UO Second Age

This debate is really simple to me. Either reduce accounts per ip in order to make a major change in the direction of t2a playstyle or continue allowing players to simultaneously use multiple accounts for the sake of convenience and promoting gameplay that encourages such usage.

To say that multiclienting doesn't affect gameplay or to say that this style of gameplay was something that was prominent or even legal during actual t2a is obviously false. The number of exploits and tactics used by multiclienting is nearly endless and has affected every aspect of gameplay on Secondage. When it comes down to it, this argument has sided between those who wish to restore the gameplay to that of actual t2a era and those who wish to further use multiclienting for their own ends.

As the shards aim is accuracy before all else, I really don't see why this is even a debate. Hell, all of the work put into fine tuning spawns, bugs, pvp mechanics, etc. is rather trivial compared to the vast changes multiclienting allows. Honestly, is balron's loot being altered going to make the shard more accurate than eliminating things such as ghosting, gatechars, healbots, standby reds, or running 4 miners on one screen? I am not trying to scrutinize the endless work the staff have put into such detail, but when looking at how much the gameplay has changed by allowing multi-clienting, it just doesn't seem like such finetuning is really moving the shard into the experience of t2a.

However, as for a compromise. Some here have mentioned that there could be problems with having multiple users in one household and also that it was in fact possible to multi-client during t2a by using more than one computer. Would it be possible to do something similar to how the UO client prevents more than one from running at the same time? Somehow allow multiple clients to connect the server from one ip, but only allow a computer to run one copy of uo at a time. This would still allow people with more than one computer to play at the same time and while it would give an advantage to users who had multiple computers, it would be era accurate (as this could be done during actual t2a).

Thoughts?

Senses wrote:Just wondering Apok, but with you and your brothers, how many accounts do you currently have access to from your IP?

4 Charecters at a time. or 4 Acct's

Lets just say we limit it to one Account Per I.P.. For people that play once in a while lets say an hour here and there i really dont think the majority of the shard will spent time crafting. I.E Alchy's Smiths. Tailors ect. So goods will become virtually non existent for player run vendors directly effecting PVP as well as all the economy it self. Kegs are sold the second they are put on a vendor as it is now.

Ya people using ghost or what ever to scout a area sucks but lets be realistic when we played years ago this happened as well. someone in our guild would run around as a ghost and msg our guild and give directions as to where to go. I think back then we where all a little younger and most likly spent many more hours online and didnt mind spending hours as a ghost or Stealther.

Look, making a major change like limiting it to one I.P would pull the foundation right out from the solid building. You would have economic crisis.

House's on Multipul account?
Main charecters on different accouts?
Player run vendors?
Accounts that you are babysitting? (I.E a friend leaves for a month and gives you his acct to refresh his house and vendors)

It seems that it would be a huge i mean huge job for the staff and well unless your donating a couple hundered a week i dont think they would have the time and resources to do this would make sense.

Lets be honest the only reason y this is an issue is because someone got pked to many times.

If you really wanted to manage this shard the way they did back then youd make it a bitch to have reds. Just like they did.

ONE ACCOUNT = ONE MAYBE TWO REDS = STATE LOSS AT SOME POINT = I DONT PLAY UO ANYMORE CAUSE ID HAVE TO LEAVE MY COMP ON FOR HOURS JUST TO REZ DAYS LATER.

so one account means i no longer use a red char. and iam sure many othr would feel the same.

blah.

Its funny Apok, because everything you just listed is exactly the way it was.

malice-tg wrote:disagree with the premise completely. especially since i multi cliented during era.

I had 2 accounts and I know of someone that said they had 10. I had a friend that had 5 accounts. I see nothing wrong with what was set up here. I normally play only one account at a time. What is wrong with having another character pick up your things when you die.. it hurts nothing or no one.

I was thinking earlier about this and I started thinking about crafters... we all know that it takes a week (or more if we lose connection while at work for various reasons or we don't happen to be at home 7 days out of the week, our macro screws up, we run out of resources and aren't around to fix that, et cetera, et cetera) of logging in our alchemist at every available opportunity to GM that skill. So with the one account logged per IP, you're talking about just not playing, just logging in this guy to grind a mortar every possible day and letting him go, for a rather extended period of time during which you couldn't do jack else on Secondage. I can't say for sure because that's not the way it works now, but I'm fairly certain it would make me sick. This has nothing to do with my previous comments; it's just another thing that occured to me.

Apok wrote:ONE ACCOUNT = ONE MAYBE TWO REDS = STATE LOSS AT SOME POINT = I DONT PLAY UO ANYMORE CAUSE ID HAVE TO LEAVE MY COMP ON FOR HOURS JUST TO REZ DAYS LATER.

so one account means i no longer use a red char. and iam sure many othr would feel the same.

blah.

Ahaha, I just read this and it's so right.
I can't play for half the week because I have to have my ghost logged in to get out of stat = someone's moving on.

I played a thief 50% or more of my logged hours back then and I used to park hidden for hours as a ghost for days watching people's houses and then spent hours more standing outside their houses hidden waiting to stealth inside and rob them. There's no accounting for what some people will spend their time doing. Was I playing fair? Yes. Now for the million-dollar question - do you think people complained about that any less than they're complaining about this? No. For some reason in Ultima, the wronged rarely just say "You got me" and leave it at that.

How would disabling multiclienting affect reds at all? It takes 8 hrs to burn off a shortterm, thus the majority of time youre burning off counts is throughout the week, at work, asleep, etc. How would not being able to burn off counts while you're playing a different char really affect much at all?.....Do you really play 8 hrs every day to where not multiclienting would prevent you from losing one single shortterm a day?....Is that really even significant?

benny- wrote:How would disabling multiclienting affect reds at all? It takes 8 hrs to burn off a shortterm, thus the majority of time youre burning off counts is throughout the week, at work, asleep, etc. How would not being able to burn off counts while you're playing a different char really affect much at all?.....Do you really play 8 hrs every day to where not multiclienting would prevent you from losing one single shortterm a day?....Is that really even significant?

its greatly significant cause if your a decent red you have alot more then 5 shortterms.

Lets just says you have 12 as an example. Just to be able to play that account again its 96 hours. and well to kill 96 hours youll have to be logged in alot more then just work, asleep ect as you posted.

So come up with an idea that makes sense.

Multi clients makes sense. So you can play the game with whatever play style you enjoy. And when you want to.

Switch to the Siege Perilous ruleset with no statloss... I'm all for that.

Apok wrote: its greatly significant cause if your a decent red you have alot more then 5 shortterms.

Lets just says you have 12 as an example. Just to be able to play that account again its 96 hours. and well to kill 96 hours youll have to be logged in alot more then just work, asleep ect as you posted.

So come up with an idea that makes sense.

Multi clients makes sense. So you can play the game with whatever play style you enjoy. And when you want to.

No, its really not that significant....even if you played 40 hrs a week (the equivalent of a full time job) that's 5 shortterms you could burn while playing another account. Compare that to the dozens of counts you burn off by simply leaving your client logged in when afk. Its obvious the majority of counts being burned off isn't by people leaving multiple accounts running for the few hrs they play, but instead by people who just leave their clients run when afk.

Even assuming everyone plays for countless hrs every day, you're really talking about a handful of counts in a week. The point is moot.

Yes, there will be downsides to such a change....every major change to the shard's design has caused controversy and endless ranting of "everyones gonna quit!" But when it comes down to it, this change will only eliminate extremely mookish game tactics used by those who would rather exploit multiclienting rather than restore the game to something similar to t2a playstyle.

Im all for allowing users to continue owning multiple accounts, so as not to punish multiple users in one household or to hinder player housing or the player economy, but there is no reason to continue allowing multiclienting (or simultaneously running these accounts) beyond the fact that many users have grown accustomed to it and simply prefer to take advantage of the current system rather than playing similarly to how the game was played during the era.

Exactly everyone has grown accustomed to it, and so they make up excuses to prevent change, all of the reasons against it so far are bull shit.

so if i understand correctly. this whole tread is because of mookish tactics.

Like ghost scouting ?

Well it was a tactic used back then aswell. So maybe iam being thick headed but Ghost scouting is T2A accurate.

Or going to rez one of your other charecters?
well back in 99 UO had over 100.000 Players online at times so if you had only one account you could page your guild.
This isnt the case anymore People have long since moved onto other online games.

So having a second account helps players actually play the game. As an example if i needed a rez. or iam stuck in dungeoun i could gate myself out.

So What other issuse's is there with multipul acct's ?

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR wrote:Exactly everyone has grown accustomed to it, and so they make up excuses to prevent change, all of the reasons against it so far are bull shit.

The ability to have a back up account or a second account for crafting is awesome. being able to create every different player style is truly unique and honestly is alot of fun. If you limit people to five slots, your tacking a huge part of a free shard away.

Keep in mind RAAAAAAR it is a free shard and runs only on donations,

There is many legit reasons for and against.

Currently iam playing and my two borthers because we can have multipul charecters. the CHARECTERS WE NEVER PLAYED back in the day.

Limit me to five slots. Ill get rid of my reds. My prov, my alchy. my posioner. my thief. my dexter. My t-hunter.

so ill keep my 5spots for 3 pvp tanks. a carpenter to make furnny. and a tamer.

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Derrick Post subject: Re: How many clients should Second Age allow?Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:52 pm


Site Admin




Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:49 pm
Posts: 3508
Location: Cove Thor wrote:
As far as the tech side (and Derrick, correct me where I'm wrong)

It's razor which allows multi-clients. There are other programs that would do the same thing, including back in T2A.

The only read IP address would be the external IP, and although each computer has a different internal IP, those wouldn't be readable.

This is entirely correct. We have know way to tell how many "real" pc's lie behind a router.""""""""""""""""""""""


So maybe this will keep people from crying. :]

there is no way to restrict it to one IP Per house and still allow others in the same house to play.

Thanks.