Etherdrifter

Members
  • Content count

    1296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Etherdrifter

  1. A while back I asked if folks thought Wurm's priests were "working as intended", the majority felt that the answer to this was "no". With the recent news of some form of PvP overhaul coming into play that impacts both priests and meditation; I was wondering, what sort of direction would everyone here like to see Wurm's magic go? Should it remain largely as it is, does it maybe need some new content/balancing, or does it require a complete overhaul?
  2. Suddenly everything makes sense!
  3. So I am only 100 hours of grinding away from being able to ride a hellhorse Wait a moment....
  4. It's never risen that far for me; I use my bow a fair bit and in 5 years my body control is camping nicely at 23. Are you sure you didn't mean to say "Priests, like non-priests, regardless of religion, have access to *the* fastest way to gain body control.... archery IF THEY PVP"?
  5. This needs a solid bump, the alliance is active but BFN is quiet at the moment.
  6. Sorry but a big -1 here from me. This would be a huge kick in the teeth to priests who (even without the nerf) have a lower stat gain rate (creation vs improvement).
  7. This both worries and excites me. Magic is finally getting peeked at, which is a good thing, but it's from a PvP perspective, which has been less than wonderful in its buffs and QoL changes where magic is concerned.
  8. Why not go the extra step and let us use charm to boost existing loyalty of a tame animal too? Make it a useful spell (since no-one I know bothers to cast it). +1
  9. On the one hand I can see why it was done (to encourage player interactions since the biggest selling point of WO is its community). On the other hand delivery work is horrible, long hours of sailing, the person you are delivering to logs off and you wait hours for them to come back etc. There is a solution to those issues out there, but then that would require active thought.
  10. +1 for this, leaving one's animals behind is the biggest trouble with moving servers. Something to bear in mind is the care for limit is done by server, so any animal crossing over would need to lose its cared for tag.
  11. Yeh ok, that's actually a good argument. I would suggest that HoTA statues find their way over to PvE some time though, a nice use for rift materials? Changed to a +1 with previous comment amended.
  12. Edit: Comment addressed, changed to a +1
  13. Ok folks, so when and where is the next rift on Xanadu?
  14. Some folks like the play the game on hardmode Also you're overlooking regrinding stats and skills twice over.
  15. Bit of a long ride but I'll set out tonight Should be able to make it via the coastal roads
  16. And yet priests support it? Odd argument isn't it?
  17. ? Evidently you can't read
  18. Because playing two toons is a mark of poor game design and wurm needs to look professional? How about.... Folks who can't afford an all powerful computer being able to enjoy the game without being forced to run in minecraft graphics mode? How about.... More folks being willing to pay double rather than skill up two toons in a game that already has horrific grind? "Laziness", the wargasm words for "baawwww, I might lose out on silver and have to pay for the game".
  19. *Claps slowly* You're just getting that point? Wurm, by definition is pay to win, the entire buisiness model of the game is based on the pay to win model. Wurm is in no way a level playing field, it is 100% pay to win. Damn right! And its a very good reason too! I mean if it wasn't in place everyone would just be a pri- oh wait no, most of the players who would go for this option own priests anyway.
  20. At the moment there is a clear divide between folks who think wurm should retain its subscription based model and those who think otherwise. We're all educate people here, so why not experiment? The servers used for the challenge maps must be gathering dust; why not create a "free play" server on one of them. Fresh cluster, never to be connected to main cluster, one island (PvE). Deed upkeep is set to 4x existing rate and offdeed decay is doubled, merchants sell mirrors, map size is release/pristine. Maybe add in some other items as cash shop only on that cluster. Give players the option to move their character from the FREE server TO the PAID cluster at any time (one way trip with all items). Run the server for 3-4 months; if its a success keep it as is (and consider a PvP server); if its a failure turn it into a subscription server, essentially how release/pristine used to be, and give folks a 1 month window to move over to the main cluster if they so desire. Either way its using existing resources in a way that allows the exploration of a new business model (also gives a large injection of players). It'll wind up cheaper than a large advertising campaign and likely draw in more players regardless of the outcome.
  21. Sacred grove!
  22. +1 And while you're at it please remove crafting goals for priests!
  23. +1 if this is all we'll get Honestly they just need to up and merge the skills (let epic keep the curve, the double exp is the trade off you get in return for being in an open PvP world) and have a skillset across all characters.
  24. I see a lot of "you have to pay the bills" and "wurm is a business" etc, but where does this come into the matter? What I have suggested is the exploration of an alternative (and very successful) business model, not a kneejerk change but a timelined experiment with a clear success criteria (1. "Did we make more profit than we would have off of subscriptions" and 2. "Did player numbers increase?"). The only case against such an experiment is that it is not worth carrying out since it would fail and/or worsen the existing issues, but then I don't think many (if any) on this forum have the level of knowledge to argue either of those scenarios well. Hopefully someone will either provide a definitive and well argued reason (with some nice references) as to why this suggestion is a bad one that should be ignored, or, provide an argument stronger than my own by (backing it up with industry experience and references) as to why this suggestion should be considered. I reckon I've said my piece. Those among you with a brain will read the argument laid forth, parse it and either, agree with it or disagree with it based on its merits after actual thought takes place.
  25. Well I posted this last night and I'm quite amused by some of the reactions; especially the usual kneejerks "how will wurm pay for itself if it goes free to play". Let me ask you a question in return; where to from now? The current situation is leading to a slow but steady decline, its not a lack of features that's doing it (we've had some amazing ones over the last year), its not a lack of space (the servers are largely empty), and it certainly isn't the various balance fixes this year (that just causes old player attrition to spike before settling out). "Things are fine as they are" is just going to lead to the same question being asked down the line but, this time, with far less options. The notion here is not to move wurm to free to play; but to see if free to play is a viable model for wurm by running an experiment to see if it *CAN* pay for wurm online. If it can't then all that has been lost is the server cost for 3 months, and the influx of players will likely cover that cost. The parameters I have suggested are a basic outline; one I will gladly admit requires refinement (the faith group abuse never crossed my mind), however, the core idea is to see if wurm could make the transition to free to play while still remaining profitable. This experiment has been run before in the form of challenge (since the challenge servers were entirely free to play, though they were aimed at testing large scale PvP); however, they were designed to be short lived whereas this experiment is designed as a long term experiment. As a final parting thought; the idea is out there if the devs want to take notice. We're currently here : -500 subscriptions in 12 months, -48,000 per year (reasonable given that we're just coming down from the cooking update peak).