legacy so the time between updates is hardly noticed.

Anyways this is getting long so I will end with this. We players deserve the chance to see if a legacy server can bring back lost friends and even attract new players. I know some will want to go even further back then AOS and I hear that but that is an entire remaking of the game as everything has changed. Let's pull from the almost 17 years UO has been influenced by the AoS style and show broadsword that legacy servers can thrive. The game deserves the chance to see if a legacy announcement can generate genuine interest in it once again.  We've waited long enough to get a legacy server as we sat by watching friends and foes fall off due to changes over the last 17 years we absolutely deserve the shot however long it may be to bring those friends back. Friendships made in UO are the best kind and I hate to say it again but we do deserve that chance to play this game once again with all our friends that have quit for various reasons over the past 16 years! @Mesanna @Kyronix @Bleak ; Please take a shot on legacy server playing with old friends and meeting new players should be a top priority for the game.
«1

Comments

  • Dot_WarnerDot_Warner Posts: 233
    As has been stated multiple times by Mesanna: No.

    "Legacy code" doesn't exist and freeshards don't run real UO code, so don't point to them as any sort of example.

    This issue has been litigated far too many times, always with the same result.


  • DJAdDJAd Posts: 290
    We need less servers, not more.
  • DJAd said:
    We need less servers, not more.

    What we need is a reasonable and easy way for *everyone* to move between the servers. More or less one giant server. I don't see like $44 bucks to go to another server and back very reasonable.
    Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies
  • As has been stated multiple times by Mesanna: No.

    "Legacy code" doesn't exist and freeshards don't run real UO code, so don't point to them as any sort of example.

    This issue has been litigated far too many times, always with the same result.


    I am so sick of people like you, constantly butting your opinion and trying to overtake ideas that would benefit a large player base that doesnt include you. 

    This is not only a great idea, that should be very heavily considered, its about the only thing that could save this game.

    You cant tell me that player run servers can handle implementing these very rulesets, and coding but our actual uo programmers cannot? Laughable and ridiculous. 

    This isnt stratics Dot, go back where you can delete our posts and maintain posts about the things you and your chosen 8 players can do as you please.

    Please Mesanna, consider this. This needs to happen.
  • DJAd said:
    We need less servers, not more.
    Agreed, eliminate all but 5. One east, one west, one asian, siege, legacy. There you go.
  • As has been stated multiple times by Mesanna: No.

    "Legacy code" doesn't exist and freeshards don't run real UO code, so don't point to them as any sort of example.

    This issue has been litigated far too many times, always with the same result.


    The issue has been hijacked too many times like forum trolls like you who pick apart things they dont personally have an investment in. 

    The implemention would be no more difficult then any major publish. Diffence this one would actually bring players back, unlike any of the recent publishes that allow you to play pirates with AI. How many returning players have cited that for thete return?? Less than 10, guaranteed.

    Every time this idea gets shot down we lose potentially hundreds of players returning, and thousands in revenue for a dying game.

    Quit being Obtuse Warden. Andy dont like it.
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,834
    Dear OP "Legacy" and AoS do not go together and that UO today all started with AoS turning UO into an item based system that we still have today.  @ToiMasheen please explain why you think keeping UO an item based system will bring in more players, you do understand that It all started the day AoS launched and the begining of the solo player began along with the demise of the crafters.  What type of server would you consider SP to be?
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,834
    DJAd said:
    We need less servers, not more.
    Agreed, eliminate all but 5. One east, one west, one asian, siege, legacy. There you go.
    This is the %1000 way to permanently fix UO by pissing off everybody that lives on all the closed servers and losing all those those accounts so EA pulls the plug.  Great idea and by the way Mesanna  has stated that NO servers will be shut down so do not even go there.  I guess Oceania, Europa, Drachenfels and Mugen don't even rate a mention do they.  Please UO propose this to EA so we can end this madness and close UO for good.


  • jaytinjaytin Posts: 417
    DJAd said:
    We need less servers, not more.
    Agreed, eliminate all but 5. One east, one west, one asian, siege, legacy. There you go.
    Great idea, let's just lose the whole of Europe! So where are we all meant to play? Games with open world housing can't do server merges, they would lose hundreds of customers and many more accounts. I would love to go back to before AoS but that isn't the way to do it and it just won't happen anyway.
  • I was sarcastically picking a number of servers to reduce to, but you get the idea. Servers with less than 50 active accounts playing on them with any consistancy is a waste.
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,834
    edited April 2019
    I was sarcastically picking a number of servers to reduce to, but you get the idea. Servers with less than 50 active accounts playing on them with any consistancy is a waste.
    There are more than 50 active accounts even on the so called dead shards and it does not matter if a player logs on or not as long as they pay their account to maintain their house.  Yea I got the idea that you put very little though into your post.  I live on one of those dead shards that you want to close so I guess I can just trash all my castles and good and cancel all my accounts, have fun in your selfish UO because you do not care about anyone else.  So when are you going to answer how we get more people with another AoS inspired shard which is what all the shards are right now or didn't you know that.
  • TimTim Posts: 797
    I play on a "dead" shard because I want to.
    If I wanted to play on a densely populated shard I would.
    I have no problem finding people to play with if I want to.
    If you can't find anyone to play with maybe the problem isn't the population level of your shard.
    Or is your problem you can't find enough people to PK in fel?

    This argument has gone around many time and alway the same answer from Broadsword (NO) so why are you wasting your time?
  • TimTim Posts: 797
    Sorry last post was off topic

    But even if Broadsword had the old code for your AoS shard would you want if locked down at that point? Or would you want them to keep updating it with bug fixes and events? 

    From all appearances they are struggling with keeping 2 rule sets going and you want them to add a 3rd?
  • AoS is not the golden age of UO by far, I think there are many that consider that a horrible turning point in the games history. It had a profoundly negative impact on the RP community, entire large guilds completely disappeared within a year or two struggling to fit the huge changes into their structures and lore. AoS changed the game very dramatically few would argue that. Although I feel overall we are going in the right direction the last couple of years. I love the new content ect. This game is designed to move forwards not backwards.  You couldn't pay me to play a fresh AoS only shard.  No thanks 
  • Victim_Of_SiegeVictim_Of_Siege Posts: 1,895
    edited April 2019
    Wheeler said:
    "no one was overpowered on a sampire"  
    This part is a bit inaccurate, Sampires were possible at the start of AOS, it just took time for people to figure out the right combination of skills to make it work.  now that it is all worked out, there will be Sampires unless you take Necromancy out. granted there were less armor and weapons available at the start but it could still be a viable template. and they would need to be sure to add the need for "real Skill" back into the rule-set since at the beginning you could use items to get to 99 for casting Vampiric embrace then take the items off and have another skill on the character in addition to the other skills of a Sampire. but, this is all wishful thinking for now since the team has shown zero interest in creating a 3rd rule set of any time frame. 
    A Goblin, a Gargoyle, and a Drow walk into a bar . . .

    Never be afraid to challenge the status quo

  • Dot_WarnerDot_Warner Posts: 233
    ToiMasheen said:
    I am so sick of people like you, constantly butting your opinion and trying to overtake ideas that would benefit a large player base that doesnt include you. 

    This is not only a great idea, that should be very heavily considered, its about the only thing that could save this game.

    You cant tell me that player run servers can handle implementing these very rulesets, and coding but our actual uo programmers cannot? Laughable and ridiculous. 

    This isnt stratics Dot, go back where you can delete our posts and maintain posts about the things you and your chosen 8 players can do as you please.

    Please Mesanna, consider this. This needs to happen.
    Unsubstantiated hyperbolic claims about "hundreds" returning to UO if only a legacy shard...blah blah blah...are crap. Threads like this are long on nostalgic fantasy from the pro side, but short on objective fact.

    It isn't my opinion, it's stated fact from the developers. A legacy shard, from any era, isn't in the cards. 

    Your lack of knowledge about UO isn't surprising. Freeshards don't run UO server code, they run on platforms coded in this millennium. Their systems can be reconfigured far more easily than 22+yo spaghetti. You might want to at least do a little bit of research so that you're not so obviously speaking out your posterior. 

    UO's six devs do not have the bandwidth to take on a 3rd ruleset, nor does Broadsword have the extra funds to pump into such an endeavor. (only two out of those six officially code) EA holds the purse strings and is notoriously stingy, go petition them to invest a few mill into a speculative venture. We'll wait.

    BTW, I'm not a Stratics mod. I don't have that kind of patience for idiocy. 

    p.s. You might want to actually understand that scene. The irony is delicious. 
  • — We have a small team of Developers who do a tremendous amount of work for the players still in UO.

    The Devs have stated over and over again that it is not feasible for them rewrite the game’s code to make a “legacy server”.

    Player-run free shards are not sanctioned by EA/Broadsward and pointing to them every time people don’t like what Official UO is doing only harms those of us loyal to the actual game.
    ~ Jennifer-Marie

    "Insanity is a naturally occurring mutation; humanity has just managed to perfect it." -- JMK [[me]]
  • Luc_of_LegendsLuc_of_Legends Posts: 319
    edited April 2019
    Wheeler said:
    "no one was overpowered on a sampire"  
    This part is a bit inaccurate, Sampires were possible at the start of AOS, it just took time for people to figure out the right combination of skills to make it work.  now that it is all worked out, there will be Sampires unless you take Necromancy out. granted there were less armor and weapons available at the start but it could still be a viable template. and they would need to be sure to add the need for "real Skill" back into the rule-set since at the beginning you could use items to get to 99 for casting Vampiric embrace then take the items off and have another skill on the character in addition to the other skills of a Sampire. but, this is all wishful thinking for now since the team has shown zero interest in creating a 3rd rule set of any time frame. 
    Okay let's stop and think about what you just said there. 

     Sam/pire - template comprised primarily of the BUSHIDO (aka way of the SAMuraiand NECROMANCY (the "pire" comes from the Vampiric Embrace spell). 

    The Bushido skill was not available until the Samurai Empire expansion which was released in 2004.  Age of Shadows came out in 2003.  There for we had a glorious year before the birth of the Sampire.  There may have been a vampire-warrior template before SE but it was not a sampire. Also I believe skill boost items may have been added later, but I'm not 100% on that.

    Vic you actually surprised me not knowing this, because I always thought you'd been playing long than I. Also you always seemed very well studied in Ultima Online history and lore.  


  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,834
    Skill boost items came out with AoS and as more skills were added more items came out with them on it.
  • Wheeler said:
    "no one was overpowered on a sampire"  
    This part is a bit inaccurate, Sampires were possible at the start of AOS, it just took time for people to figure out the right combination of skills to make it work.  now that it is all worked out, there will be Sampires unless you take Necromancy out. granted there were less armor and weapons available at the start but it could still be a viable template. and they would need to be sure to add the need for "real Skill" back into the rule-set since at the beginning you could use items to get to 99 for casting Vampiric embrace then take the items off and have another skill on the character in addition to the other skills of a Sampire. but, this is all wishful thinking for now since the team has shown zero interest in creating a 3rd rule set of any time frame. 
    Okay let's stop and think about what you just said there. 

     Sam/pire - template comprised primarily of the BUSHIDO (aka way of the SAMuraiand NECROMANCY (the "pire" comes from the Vampiric Embrace spell". 

    The Bushido skill was not available until the Samurai Empire expansion which was released in 2004.  Age of Shadows came out in 2003.  There for we had a glorious year before the birth of the Sampire.  There may have been a vampire-warrior template before SE but it was not a sampire. Also I believe skill boost items may have been added later, but I'm not 100% on that.

    Vic you actually surprised me not knowing this, because I always thought you'd been playing long than I. Also you always seemed very well studied in Ultima Online history and lore.  


    I am but sometimes you don’t think things through completely before typing  :D. What I was basing it on was the leeching ability of the vampiric embrace coupled with the damage output of the chivalry spells. You could do quite a bit with the necropally before the bushido skill came along.  After that it was game over. 
    A Goblin, a Gargoyle, and a Drow walk into a bar . . .

    Never be afraid to challenge the status quo

  • WheelerWheeler Posts: 5
    ToiMasheen said:
    I am so sick of people like you, constantly butting your opinion and trying to overtake ideas that would benefit a large player base that doesnt include you. 

    This is not only a great idea, that should be very heavily considered, its about the only thing that could save this game.

    You cant tell me that player run servers can handle implementing these very rulesets, and coding but our actual uo programmers cannot? Laughable and ridiculous. 

    This isnt stratics Dot, go back where you can delete our posts and maintain posts about the things you and your chosen 8 players can do as you please.

    Please Mesanna, consider this. This needs to happen.
    Unsubstantiated hyperbolic claims about "hundreds" returning to UO if only a legacy shard...blah blah blah...are crap. Threads like this are long on nostalgic fantasy from the pro side, but short on objective fact.

    It isn't my opinion, it's stated fact from the developers. A legacy shard, from any era, isn't in the cards. 

    Your lack of knowledge about UO isn't surprising. Freeshards don't run UO server code, they run on platforms coded in this millennium. Their systems can be reconfigured far more easily than 22+yo spaghetti. You might want to at least do a little bit of research so that you're not so obviously speaking out your posterior. 

    UO's six devs do not have the bandwidth to take on a 3rd ruleset, nor does Broadsword have the extra funds to pump into such an endeavor. (only two out of those six officially code) EA holds the purse strings and is notoriously stingy, go petition them to invest a few mill into a speculative venture. We'll wait.

    BTW, I'm not a Stratics mod. I don't have that kind of patience for idiocy. 

    p.s. You might want to actually understand that scene. The irony is delicious. 
    I don't recall it ever being said that legacy is not in the cards but then again WoW's dev's also said the same thing and look where that went?

    There is no 'investing a few mill' into anything the dev's get paid to program and produce content which is exactly what a legacy server would be content. You always pop in threads to spread negatively  and obviously they are no concern to you so why do you feel the need to speak on behalf of the developers the worst part is you try to pretend that what you say is fact when your just an angry person trying to push her own agenda. Your fine to your opinion but that doesn't mean we are also not entitled to ours.

    I enjoy how you can claim its a crap to believe players will return to play if we had a legacy server. I mean there is only one way to truly find that out for certain. I think the issue here is maybe your afraid that a legacy server would actually be more popular then live servers is that why you pop in here to try and dissuade people from the idea.

    We get it you don't want it to happy i have no idea why. But stop speaking on behalf of the developers and unless you got something legitimate to add please stop trying to get the thread locked  with your obnoxious troll attempts.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 9,230
    UO needs to move forward not backwards.

    Make a guild that uses GM armor only and then when you can show us battles of hundreds of accounts, come back and show us.

    Reflections of the past are always rosy.  That time period was horrible.
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • WheelerWheeler Posts: 5
    Wheeler said:
    "no one was overpowered on a sampire"  
    This part is a bit inaccurate, Sampires were possible at the start of AOS, it just took time for people to figure out the right combination of skills to make it work.  now that it is all worked out, there will be Sampires unless you take Necromancy out. granted there were less armor and weapons available at the start but it could still be a viable template. and they would need to be sure to add the need for "real Skill" back into the rule-set since at the beginning you could use items to get to 99 for casting Vampiric embrace then take the items off and have another skill on the character in addition to the other skills of a Sampire. but, this is all wishful thinking for now since the team has shown zero interest in creating a 3rd rule set of any time frame. 
    Sorry I didn't really mean to get into a debate about the history of sampires lol. But I simply meant that there were no players running around with the perfect skill setup and custom crafted weapons with the appropriate slayer and leeches soloing every encounter in the game while you could still do good with necromancy it was balanced out by the available items at the time.
  • Wheeler said:
    Wheeler said:
    "no one was overpowered on a sampire"  
    This part is a bit inaccurate, Sampires were possible at the start of AOS, it just took time for people to figure out the right combination of skills to make it work.  now that it is all worked out, there will be Sampires unless you take Necromancy out. granted there were less armor and weapons available at the start but it could still be a viable template. and they would need to be sure to add the need for "real Skill" back into the rule-set since at the beginning you could use items to get to 99 for casting Vampiric embrace then take the items off and have another skill on the character in addition to the other skills of a Sampire. but, this is all wishful thinking for now since the team has shown zero interest in creating a 3rd rule set of any time frame. 
    Sorry I didn't really mean to get into a debate about the history of sampires lol. But I simply meant that there were no players running around with the perfect skill setup and custom crafted weapons with the appropriate slayer and leeches soloing every encounter in the game while you could still do good with necromancy it was balanced out by the available items at the time.
    And I did jump the gun as Luc pointed out. It was a year or so after launch before samurai empire came out anyway. But you could make a similar character from the beginning. It would be nice to see legacy servers from BS but it is unlikely with the small team and budget. But hey, I’ve always been one to ask for things regardless of whether it is guaranteed to fail so keep asking, all they can do is say no. 
    A Goblin, a Gargoyle, and a Drow walk into a bar . . .

    Never be afraid to challenge the status quo

  • Pawain said:
    UO needs to move forward not backwards.

    Make a guild that uses GM armor only and then when you can show us battles of hundreds of accounts, come back and show us.

    Reflections of the past are always rosy.  That time period was horrible.
    The biggest thing I remember was me going. “ where did all this crap armor and weapons come from and what happened to my leet invulnerable gear!!!”
    A Goblin, a Gargoyle, and a Drow walk into a bar . . .

    Never be afraid to challenge the status quo

  • WheelerWheeler Posts: 5
    — We have a small team of Developers who do a tremendous amount of work for the players still in UO.

    The Devs have stated over and over again that it is not feasible for them rewrite the game’s code to make a “legacy server”.

    Player-run free shards are not sanctioned by EA/Broadsward and pointing to them every time people don’t like what Official UO is doing only harms those of us loyal to the actual game.
    I never once asked them to 'rewrite' the games code. We just need to take what we got and modify it to be an accurate representation of Age of Shadows.
    I am one of these players still in UO and I wait patiently while they put out content for others that doesn't interest me I don't go into those discussions saying negative things about it / protesting it. 

    I do believe there is interest in what I suggested and I do believe we should have the opportunity to explore that option as it's no different then the dev team working on any other publish. And if there is even a chance that it can bring back old friends and new players then please tell me WHY it shouldn't be explored further? Sure it could fail but then again what if its an overwhelming success ? Don't we deserve the chance to find out either way.

  • Unsubstantiated hyperbolic claims about "hundreds" returning to UO if only a legacy shard...blah blah blah...are crap. Threads like this are long on nostalgic fantasy from the pro side, but short on objective fact.

    It isn't my opinion, it's stated fact from the developers. A legacy shard, from any era, isn't in the cards. 

    Your lack of knowledge about UO isn't surprising. Freeshards don't run UO server code, they run on platforms coded in this millennium. Their systems can be reconfigured far more easily than 22+yo spaghetti. You might want to at least do a little bit of research so that you're not so obviously speaking out your posterior. 

    UO's six devs do not have the bandwidth to take on a 3rd ruleset, nor does Broadsword have the extra funds to pump into such an endeavor. (only two out of those six officially code) EA holds the purse strings and is notoriously stingy, go petition them to invest a few mill into a speculative venture. We'll wait.

    BTW, I'm not a Stratics mod. I don't have that kind of patience for idiocy. 

    p.s. You might want to actually understand that scene. The irony is delicious. 
    For starters, where are your figures proving my statement is crap? You constantly bash any idea that isn't from your own agenda for the future of UO because you're a sour person with a horrible attitude.

    Secondly, I recall similar comments about free to play not being in the cards, yet here we are.(Even though, any successful business knows that change is not only inevitable but necessary to succeed.So, I'm not really concerned with comments made years, months, etc ago because currently the state of UO is failing to guarantee a future for its players in the direction its headed.)

    I refuse to reply to your insults, as you are just trying to get this thread locked. I feel the moderators should remove you from this post, since you have nothing to add but your poor personality and snide comments.

    BTW, I never said you were a moderator at stratics. Merely making point that you and your group of 7 people (who include moderators) only allow threads to exist if they fit your own agenda and topics that interest you.

    I'd be curious to look at a diagram showing active accounts, and subscriptions during the peak eras of UO. I guarantee the numbers do the talking. This should be something that is considered. Period.


  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,834
    edited April 2019
    @ToiMasheen Please explain what would be different about a "LEGACY" item based AoS Shard and the current Item Based shards we have now.  It is still an item based game.  What do you think it is going to bring back?  What do you think it will fix?  EA/UO will never give out number of accounts but right before AoS there were no open housing spots on any shard.

    So you want to drop down to 4 land masses: Tram, Fel, Ilshenar and Malas and you want to do away with  Samurai Empire • Mondain's Legacy • Kingdom Reborn • Stygian Abyss • Time of Legends and HighSeas, any and all updates after 2003 AoS launch and you think this will bring back old players.  What is it about AoS that makes you think that it will revive UO.  And you also understand that there was no EC back then so the only client will be the CC.
  • PureLifePureLife Posts: 54
    edited April 2019
    I think it would be a good idea to do something like this at it solves quite a few issue's I have with the game in it's current state.
    Bilbo said:
    @ ToiMasheen Please explain what would be different about a "LEGACY" item based AoS Shard and the current Item Based shards we have now.  It is still an item based game.  What do you think it is going to bring back?  What do you think it will fix?  EA/UO will never give out number of accounts but right before AoS there were no open housing spots on any shard.
    I know it's not directed at me but I will give me take if you don't mind. What would be different for starters players would not have 820 skill point templates anymore it is not balanced against players with 720 skill points the ridiculous itemization of the game with 13 mod equipment is one of many reasons I find myself logging on less and less. Consumables are a crutch I disagree with greatly and after AoS more and more have been added *enchanted apples / trap boxes / conflag / supernova*. The removal of factions and forced into VvV is again another issue. Forged / Royal pardons allowing players to kill others and minutes later go blue again. I have never been fond of spellweaving or mysticism as skills. Flying gargoyles should never have been added. Being able to custom build equipment with Imbuing. Faction / VvV artifacts being given out as freebies and even worse they are stronger then the real versions. Splintering Weapon is probably the most garbage mod ever added. I used to enjoy dueling but the random poison immunity ruined that for me.

    I could think more on it and find a multitude of reasons that have happened between AoS and now that have contributed to my personal lack of enjoyment from the game. I don't know if others agree with any of my issue's and I am sure others have their own issue's with the game that caused them to leave but I can only speak from personal experience.
    Bilbo said:
    So you want to drop down to 4 land masses: Tram, Fel, Ilshenar and Malas and you want to do away with  Samurai Empire • Mondain's Legacy • Kingdom Reborn • Stygian Abyss • Time of Legends and HighSeas, any and all updates after 2003 AoS launch and you think this will bring back old players.  What is it about AoS that makes you think that it will revive UO.  And you also understand that there was no EC back then so the only client will be the CC.
    I am absolutely fine with going down to 4 land masses I mean you can correct me if I am wrong but Tokuno, Ter Mur and Eodon really do not provide much in terms of content. I think the name Age of Shadows is a very marketable name and something a lot of former players do have fond memories of playing. I know from your post history that you believe the need for player skill somehow died with AoS but I do not find that true at all which is why you personally have negative opinions of the expansion yet here you are still all these years later still playing the game that is no built upon AOS mechanics so it couldn't have been all that bad. I do not wish to change the subject of the thread but if you wish to open a new discussion on EC and CC I would be happy to talk about it more there but I will say this .... I would be thrilled if a legacy server was CC only this game is 20 years old and it should embrace that for what it is and make the CC the best it can be the EC does this game no favors with its graphics. *edit* I just want to clarify I don't care either way if the EC was playable on a legacy server you brought it up so just replied I do not have anything against it but I wouldn't care either if it wasn't available.
  • ArronArron Posts: 485
    edited April 2019
    In my opinion I think the game is going in the right direction, Forward. In any world it is natural to move forward. We do this by discoveries in many areas sometimes not always the best areas are advanced but we always move forward. I do not think it is unexpected that the world of UO does the same. While it is fun to remember the past I don't think there are many in the world of UO who would want the game to stay the same forever. I am not saying there are none but I believe the number is very small. You believe that we are losing players because of the fact that the game has been moving forward, I believe there are many reasons why the player base is smaller, most of which has to do with Real Life. Not all the players of yeards ago are able to dedicate the time or funds to continue playing, not because they do not love the game, but because there real lives have caused a change in their priorities. We all have things we like about Uo and things we do not like. We are all entitled to our own opinions, however the bottom line is the masses move his game. We have no idea about the number of players on each shard the Parent company EA does and so do the developers. If EA thought it would bring in more money to do an expansion to your Legacy Shard WITHOUT LOOSING A LOT OR INVESTING A TON OF MONEY then I think that is someting they will look into. It is up to each of us to decied if we will stick with them or not. And to the statement that the Dev Team are being paid to program and it would not require any investment on EA's part, just think about your job and all you do. Would you be happy to be given 33% more work and not have an increase of man power (Or Woman Power) or a budget increase? The Dev Team does a lot and in my opinion the are doing an excellent job especially with the limited resources available to them. There is another option you could become a major share holder in EA and help shape its future. (Not trying to be a smart mouth) Again I am happy with going forward with UO not backwards. If there are those who are not happy then they have to make a choice to stay or go. I hope they stay but not my choice.
This discussion has been closed.