Postes

Doctorchaos and I had both ran on The Landing once before to gank someone, and JK never complained about it being unfair. Don't make this about kingdoms. The basic truth is, Zaza, you haven't ever really raided a place. Your view only comes from wanting better safety for yourself on a deed, which makes Wurm bad when you suggest bias suggestions, no offense. Guards are just merely lookouts, you should not depend on them to fight your wars or defend your land. A player should do that. The game is always about PvP and not PvNPC. It's the reason SV only has 2 guards, and those are just to set off the alarm and grief-alts. We rely on the people in the village and JK-mates to defend the town. You have no idea what I have and haven't raided so your assumption I have never raided or taken part in pvp is a moot point and a snide attempt to attack my opinions legitimacy at best and neither of which is a valid point of why my opinion or suggestion is terrible. The reason SV has only 2 guards is not because you rely on 'people' to defend your deed as much the reason why kyara doesn't sit with max guards on or even half max last I heard its deep within JK territory and as we all know no one can touch you. The only reason why you won't even acknowledge or debate my decisions is because you, as JK, are having the time of your lives with no one being able to touch you except when you make stupid mistakes and even then it takes an excessive amount of effort to kill you. More on topic, having guards track their targets at the speed that the target is going +1-2km/h would be good as has already been similarly suggested it would be a small but decent buff without having to increase their strengths at all and may deal with the horse problem although I like others think they should attack horses as well we might as well start with a small change before a large one. Well part of a deed's defense is where you plant it. MR have been around SV before, it's in the heart of JK, sure, but then answer me why at LoL did we still only have 2 guards? Despite it being nearly in the middle of the map? We all had money, we could of put down a side 20 if we wanted, but we choose not to. A deed to us is merely a place to respawn and prevent decay, not a sanctuary where you're untouchable, which seems like what you desire. So to debate your arguement - Even as BL I was in a village with 2 guards, my opinion of guards from BL to JK never has changed. They're NPCs who guard the town, and that's it. The idea of "not wanting a challenge" is just silly in my opinion. A challenge shouldn't be fighting a NPC army, it should be fighting REAL players.

The point is moot anyway, you died because you were nude and AFK on a non-secure deed. Topdog (extrusion) could of easily converted BL, ran on there, and ganked you as a BLer. It wouldn't of mattered.

Doctorchaos and I had both ran on The Landing once before to gank someone, and JK never complained about it being unfair. Don't make this about kingdoms. The basic truth is, Zaza, you haven't ever really raided a place. Your view only comes from wanting better safety for yourself on a deed, which makes Wurm bad when you suggest bias suggestions, no offense. Guards are just merely lookouts, you should not depend on them to fight your wars or defend your land. A player should do that. The game is always about PvP and not PvNPC. It's the reason SV only has 2 guards, and those are just to set off the alarm and grief-alts. We rely on the people in the village and JK-mates to defend the town.

In my opinion there's nothing wrong with that situation what-so-ever. Basic logic: Horse are faster than guards on foot. You can easily breeze past guards if on horseback. We shouldn't penalize players for having strong body stats and expensive armor, that's apart of the game. You took a risk being naked on the starter deed, when you could of chosen to log off. It wouldn't really be fair to have 50 guards attack at once, it would be an instant-gank. The system as-is is fine, but guards and deeds don't promise safety.

Like in most games, premium players have perks, and this is one of them. The free-to-play feature isn't meant to be permanent, it's meant to show new players the game for free, and if they enjoy it enough to buy premium and experience the FULL game itself. Most changes and suggestions will always apply to premium players.

Please restore it back to what it was.

Have your fish. ><))))°> Zeds obviously hasn't seen the charts. Wurm has actually shot up a lot in the past 2-3 months, likely from more publicity from MMOHut, Massively, Minecraft, and youtube videos.

Personally I'd say -1, I like being able to barter for some things I see on the trader, like bed parts, gems, etc.

Yeah, but I think the problem is they can't climb up, nor go any lower because of the water. So they just can't go anywhere but at sea level.

This was meant to be fixed, but the way I see it the animals go down to the bottom of a slope, get stuck there, and are coded to not go back up. While this making hunting easier, it just looks wrong, and in my opinion resembles a bug. For example...

I have to admit this does sound rather awesome. +1

Hell, I'd love to PvP/raid if deeds guard never existed. I hate NPCs myself.

Sorry, -1, just nothing here I really agree with that needs changing.

I believe a player out of game has rights to spend their money on whatever they desire, account or not. With that said, I believe it's because games like Wurm and WoW differ. WoW is much easier, and it's heavily populated within a million players, and it's easy to start an account business on the game. Having a team of levelers, powerlevelers, and selling accounts, which is making money off of Blizzard in a sense. Where as in Wurm it takes a year or more to have a decent account, and there's no real way to farm accounts and resell them like a business. I think Wurm just hasn't had any issues with it all yet to put a stop to it.

Well no offense, but I read your forum posts and they're all on Freedom. So it's kind of narrow-minded to start making suggestions when you aren't even on Wild nor PvP. You don't realize how it is here, so please just stop making suggestions that effect others players, and a whole other server that you're not on.

Because it forces players to die to other players, and not just /suicide out? Imagine you chase someone for 10 solid minutes, across a lot of land. You have same horse speed, it's pretty close, and right when you catch up they /suicide. It would likely annoy you. Now imagine this happening 10-20 times, you would get VERY annoyed. It's pretty basic.

Sorry, you are misunderstanding the suggestion here.

This whole Idea of you having some kind of rights to kill them because someone's name appeared in local is a joke. How about removing enemies names from local all together? This is a PvP server. From reading your posts I don't even think you're on it, because you've made little sense thus far. The point of this is to allow for more PvP rather than just suiciding out unfairly.

What Friend said. Just popping the edge of someones local is like.. what? 50 tiles? I can't hit them right away upon seeing them.

Okay, but you're then /suiciding for a reason, because you know the enemy's presence is going to result in your death. Thus those players should be rewarded for causing you to suicide out instead of just being killed by the player. I like PvP, and I know you said you aren't interested in it, but it's not fun when enemy just quits and won't give others the fun of it.

Well, because this: "The mentality on wild is what contributes to the problem, perhaps if you folk didnt make such a big deal about killing folk and gloating people would be more inclined to let you take their chars down and less inclined to swallow their tongues." This has nothing to do with letting suicide alts be killed by other players and gloating, that comment was just silly talk. They're just throw-away alts, and there needs to be more restrictions added to them about suiciding. They don't suicide to avoid gloating, they do it because they already have nothing to lose.

This has nothing to do with you. It's more about the 10 suicide-spy alts around DC area. Zombify, Zombiefetish, Xandria, Xsi, etc etc etc.

+1 A part of me likes this idea, but.. SV has 4 vyn champs. I can sit there all day casting locate soul on someone and just wearing their jewelry down. I guess this is a fair tactic, but just seems rather silly.

The problem with it is I can't suggest like making the penalty more severe when suiciding with enemies in local, because most of the people who /suicide are just throw-away suicide alts. Suiciding more doesn't really matter, they're just to made to spy. So either the penalty of suicide should increase with enemies in local AND your rank should be given to the enemies in local for causing that person to suicide.

You miss the point though, which is that it affects the enemy also of gaining any affinity, rank, FS. Suicide was more designed because Wurm is buggy, and you can get stuck easily, and a quick-fix is suiciding out. This is Wild, and we should fight each other, not cowardly suicide out to spite the enemy of any gain. I should gain something still if a person to chooses to suicide to me because they're too afraid. It should be disabled or if they choose to suicide with enemies in local the punishment should be more severe. The second fails because people are doing this on alts who already have 0fs, and 0 in all other skills.