UO Second Age

The point is, both make the game more convenient. I don't expect the staff to make Macroing illegal, so it is relevant to this thread.

Altay wrote:The Staff here can easily post on the homepage, ALL UNATTENDED MACROING IS ILLEGAL AND WILL GET YOU BANNED, then they can CHOOSE to IGNORE their own policy, but as it stands, the current policy isn't T2A accurate. Now we're just picking and choosing WHICH policies will be enforced [Macroing vs Exploiting]. Both should be disallowed to be more T2A accurate.

The point is, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not, the purpose of allowing macroing on this shard is for CONVENIENCE. Just like bank checks would only make things more convenient for everyone.

That step would remove any creedance to any other statements the staff make. I wouldn't want to see their credibilty lessened for anything like this..

Macroing is allowed and most likely will be allowed.

Altay wrote:The Staff here can easily post on the homepage, ALL UNATTENDED MACROING IS ILLEGAL AND WILL GET YOU BANNED, then they can CHOOSE to IGNORE their own policy, but as it stands, the current policy isn't T2A accurate. Now we're just picking and choosing WHICH policies will be enforced [Macroing vs Exploiting]. Both should be disallowed to be more T2A accurate.

The point is, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not, the purpose of allowing macroing on this shard is for CONVENIENCE. Just like bank checks would only make things more convenient for everyone.

While we could indeed post a message like that on the front page of the website, that would inevitably drive potential players away because they would not be any wiser to our actual handling of the policy. In that respect, we don't have to handle things exactly the same way that OSI did to achieve the same results that they did. Given that reality, it is well established that the experiences with respect to macroing in itself were varied from OSI server to OSI server. Since the end result for our server is to handle issues of policy in whatever way we feel is most comfortable, we are following in line with OSI handling of the same situations. The fact that we don't do it in exactly the same manner that OSI did is not consequential (otherwise, you would have to condemn us for using C# to emulate a freeshard instead of emulating in C, because that's how OSI did it).

Beyond that, the reasons for allowing macroing aren't really a matter of convenience, but are simply a reality of the functioning of a freeshard.

To: noxmonk and Altay

It's already documented by your earlier posting that you disagree with bank check changes. So be it, argue against the fact of change here, in this thread. But redirecting this forums topic to the policy of unattended macroing is off topic.

Why not start a thread discussing the abolishment of unattended macro, set up a poll, and I'm sure people like myself and others will stop by to put forth their own feedback and opinions. But until either one of you does that, I think you are distracting from the topic at hand.
_____

To comment on the issue that new players would be inconvenienced by a patch abolishing bank checks, I'm not sure that lines up. Considering we currently have oodles of room for 7x7 housing, no new player would need to intiate a purchase of property from an existing player. They could buy a deed from a vendor, seek our their plot, and place their house. Also, what new player has a large sum of money to collect rares or a buy a castle, when they will be more focused on purchasing supplies, hunting, or working their characters? By the time a "new player" starts spending 50k/item on rares, or 250k on a nice sized lot, they really aren't that "new" anymore, rather, they are established.

Charles Darwin wrote:To: noxmonk and Altay

It's already documented by your earlier posting that you disagree with bank check changes. So be it, argue against the fact of change here, in this thread. But redirecting this forums topic to the policy of unattended macroing is off topic.

Why not start a thread discussing the abolishment of unattended macro, set up a poll, and I'm sure people like myself and others will stop by to put forth their own feedback and opinions. But until either one of you does that, I think you are distracting from the topic at hand.
_____

To comment on the issue that new players would be inconvenienced by a patch abolishing bank checks, I'm not sure that lines up. Considering we currently have oodles of room for 7x7 housing, no new player would need to intiate a purchase of property from an existing player. They could buy a deed from a vendor, seek our their plot, and place their house. Also, what new player has a large sum of money to collect rares or a buy a castle, when they will be more focused on purchasing supplies, hunting, or working their characters? By the time a "new player" starts spending 50k/item on rares, or 250k on a nice sized lot, they really aren't that "new" anymore, rather, they are established.

Unfortunately, I do not feel I am detracting from the center of the argument, and that is convenience to the player and era accuracy. It states Era Accuracy clearly in the title. My thoughts on checks are neutral, I could take or leave them, however if you're going to choose to ignore one portion of the era in favor of the other, this is also incorrect. Everyone seems to want an all or nothing attitude except when you bring up macroing, razor, and the fact it would have been an exploit during that time period, everyone complains and cries. Era Accuracy is either strived for or isn't. If there's no attempt to correct a fairly large flaw about this shard versus OSI T2A, then why bother correcting any?

If you look at the topic for this thread it clearly reads:

[Era Accuracy] Bank Checks

Not

[Era Accuracy] Unattended Macro, Third Party Programs

Additionally, right above this thread topic it reads:

Forum rules

Posts in this forum are expected to be constructive, realistic and civil. Inflamatory or off topic posts will be removed.

So with all do respect, noxmonk, I do think you are "detracting from the center of this argument."

Charles Darwin wrote:If you look at the topic for this thread it clearly reads:

[Era Accuracy] Bank Checks

Not

[Era Accuracy] Unattended Macro, Third Party Programs

Additionally, right above this thread topic it reads:

Forum rules

Posts in this forum are expected to be constructive, realistic and civil. Inflamatory or off topic posts will be removed.

So with all do respect, noxmonk, I do think you are "detracting from the center of this argument."

The core of the argument is how far do we push era accuracy. Which is what I'm discussing. However you may feel about it is irrelevant. If you feel it is further off-topic than other posts, feel free to use the exclamation mark in the lower right hand corner of each post to notify the staff that you feel the post is off-topic.

Thank you.

Noxmonk is dead on.

This thread is about how far Era accuracy should be taken. Both Bank Checks and Razor / Macroing exist for convenience. If bank checks get Taken out, there's no reason why these other two should remain.

Macroing / Razor do not need individual threads, simply because there is no argument. They were not allowed, end of story. But They exist HERE just like BANK checks exist here for the sake of convenience.

no this thread is about era accurate bank checks and trade windows not ERa accuracy in general/macro law
start a new thread to argue overall accuracy and macroing

here this isnt a difficult thing to do so i did it for you

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7527

click that link to continue discussing macroing
this thread is about bank checks please respect that

I don't know why people are so passionate about keeping some things that can and will be changed eventually, no matter what they say. This is a great shard with a dedicated and professional staff that tries to emulate the T2A era, pre-2000, and aiming for the latter part of 1999. And this is true for ALL "era-accuracy" discussions in regards to game-mechanics, it will eventually be changed. The things is that most of the people that play on this shard does it because of it's core agenda, to replicate time long lost.

Derrick said it best (please note the highlighted part):

Derrick wrote:Again, when forced to choose which accuracy or bug issue I'm going to work on I'm more interested in making mechanics corrections that will please (or effect) the larger portion of the population. I agree that checks are out of our target timeframe and the removal of them will certainly bring about more of that "Era Feel" for good or bad. The only personal judgement I would pass on this correction is When to fix it, our mantra of era accuracy (which includes mechanical constistency) really does demand this be corrected.

remove tbh.

I'd be okay with the removal of all three of these things. The more difficult, the better.

Please give advanced notice (a week or two would be nice) before such a change is implemented so preparations can be made. Preferably in the form of a big red system message on login.

By the way, does anyone remember silver pieces?

Remove bank checks because they aren't era accurate, but leave capture the flag, etc.

I must be missing something.

nethervoid wrote:Remove bank checks because they aren't era accurate, but leave capture the flag, etc.

I must be missing something.

It's 2009 and CTF, DD, and other features are fun ways to keep the population interested. It has nothing to do with trying to 'fix' UO through custom neon llamas or out of era mechanics.

Kraarug wrote:

nethervoid wrote:Remove bank checks because they aren't era accurate, but leave capture the flag, etc.

I must be missing something.

It's 2009 and CTF, DD, and other features are fun ways to keep the population interested. It has nothing to do with trying to 'fix' UO through custom neon llamas or out of era mechanics.

It sounds like it doesn't matter what's really better for the players. All that matters is era accuracy. CTF, etc are not era accurate. They shouldn't be on the shard. I mean bank checks get taken out for era accuracy? Are you serious? lol Just makes dealing with gold suck, tbh.

Not really sure how you can be serious about removing bank checks for 'era accuracy' and be ok with CTF. That doesn't make sense.