Without the influences of Trammel: A Discussion about Risk within UO:R

As stated in the original post, the goal is a dialogue with the admins. The hope is that they would provide the direction. Discussion amongst ourselves is not productive. As has already been stated, we end up with the same arguments.

For those who were discussing the ossytank dexxer build... It can be done with any ostard but frenzied is of course better. Its not a bad way for a dexxer to make money, even my forest ostard can tank lich lords, dragons, titans, and more.

bwahhhhhhhh?????? Wow never would have thought.

But returning to the core issue I dont think people who are calling out the anomally of no risk for tamers are doing so because they secretly want to be tamers. The "you can be broken too" argument doesn't address the feature of risk nor how those taking advantage of no risk are able to rapidly develop wealth advantage. Not everyone wants to run what is effectively a trammel exploit to be able to compete in bidding wars, housing etc. I don't think the fact that they don't means that they should accept others doing so.

Re: Bashoosh I don't think the thread has derailed because people are groping for the real heart of inbalance and this leads to the mechanisms and loopholes that enable and or encourage players in a particular direction.

Tamer death penalties and tamer nerfs are related because tamers are both the most powerful class and the one with no risk. So something has to give. Triple accounts are related as well because the current system allows multiboxing and so you have 3X the OP No risk tamers making exponentially more gold and platinum than the conventional player. You seem to worry about thread derailing so much that you don't notice when it often has not in fact derailed.

People who say I think taming is fine as it is are never able to answer to why tamers should not have risk like everyone else. So instead of everyone else being the ones that should shut up about it, perhaps the profusion of threads and posts regarding this topic points to the prevailing inadequacy of their explanations/arguments.

I disagree - tamers being the cream of the PvM crop, tamers having no risk, and triple accounts are all separate issues with their own sets of problems. People see the triple-tamer-dragon-death-clouds at champion events and they panic. Rightfully so - clearly that is ridiculous. But it's all just a conglomeration of these 3 separate issues. Fixing one will not solve the others.

• If we address tamers being the kings of PvM by dropping the maximum control slots from 8 to 5, tamers would lose a lot of firepower, but they still have no death penalty and triple boxing still reigns supreme. Triple-dragon-death-clouds isn't the only thing that makes 3 accounts powerful. Running any mundane activity in triplicate is going to generate triple the outcome.
• If we go after tamer risk and implement a 10% skill loss to pets on death, tamers will still be soloing boss monsters, while triple boxing runs rampant.
• If we go after triple boxing and reduce everyone to one account, that would not change the fact that tamers are still the strongest archetype with little risk.

Each issue has to be tackled separately if we want them solved.

This thread has derailed because it was originally a discussion about risk. It has turned into a gripe session for whatever people feel is imbalanced on UO:R. For the record, I agree with most of the gripes here. I am in favor of moving to 5 control slots, I am in favor of a 10% pet skill loss penalty, and I am in favor of just one account (with 15 character slots and restricted housing rules). I say this as someone that absolutely loves and abuses their tamer and is always running 3 accounts doing something (though not dragon-death-clouds... I don't have the willpower or the character slots to train 2 additional tamers).

Those are valid discussions, this just isn't the place. It's diluting the entire point of this thread.

I agree with the statement that there are no classes. The main complain here is about ONE single skill (or skill set) that is kind of overpowered. As I already stated on irc sometimes, one day I'll make a tamer with the following skills:

Animal Taming
Animal Lore
Veterinary
Cooking
Begging
Camping
Taste Identification

And I'll still be bad ass on pvm holding 2 fully trained bonded dragons and a fully trained bonded mare, walking naked with a kit of bandages and cookies on my pack!
But no, I don't want taming to be nerfed. Just get the stat loss on pet death back and maybe make the tamer quest a bit harder, but that's it! I'm more into making interesting mechanics that get nice with other skills and skill sets, like the idea on making parrying better, and the hp regen armor OR high def armor non-medeable that reduces taming and vet, and maybe, just maybe, reducing the dificulty on barding things!
But, I still think the best way to handle things is: play in groups damn! This is a MMO, you have hundreds other players there to join with and strategy together to get the best out of it!
Everytime I see a bounty announcement on irc, i've NEVER seen a solo pk! It's always 2, 3 guys banding together! Are they smarter than the pvm ppl?

Yes, there are no true classes in UO. Perhaps, a better word could be used. A playable class would entail a fixed set of skills. However, much as in your example template, some skills are almost always accompanied by other skills. Your example did include Animal Taming, Animal Lore, and Veterinary which would be the focus of your character as your post seems to indicate. For lack of a better word, we could call that template of the taming class. Anyway, I concede the point.

There is nothing above that except bosses and champions, shadow wyrms are easily the toughest mob and I'd have to say I don't think a peace dexxer could handle them considering 55dmg firebreath +dp +very high magery

Why do people get so riled up about how other people play the game? The shard is not so populous that there
is a shortage of PvM spots or available champ spawn sites (I have never seen more than 2 champs being worked at once; the majority of the time there are no champs being worked at all). Hell, I regularly hear PKs complain that there aren't enough active players for them to target!

The only argument that holds any water, in my opinion, is that it accelerates gold inflation. But the "triple tamer death cloud" isn't that much more effective at farming gold than a single disco or provo tamer.

The amount of whining that is going on in this thread is unbelievable.

You sir obviously have no idea what you are talking about which is unbelievable, first no self respecting triple boxing tamer goes out and farms straight gold, they farm platinum. Second, If I put a taming account each on its own monitor and put each tamer in a high yield gold per hour spot, I would in fact farm so much more efficiently than you that your pink silk panties would ignite in pure rage when I blow you out of the water in a 1v1 who has more gold auction. Triple anything... ruins everything.

Kane I was able to provoke shadow wyrm's with around 10% chance w/o discordance, so adding that to it makes it 15% with a GM instrument.
Having a slayer instrument would probably make that 35-40%. That's why I said "the maximum".

I think it is rather naïve to think that one's playstyle is insular. Should a thief steal an item from your backpack, their playstyle will have affected yours. Should a miner/lumberjack/fisherman be allowed to macro unattended 24/7, their playstyle will have afftected yours. Should a murderer engage you in non-consensual pvp, their playstyle will have affected yours. This could be one of the best reasons why UO had no instanced dungeons.

There is a reason why certain mechanisms have been implemented on this server as well as the OSI server of old and that is because one playstyle does affect another. One of the best things about UO is that your playstyle can affect another. If you fail to see that or are incapable of debating the issue, then STAY OUT.

Now, this is just an argument about a game. I recognize that but what hardcore devotee of any subject doesn't like to engage in a debate regarding an issue they so enjoy.

There is no shortage of posts on this site. If the subject or the responses annoy you, why are you reading this thread much less posting?

Well previously you had said with disco and peace, and let me tell you there's no way a peace dexxer is going toe to toe with a SW even if it's discod. This is the first time you've mentioned provoking it first

This perfectly sums up what I had brought up in the other thread. The fact is, due to some of the mechanics of the server, in combination with the power of the class, things are kind of out of whack. And in regards to some of the economy, how different would the economy be if people weren't able to triple box tamers?

Triple tamer is markedly more effective, which is why you see almost every big monster basher making second and third tamers.
I could see where it may be too much trouble to do something like farming elder gazers, but in terms of champ spawns it's much more productive. 1-2 people can easily do champ spawns quickly running triple tamers, which is exactly why people are moving towards this new meta.
The actions of a few players can have quite an impact on everyone else. A good example was when people were farming despise 24/7, because these people overdid it a little bit champ spawn rewards were heavily nerfed across the board.
It's an extreme example, but still something that happened. And as someone who enjoys an occasional spawn it annoyed me, spawns really aren't worth the trouble anymore.

It also leads to much more plat in the system, which effects the economy.


Thinking about the topic in general, I do agree with Basoosh's thoughts about an unfocused discussion being unproductive, but at the same time I feel all of these things are related. If tamers bore more risk, you would see less people trying to triple box them. If tamers were less powerful, you wouldn't see people being able to solo champ spawns with their three accounts.
All three of these things are issues, and the issues are all coming together to create a dragon infested hellscape.

Plankton, re-read my post. I wasn't asserting that "play style is insular." The point was to question whether people who play 3 accounts at once currently have too much of an effect on other players. Nuance is important.

It seems to me that there are two primary reasons we should be concerned about how one person's decisions will affect others in the game: (1) does it unduly deprive others of the ability to take part in the game's primary content (hunt in specific dungeons; work champ spawns; etc.); and (2) does it have a detrimental effect on the economy, such that others are economically excluded from taking part in portions of the game's primary content. There isn't a shortage of in-game content that is being brought about by people playing 3 accounts at once; one tamer can camp most PvM spots as effectively as 3. And while playing 3 tamers clearly leads to a more rapid rate of gold (and platinum) inflation, it doesn't do so at a rate that is problematic (in my opinion), because a single tamer can still be highly effective at farming gold and earning platinum.

No one here is prevented from playing 3 tamers, 3 lumberjacks, 3 fisherman, or 3 spirit-speaking cooks at once. If they want to achieve ultimate farming efficiency by playing 3 accounts at once, they're free to do so. At the moment, I don't see that as a cause for significant concern. Which is why I think people are just whining.

Kane, they all go under barding difficulty, so it doesn't matter if i provoke or peace. In fact provocation has a bit more difficulty because you have 2 creature checks than 1.

I am just saying with best equipment, they have a chance. Having a chance is different than going "toe to toe".

I think you missed his point though. If tamers bore more risk, you would see less people triple-boxing tamers and more people triple-boxing miners. So you're not really solving the thing that it sounds like you want to solve, which is the triple-boxing.

My own .02 on this would be that someone should create 4 new topics, one for each of Gideon's topics in his post back on page 1, and that way each individual issue could be addressed separately and hopefully with less topic drift. EDIT: see my spam in the Discussion forum.

triple box miner loses gear (earth shatter elemental ban) and is way easier to shut down. Tamer loses nothing. Once again you side-step risk disparity.

I still think it would be worthwhile to get the admins input about the choices made thus far and what may lie in the future. A conceptual approach may be enlightening. This may all boil down to this is what we wanted, its our project, end of story...

Since I have repeatedly pointed out (and summarized) my separate position on the risk disparity issue, I can only assume that you are intentionally conflating the various issues that are being addressed in this thread in an effort to get a reaction out of me. So I will merely say: nice try, Geo!