UO Second Age

If you have a castle it seems fair enough that you should also have an army to defend it, oh mighty lord. Look at how many WMD security are running around to defend Angel's town.

Mirage wrote:Considering there is limited castles on this shard it would raise the value of castles and property in general. Secondly, most of the runes acquired to peoples courtyards were obtained by a bug placing a tower near the castle and teleporting into the courtyard.....of course some people were ignorant enough to carry around runes to the courtyard.

Every one of my Castle runes were obtained by marking runes long before any of ya'll were here, or through theft and/or murder.

i dont think placing a tower and teleing over could be considered a bug

BlackFoot wrote:i dont think placing a tower and teleing over could be considered a bug

I think the LOS was bugged/inaccurate for a few months. But going on the logic of this server, old items that are out of era but created here stick around. Look at the neon leather caps, the vanquishing wands, etc...

I can also guarantee I spent more time marking runes than most Castle owners spent farming

See this is the exact point of my Poll, not only based on Syntax and the bugs that have taken place since shard birth but Roadkill is case and point. Do we want to talk Era Accuracy? Well I don't think back when I played OSI Atlantic what 8 year or 9 years ago did a person know every conceivable castle location in the game. So Roadkills argument is that because he was here before other people and marked runes to every possible courtyard spot that he has the right to keep them and make money. I think that's complete bullshit in my opinion, one man should not have the ability to grief every present or future castle owner in the game. I have played UO as long as many of the people against me in this thread and my motivation is selfish, I think if I spend 1million gold that I shouldn't have to suffer because someone griefer/looter marked a rune in my courtyard years ago. Also for other people who are castle owners who are against this, I can understand the era accuracy thing to a point but don't forget that this is one-time and would make your castle an actual castle. I thank the people who have responded for their opinions, I expect this poll to be 15 to 1 just due to the fact of castles being a minority and nobody likes to help the rich lol.

You can't use "learned knowledge" against "era accurate"

There are TONS of things on this shard, and every shard, that will never be "true to the day" because of the amount of experience many of us have.

RoadKill doesn't have a rune to my Castle courtyard.

fight hard Roadkill! fight hard !!! lets just hate on people who were not here first on secondage!

You make a very poor argument Cindrew, if you want to go era accurate, things will never be the same, back on OSI in 1999 players at best only had 2 - 3 years experience with the game & map as opposed to know where players have had 15 years to explore, play, emulate, and tear apart game code, Players will never be able to unlearn these things, and thus not allowing us ever to truely replicate the "feel" of the Era,

Also case and point, because of an exploit bug that was around for a short period of time, there may be players who have courtyard runes to your castle, but on the other hand I have met players who marked hundreds of runes in possible castle locations to idealy get one inside a courtyard if a castle was placed, how would this be fair?

Not to mention the potential undertaking in which a GM/Admin would have to go through to systematically remove every rune for a possible series of locations, leaving rune books & librarys void of these runes, which I dont think is even possible, I recall a story a friend told me once about being somewhere with derrick & marking a rune (to an otherwise unaccessable part of the game) and having derrick chace him around until he got the rune back, now whether this is a true tale or fabrication is another discussion, but if this is true wouldent derrick just "delete" all runes to that location?

Finally, correct me if I am wrong since I never owned/dreamed of owning a castle in the era, but wouldent over the cource of years most/all castle courtyards have runes marked into them, vis a vis sales of castles, lost of runes & runebooks with marked runes, and possibly other methods avaible back on OSI I dont know about from the time they were originally placed until the end of era? I would assume so, and that if there were any courtyards which there were no runes it would be a very very rare and but in reality there would be no way to tell if your courtyard did or not, I would think it to be absurd that anyone owning a castle would use "no one has runes to my courtyard" as their only means to house security, so how would it be fair/accurate to allow rich players this option?

I cant see how in the least this is a sensable proposition,

Cindrew wrote:I expect this poll to be 15 to 1 just due to the fact of castles being a minority and nobody likes to help the rich lol.

This is an obvious statement, and its not because "no one likes to help the rich" but rather because this idea is one sided, and not even a fix for a bug rather a

RoadKill wrote: "Because I want it"

mentality, and who is to even say some one used the LOS bug on your castle while it was still possible to do, and dident aquire a rune via a legal and legit method?

Like I said, its a pretty absurd proposition, even if I owned a castle this would be my position.

Cindrew wrote:cry hard Cindrew! cry hard !!! lets just cry on people who were here first on secondage!

Corrected to be era accurate.

noxmonk wrote:

Cindrew wrote:cry hard Cindrew! cry hard !!! lets just cry on people who were here first on secondage!

Corrected to be era accurate.

QFT

I have not tried to hide the fact that my intentions are selfish, the point of this post was to put my idea out there. Now I understand that many are against this idea. However the majority of the people who have spoken out on this post are people who would have something to lose themselves or are not affected whether it went either way. I guess im just sitting here as a secondage player thinking, gee i spent the same money on my castle as did say Faust who has a secure courtyard.

Anyways the people have spoken fair enough, I just know this would have little impact on the server and would be a nice thing to have done, its not hard to code, it was actually done on a past server I played on, and believe it or not the server processors did not have a meltdown. As far as messing up rune libraries? I guess i haven't visited a rune library that had a book of castle courtyard spots in it. Or do I see that being a loss to a rune library.

could probably pay to have your rune removed from peopesl runelibrarys :LD

Cindrew wrote:gee i spent the same money on my castle as did say Faust who has a secure courtyard.

this would be no different then OSI where if a player placed a castle in the fist few months they were available and keeping it secure and holding on it to, vs a player who bought/placed their castle months/years later

BlackFoot wrote:could probably pay to have your rune removed from peopesl runelibrarys :LD

There ya go! Cindrew, if you got that money to spend on a castle, why not bribe the guy who has your rune?

I voted "no"