• Announcements

    • Retrograde

      DNS Connectivity issues   05/29/17

      We are experiencing some DNS connectivity issues with the login server, unfortunately this is out of our control. We will let you all know when these issues resolve. 

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'deed permissions'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Official Buildings
    • GM Hall
    • City Hall
    • Website News
    • Public Test Board
    • Official Auctions
  • Back Streets
    • Town Square
    • Community Assistance
    • Village Recruitment Center
    • Suggestions & Ideas
    • The Creative Commons
    • Wood Scraps
  • Wurm Unlimited
    • Unlimited Discussion
    • Server Listings & Advertisement
    • Unlimited Modding
    • Technical Issues
  • Freedom Isles
    • Celebration
    • Deliverance
    • Exodus
    • Independence
    • Pristine
    • Release
    • Xanadu
    • Freedom Isles Market
  • Maintenance Buildings
    • Technical Issues
    • Server Bugs
    • Client Bugs
    • Model and Sound Bugs
    • Other Bugs and Issues
    • Wurmpedia / Wiki Maintenance

Found 5 results

  1. As I continue work with the Ultima Nostalgia project (in which the entire server is one huge deed), I'm getting more and more requests on YouTube and elsewhere from people who would like to live in their own house on the server. I suspect that a lot of these people are Ultima players who have never tried Wurm before but who would be willing to buy Wurm Unlimited to live in a place that looks like UO and is populated by other Ultima fans. Obviously, since they've never played Wurm they don't really understand how deeds work. So I've tried to explain the problems of letting them live there. This got me to thinking about permissions. We can set permissions to houses, carts, boats, fences, mounts etc. But what if we could right click and set permissions to TILES that are within one's deed? This way, deed owners could: Create various empty plots - allowing "anything goes" so players could build a house from ground up, farm etc and anything they wished - so sort of like a mini deed inside a deed. Create a public mine that allows players to mine and pick up ore, but doesn't allow them to load a forge onto a cart Create wood chopping forests, keeping the forests and trees of the rest of the deed safe. Create public farming land And I'm sure there are many uses that I'm not even realizing at this point It would be up to the deed owner to mark these areas somehow with fences or signs Right click tile... Set permissions from a popup Coordinates of tile can be seen in the title to ease remote management Tile could be named to better keep track of which set of tiles (Plot 1, Plot 2, Public forest, Public mine etc) they belong to PS: Before posting this, I checked to see if there were any other similar posts, and I'd just like to point out that Enigma_Prime is suggesting something similar. Please go and check out Enigma's post as well. I decided to make a separate thread about this since what I'm asking for is slightly different, has different mechanics etc
  2. I feel that many people play this game for the novelty of how WURM works and the fact that you have pretty much full freedom to do what you want when you want with specific limitations. However, it has been my experience, regarding WURM, that there is an issue with player community. The players themselves do what they can to promote community and the devs have done a wonderful job improving this area yet to me it seems that it still lacks the "Let's be togetherness". I believe this idea that I have about the ability to "sell" property to players if they wish to be a citizen of a settlement can help with this shortcoming. Selling property with preset permissions that come with being an "auto citizen" lets individuals get to know others by proxy of purchased property. Essentially the community stems from being neighbors. One of the walls I have found as a deed owner is the fact that I have to "get to know" anyone and almost everyone that I add as a citizen. I would have to spend a considerable amount of time with an individual, as a deed owner or an individual that is capable of inviting strangers to a deed, in order to fully know if they are trustworthy enough to not seriously grief/damage everything on my deed before giving them the permissions that they want as part of a deed. All the while the individual wanting the benefits of my deed, and the community that comes with it, will have to wait that considerable amount of time to do pretty much anything on deed while they craft and build things off deed (wasting their time in my opinion). This may not seem like a problem with settlements that have a population less than 5 however when it gets to the point that the settlement has 10 - 20 or more then it gets annoying. As mentioned before as a settlement mayor it is hard to justify the time spent getting to know all the individuals that want to enter my deed. It is time better spent enjoying all the facets of this game that I have yet to do. This is only my opinion but the micromanagement style to deed owning is arduous. This issue is reduced a little with the ability to sell property that I allocate on my deed. As the mayor (or anyone authorized to do mayor things) I can then set certain permissions that automatically take effect as soon as they buy the property (and become a citizen of the settlement) just like it is set up now. The benefit of this situation is the individual that purchased the property can do what they wish, how they wish within the confines of the purchased property and its set permissions. The ability to sell property on a deed alleviates the issue of "trustworthiness" of the individual and enables them to gain the settlement benefits they so desire all the while putting a bit of currency in the coffers of the deed (the purchaser will still have to adhere to and be aware of any taxes that come with being a citizen). It is no secret that WURM also lacks anything that can be considered an economy. It has been mentioned by the players and the devs uniformly that the trading system between players is... clunky at best. The idea of selling property will benefit to the inevitable solution by creating a bit of "cash-flow" through the settlement. The Mayor (or authorized citizens) plant a property marker, sets the price and they are done. As soon as another player "purchases" that property marker funds are debited from the players account and the deed coffer is credited. Now this is in no way to be a huge effect on the problem but does introduce motivation to both purchase and use in-game currency. So this is all good but how would a system like this be set up? Good question and I have thought about this quite a bit: 1) Mayor (or authorized citizen) sets up permissions for a "New citizen" just like they do now. This will be what they are allowed to do anywhere on the deed (Pick-up items, not pick-up items, Lead, not lead, dig, not dig, etc.) 2) Set up a "property profile" for different types of property (what the purchaser is allowed to do within the confines of this type of property) Similar to the "New citizen" permissions however will include subjects such as maximum slope allowed or maximum building height for example. 3) Purchase a property stake from a trader (or make one. this would be entirely up to codeclub) 4) Place the property stake. Now this seems simple however I have thought about just letting the "marker" be in the center like the deed marker but considering you are dealing with a much smaller area (I'm thinking minimum 5x5 tiles with a one tile [or more] perimeter) Having a marker in the center where you cannot build anything would be annoying. So the solution would be to place the marker and have a UI that would allow a 0 to be placed in the fields asking how far north/east/west/south you would like the property to be with a minimum of two fields filled in and a mandatory perimeter (minimum one tile). 5) Apply a "property profile" to the marker and “citizen type” they would become if purchased. 6) Set Price 7) Player purchases property That's it. As soon as the purchaser buys the property they are now a citizen of the settlement (which is set with the "property profile") and can freely build within the property limits (also set in the "property profile"). From here on it is up to the new citizen to get to know others do good things for the settlement and gain more permissions or higher citizen ranking along the way. I admit there are a few more questions that need to be answered that are more difficult to deal with and ultimately, if this idea takes off, would have to be debated. However this is the gist of the subject. Some questions that I had a hard time confronting: 1) If an individual purchases property then quits playing/doesn't follow the rules/irritates the other citizens; do I as the mayor have the right to revoke their citizenship and take their property? 2) If, as a mayor, I have the right to take their property how does codeclub prevent mayors from stealing your game currency by booting the citizen out as soon as the transaction is complete? 3) Would a purchaser have the ability to purchase more property and if so how would I prevent them from “land-grabbing”? 4) Would a purchaser have the right to develop the property then sell to another? If so does the second purchaser become a citizen? and to this if so then what level of citizen? 5) Can purchasers "sub-lease"/share the property? 6) After purchasing; would the purchaser be able to add others to the property and set permissions for them?
  3. So I was adjusting alliance settings on one of my deeds and noticed a setting for external village named Alliance Members and the other which seems to be the default role, ally for alliance members. I can't remember if I added the alliance members role or know how it got named external village. I deleted the external village role as I was uncertain what village it would be.
  4. These new permissions for carts could be improved. On my deed we have always shared large carts but with the new permission system if I use a cart that I didn't build and walk away from it when it's on another deed I lose it despite having been given permissions by the person who built it. I think if a person has command permissions on a cart they should be able to command it regardless of deed permissions. What reason is there for my not being able to command my friends cart just because I am on another deed? If there is a good reason for this setting maybe there could be a warning message. I lost a cart, two horses, and several loaded items this morning because I was in what looked like a wilderness area but was actually a deed. A simple warning message would have saved me a lot of grief. Also I think citizens of a deed should be able to command a cart they don't have command permissions for just until it leaves the deed. They shouldn't be able to open it without permissions, or continue to drive it once it is off deed, but that would allow an abandoned cart to easily be removed from a deed.
  5. As it stands under the current system, Settlement-Manage Settings , we can mark the checkbox for deed guards to "Mark this if you want your guards to ignore aggressive creatures". This is a incomplete permission system and quite flawed. Allow me to argue. We had a funny incident in our deed this week, where about 6 eaglespirits spawned near our deed and one was a champ. You can figure out what happened afterwards just by the number. A couple of tamed horses got killed, and a villager got killed repeatedly by the champ eaglespirit. Needless to say, 5 tower guards couldn't handle the influx of spirits of this number. The annoying part was when I unchecked the box for guards to attack aggressive creatures. Lo and behold, instead of attacking the eaglespirits , our brave spirit templars aggroed on our deed Hell Horses and started slaying them in droves. This shouldn't happen on deeds. Seriously, besides a defence against raiders, what use do spirit templars have against aggressive animals if instead of killing enemy creatures, they just butcher your own hell horses? My suggestion is this. Add a new Reputation Checkbox for each aggressive animal in part. It could look like the rep box for players. For example: Set reputation for Scorpion: -100. (guards will always attack scorps) Set reputation for Hell Horse: +100 (guards will always ignore hell horses) Set reputation for Lava Spiders: -100 (guards will always attack Lava Spiders) Set reputation for Bears: +100 (guards will always ignore bears, why not? some people like bears as pets, etc.) You get the general idea from this list. This could be implemented quite elegantly in wurm and thus help deeds adequately defend against certain types of creatures while not endangering hell horses (which are often a pvp and pve asset). What do you guys think? I find that we really need this feature.