Destructible Houses Combined thread /Mod

[Bulveigh]

Originally Posted by Traceur

one thing i don't understand, is why your ok with lootable houses - where i can steal all the content in your museum and empty it out - your even ok with letting me steal your house and change the locks - but your not ok with me destroying it altogether...

I never sayd that.

I like:
FFA PvP
Full Loot


I dont like:
lootable houses
distructable houses

Originally Posted by Traceur

then sign treaties, try to avoid making enemies, avoid building it on impotent trade routes, etc...

do what a character who'd want to be part of a small community would do - think like your character.

That quote let me think, you never really play UO :P

u really think players need a reason to destroy houses? And you really think a world can be big enough, to build a house noone finds?

The reallity will be: Many Many players will run throught forests and search houses to destroy.

[Shinzon]

There was a post somewhere that talked about linking each house built near a castle to a castle's "District" that would be unlootable and undestryable until the said district has been captured, and it is up to the new owners to decide what to do with that house.

[Traceur]

Originally Posted by Tehghost132

Seriously though... There should be something like... If its in a designated city or town it can be destroyed in a siege.

But I want to craft in my little cabin in the woods, whats my incentive to craft knowing that at anytime I can just be ganked by some asian farmers or people with no life? They can just take all my crafted goods and my money ive made from spending my time crafting, so whats my incentive to craft? There is no reason to be able to destroy player housing unless its in a city or town that being attacked.

your incentive to craft is the proccess of crafting or to raise your crafting skill - it's not to accumilate 10000 chairs saftly locked in your magical indestructible house.

Originally Posted by Tehghost132

I dont plan on being in a guild or having close relations with one either, so building inside their city is out. I know that people wouldnt just leave me alone to craft, because they are T3h H@rDC0r3 L337eRs and feel the need to annoy me to make themselves more hardcore and leet.

[...]
Houses decaying over time without routine upkeep would work, but im in the military... What happens to my house when im deployed over seas to iraq?

you want the protection of civilization - the kind that's granted in real life by people like you and me who served our respective countries in green uniforms - without having bound to civilization?

your looking to eat the pie and leave it too. should be able to be granted the protection of an NPC civilization withou the protection of a guild, but you want to protection of... what? magical forces sprouting from the gruond making houses indestructible?

Originally Posted by Tehghost132

I would say that if there are more than X number of houses within a certain distance of each other than they should be destroyable, but there would be exploiting with this (some guild builds alot of houses near yours just to destroy yours) and it also wouldnt be fair to the small communities that just want a random town for a sense of community.

I cant think of a way to really balance it out (and making everything destroyable isnt balancing).

great, now all guilds will spreed themselves into villagers, and their will be a new griefer-activity to come in and build the extra house which makes a village destroyable - and yes, it will be griefing, because unlike destructible houses all the time where everyone takes stratigic measures for protection, this would be a good morning suprise... what your suggusting is just adding holes to the system.

Originally Posted by no-one

With destructible housing there would be no motivation to decorate. The devs said they would like to see houses decorated.

motivation to decorate? you are motivated to decorate by our own personal design & taste, your own expression and innate human instinct to brend yourself within your near enviorment - or if they add something akin to the morale system someone suggusted in another thread it might have actual benefits. regardless, not the instinct nor any potential gameplay benefits get lost because of the risk of house destruction. if anything, rather then slumbering with your first piece of art to the rest of your gaming spen until the server gets a reset, you will have the ocasional dramatic blank paper of a house to stare at and decorate again.

Originally Posted by Piokken

Im sorry to see ther are a vast number of idiotic moronism and what i also did write in this poll is

The point of the senseless poll was just to maybe see if someone actually put out a normal post about why it really is braindead to think that they should be destroyable, so they could shut up once and for all but :>


Obivously people that think destroyable private player houses should be destroyable by other players have never NEVER played a game like uo before. They have grown up with CS and round based games where its "matches" and after each match you start all over again

if you'd notice, most of the people in this thread calling for destroyable houses are UO-x-players, me included. just because some people can take a step back, look at the premise of the game rather what it did or didn't execute, and rethink things rather then try to copy our first MMO expirience, doesn't mean they didn't play UO.

now it's nice of you to call us braindead, really, it is, it's easier then making logical counter-arguments and actually debating things. but since nobody did make "a normal post about why it really is braindead to think that they should be destroyable", which you apearently wanted us braindeads to relate too. instead, us braindeads came up with a lot of reasoning for destructable houses, spreed through your entire thread. if you expacted us braindeads to read through the hypothetical yet-to-be-released post arguing against destructible houses, why not give the same feedback back and actually read what people have to say, think about it, digest it, and (if you still wish) then find reasons why our reasoning is wrong?

[Bulveigh]

sensless..

and the funny part of all is: I think you will be the first one, who quits the game after loosing your house :P

[Shinzon]

You aren't the one to judge that. All I know if some bastard burns my house down, I would want to hunt hum down

[Bulveigh]

than you find him, kill him, loot his 3cent equipment, and he starts laughing about you cause he lootet your entire house.. :P


EDIT:
Why you dont ask a dev, about the destructable houses idea?

[Shinzon]

I stalk him day and night, find his house, kill him in his own house and set it on fire

[Bulveigh]

yea. but more realistic is, that you came online one day and your house is gone, impossible to see who destroyed it.

maybe after a really really fucking hard day at work. You came home, log in and see that your house is gone. I think i would quit the game in this situation...


the only way, to make it not that hard, is making housing worthless. When the bank is big enough to put all your stuff in it. But then, i will not even start the game :P

[Shinzon]

I am going to write some BIIG Triple damage text wall tomorrow as a response to that... as for now... Sleep becons...

[Traceur]

Originally Posted by Bulveigh

sensless..

and the funny part of all is: I think you will be the first one, who quits the game after loosing your house :P

Originally Posted by Bulveigh

maybe after a really really fucking hard day at work. You came home, log in and see that your house is gone. I think i would quit the game in this situation...

^ funny how projecting works - you say you think I'll be the first one to do what you plan to do? some people take risks and accept the consequences rather then wanting a risk-free world.

Originally Posted by Bulveigh

Why you dont ask a dev, about the destructable houses idea?

because as anyone who took the trouble to read through the Q&A's to find out about the game - rather then just assuming it's UO-the FPS version -would tell you, or as you would know if you'd took the little time to actually read what i post in this thread before answering, someone already asked that question and they said "We'll comment on that later on", which is a very vogue remark but it is not a no.

[Bulveigh]

Originally Posted by Traceur

^ funny how projecting works - you say you think I'll be the first one to do what you plan to do? some people take risks and accept the consequences rather then wanting a risk-free world.

Ähm, Traceur?
I hate the destructable houses idea.. So you wonder that i wanna leave the game in this situation? I even dont start playing this game, when private houses destructable.

Cause like i say:
When they are destructable its unbelivable frustrating to loose them. The only way to change this is making housing worthless. In both situations i dont want to play this game.


I say you may be the first cause Devloper "lore".
"The player is the last one, who knows what he really wants"

i think in your mind the destructable house idea sounds really cool, but after testing in 1 weak you hate it. Just my opinion.


EDIT:
I cannot find the part where they talk about Destructible houses...

[Piokken]

Most people just dont know any better like Traceur,

For instance, he just lost 2 years of stashed loot and equipment etc seeing his house lasted this long though,

Would we see him in game after that? or beeing the first one to be at the spot when he comes online to see that his whole game account suddenly scooped down to 0 worth of stuff after 2 years played, well he got his character left... but coming with a smiley and a humouristic sentence to comment his loss, Id like to see how long he stayed in game after that

of course hes a big tough guy now talking about how cool and awesome destroyable private houses is, but i really dont bet he played uo the real days back when osi had it really. I just cant.

And i just cant imagine him being realistic at all what he means here, since its just hes just a stubborn guy whos gone to deep with his meanings and its too late for him to pull out of this discussion with dignity, so he writes several a4 page answers to anything opposite of his meanings here

[admiralnlson]

Why are people soooooo attached to their belongings?
I mean all that should really matter is player interaction. If you got good friends in game, you'll bounce back very quickly.

Besides, making houses indestructible would force the devs to severely limit the locations where you can build them, because nobody wants to see indestructible houses spawning everywhere or within destructible player cities/fortresses/whatever.

EDIT:
Maybe the solution to content everyone is to have indestructible (instanced?) housing in NPC cities, and destructible houses in player cities.
Or even better, the houses in NPC cities are the same as player city ones by essence (including destructible), but there are so many guards in NPC cities that it's just impossible to have the time to destroy another player's house as you would get owned so hard (like insta-shot).

[iMP]

i cant se any point to talk about this. really. WHY would anyone want a house if u the next day find it gone... hmm.
What if youre NOT in the biggest clan/guild and cant get help doing all the revange etc etc. no chanse in HELL that that poor guy gonna keep his house.
So i can almost put my left hand that there will be NOTHING thats kills a player house over night., simple as that. IF it aint like the devs really dotn want playerhouses at all, then they can do it ofcoz. but no reason make a feauture that noone will use. and that so manny want..

WHat the dev CAN do and what sounds "fair" is that u can attack an house. but you cant destroy it, you only make it decay faster. Like if ure house decay normaly after 30 days if nto using it. an attack can do it decaay in 15 days meening half the decay time. same goes for a house thats only have 5 days left , you can attack and its only 2½ days left., BUT can only be made 1 time in a decay preiod. so if a guy gets to his house the timer restart.

this is the only way i can see this will work..
as REAL housing as there was in UO is so big part of the endgame. i doubt it will be so u can loose it over a night.

[Bulveigh]

Originally Posted by iMP

WHat the dev CAN do and what sounds "fair" is that u can attack an house. but you cant destroy it, you only make it decay faster. Like if ure house decay normaly after 30 days if nto using it. an attack can do it decaay in 15 days meening half the decay time. same goes for a house thats only have 5 days left , you can attack and its only 2½ days left., BUT can only be made 1 time in a decay preiod. so if a guy gets to his house the timer restart.

that can be increddible frustrating..

2 weaks holiday, someone attack your house, you come back and its gone.


I think the entire idea of attackable, lootable ore destroiable private houses is bullshit. A house shuld be you verry own safe place. A place where you hide for PK's, where you talk to your friends without the fear of gettin attacked and where you spend hours and hours with crafting.

After 1 years(or earlier/later) your house contains everything you have. thousends of ingots and armors or some nice rares from events.. and so on.

[ravage]

This is is the worst and most stupid idea ive ever heard in my life concerning a MMOG,people dont seem to grasp the true concept of houses in a mmog.
A player's house is purely for socialization/bragging rights,that's it,if it would be destroyable there would be no point to build one.

I can already see a guild named "Homewreckers" going around and just destroying houses with a 50 man group,how are you going to defend agaisnt all of them ?

[Bulveigh]

Originally Posted by ravage

I can already see a guild named "Homewreckers" going around and just destroying houses with a 50 man group,how are you going to defend agaisnt all of them ?

dont ask :P
i think the answer will be:

"You have to organize you better! in big community's to defend your house! ohh yes!"

[Sarvoth]

Destructible houses won't work for everything stated. Not only will the biggest guild on the server be able to just destroy houses and loot everything, but it would loo inanely ridiculous to see a catapult next to a small house trying to take it down. Finally, this will destroy the economy. Why bother trying to take down merchant caravans when you can just destroy the merchants house? Sigh.

The compromise would be something that was already suggested - teaming house zones to a keep or civic building owned by a guild or multiple factions. When the civic building, castle, keep and all civic infrastructure is destroyed - then the houses connected to it could either be destroyed or taken down - but it should be done so that this would take days and citizens would have the opportunity to migrate their goods outside of the war zone. Basically, if you are going to have an eventual means to house destruction, have it make sense, look convincing (no catapult shooting rocks at a single house) and give enough time to the player to have a chance to do something about his items in his house.

[admiralnlson]

Players can own indestructible houses in NPC cities.
Players can own destructible houses within (emphasis on 'within') Player city walls.

Those with the guts to build houses in Player (international guild) Cities, which they are pretty confident will NOT be turned to ashes, will have a return point closer to where their guild is operating.
They can also have a house in an NPC city too (or just a locked slot at a bank), for the belongings they really don't want to lose.

End of story. With both possibilities, everybody's happy.

Why do you want to limit what others might like so much? Moreover, calling other people names will not help making your arguments better.

[Bulveigh]

but whats, when i wanna own an indestructible house in a player city?
Cause i dont want to see, that just asia farming guilds can own citiys :P


I think, when there is someone who wants to throw his playtime into waste, it should be possible. But please, dont limit the normal players with this idea :P

maybe an isle in the world, where is 1 castle for every god. Arround these castles are walls, in which you can build a house. The gods fight each other, and just there its possible to destroy houses.
To give it a sense, you earn some kind of "Fame for your god" when you build a house there and keep it long time. And the place is really spezial :P

[ravage]

Originally Posted by admiralnlson

Players can own indestructible houses in NPC cities.
Players can own destructible houses within (emphasis on 'within') Player city walls.

Those with the guts to build houses in Player (international guild) Cities, which they are pretty confident will NOT be turned to ashes, will have a return point closer to where their guild is operating.
They can also have a house in an NPC city too (or just a locked slot at a bank), for the belongings they really don't want to lose.

End of story. Everybody's happy.

Why do you want to limit what others might like so much? Moreover, calling other people names will not help making your arguments better.

Soo what would be the point to make destructible houses in a player town when you can have a safe house inside a NPC city ? You still dont grasp the point of houses,if you just buy 1 in a player city to leave it empty...

[admiralnlson]

Originally Posted by ravage

Soo what would be the point to make destructible houses in a player town when you can have a safe house inside a NPC city ? You still dont grasp the point of houses,if you just buy 1 in a player city to leave it empty...

Please read all my post. I've already repeated myself once :

Originally Posted by admiralnlson

Those with the guts to build houses in Player (international guild) Cities, which they are pretty confident will NOT be turned to ashes, will have a return point closer to where their guild is operating.
They can also have a house in an NPC city too (or just a locked slot at a bank), for the belongings they really don't want to lose.

= to have a spot, to put all your stuff, that is located where all your guild mates are, and obviously close to its current region of activity, unlike NPC cities who are far.
Is that clearer now?

Originally Posted by Bulveigh

but whats, when i wanna own an indestructible house in a player city?

OK, you want invulnerable player cities? That's a whole different story then. (Unless you're asking for indestructible houses in destructible player cities ? you might want to see a doctor if yes).

I thought invulnerable player cities were out of the question. The devs said there would be sieging, didn't they?

[Bulveigh]

ähm, i think the problem ist that there are to much housing possibilitys.

what i wanna say is: It should not just be possible to build houses in a npc city, it should be possible to to build somewhere in the woods 20 houses and say "this is a city!" :P Or maybe mark it, as city like in SWG.

Siege should work like i sayd upper. There should be spezial places where you can capture castles or little villages to get some advantages from it.