Etherdrifter

Members
  • Content count

    1545
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Etherdrifter

  1. Pretty simple, allow folks with high stone cutting to create HoTA statues out of rift stone and normal stone (start by using a chisel on the rift stone (large piece, maybe even max stackable weight?), make up the remaining bulk with normal stone). Adds a way to get them in PvE; still lets the PvP folks have their "risk/reward advantage" and gives everyone another use for the rift materials.
  2. Speaking as a priest, we've not seen *useful* new content in a fair few years (at least nothing a bless bot can't quickly do). -1 from me as it stands
  3. I disagree, this implies that those who PvP don't actually want to be doing so. This rather implies that PvP is something one does for utilitarian means, not for the fun of it. You are also assuming that anyone save the main kingdoms can actually compete; a gross misconception. In essence the notion of blocking copmetitive content is a good one, if the event were actually competitive. Also, if you wanted the competitive elements to be stronger (i.e. more attendees) you'd also be in favour for mechanics such as capped skills and fixed equipement in the play area; both of which would definitely make the event more competitive (a lot more turnout too), but it would also errode the massive advantages elite players (most of whome got their skill levels using mechanics which no longer exist) possess. While I do think PvP should have a lower access barrier to content (risk vs reward, it's got to come into it), I do not think it should act as an absolute barrier to content (PvP or gtfo).
  4. -1 Far too easy to farm (pun intended)
  5. +1 for village/alliance emblems -1 for kingdom I think we all know why.
  6. +1, this would make rares a lot more useful.
  7. Surely it would come under toymaking? +1
  8. I quite agree with you, what competitive content has it been blocking?
  9. I see a lot of the nebulous "oh this would make PvP less unique" argument cropping up any time PvE wants access to sandbox content, which begs the question "why is this a bad thing?". Wurm's PvP needs to stand on its own merits as a fun competitive platform; not as a block to sandbox content. Insisting that "if you want x then you have to PvP us for it hur hur hur" doesn't make people more likely to PvP, all it does is create resentment against that mindset and further errodes a dying community. To be quite frank, the elephant in the room is that most people suspect the "oh this would make PvP less unique" argument is really "oh this would make it harder for me to make silver ingame" in disguise. Personally speaking; the divide between PvE and PvP content shouldn't be in terms of item availability; it should be in terms of convenience. Either take a risk (PvP) and get what you want quickly, or spend a long time grinding (PvE) for the same effect (rather like how fighting skill currently works). It retains item value and makes those items accessable for those of us who don't want to buy someone elses account for a chance to compete.
  10. Which rather serves a useful purpose of its own.
  11. Well a logical question is why not start work on a new client in one of these engines? While such an undertaking would be a heavy one I believe it would greatly help in resolving a lot of wurm's current bottleneck issues, improving code maintainability and "modernising" wurm to be more efficient (such an engine would doubtless generate a much improved framerate on any system and may even lower the system requirements).
  12. That's kind of why suggestions like this get -1ed so hard.
  13. The day freedom gets a similar mechanic is the day I'll +1 one of these XD
  14. A shot I captured in 2013 while exploring "Paradise Valley" on release (home of so many angry trolls):
  15. I'd be wary of that, the top 10-20% on some servers would be nigh on unreachable (one single mountain), whereas on other servers it would flood large areas with snow. A simpler notion would be a hard capped snow line set manually for each server (the devs can run a simulation easily no doubt).
  16. As someone with a 308 tile long tunnel (that he cannot clear in event of cave ins, nor improve, nor reinforce) as his only link to the rest of the world? -1
  17. +1 Some form of mountain herb that can only be foraged/botanised above a certain height would also be nice... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_plant#Medicinal_alpine_plants
  18. +1 Good idea
  19. +1 if only for a new way to train natural substances (though I doubt it would solve the ash shortage for obvious reasons :P)
  20. There is a strong feeling among many that wurm is in its twilight. The low Xanadu population is noticeable (I rarely see anyone in local when I travel to rifts) and adds to this feeling. Until WO offers a similar price to WU? It will not improve.
  21. I don't really like it myself (and I do live on a mountain); but it would be beneficial for game immersion (and quite frankly, beneficial to my wallet :P)
  22. I put forward something too; it was a little more artificial (though much easier to code). Water could be added to wurm, however it would take a fair bit of coding to make it happen
  23. Honestly? Things like that are wurm's future. 0 extra functionality, it is all about cosmetics!
  24. It's a -1 from me at the moment, mostly because I don't think the moving of animals will really help trade. For PvP all you'll see is "sponsored" horse factories on a PvE server; the impact on the market will be negligable. For PvE the horse market is already fairly poor (folks is my alliance literally give away 5-speeds) and this is just going to make it poorer (one horse for all servers now rather than one on each).
  25. A set of almanac-like pages for collectables might be nice!