Jump to content

Welcome to Ultima Online Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account

Welcome to UOForums

If not already a member, take a moment to join our awesome community. It is free to sign up and there are no ads.

 

When you click on CREATE ACCOUNT, the sign up form will appear at the bottom of the forum.

 

If you have issues, like not receiving a validation email. Then please contact us by email help@uoforums.com and we will help you get set up.

 

If you wish to contact us about our site for other reasons, then please contact us by using the contact form in top right corner of the forum


Photo

Any talk of combining shards?

- - - - - combining shards talk

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1
PoPwAr

PoPwAr

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
Was wondering if theres any talk of combining shards, as most shards are lowly populated compared to the old days. A manditory, but free transfer system could be implemented, to condense 2 shards into one.

Any info or link to current threads would be helpful.
(one who misses the days of a crowded Brit bank trading area)

#2
Warsong of LS

Warsong of LS

    Knowledge is power; Guard it well!

  • Members
  • 2,250 posts
Not yet!
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment

#3
buddy lee

buddy lee

    Agent Zero

  • Members
  • 2,249 posts
combining shards would get ugly. you would have the issue of who gets the house? for example, i own a house on LA in the same spot you own one on Atlantic, do you get to keep your house when LA is dropped and i have to move to Atlantic with no house? the hell with that. just an example, would not be a problem for me as i have a max storage house on LA, Atlantic, and Chessy. but you get my point.

#4
Drakelord

Drakelord

    The old man

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
If for some reason they were to do and it was the shard I played on, then I would close my accounts and quit. I am very happy with the housing I have on Sonoma, two places I would not be able to get if forced to move as they are key spots in the facet they are on.

22815_1049897365024789_76475492465172463


#5
Lord Target

Lord Target

    I know I am, and so are you. Now I must throw giant waffles at y

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 475 posts
It won't happen unless there's a painless way to move all of the houses over without offending the owners, or destroying the houses.

If people's stuff is threatened, their subscriptions might suddenly stop.

EA definitely doesn't want that.

 


#6
PoPwAr

PoPwAr

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
Let me remove the word manditory, and perhaps add: Give the option to the *smaller* shards to move freely to the mid-to-larger sized shards if they so choose. And as far as the housed items i know when you get a transfer you get a box in your bank to put stuff into and it follows you over, however im not sure if they still do this.

#7
MalagAste

MalagAste

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
Only way I'd agree to combining shards would be if there were some way to do it fairly where folk didn't lose all their homes and things.... that and if they were able to somehow combine things to themed type shards for things like Roleplayers, hunters, PvP/champspawn folk and the like.... Oh and clasic.....

Posted Image

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

#8
Nok

Nok

    Founder/Publisher of GameXbar

  • Members
  • 3,217 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA
The UO Team has never considered it, and squashes it as strictly player conjecture. They have said repeatedly that they have no reason to see it as an option.

After nearly 11 years (in September) of the existing shards... each shard has not only player houses, but especially guilds/alliances, player towns, and individual shard histories that would be lost.

Combining shards is another idea that likely won't see the light of day.

Posted Image
GameXbar: DAoC - LOTRO - MMO - UO - WAR - WoW


#9
mora

mora

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts
i play on la one of the smaller shards. I've also played on pac. I like my empty shard, so really wouldn't want to combine with a bigger one. If they should think of combining, i would think combining the smaller ones together would be better. Oh and no way would i give up my house. i love my house:'(

#10
WyndRyder

WyndRyder

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 278 posts
Aye it would not work at all. Sight for example a 10 yr. old still functioning very large feluccan player run town on Chesapeake ie Paxlair. Let's say that Ches. had to *transfer or move* to Atlantic........what a mess that would be just regarding one very historic player run town that even Lord British has visited and well it just would not work. It would obliterate history on some shards with player run towns that are *ancient* and still there functioning.

Course IF they offered all my chrs. and their gold and regs. and vet rewards and heiloom tokens etc. to go from Siege to Chesapeake ...I might take them up on that offer though. I could consolidate my two shardedness to ONE..since I have been on Ches. for years and Siege for 4 yrs. but it's once vibrant fuller population dwindles, and I spent hours working on my chrs. skills via ROT the past 4 yrs there. etc. I could use them elsewhere like Chesapeake, IF.. if they offered us free passage with many of our 'non Siege specific' items, to transfer off of Siege. I bet I would not be the only one taking em up on that offer either.
Posted Image

#11
jfk

jfk

    Lost in the Abyss

  • Members
  • 1,190 posts
As others have said, it simply isn't going to happen. Houses are really the issue at the heart of it. My main shard is GL, and I occasionally play Atlantic. Not that I would see either of those being closed due to size of populations, if hypothetically they DID close GL and consolidate it with Atlantic, how do they move my houses from GL to Atl? Both the plots are taken on Atlantic. I too, would likely close my accounts and close shop on UO. This is simply an idea that I can never see happening.

#12
Thaur Macil

Thaur Macil

    Norway

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 339 posts
I find it hilarious that people would choose their pixels over a better game though. People are strangely attached to their pixels in this game. Wouldn't it be more fun to have alot more people to get to know and interact with? Make bigger and better communities. Give more life back to felucca. Have dungeons and hunting spots all over the world more lively.

I'd demolish my house for that in a second. Come on..

Vordrius (V^S) ‎(17:52):
THAT'S why all my chars have been ********!!! It's because I knew deep down I hated RPers!!!

#13
ladykolleen

ladykolleen

    Original Wonder Woman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 362 posts
I do miss the days of crowded brit bank! I play on chesapeake and i remember the days when the 'big bank' and 'little bank' of britain always had groups of people there. Boy was that a good time.


Good idea - but it would be a big headache if they did it. I mean im on chesapeake and i cant find a place now for my house to be built - so i could just imagine.

#14
GirlPower

GirlPower

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
Might be cool if there was a place, like a whole land of all the same size, perfectly placed housing just to get everyone onto one shard. All your items from the shard you were on be placed into what is your house now and you could recall right into it. Maybe be able to design, color and customize them but make them no bigger. Everyone would have the same house, so no competition for housing. I have a castle, and i would be willing to do it in a minute! It could just work! I miss the old packed uo days :( and were losing so many people b/c they get bored and that will make more people leave. Everyone just might have more fun and learn some things if we were all stuck together.

#15
RPG_Buff

RPG_Buff

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 43 posts

I find it hilarious that people would choose their pixels over a better game though. People are strangely attached to their pixels in this game. Wouldn't it be more fun to have alot more people to get to know and interact with? Make bigger and better communities. Give more life back to felucca. Have dungeons and hunting spots all over the world more lively.

I'd demolish my house for that in a second. Come on..


If I was playing a MMORPG just to interact with the most people possible, I would go back to WOW (Kel'Thuzad). To me it is about the quality of players not quantity. I have a few people on Origin I interact with and I love it. I actually had a problem with to many people wanting one spawn last night, it made me laugh.

#16
jfk

jfk

    Lost in the Abyss

  • Members
  • 1,190 posts
I'm not interested in "numbers". I'm interested in "community". I play my main shard NOT for population, but due to the number of friends I have in that community. I couldn't care less about bank numbers, I don't park my rear end at the bank. I enjoy the company of my compatriots as we do peerless, pvm, or pvp together. These relationships are what makes the game, not the number of people. I don't really care about the house per se, I care about the "pixels" I associate with in game.

FWIW, I find the larger shards to be far, far, less "personable" than the moderate or small shards. Actually, I find the moderate size shards to be absolutely perfect (see GL), as they give me exactly what I want in the game.

#17
ladykolleen

ladykolleen

    Original Wonder Woman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 362 posts
The point of populated banks is more or less to say that the shard was packed at one point, and now you rarely see anyone. You cant tell me you never ever go to the bank.

i think chesapeake is an awesome shard, there are quite a few people around and I do have good relationships with a lot of them. Big or small, the game is what you make it. and all in all in the end it is still just that - a game.

#18
MalagAste

MalagAste

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
IT's not strange to be attached to pixels....... how do pixels differ at all from say your favorite baseballcard collection????? How do they differ from a good sword collection????? Would you give up all your favorite tools????? how about all those family photos? If you were given a really nice photo album but it only had room for 12 pics..... but if you take the nifty new album you can't keep any photos that don't fit in it????? How do you feel when a burgalar breaks into your home and steals your mothers ring????? Violated?????? So.... Your best friend in the game gives you a bag with a book in it telling you thanks for something you did and a cloak.... is it any less precious?
Posted Image
Posted Image
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

#19
buddy lee

buddy lee

    Agent Zero

  • Members
  • 2,249 posts

im on chesapeake and i cant find a place now for my house to be built - so i could just imagine.


i will hook you up.

#20
Pickaxe Pete

Pickaxe Pete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts
I've made a suggestion several times to the devs that, if implimented, would be the most elegant solution.

Here it is again:

-5 clusters each of which will run on one physical server(s), one for each region (PAC MIDW ATL ASIA EU) with a couple hangers-on staying just as-is: AU, SP ruleset

-Shared dungeon server (includes t2a....no reason to not combine this for each cluster) ....This sub-server will be the only one actually merged.

-Moongates have a toggle to choose the shard before the destination.

Voila, no one loses item 1, or heaven forbid, their home. Players run into each a lot more for interaction, making cluster events very workable, and dungeons will be busy again.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: combining, shards, talk