Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
kraten

The Great Fence Of China

59 posts in this topic

I LOVE to wander the lands of Wurm but much of the time is spent navigating the maze of various fences. I'm suggesting increasing the decay of off-deed fences for several reasons:

Fences are very easy for anyone to construct and even low QL fences last a terribly long time making them abundant.

Fences are very important to the starting player who needs early protection and security but their areas tend to be small at first. Ever evolving, a new player's area should be able to grow and take shape to their needs, including rearranging fence layout. Fences should be easier to deal with and remove by the person who constructed it. While destroying a wall by hand is near impossible, a catapult really isn't an option either for a new player due to the rope needed to construct; this makes moving and leaving an area to decay about your only option; leading to many small wasted areas with fences still standing.

I have noticed owners of small deeds fencing off HUGE tracts of land well beyond deed borders with little concern due to the slow decay rate of fences. While i'm not disagreeing with the practice, there should still be balance between gaining large areas of private land and being responsible for maintaining that much fence.

Another matter relating to claiming such large areas without balance is allowing hedges to grow on such steep slopes. This in effect negates the restrictions otherwise given to normal fence slopes. Have a slope that's too steep? Just throw a hedge down and keep going.

In areas around me specifically, I have noticed people resorting to hugely long fences (The Great Fence of China) spanning hundreds of borders to block off entire regions to travel for no real reason. Increasing off-deed decay should at least help in the matter of fence abuse and make exploration more enjoyable for everyone.

In short, fences should not be as abundant as they are and maintaining fences should be more important if off-deed.

Edited by kraten
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there's a gatehouse every 11 tiles it's not an enclosure and you can bash right through it, and i totally agree :) +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, since fences don't have ownership like houses so decay can't increase after the owner haven't logged in for a while it would only be logical to increase the decay on off-deed fences.

ql70 fences can last for 1 year+ off-deed which is too much, it wouldn't be too much to require people to at least maintain their off-deed enclosures once a month IMHO.

Alternatively could also add ownership to fences, that would also enable new players to bash their own fences they misplaced without getting to 21 body strength.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well If I remember correctly roads tiles used to have to be used or they would go away.

Why not make it so if no one walked near the tile the fence was on after awhile they would speed up decay.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back to independance, well over a year (probably much longer) after I left. The fences to my old deed were still here. 40 ish ql iron fences with only 60 damage on them after a year of no maintanance is just silly.

big +1 from me for faster decay on off-deed fences

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well If I remember correctly roads tiles used to have to be used or they would go away.

Roads still work this way. If a road isn't used for a month it has a 1 out of 10 chance of disappearing

I went back to independance, well over a year (probably much longer) after I left. The fences to my old deed were still here. 40 ish ql iron fences with only 60 damage on them after a year of no maintanance is just silly.

big +1 from me for faster decay on off-deed fences

Thats too long for them to be around. I agree 100% +1

They should be gone in a month or two without maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another matter relating to claiming such large areas without balance is allowing hedges to grow on such steep slopes. This in effect negates the restrictions otherwise given to normal fence slopes. Have a slope that's too steep? Just throw a hedge down and keep going.

Just noticed this.

A hedge isn't a fence so its not an enclosure if part of the enclosure uses hedges (an enclosure as defined in the FCC).

I still feel enclosures (as defined by FCC) should have a size limit to be protected, because I notice more and more 50x50+ enclosures recently. Thats a whole other discussion though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because you want to wander the map doesn't mean you should be able to remove the only means of keeping someone's land safe from mass tree cutters, pit diggers and other such riff raff.

Deed it or lose it

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deed it or lose it

Right

Edited by Macgregor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be nice if unmaintained fences/walls decayed much quicker than they do, but only if it's easier to keep them maintained (maybe by removing the need for a plank/brick/whatever if the damage is under 10 or 5 or something). This would reduce the clutter from abandoned villages and at the same time make it slightly easier for active players to keep their area maintained.

Edited by Jonneh
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be nice if unmaintained fences/walls decayed much quicker than they do, but only if it's easier to keep them maintained (maybe by removing the need for a plank/brick/whatever if the damage is under 10 or 5 or something. This would reduce the clutter from abandoned villages and at the same time make it slightly easier for active players to keep their area maintained.

So, something like easier maintenance and faster decay? Brilliant!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I sound like Protunia but I completely disagree with off deed fence decay increase. I'm fine with how it is, I do have some fences off deed surrounding small parts of land that are a pain to maintinence in general, so more decay would really not help. And if that isn't enough to go against the idea then what about new players that can't afford a deed? They usually live on shacks with a small fenced in area for a few months or more, increased decay rate really wouldn't be fair to them.

So a -1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think decay should be slow at first, but after it hits a certain dmg it should be gone in a few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Know what. You are absolutely right. These enclosures the noobs make need to decay much much faster. My 70ql fences will last. I pay for my perimiter and I'm able to protect it. Their 20ql fences won't last with faster decay. They don't need enclosures anyway. So screw the noobs so a couple people can wander around.

Your perimeter doesnt protect your fences against decay, so you will still ahve to manually repair everything you build ofdeed - perimeter or not. The noobs dont get screwed. They dont try to maintain 200x200 enclosures ofdeed, just a small fenced area. A couple of planks every month isnt much, but you will force the landwhoring vets around the servers to put effort into keeping "their" free ###### protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad idea, when there is a player not on a for a bit and the walls are a damaged and close to that point, then they are gone unexpectedly, they come back and a good portion of their walls are down, that isn't fair. And if you don't like the fences and walls being up then get out a maul and start bashing some down :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad idea, when there is a player not on a for a bit and the walls are a damaged and close to that point, then they are gone unexpectedly, they come back and a good portion of their walls are down, that isn't fair. And if you don't like the fences and walls being up then get out a maul and start bashing some down :/

I disagree with that totally, fences show a different graphic for high Dmg. at 60+ which is more than generous, giving you plenty of notice that they need repair.

The point was also made about how incredibly hard it is to bash a fence with a maul. I once spent 20 minutes on one section that I built to destroy it(not having wemp yet), that just shows something is wrong with that system.

You also stated earlier:

They usually live on shacks with a small fenced in area for a few months or more, increased decay rate really wouldn't be fair to them.

I agree new players live in small shacks at first but I would argue they lack the experience to construct a viable settlement that would still suit them a month later. They need the ability to expand, improve and re-arrange fences. Higher decay would not hurt them as much as not being able to take down their own badly positioned fences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, actually you make some very valid points, may have to rethink on that one. But still I do have walls off deed and they are a hassle to repair to begin with, a higher decay rate would make it a nightmare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a thought. How about the decay ticks on fences (and even house walls) increase exponentially. For example, a fence at 40 damage would have larger decay ticks than a fence at 20 damage; a fence at 60 damage would have higher decay ticks than a fence at 40 damage, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there's a gatehouse every 11 tiles it's not an enclosure and you can bash right through it, and i totally agree :) +1

Every 11 tiles is not a rule.

My village owns an island. *owns* is the relative term, since we have roughly 500-600 stone walls around half of it comprising about 14,000 tiles. Originally that was due to a war on the island (war by freedom terms) but we do have an active village with many active villagers. If they ever left I would be forced to knock the walls down or try to sell our holdings to a group as it wouldn't be fair to hold that much land myself. Every 6 months we repair/improve them for about 3 weeks.

But... we have a large orchard, and a bush orchard, forests of cedar, pine, maple, birch and nice houses out of sight of each other plus a great harbor (which is deeded), and allies/locals are all allowed to come in to grab sprouts, chop trees, hunt. And we have about 2500 tiles of just grass waiting for frikkin cows (or bison, hahaha - never happen on grass) and since this is an island, only way to get them. I have made gatehouses roughly every 15-25 tiles so it is obviously an enclosure.

Still, I would like to see walls have stronger decay. If that means I have to repair mine more often so be it, worth it to see the walls maintained by afk players die faster.

Edited by leaf
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a thought. How about the decay ticks on fences (and even house walls) increase exponentially. For example, a fence at 40 damage would have larger decay ticks than a fence at 20 damage; a fence at 60 damage would have higher decay ticks than a fence at 40 damage, etc.

That makes it seem less predictable, which would be bad for people who actually do have to maintain their fences and go by the visual decay indicator. It's better to just ramp up the linear decay rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your perimeter doesnt protect your fences against decay, so you will still ahve to manually repair everything you build ofdeed - perimeter or not. The noobs dont get screwed. They dont try to maintain 200x200 enclosures ofdeed, just a small fenced area. A couple of planks every month isnt much, but you will force the landwhoring vets around the servers to put effort into keeping "their" free ###### protected.

Right.

Edited by Macgregor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0