UOSA Tournament System

[Ulfrigg]

So the problem for you is it is (AUTO) not staff runned? Thats hard to belive since you guys belive in the P.R.I.S.M.

[Yxven]

I gotta tell you that as a new player the shard's t2a accuracy policy is kind of baffling. I get that we're trying to stay true to the spirit of t2a, but I don't understand why we're toeing a hard line on events with the t2a policy when the policy is already inconsistently applied.

Off the top of my head:
Ancient wyrms are intentionally not era accurate to provide "extra challenge."
Banks used to have arbitrarily large storage.
Most bugs that existed back that were widely used are fixed (like ev + reactive armor = resist gains).
Some design flaws that existed back then that were widely used are fixed (like meteor storm parties).
Some bugs that existed yet very few people if any used (like being killed in the center of your small) will never be fixed.
Sparring use to be difficulty based. People went to the bone wall in Deceit for a reason.
There are savages and ridgebacks near Compassion shrine...
I've never entered an orc fort and been told I can be freely attacked by players on an OSI shard.
There are intentionally more stable-masters than on any osi shard.
No one ever bought out most of the stables on OSI shards.

This shard is not 100% t2a accurate. It never will be, and being 100% t2a accurate is not even desirable (Cutting individual bandages? Really?). Why can't automated events be another small exception?

Staff events were t2a accurate. Adding regular staff events would improve the shards t2a accuracy. Most players want them to return in some form. It might even boost the shard's population. Having to automate them because we also don't have the t2a accurate staff that goes with the t2a accurate subscription base is a small compromise for improving the health of the shard.

Keep silver generation gone, but bring back the events.

[Flea]

Ok well since Derrick has been MIA for 6+ months, no updates of any kind, and we havnt heard much from him when it comes to events since he said "dont expect events to return in the same form or regularity that they previously have" ok cool whatevs. Some input from someone other than Kaiven would be nice tho.

So my thoughts.... This shard has a huge HUGE, gigantic advantage to players who played it within the first 1-3 years and I feel that is pretty lame.

Yeah our #s our great... where the fuck are people? AFK? they log in to refresh houses but don't "play" anymore.

How about a clone shard, starting fresh, called UOSA:FUN. Where us people who want to have events or new items, possibility for some sort of expansion WITHIN the T2A mechanics. I invested too much time into this shard when it was much more active and fun to just want to walk away now and I think that's where many other people are. Having hopes of the shard being as fun and active as it was 2 or so years ago.

Alas, I think our hopes of that have been quelled, but many of us dont want to just quit because of our love of UO and dont believe we'll ever play again beyond here. We don't want item based PVP, we enjoy a full loot game, and very much appreciate what the remaining few staff members do here.

[Kaivan]

I really think I need to address this, mainly to dispel the rumors being created.

I gotta tell you that as a new player the shard's t2a accuracy policy is kind of baffling. I get that we're trying to stay true to the spirit of t2a, but I don't understand why we're toeing a hard line on events with the t2a policy when the policy is already inconsistently applied.

Our policy of mechanical accuracy is applied as consistently as possible.

Off the top of my head:
Ancient wyrms are intentionally not era accurate to provide "extra challenge."

Can you provide evidence that we are making ancient wyrms more difficult just for the extra challenge? I am entirely unaware of any changes to the behavior or strength of an ancient wyrm that we have done without any evidence. If one exists, then it should be fixed.

Banks used to have arbitrarily large storage.

This is ambiguous. Are you saying that our banks used to have arbitrarily large storage, or are you saying that OSI servers bank boxes had arbitrarily large storage. If the latter, then this was true only during the earliest part of the game, and only from the perspective on the total number of items. If the former, then RunUO default has a limit of 125 items on bank boxes, just like we do.

Most bugs that existed back that were widely used are fixed (like ev + reactive armor = resist gains).

For one, do you have any proof of the EV/resist gain bug in the first place? Second, there is a patch on September 1, 1999 that fixes a bug with Reactive Armor, although it is not specific which one.

Some design flaws that existed back then that were widely used are fixed (like meteor storm parties).

We have seen no evidence to support the existence of meteor swarm parties on OSI servers. We know that any spell that did direct damage of any kind (and AoE damage is still direct, just on many targets) would check against your resist based on the amount of damage taken, and as a result, our best information shows that resist parties were useless.

Some bugs that existed yet very few people if any used (like being killed in the center of your small) will never be fixed.

I've talked about this until I'm blue in the face in several other threads. The LoS behavior is exactly what it should be, and several things that players point to as being huge bugs, are the exact same mechanics used to do common things such as getting on the roof of certain structures. The only difference is player knowledge, which is something we can't control.

Sparring use to be difficulty based. People went to the bone wall in Deceit for a reason.

Sparring is difficulty based here.

There are savages and ridgebacks near Compassion shrine...

These are renamed and rehued bone knights, desert, and frenzied ostards for an event that we are working on. Scenario creatures were common on OSI servers, and we use them here as well.

I've never entered an orc fort and been told I can be freely attacked by players on an OSI shard.

I've already addressed this in this thread, but again, RP guilds were afforded extra help on OSI servers relative to other groups as a way to help facilitate their RP role. While our overall policy on helping players differs on the whole from OSI servers, our policy makes the same distinction that OSI did, and we help the RP groups facilitate their role when it deepens their RP interaction on the server. This is a matter of policy about known exceptions, and we do not replicate policy.

There are intentionally more stable-masters than on any osi shard.

Actually, this isn't the case. An old version of the taming archive uploaded by the curator of the website specifically for us shows the total number of stable masters on both facets per shard for several shards. We have a significant number of stable masters, but we do not have more than every OSI shard.

No one ever bought out most of the stables on OSI shards.

You're talking about player behavior 13 years out of date, and something we have little control over. This has nothing to do with mechanical accuracy.

This shard is not 100% t2a accurate. It never will be, and being 100% t2a accurate is not even desirable (Cutting individual bandages? Really?). Why can't automated events be another small exception?

We have never claimed that we will be 100% accurate, which is what you are expecting from us, given some of your responses. Our only goal is to be as close to mechanically accurate as possible, since these are the only things that we can readily control.

Staff events were t2a accurate. Adding regular staff events would improve the shards t2a accuracy. Most players want them to return in some form. It might even boost the shard's population. Having to automate them because we also don't have the t2a accurate staff that goes with the t2a accurate subscription base is a small compromise for improving the health of the shard.

I've already addressed this as well, but I'll say it again. While it is true that staff events were T2A accurate, the type of events - and the frequency of events - that players want here are completely outside the realm of what was done on OSI servers. Also, the types of changes that players are requesting in order to hold these events represent major suspensions of the era mechanics to facilitate a specific type of game play, simply because they find it fun. This would give unprecedented privilege to a specific group of players for no other reason than because they want it, which is entirely unacceptable.

[Menkaure]

Kaivan, in Catskills, in the year 1998, there was a staff event for a dueling tournament. It was hosted by GM Cocheese and the guild, DnA. Does anyone else remember this? I even remember the winners name was ShAmPoO. I can't remember where it was held, I think near Minoc, but I do remember standing there watching the fights you could not cast any spells (it would say that spell does not work here), Unless you were fighting. That's all I remember, does anyone else remember this?

[Kaivan]

I'm not sure how I missed this.

Don't try to make it seem like I am belittling PvM. PvM is totally fine with me, and I even engage in it myself. It is as viable a play style as any. I celebrate the entire catalog of activities in uo.

I'm not trying to make it sound like anything. When you openly say that PvP events are the only things that bring people together, you are necessarily belittling other play styles. This isn't me putting words into your mouth, this is flat out what you're saying.

You seem to be saying the Pvmers dont PvM for the fun of it! You seem to be saying they only do it to grind out gold resources, and items. Why would you assume that?

You completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'll rephrase it.

In general, for PvP encounters you are looking for the following:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvP encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

For PvM encounters, players are generally looking for the following:

• A way to acquire gold, and resources.
• For the fun of it.

The theoretical automated event system to support this that you proposed would provide the following:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvM encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature, which is meaningless to the purpose of PvM, a ranking and records system for how many creatures are slain.

I'm not sure if you see the difference, but your proposed system excludes one the points for PvM, which is to acquire gold and resources. In fact, virtually any other type of "event" that might be run has some other additional reason beyond "for the fun of it". By saying that all events must conform with the PvP events, which would be run exclusively for the fun of it, you are removing a major reason for participating in these other events (after all, PvP doesn't provide any new items, just the potential items if your opponents). This is an awfully convenient position to hold for PvP events, and ignores the fact that if we accept that we are trying to support the full fun of a given playstyle, this would necessarily include loot for PvM events.

I don't care what kind of cool events could be thrown into the world, it doesn't have to be pvp. All I know is that there was a cool system in place at one time, that MANY people (not just myself despite you trying to single me out) enjoyed. I get what you are saying, but you don't seem to get what I am saying. We do not want to change mechanics. We do not want any special way to get rewards. We simply want a weekly, rewardless, use our own resources, tracked tournament of some sort. If not being "in the world" for an hr a week just slaps your precious NEA in the face SO HARD, so be it... Doesn't change the fact that it's dumb.

You seem to miss what I'm saying. By requesting an environment where you can have the full breadth of fun that you want, while preventing anyone from interacting in any undesirable way, you are asking for a change in mechanics.

Kaivan, in Catskills, in the year 1998, there was a staff event for a dueling tournament. It was hosted by GM Cocheese and the guild, DnA. Does anyone else remember this? I even remember the winners name was ShAmPoO. I can't remember where it was held, I think near Minoc, but I do remember standing there watching the fights you could not cast any spells (it would say that spell does not work here), Unless you were fighting. That's all I remember, does anyone else remember this?

Anecdotes are not evidence.

[Abyz]

Show me where I said that PvP events are the only things that bring people together.

[Menkaure]

I'm not sure how I missed this.

Don't try to make it seem like I am belittling PvM. PvM is totally fine with me, and I even engage in it myself. It is as viable a play style as any. I celebrate the entire catalog of activities in uo.

I'm not trying to make it sound like anything. When you openly say that PvP events are the only things that bring people together, you are necessarily belittling other play styles. This isn't me putting words into your mouth, this is flat out what you're saying.

You seem to be saying the Pvmers dont PvM for the fun of it! You seem to be saying they only do it to grind out gold resources, and items. Why would you assume that?

You completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'll rephrase it.

In general, for PvP encounters you are looking for the following:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvP encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

For PvM encounters, players are generally looking for the following:

• A way to acquire gold, and resources.
• For the fun of it.

The theoretical automated event system to support this that you proposed would provide the following:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvM encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature, which is meaningless to the purpose of PvM, a ranking and records system for how many creatures are slain.

I'm not sure if you see the difference, but your proposed system excludes one the points for PvM, which is to acquire gold and resources. In fact, virtually any other type of "event" that might be run has some other additional reason beyond "for the fun of it". By saying that all events must conform with the PvP events, which would be run exclusively for the fun of it, you are removing a major reason for participating in these other events (after all, PvP doesn't provide any new items, just the potential items if your opponents). This is an awfully convenient position to hold for PvP events, and ignores the fact that if we accept that we are trying to support the full fun of a given playstyle, this would necessarily include loot for PvM events.

I don't care what kind of cool events could be thrown into the world, it doesn't have to be pvp. All I know is that there was a cool system in place at one time, that MANY people (not just myself despite you trying to single me out) enjoyed. I get what you are saying, but you don't seem to get what I am saying. We do not want to change mechanics. We do not want any special way to get rewards. We simply want a weekly, rewardless, use our own resources, tracked tournament of some sort. If not being "in the world" for an hr a week just slaps your precious NEA in the face SO HARD, so be it... Doesn't change the fact that it's dumb.

You seem to miss what I'm saying. By requesting an environment where you can have the full breadth of fun that you want, while preventing anyone from interacting in any undesirable way, you are asking for a change in mechanics.

Kaivan, in Catskills, in the year 1998, there was a staff event for a dueling tournament. It was hosted by GM Cocheese and the guild, DnA. Does anyone else remember this? I even remember the winners name was ShAmPoO. I can't remember where it was held, I think near Minoc, but I do remember standing there watching the fights you could not cast any spells (it would say that spell does not work here), Unless you were fighting. That's all I remember, does anyone else remember this?

Anecdotes are not evidence.

I never said it was evidence. I was asking around for anyone who read the post because maybe they would remember it as well. And then maybe we could work together to try to find it to bring it to the table. Obviously hearsay is not evidence.

[Pac]

Show me where I said that PvP events are the only things that bring people together.

PvP events are the only things that bring people together.

[montier]

I'm not sure how I missed this.

Don't try to make it seem like I am belittling PvM. PvM is totally fine with me, and I even engage in it myself. It is as viable a play style as any. I celebrate the entire catalog of activities in uo.

I'm not trying to make it sound like anything. When you openly say that PvP events are the only things that bring people together, you are necessarily belittling other play styles. This isn't me putting words into your mouth, this is flat out what you're saying.

You seem to be saying the Pvmers dont PvM for the fun of it! You seem to be saying they only do it to grind out gold resources, and items. Why would you assume that?

You completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'll rephrase it.

In general, for PvP encounters you are looking for the following:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvP encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

For PvM encounters, players are generally looking for the following:

• A way to acquire gold, and resources.
• For the fun of it.

The theoretical automated event system to support this that you proposed would provide the following:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvM encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature, which is meaningless to the purpose of PvM, a ranking and records system for how many creatures are slain.

I'm not sure if you see the difference, but your proposed system excludes one the points for PvM, which is to acquire gold and resources. In fact, virtually any other type of "event" that might be run has some other additional reason beyond "for the fun of it". By saying that all events must conform with the PvP events, which would be run exclusively for the fun of it, you are removing a major reason for participating in these other events (after all, PvP doesn't provide any new items, just the potential items if your opponents). This is an awfully convenient position to hold for PvP events, and ignores the fact that if we accept that we are trying to support the full fun of a given playstyle, this would necessarily include loot for PvM events.

I don't care what kind of cool events could be thrown into the world, it doesn't have to be pvp. All I know is that there was a cool system in place at one time, that MANY people (not just myself despite you trying to single me out) enjoyed. I get what you are saying, but you don't seem to get what I am saying. We do not want to change mechanics. We do not want any special way to get rewards. We simply want a weekly, rewardless, use our own resources, tracked tournament of some sort. If not being "in the world" for an hr a week just slaps your precious NEA in the face SO HARD, so be it... Doesn't change the fact that it's dumb.

You seem to miss what I'm saying. By requesting an environment where you can have the full breadth of fun that you want, while preventing anyone from interacting in any undesirable way, you are asking for a change in mechanics.

Kaivan, in Catskills, in the year 1998, there was a staff event for a dueling tournament. It was hosted by GM Cocheese and the guild, DnA. Does anyone else remember this? I even remember the winners name was ShAmPoO. I can't remember where it was held, I think near Minoc, but I do remember standing there watching the fights you could not cast any spells (it would say that spell does not work here), Unless you were fighting. That's all I remember, does anyone else remember this?

Anecdotes are not evidence.

Thank for your previous response it was quite informative..

So looking at this.. Is it possible to make the automated events close enough to mechanically accurate that it is acceptable. I have no clue how feasible what i am proposing is..

In general, for PvP encounters looks like this:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Instead of providing a place, use an existing in game location.
• Do NOT ensure that no outside interference occurs. Maybe we encourage, Players to police the event place... As it is a regular Location, Regular Time it would be easier to try to get people there to defend the location and prevent intervention.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

[Yxven]

Off the top of my head:
Ancient wyrms are intentionally not era accurate to provide "extra challenge."

Can you provide evidence that we are making ancient wyrms more difficult just for the extra challenge? I am entirely unaware of any changes to the behavior or strength of an ancient wyrm that we have done without any evidence. If one exists, then it should be fixed.

"The ancient wyrm is one of the very few creatures here that is intentionally not era accurate. He's quite a bit beefed up and will auto-dispel. The intent is to provide a unique challenge, the loot has been upped accordingly." ~Derrick
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1376&p=9108

Banks used to have arbitrarily large storage.

This is ambiguous. Are you saying that our banks used to have arbitrarily large storage, or are you saying that OSI servers bank boxes had arbitrarily large storage. If the latter, then this was true only during the earliest part of the game, and only from the perspective on the total number of items. If the former, then RunUO default has a limit of 125 items on bank boxes, just like we do.

According to the patch notes, I appear wrong on this one.

Most bugs that existed back that were widely used are fixed (like ev + reactive armor = resist gains).

For one, do you have any proof of the EV/resist gain bug in the first place? Second, there is a patch on September 1, 1999 that fixes a bug with Reactive Armor, although it is not specific which one.

I misremembered this as it involved blade spirits not evs. The proof is at the bottom of the patch notes. http://wiki.uosecondage.com/1999_Patch_Notes

Some design flaws that existed back then that were widely used are fixed (like meteor storm parties).

We have seen no evidence to support the existence of meteor swarm parties on OSI servers. We know that any spell that did direct damage of any kind (and AoE damage is still direct, just on many targets) would check against your resist based on the amount of damage taken, and as a result, our best information shows that resist parties were useless.

I'm certainly not having any luck finding evidence. I only remember doing it.

Some bugs that existed yet very few people if any used (like being killed in the center of your small) will never be fixed.

I've talked about this until I'm blue in the face in several other threads. The LoS behavior is exactly what it should be, and several things that players point to as being huge bugs, are the exact same mechanics used to do common things such as getting on the roof of certain structures. The only difference is player knowledge, which is something we can't control.

...

No one ever bought out most of the stables on OSI shards.

You're talking about player behavior 13 years out of date, and something we have little control over. This has nothing to do with mechanical accuracy.

It's a question of whether you're trying to reproduce a buggy code base or recreate an experience. You're choosing the code base over the experience.

Sparring use to be difficulty based. People went to the bone wall in Deceit for a reason.

Sparring is difficulty based here.

You are mistaken good sir. You can gm wrestling in 5-6 hours with 35 dex here by sparring a llama. You'll hit every time. It's slower to spar things with weapon skills because you miss more.

I've never entered an orc fort and been told I can be freely attacked by players on an OSI shard.

I've already addressed this in this thread, but again, RP guilds were afforded extra help on OSI servers relative to other groups as a way to help facilitate their RP role. While our overall policy on helping players differs on the whole from OSI servers, our policy makes the same distinction that OSI did, and we help the RP groups facilitate their role when it deepens their RP interaction on the server. This is a matter of policy about known exceptions, and we do not replicate policy.

Sure, OSI helped rpers out sometimes with shiny pixels and special events, but giving them a count-free zone sounds like a mechanic that didn't exist to me.

There are intentionally more stable-masters than on any osi shard.

Actually, this isn't the case. An old version of the taming archive uploaded by the curator of the website specifically for us shows the total number of stable masters on both facets per shard for several shards. We have a significant number of stable masters, but we do not have more than every OSI shard.

Hmm, this is interesting. Why do you think some shards had almost twice the stable masters than others? I suspect they were trying to avoid having constantly full stables...

Staff events were t2a accurate. Adding regular staff events would improve the shards t2a accuracy. Most players want them to return in some form. It might even boost the shard's population. Having to automate them because we also don't have the t2a accurate staff that goes with the t2a accurate subscription base is a small compromise for improving the health of the shard.

I've already addressed this as well, but I'll say it again. While it is true that staff events were T2A accurate, the type of events - and the frequency of events - that players want here are completely outside the realm of what was done on OSI servers. Also, the types of changes that players are requesting in order to hold these events represent major suspensions of the era mechanics to facilitate a specific type of game play, simply because they find it fun. This would give unprecedented privilege to a specific group of players for no other reason than because they want it, which is entirely unacceptable.

First, no one in this thread is unwilling to compromise on the frequency of automated events.
Second, you've already intentionally created special circumstances for specific groups of players including custom duel pits, no-count zones, and animal trainers; so it's not unprecidented.
Third, that specific group of players you're referring to is known as "people who enjoy pvp." The events would be open to everyone on the shard and advertised to everyone on the shard.

[Kaivan]

I'm not sure how I missed this.

Don't try to make it seem like I am belittling PvM. PvM is totally fine with me, and I even engage in it myself. It is as viable a play style as any. I celebrate the entire catalog of activities in uo.

I'm not trying to make it sound like anything. When you openly say that PvP events are the only things that bring people together, you are necessarily belittling other play styles. This isn't me putting words into your mouth, this is flat out what you're saying.

You seem to be saying the Pvmers dont PvM for the fun of it! You seem to be saying they only do it to grind out gold resources, and items. Why would you assume that?

You completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'll rephrase it.

In general, for PvP encounters you are looking for the following:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvP encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

For PvM encounters, players are generally looking for the following:

• A way to acquire gold, and resources.
• For the fun of it.

The theoretical automated event system to support this that you proposed would provide the following:

• Provide an environment to set up these PvM encounters, for the fun of it.
• Ensure that no outside interference occurs.
• As an extra feature, which is meaningless to the purpose of PvM, a ranking and records system for how many creatures are slain.

I'm not sure if you see the difference, but your proposed system excludes one the points for PvM, which is to acquire gold and resources. In fact, virtually any other type of "event" that might be run has some other additional reason beyond "for the fun of it". By saying that all events must conform with the PvP events, which would be run exclusively for the fun of it, you are removing a major reason for participating in these other events (after all, PvP doesn't provide any new items, just the potential items if your opponents). This is an awfully convenient position to hold for PvP events, and ignores the fact that if we accept that we are trying to support the full fun of a given playstyle, this would necessarily include loot for PvM events.

I don't care what kind of cool events could be thrown into the world, it doesn't have to be pvp. All I know is that there was a cool system in place at one time, that MANY people (not just myself despite you trying to single me out) enjoyed. I get what you are saying, but you don't seem to get what I am saying. We do not want to change mechanics. We do not want any special way to get rewards. We simply want a weekly, rewardless, use our own resources, tracked tournament of some sort. If not being "in the world" for an hr a week just slaps your precious NEA in the face SO HARD, so be it... Doesn't change the fact that it's dumb.

You seem to miss what I'm saying. By requesting an environment where you can have the full breadth of fun that you want, while preventing anyone from interacting in any undesirable way, you are asking for a change in mechanics.

Kaivan, in Catskills, in the year 1998, there was a staff event for a dueling tournament. It was hosted by GM Cocheese and the guild, DnA. Does anyone else remember this? I even remember the winners name was ShAmPoO. I can't remember where it was held, I think near Minoc, but I do remember standing there watching the fights you could not cast any spells (it would say that spell does not work here), Unless you were fighting. That's all I remember, does anyone else remember this?

Anecdotes are not evidence.

Thank for your previous response it was quite informative..

So looking at this.. Is it possible to make the automated events close enough to mechanically accurate that it is acceptable. I have no clue how feasible what i am proposing is..

In general, for PvP encounters looks like this:

• A way to test your skill in competition with another player, for the fun of it.

The automated event system would exist to facilitate this environment in the following way:

• Instead of providing a place, use an existing in game location.
• Do NOT ensure that no outside interference occurs. Maybe we encourage, Players to police the event place... As it is a regular Location, Regular Time it would be easier to try to get people there to defend the location and prevent intervention.
• As an extra feature designed to support the main purpose, a ranking and records system attached to the character.

A fundamental problem is the automation itself, which would inherently be a mechanic. It's not very different than an automated town invasion, or an automated dungeon crawl that happened at scheduled times. The only difference is that those types of events are entirely impossible without some sort of intervention, while PvP events are something that players are capable of doing for themselves, short of the player statistics.

At best, a system could be devised where a player could sponsor a tournament through a non-intrusive "tournament book" that is requested from a GM. The book would ideally allow a tournament master to set up different tournament types, and allow players to sign up and report their own results. The only thing that the book would do is randomly generate pairings, and record statistics at the end of the tournament. Of course, this particular method would require extra code, and what time is available for coding is going to be spent on the base mechanics, however this is the only reasonable thing that can be expected.

[Blaise]

Kaivan has the patience of Job, I swear. The answer is as clear as day people. Arrange tournaments, provide security and track win/loss for leaderboards and ranking.

The only thing players CAN'T provide for tournaments is Trammel. All it takes is coordination and commitment. Unfortunately, the vast majority here have neither, unless we're talking about forum posting.

Kaivan, what are the chances that the website can be updated to accommodate linking to the uosapvp.com data/site, in lieu of the archaic event data here that is truly only a history page?

[Kaivan]

Off the top of my head:
Ancient wyrms are intentionally not era accurate to provide "extra challenge."

Can you provide evidence that we are making ancient wyrms more difficult just for the extra challenge? I am entirely unaware of any changes to the behavior or strength of an ancient wyrm that we have done without any evidence. If one exists, then it should be fixed.

"The ancient wyrm is one of the very few creatures here that is intentionally not era accurate. He's quite a bit beefed up and will auto-dispel. The intent is to provide a unique challenge, the loot has been upped accordingly." ~Derrick
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1376&p=9108

This post, in July of 2008 is outdated and does not reflect the current behavior of ancient wyrms. They are no more difficult than they should be.

Most bugs that existed back that were widely used are fixed (like ev + reactive armor = resist gains).

For one, do you have any proof of the EV/resist gain bug in the first place? Second, there is a patch on September 1, 1999 that fixes a bug with Reactive Armor, although it is not specific which one.

I misremembered this as it involved blade spirits not evs. The proof is at the bottom of the patch notes. http://wiki.uosecondage.com/1999_Patch_Notes

We do not have this type of bug particularly because we do not know how it worked. Without any information on how the bug worked, there is little we can do in terms of replicating it.

Some bugs that existed yet very few people if any used (like being killed in the center of your small) will never be fixed.

I've talked about this until I'm blue in the face in several other threads. The LoS behavior is exactly what it should be, and several things that players point to as being huge bugs, are the exact same mechanics used to do common things such as getting on the roof of certain structures. The only difference is player knowledge, which is something we can't control.

...

No one ever bought out most of the stables on OSI shards.

You're talking about player behavior 13 years out of date, and something we have little control over. This has nothing to do with mechanical accuracy.

It's a question of whether you're trying to reproduce a buggy code base or recreate an experience. You're choosing the code base over the experience.

Experiences vary from player to player, which makes replicating any experience impossible. The only thing we can feasibly do is replicate the mechanics as best as possible.

Sparring use to be difficulty based. People went to the bone wall in Deceit for a reason.

Sparring is difficulty based here.

You are mistaken good sir. You can gm wrestling in 5-6 hours with 35 dex here by sparring a llama. You'll hit every time. It's slower to spar things with weapon skills because you miss more.

I'll check with Derrick on this, but if weapon skills are not scaling with more difficult opponents, then this should be corrected. An inaccuracy isn't an excuse for more inaccuracies, just a fix for the one that exists.

I've never entered an orc fort and been told I can be freely attacked by players on an OSI shard.

I've already addressed this in this thread, but again, RP guilds were afforded extra help on OSI servers relative to other groups as a way to help facilitate their RP role. While our overall policy on helping players differs on the whole from OSI servers, our policy makes the same distinction that OSI did, and we help the RP groups facilitate their role when it deepens their RP interaction on the server. This is a matter of policy about known exceptions, and we do not replicate policy.

Sure, OSI helped rpers out sometimes with shiny pixels and special events, but giving them a count-free zone sounds like a mechanic that didn't exist to me.

Taking over a specific structure in game such as the Yew orc fort, with a guild stone sitting in the open and all, was certainly not an optional mechanic on OSI servers either, yet it was done for an RP guild. There is precedence for exceptions to mechanics for RP reasons as a way of enhancing their roles as RPers, not providing a safe haven for PvPers because they find it fun.

There are intentionally more stable-masters than on any osi shard.

Actually, this isn't the case. An old version of the taming archive uploaded by the curator of the website specifically for us shows the total number of stable masters on both facets per shard for several shards. We have a significant number of stable masters, but we do not have more than every OSI shard.

Hmm, this is interesting. Why do you think some shards had almost twice the stable masters than others? I suspect they were trying to avoid having constantly full stables...

I don't claim to know why some shards had more stable slots than others. However, this does not change the fact that we did not have more stable masters than all other servers, nor does it change the fact that a stable limit did exist on OSI servers, and thus exists here. The way that the limit is treated by players is entirely out of our hands.

Staff events were t2a accurate. Adding regular staff events would improve the shards t2a accuracy. Most players want them to return in some form. It might even boost the shard's population. Having to automate them because we also don't have the t2a accurate staff that goes with the t2a accurate subscription base is a small compromise for improving the health of the shard.

I've already addressed this as well, but I'll say it again. While it is true that staff events were T2A accurate, the type of events - and the frequency of events - that players want here are completely outside the realm of what was done on OSI servers. Also, the types of changes that players are requesting in order to hold these events represent major suspensions of the era mechanics to facilitate a specific type of game play, simply because they find it fun. This would give unprecedented privilege to a specific group of players for no other reason than because they want it, which is entirely unacceptable.

First, no one in this thread is unwilling to compromise on the frequency of automated events.

The "compromise" is to change it from what it was at a rate of 4 events per day to one event per week, on an automated basis. This frequency is still leagues outside of what everyone keeps comparing it to, which were the events on OSI servers. It is ridiculous to say that events happened on OSI servers on a rare basis, therefore we should have very frequent and automated events here. This is a complete non sequitur.

Second, you've already intentionally created special circumstances for specific groups of players including custom duel pits, no-count zones, and animal trainers; so it's not unprecidented.

There is evidence of special arenas being created in-era that allowed players to duel in. However, these duel pits did not come with special mechanics that prevented other players from interfering, which makes them distinctly different from the proposed automated event mechanics. Regarding the stable masters, you are talking about player behavior which we have no control over; it's an entirely irrelevant point. Finally, regarding the no-count zones for RP guilds, see my previous responses in this thread, including the link to the other thread where this has been discussed thoroughly. Assisting an RP guild in order to enhance the RP play style is something that was clearly done on OSI servers (see: Yew orc fort).

Third, that specific group of players you're referring to is known as "people who enjoy pvp." The events would be open to everyone on the shard and advertised to everyone on the shard.

This is the same argument that I've heard countless times before: "everyone is open to join, so it's there for everyone". This argument ignores that there is a clear promotion of an entire play style that can only be enjoyed by those who participate in that play style. So no, just because it is open to everyone does not mean that it is for everyone.

Kaivan, what are the chances that the website can be updated to accommodate linking to the uosapvp.com data/site, in lieu of the archaic event data here that is truly only a history page?

You'd have to speak with Derrick about that. We should remove the tournament statistics, the event schedule, and consider how we move forward from here at the very least.

[Blaise]

Kaivan, what are the chances that the website can be updated to accommodate linking to the uosapvp.com data/site, in lieu of the archaic event data here that is truly only a history page?

You'd have to speak with Derrick about that. We should remove the tournament statistics, the event schedule, and consider how we move forward from here at the very least.

Seems legit, thanks.