Archived from groups: rec.games.computer.ultima.online (
More info?)
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:53:08 -0600, Ice <nobody@noplace.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:27:09 -0500, Reg LeCrisp <x@x.x> wrote:
>
>
>>I think what would really solve the problem would be just to give all
>>houses the same amount of storage regardless of their size. I think
>>that half the reason people go for the enormous 18x18 plots and turn
>>them into ugly concrete cubes is just for the extra storage. A serious
>>UO player usually can't get by with the item count a small house
>>provides.
>>
>The original argument against this idea was "item count" Each server
>can only handle a limited amount of items. The DEV team just keeps
>creating more items and things seem to still run, so I am not sure
>that is still a good argument. If they really wanted to limit items,
>more things would "stack". Potions in bottles, arcane gems, seeds
>from the same plant, BOD's that are identical, etc.
>
Yup, and item count really was a problem back in the old days. I don't
think it's really an issue anymore though or they would never have let
us keep as many vendors as we have now. Plus, backup times are still
quite reasonable.
>>Even better would be to give every account a certain amount of storage
>>that would be accessible via their bank box even if they didn't own a
>>house. If you had enough storage and if you could easily transfer
>>stuff between characters then owning a house wouldn't be such a life
>>or death issue.
>>
>There is a real reason for this one. Because people wanted to be able
>access their bank account from any bank in the land, you bank account
>is connected to your character. It travels every place your character
>goes. If you had a large item count crossing server lines and running
>across the country side, you would be too lagged to move.
>
Oh right, I knew that but forgot.
>The answer to this problem would be to have only Gold attached to your
>character, and you pick a town where your "bank box" can be accessed
>when you create your character. If you want to change towns, you
>would have to do it just like you do when you change houses. YOU pick
>up all your stuff and move it to another town bank, you could have
>maybe one week to get things moved and close the first box before it
>is all eliminated. This box could be accessed by all characters on
>the account, or "maybe" even any character with the password.
>
>The "personal" bank box that travels with the character would be
>limited to maybe 20 or so items. Gold and a few re-outfit armor
>and weapons for when your killed and lose everything.
>
>Something like this could even bring "dead towns" like Trinsic back to
>life. Everyone could not get a bank box in Britain, so towns like
>Trinsic, Minco and Vesper, would again become populated. Towns
>would again become a place to meet new people, not just a place to
>spam what you have to sell, or want to buy.
>
>I like the idea of having a common account bank box, and I do not
>mind being requires to pick a town to open my "Bank account".
>I would also love to see ALL the towns populated again with people
>using the bank, and chatting.
>
>I have known a lot of people that have said they would not have a
>house if they had a common bank box that all of their characters
>could use. If you have 5 characters, you get storage for 1125 items,
>if you have 6 characters, maybe you get a bonus storage of 200 items.
>(I say that because you had to pay extra for the 6th character slot).
>
Great ideas Ice. They'd revive dead towns and take all of the stress
out of the housing market. People that wanted houses could just choose
whatever size suits them based on the location rather than feeling
like they absolutely have to have the largest spot they can get just
to store their BOD collection. Plus, they'd make the game a lot more
newbie friendly.
Reg LeCrisp - Atlantic
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram