Fairyshine

Members
  • Content count

    1157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Fairyshine last won the day on October 10 2016

Fairyshine had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1892 Rare

6 Followers

About Fairyshine

  • Rank
    Villager

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Release

Recent Profile Visitors

4219 profile views
  1. Looks awesome.
  2. I was going to say we are pretty much forced to have alts since no toon can have more than one deed, and yes I agree, it is almost impossible to play a priest as a main (unless you have some friends around who can do some stuff you are restricted to do). Furthermore, people are encouraged to buy prem on occasion as the priest can't do a lot of priesty stuff unless they are prem, and two unpremmed chars can't trade deeds either. Functional starter towns will give people who want to actually play the game, a chance to learn the basics. Alts only created for a purpose like becoming a priest for another toon or taking care of a second deed, is pretty much not going to "live" in a starter town.
  3. Awesome ad. Unfortunately I grew roots where I live....but, hopefully, one day, we can have cross server allies! Wouldn't that be grand!
  4. ...but having people live together on a new player starting deed funded by other players is different to this...how? The fact that players pay for these deeds yet the outcome is exactly the same (newer players can live with them being handed some basic tools in a protected environment while they gain enough skills to strike out on their own, at the same time building relationships with those around them which in many cases will last their whole Wurm life) is exactly the same concept, except, obviously, that players fund these and not the game. Does it help to retain new people? Yes. Should it always be up to players to fund this? No. Also, you should know that not everyone who invites noobies to come live on their deeds is necessarily noobie friendly. Sometimes the noobies end up being nothing more than slave labor, creating stuff the deed owner sells to help fund the deed the noobie gets free lodging on. If at any stage the deed owner decides to kick the noobie and take all his/her stuffz, a GM will most likely shrug and say too bad too sad, you live on someone else's deed so they can decide what to do. These type of things can see a player pack their chisel and leave Wurm. I know of three noobies who tried making a little house close to one of my friends' deeds but as they were still trying to come up with enough money to make their own deed, they had their animals in pens around the houses. Some other numnut thought it wise to go kill their bison and lock their fences. Last time I saw those three noobies was when they raged in local and logged out, never to be seen again. I am not saying livable starter deeds are the right choice, or mentors, but I know that these type of options usually give a much better experience to new players than just being left to their own survival skills. Nobody said hand everyone everything on a silver platter either. They still need to mine their own ore and make their own tools, but at least they have a bed and a usable forge and an open mine. The point is that a char living in a paid for starter town is no different to a char living in a player paid for deed somewhere else. It is a body in the game. Whether they don't pay for a starter town deed or they don't pay for a player funded deed, they don't pay for a deed. However, putting all the responsibility for funding the deeds for noobs back on players, is perhaps not such a wise decision if you are serious about retaining new players.
  5. I wondered if I should respond to this, seeing as there is another thread at the moment requesting this specific thing you suggested, but seriously, this just further shows the depth of the effect that complete nerf of all traders had on the game. I agree with you Hailene, it should not be up to players to make, run and fund deeds to try and retain noobies. (This was one of the arguments used to state how traders in the past actually helped noobies and helped to retain them as well.) However, the response of the devs is completely different as they "don't see livable starter towns being beneficial, if that were the case any new player starting deed would work and that can be achieved by players." Basically, fund it out of our own pockets, or lose it (and with it the potential noobies who may have stayed. Again, this is not in dispute, it actually happened.) Again, +1 to the OP's ideas for trader coins linked to the deed upkeep of the deed they are attached to, which would see a benefit to all players in Wurm.
  6. I chose the fix because with the previous system I could not get meals for certain affinities. What I want is a system which means all chars can potentially get any affinity in the list, and this also means not having to rely in rare ingredients to get certain affinities. Seeing how some people can't get a rare oven or forge, I would assume it to be much fairer if everyone gets the affinity they got for the non rare oven/forge but just a longer timer (same affinity), and the same for pan vs rare pan, which means that you can stack the timer a bit using a rare forge/oven plus rare pan to get a meal with a much longer affinity timer.
  7. wagon

    16 silver
  8. If the bows can be mailed please send to Fairyshine. If needle is still available please send to Fairyshine. Scissors CoC 84 to Fairyshine.
  9. I do have proof of this, but like I said, it is only those people I personally know. The devs, on the other hand, can look at every player buying money from the shop, and what type of game style they have and size of deed(s) and amount of deeds or chars or whatever, and make an informed business decisions. Again, bantering on forums does little to change anyone's mind, but it may spark some useful ideas around this, one of which may be to really study the playing style of people who really prop up the GAME, because that is what is important here (the game, not arguments). On your second thought: Why not give it directly to noobs? Giving it via foraging was the intent, give some of the coins to noobies to make the game more user friendly and perhaps retain some of the noobies. You stated that the activities chosen were deemed to be mainly noobie-type activities,which is why the money was earmarked to be attached to those specific activities only (I am not sure that those activities are mainly done by noobies, but let's go with that for a moment for the sake of open debate.) Unfortunately, it backfired for two reasons: 1. Anyone can forage, which means that the vets with an OCD streak immediately adapted and made an army of alts foraging the heck out of tiles and netting the coins which were supposed to go to noobs. 2. It is not only the noobie market who should be retained. The people who pay some money into the shop as loyal and established wurmians, also deserve some support. Obviously I am not saying that market only consists of people with a trader on their main deed, however, the same argument you use to say mainly noobies do these actions so that is why coins were earmarked for those, can be used to say mainly established players would have a deed with a trader, which is why some coins were supposed to be earmarked for those. I don't remember all the discussions but iirc that is why the money bucket was to be split in two, one part to go to some coins for noobies and one to go to some coins back to established players via traders. Since the bucket was not split, all that happens now is that most of the money earmarked for resdistribution get dropped in the grass/hunting, and in many cases non noobies get it any way. There is a difference between having a trader on deed to help pay for deed upkeep used by an established player who intends to stay for a long time, vs having one to milk for coins, which is why the OP suggestion to link the funding to deed upkeep makes a lot of sense.
  10. Nope, I am saying retaining players who regularly inject money into the game via the shop will increase the pool of silver as a result. The devs can look at the purchases via game shop, and see who buys their silver there and then do a profile of which types of deeds they own and what game style they play. If you own a small deed and always just forage to get your upkeep, you are effectively relying in the people who routinely pay for silver via the game shop to provide the money for you to be dropped in the grass for you to pay for your deed. If you just get silvers from other players by selling stuff or imps or mats, you are essentially relying on the people who routinely buy silver via the game shop to inject the money back into the game. It does not matter if you own a small deed and get it paid for with in game silvers or a large deed and get it paid via in game silvers, somewhere someone had to pay for those silvers via the game shop. If you are a player with a small deed and inject money into the game via the game shop, you are actually doing more for the long term survival of the game than a person with a huge deed who just sell mats and imps and bulks and never inject money back via the game shop. Circulating silvers in game is not the crux here. It is the fact that people inject money into the game buying either premium or silver to pay for deed upkeep, through the shop whose game style are most supportive of the survival of this game. Why? Because they subsidize everyone else. Perhaps if we are honest we should say that the game style of those people are the style the devs need to look at and promote. I don't have all the facts, I just know a few people in this game. I can say from experience that those who invested in traders to help them pay for their deed upkeep, are also those who more routinely buy silvers from the game shop, but I may be wrong. They will still buy those silvers no traders no longer support their deed upkeep, but they will be less inclined to share it around to others in game as there really is not that much to go around. If they happen to be those who form the bulk of the clients who purchase silver through the game shop, obviously, they should be retained. The devs are in the best position to look at all the facts to make decisions, so continually speculating here on forums really is not going to do much to change their minds, except to state the obvious: Retention of players who are willing to spend real life money on this game is beneficial for every player.
  11. Yes, one day (TM). Both sides have valid points here. Firstly, "farming gold" by using an army of alts to forage would also be a hard core person's take on the change in game mechanics, once again, leaving the coffers empty for the noobies wanting a few coins. Secondly, if you split the pool and retain some of the players who consistently inject money into the game via purchasing silver via the game shop, you have a better chance of actually getting a few coins back to those who forage for coins. This is the crux of the matter. What do you see as in-game actions? I mean, why are only digging and foraging and hunting giving coins? Why not riding x amount of tiles on your cart? (I am almost always on my cart, why aren't I given the option to get some coin for doing that in-game action?) Why don't I have the option of getting a coin when I farm? Why don't I get it for spinning a string of cotton? Why don't I get it for grooming my horse or breeding my bison or milking the cows or emoting another player? Also, why should some people get a rare they can sell for heaps of money when I don't have that? What makes them so special that they get the successful rare roll or dig up the rare bone and I didn't? Why are we paying people to just do certain in-game actions? Devs can decide to attach monetary value to certain game actions and some game mechanics. TL:DR I think devs can look at this matter and get some middle ground where people who have traders can get some deed upkeep out of it without breaking other money systems introduced. +1 to the OP for a reasoned and balanced point of view on this highly contentious matter. What is happening here is a suggestion thread to have this looked at. It will spark some other ideas which may be useful as well.
  12. So your suggestion is to just say "the game lost its spark" and then what? Not make a suggestion but instead just leave Wurm? Every time someone leaves the game because it "lost its spark", less money is spent in the shop which leads to less money to forage and less for the traders. I guess, according to you, this is a good thing though. It will solve many of the things you seem to have an issue with: 1. There will be less "whiny" people asking for a rebalance or splitting of the money pools. 2. There will be fewer people with those unnecessary larger deeds. People will resize smaller or just pop the deeds and leave. Again, it is is beyond dispute that this is happening already, because, well, it IS happening. 3. There will be fewer pockets of land kept for community benefit, like noobie academies (remember those? Free deeds maintained for the benefit of teaching noobies how the game works, and setting them off in the wide world with a basic set of skills, a speedy horse and a few good names on their friends list.) 4. I guess the days of free imps and high priced bulk goods will be just a fond memory, but it will solve your other pet hate namely getting something for little work (because noobies will be lucky to get anything for free. But from what you say, it is a good thing that noobies will learn the value of hard work in exchange for some coin, which, like you said, is a valuable life lesson! Especially since games will thrive if they continually require working for long hours to earn some coin in game. I guess that is why we have such an influx and retention of noobies all the time...) Traders did not "pay people NOT to play the game", it actually supported people to play other aspects of the game. In many instances, these things benefited many others in the community. I respect your opinion, and it is your right to live on a tiny deed and just buy the minimum bare essentials, and work hard for every coin you get. I take my hat off to you. However, many people play Wurm in a different manner than you. Many people are thankful some people will maintain community beneficial service type deeds (inns, academies, community event type deeds) or large tunnels and mines open to the public (protected by deeds). Not everyone is as hard core as everyone else. Perhaps there is a middle ground to be found, instead of people just aiming to destroy other people's requests in a blanket argument because they dare to play the game in a different manner than you do, and then told to just admit that Wurm as a game "lost its spark", if they don't come around to your point of view.
  13. Bridge bathed in blue. Courtesy of Robby.
  14. Where have all the bison gone? Please make them spawn again?
  15. In fact, I know of quite a few people who regularly bought a large amount of silver from the shop ( and always from the shop), at what you call "full price". If you asked them why they did it, they would answer that they enjoy the game so their support goes towards the game itself via the shop. No, they are not interested in 70 ql tools. Most high end players I know would rather give 70 ql tools away to others for free. However, since the market tanked as there are not a lot of in game silvers to splash around, many people would now sell those 70 ql tools for the 20 copper they can get or imp to 90 for the 80 copper (instead of giving it away for free). They would also be reluctant to pay a little more for bulk stuff and would rather see if they can get it cheaper or delivered for free, or make it themselves and not bother buying from others trying to sell bulk stuff. One thing that is a common theme in this thread is that quite a few people who had/have traders, used the money to do community building events or maintain deeds for the benefit of the whole community. It is not in dispute that this happened, it did. It is also not in dispute that it is happening less or that non essential deeds are being dropped despite them being for community benefit, because they are. I don't think anyone has anything against foraging giving coin, the issue is with the fact it comes from the same money bucket as traders, and that deed upkeep which used to be supported with trader coin now no longer is supported, so the money has to come from somewhere else. Selling tools or imps or mats to people who foraged the money is perhaps a way of getting the money back you used to get from the trader, but doing those things all day every day quickly feels like a job instead of a relaxing game. As always there are two sides to this coin (excuse the pun).