Etherdrifter

My hat goes off to you Angelklaine; you've survived the gauntlet so to speak. It's a very different way to play wurm, but I always found it rewarding in its own way. There is a lot of potentially good content that could be added to priests; especially "household" spells for QoL. You could easily just have papyrus making as your inscription skill which opens a rather delightful possibility of giving priests different ways of using existing skills.

Glad to hear that issue is fixed; not that I notice these days since I rarely do any casts! Really only impacts point (d) of my post of course; the rest still stands rather well.

Honestly; the best solution would be to just to remove drain entirely. It's not going to offset the advantage gained over YEARS in the old servers, however it is going to be less of a kick in the teeth than the numerous ones we've had over the years. What am I going to do with 500 fast regenerating favour; take over the world?

So... Lets review here. 1. Without sacrificing, initial favour regeneration is still slower than it was prior to the developer's "fix" This was removed 2. Using links to help level channeling at later levels is no longer viable after the developer's "fix" 3. The new "favor overflow" feature isn't worse than what we had before (additional favor just poofed), but it doesn't seem to be much of a buff 4. Sacrificing now takes less time (15 seconds less) which is a clear buff to saccing So, the question is do 1 and 2 outweigh 3 and 4? Well... a) In terms of material cost; no. You're going to have to sacrifice a lot more during longer channel grind sessions. This is going to be good for getting rid of bulk items, though in reality it's just going to make the grind unpleasant as this just translates to hours more chopping veggies for favour that would have otherwise naturally regenerated. b) In terms of time spent; no. You're definitely not going to be doing natural-regeneration casts; though you could oversacc your two batteries and yourself which would lead to short bursts of chain casting. However, this comes at a substantial material cost as you're losing about 18 favor per minuite in that setup (according to OR's data) and you'll need to sacc more to accomodate for that. c) What about sacrificing as a tactic for PvP? Well yes, you can do it faster and the residual favour will enable you to cast even more spells at the cost of more materials being consumed. Though, I am not sure this is something they intended to buff... d) What about priests who are just starting out? Most of them use natural regeneration and few actively sacc, so they're worse off generally speaking. Without (1) this is really invalid Overall, the only buff seems to have been one that was probably unintended (c), and the general feeling of "the dev team hate priests" is somewhat justified.

A solution would be to yellow links where crafting with QL1 materials would be impossible but QL100 wouldn't. Red out links where QL100 materials would be impossible. It's not perfect but it's going to give players more information than they currently have.

Well in theory one could just reward all links with a percentile reduced tick at a standard difficulty based on the linker's channel skill. The larger the skill loss for the primary, the smaller the reductions for the secondary. Why not think outside the box though, why not let it be prayer ticks instead of channel? That way you can't argue it'd make channel gain too easy while still making it at least somewhat rewarding.

Oh come on now... You should know how this works by now; wurm's priests will never be balanced or buffed XD

This definitely needs fixing. It's more a bug than a suggestion though.

Hrm... Well that favour feedback thread was well hidden and short lived! Honestly, its a big change that will no doubt need a lot of tweaking. The slowdown in natural regeneration has already been a kick in the teeth; this change would have to counter-balance that to even return to the status quo. Essentially, to manage fast casting, you're going to need to bank a lot of favor. But if you do so you're probably going to waste a lot if you're casting spells like LT over a long casting period as you'll be burning banked favour during the cast time.

There is a lot to unpack here, and this very much is a suggestion for there are many details to be dealt with. However... The bones of a good new server are there, with a strong distinction from regular wurm play and a heavy seasonality. I can see this becoming a popular feature, especially with the skillgain posited later (burn your SB on your main server, then head over to Jackal to carry on at a decent level of skillgain without SB).

100 prayer!

Fishing used to be a good "AFK" skill; something to do while waiting around for someone and reading a book. The new variation is much more intricate and, while more fun as a mechanic, it's really not wurm's fishing. Goes under "uncool" for me since now my only afk skill is prayer, and no-one likes that skill.

158 people in local at peak, that's higher than the entire cluster on some days! Thanks for the great hunt!

Aye, I think this thread isn't the place for it; I'll move it to PMs I think since I reckon it's time someone took Ekcin to school XD

Alright, lets review here: Here I think you're conflating my point; I did not bring up law, I pointed out that using law was a poor example. Law (as most of us know it) has public oversight and is not dictatorially imposed; here the point argued was not idealistic, merely that it was a natural consequent of your comment on law textbooks (which I must admit, I've only read the ones on land law, and those are some of the worst written books I have ever had the displeasure to read). No, you were being quite clear; you were just in error. Firstly, this raises a new question; can I charge you 50 silver to correct your misapprehensions in my field (I jest). No system proves its own consistency (thanks Gödel!), and we are (to my extensive knowledge) always dealing with relative notions of consistency or assumed consistency when working with foundational systems. There is no "must" in mathematical logic; merely the notion of utility: a system that contains contradictions has a perfect right to exist, but it is entirely useless for the purpose of constructing true statements since ⊥⇒T and ⊥⇒⊥ ("you can derive anything you want from a contradiction") are both assumed in sentential logic regardless of which foundational school you subscribe to. You're conflating the game itself and the system from which the medium by which the game is created is derived; the "algorithms" you speak of are not a subset of logic, they are a derivative by combining logic with a foundational system that we assume to be consistent (or if you're a platonist they just always were and we discovered them). For the rejection of your comparison to law, see the first comment. (Small aside that is genuinely meant to encourage your interest in this field, not as a patronising stab; the book "Introduction to the Foundations of Mathematics" by R.Wilder is a really good introduction to this field as it covers a lot of the ideas that you're really close to getting; if memory serves there is a pdf of it floating around the web and I can definitely recommend it. It's a good book for getting past common misconceptions and building a nice intuitive "feel" for the field.) I disagree, but some mathematicians would not. It's a grey area in mathematical logic as some (like Hilbert) considered mathematics merely to be a symbolic game whereas others (like Brouwer) considered it to be a natural consequence of human intuition. For the rejection of the law comparison, see my first point.