AndreC

I've noticed that decrease as well. I used to top easily 100, Maybe it was 180 iron per hour, but now its around 59.

I can connect on my main char, but its female for some reason -.-

Yeah I don't think this will ever happen. We have large collabborations on wurm, but nothing that exceeds a month in most cases. While I would love to make a hub thingey, I don't have the time, or the patience at the moment. So I feel that there is going to be a large gap of time before someone else replaces ETP on Exodus. Its easy to replace, but nobody has offically done it. Then again, most active markets fail eventually. So now all ETP is, is a merchant spot. Freedom market in indy is simply a merchant deed, people go there because they find deals without competing with others, or for a fast item. But y'know, you can only wonder until it happens.

Just looking at the front page... Jesus that game is expensive, its basically 10$ a month, and ontop of like 30$ for an account. I don't think they need kickstarter, they need a price drop. Like seriously. Although the complexity is far past Wurm, so I can see why its so expensive, but I would not pay 30$ for an account then 10$ monthly.

Death. Nah I heard really good ql cloth is worth getting in the right situations.

The Sol is too hot. Place it on the earth and dip it in the sea. But yes, I'd love to see that I can cool things in a barrel of water, or at least put hot items into my BSB without fear of it spontaneously combusting.

I'd prefer this too but then you'll have people who own deeds get shacked up by experienced, or even noob players, literally stopping them from expanding. Its very simple, imagine it like /support... Which I just now understood after reading the above, since I've only had to use it once and a GM was there (Boat in cave problems =/). Simple hiearchy, CA to GM so i'm guessing your looking at the complicated portion as the template. I think I need to clarify that this is MY sample template, the actual sample template(s) would be made by GM's in collaboration just so there's a base to go off of. CM's are still moderating the forum. They're not going in game and forcing them to change their perimeter just because, and they can't. This is simply a forum based situation. Players who literally don't own the land because they have no deed, come to the forums seeking a solution. Quite honestly, I think solutions should be made in game with the deed owner, and that it shouldn't involve CM or GM. But the problem there is that nobody with money wants to compimise with someone with no money, or nothing to offer them, other than the land they're trying to aquire. If i was as active as I used to, I wouldn't mind helping new players move away from the situation, help them build a shack elsewhere. I've done it before, and those players actually stayed playing the game, instead of quitting because of the total loss and having to start again. And your land may not fit MY template, but I literally thought of that in 30 seconds, I put it up as a personal example, not saying that your place wouldn't meet requirements, but this was made a an ENCLOSED established area. Your area is open and free, which could still apply in most cases, up until your buildings. And as I said a bit earlier, I'd I'd prefer protecting too but then you'll have people who own deeds get shacked up by experienced, or even noob players, literally stopping them from expanding, so this isn't to save noob shacks. Deed it or loose it is a remedial term. I could make a few 60 ql stone houses around and it just became deed it or get shacked. Now, since I'm not sure how often this happens nowadays, this still probably doesn't happen enough for this to happen, and unless we have that, this is just a sitting suggestion. Most new players don't have this problem (From what I see) because they stick around the spawn area (Essert, in this case) and nobody really wants a deed that close to spawn, especially the fact that fence and house remains prevent them from putting one down. And as you stated, this is a pay for land, not a free-i'm-here-first-so-its-mine land game. As in the title, Perimeter vs the ESTABLISHED, not vs the noobshacks. Deed or or loose it would still stand, just not in some situations, if it's being made out to be a big "Am I really loosing my expansion plans to a noob shack with a 10 tile farm?"

Considering that it's open to interpretation, isn't the freedom code of conduct one big open book then? As well as just about every decision made by GMs in the game. I mean, its not hard to determine what an established area is. One way or another, someone has to make a decision in the end of the day, and if people don't want to be bothered to publicly disclose the information, which is neither of a monetary or security risk to them, it must not be that important to them and they can move on. The idea here is that the cases that do come through are for a legitimate reason, not just because they made a house and a fence and don't want to move. And for the problems that come with moderating a forum... There should be zero distrust. If they come to the forum knowing that they're a free player, or a paying player with no deed then they should understand that they're already at a loss if they decide to go forth with the appeal. If there's really that thin of a line in disclosing minor disputes like this, then I wonder why 90% of online community's that have public ban appeals haven't collapsed because they feel the administrators are unfair and abuse their power. If you're in a position to assist players, I'm sure you can do so following a base template, collaborate even. You're looking at it from a head-on approach where you're looking for the problem, which is fine, if things didn't have problems we wouldn't need suggestions to fix them. Either way moderators are there for just that, to moderate, and while your role is still your average player with some chat warning powers in game, it shouldn't change the outlook of how the community views moderators just because they were denied their appeal. Looking at it at the day's end, this entire situation could be avoided if the deed owner was either willing to compromise, or to assist the person in moving, assuming its not across the whole freaking map, so this is more or less a fallback in the case where direct interaction does not help, or makes the situation worse. Of course if you're hot headed while asking them to remove their perimeter, probably swinging foul language across the chat, I wouldn't expect them to want to either. I still like your idea with the deed thing as the scripted substitute of this. Anywhoo, no it's not a Judge Judy thing. Its a simple pre-pass on to GM decision making. It should be no problems for CM's to moderate the game via forum , as they are trusted enough to earn the title, they should be trusted enough to not be bias and just say no to everyone becuase they didn't have a deed. And I only used the 2-D overhead map as an idea since I don't have an ingame screenshot of what I would call established. And as above, people come to the forums knowing they're already at a loss. They should know this and understand they can't win just because they live there for a couple of weeks.

Explain why or else you're not telling me anything. It's not. Its really very little actually, but considering how often this has the chance to happen, this will allow it to be contested without it going straight to GMs. its not hard to look at a post, see that the person is defending a 1x1 shack and deny it without going any further. As for what you mean by your sand and such, I get that and I was just laying out something that I would consider, not what I'm saying is going to be considered a settled location. I never had farms when i was freebee, but I had enough buildings clustered together, Im just throwing examples around so people get the jist of what i'm saying. And yes, 'minideeds' would be better, but im trying to come with a solution that doesn't involve changing the script in such a big way. Plus imagine the greif that that could cause if someone spammed alts, gave them some silver for the mindeed and planted them everywhere.

As you can tell, the recent mixup, and then reclarification of the purpose and ability of the perimeter has stirred up the deserts and sand has been flying in eyes about the would-be change to them, and ways to circumvent this. Well, I have a solution that involves no script changes, and quite frankly works like a lawsuit. Forum heiarchy Perimeter Appeals Accepted To be served (Optional sub-subforum of Accepted) [*]Denied CM/CA/GM moderator access of the forum to move, lock and edit title topics. Now that that is done, for the real gamechanger. What I'm getting at it is to make it so an established freebee can stay put, and actually have the chance to win in the case that they are overlapped, minus fence area if that's all they were overlapped at. I'm not saying a noob shack sits as qualified, but a proper image based definition and a forum is all that we would need. That'd be easier, and probably simpler than changing game mechanics just for this to happen. Simply post a picture of your place and where the perimeter is overlapping, and have it approve/reviewed by a CM, etc.. Then if deemed, it will be forwarded to a GM if direct contact with the deed owner doesn't help. Simple hierarchy instead of going "GM HELP IM IN PERIMETER HE FORCE ME OUT" Established freebee settlements can't have their building(s) perimetered over. Should this happen, contact the deed owner directly; Try to work a solution, if fails, move to next step Go on a (would be) forum section and post a picture of your place, where perimeter goes over buildings, and explain the situation and the deed owners response to you CA/CM would look at them, deem if they're able to receive GM help, using requirement template as a reference (Optional: Try to convince the deed owner to work something out with the freebee) GM would give a ruling on the situation based on responses, case by case. Example requirement template: 2 buildings minimum (4+ tiles each) or one large Legitimate enclosure with farmland or two+ animals Bed Basic containers (Large chest, Large barrel, Forge or Oven, Food storage bin, Bulk storage bin) Screenshot of conversation with deed owner (Chat logs also suffice) That would be my base minimum as established. If you just made a 3 tile shack and all you have is a BSB and a forge, well you don't apply. Getting the bed would be the first problem with no help, requires fur and only bears and wolves give those. Killing one as a player with no armor at the time is not easy at the beginning. Basically, you can't win just because you've been there for a week, and have 2 houses with nothing in them but 2 chests, a bsb a forge and oven. I'm only considering this as an idea because I don't know how that would work in the end. Sure people will be pissed at the idea because of "Deed it or loose it" will become "Deed it, build up, or loose it" which means exactly that. Deed it, or build it up to the would-be standard of established, or loose it. While I hate to make it a formal thing, because this is a sandbox game, and paid rules non-paid, but there needs to be balance. I don't like the idea of having GM's tell paying players that they're in the wrong for going over someone elses mini-village thing, but something needs to be done or else this will happen, and I've been in that situation before, it aint fun. Just a picture reference just so people see a better idea. The white overlay is where deeds CAN overlap perimeter, not only because the game will allow it, but because its not over their established buildings. Everything NOT in that white overlay would have to remain untouched in order to allow them to keep their buildings in repair. This is also a decent example of an established enclosed freebee area. Now, imagine gatehouses on all 4 corners. That wouldn't be considered a part of the undeedable rule I'm trying to establish, or else that would be constituting the noob shack Armageddon that people can easily do to deeds these days. I already know there's the people will hate this because paid should always rule over free, but if we did that in every situation we would never have new players. Hell, just force them to pay to play. Both as premium and a freebee at some time, I felt that the idea of that was unfair, because some guy could come over and decide to deed and just extend perimeter over you just because he can, and you couldn't do anything about it.

See below; I don't want shacks dominating deeds, not like they already can't for a few months. I think you're missing the point here. That's the easy way out, not the smart way. What I'm really getting at, and I'm probably doing a godawful job at wording it is, make it so an established freebee can stay put, and actually win in the case that they are overlapped, minus fence area if that's all they were overlapped at. I'm not saying a noob shack sits as qualified, but a proper image definition and a forum is all that we would need. That'd be easier, and probably simpler than changing game mechanics just for this to happen. Simply post a picture of your place and where the perimeter is overlapping, and have it approve/reviewed by a CM, etc.. Then if deemed, it will be forwarded to a GM if direct contact with the deed owner doesn't help. Simple hierarchy instead of going "GM HELP IM IN PERIMETER HE FORCE ME OUT" So in hopefully the most basic way I can put my complicated idea... Established freebee settlements can't have their building(s) perimetered over. Should this happen, contact the deed owner directly; Try to work a solution, if fails, move to next step Go on a (would be) forum section and post a picture of your place, where perimeter goes over buildings, and explain the situation and the deed owners response to you CA/CM would look at them, deem if they're able to receive GM help, using requirement template as a reference (Optional: Try to convince the deed owner to work something out with the freebee) GM would give a ruling on the situation based on responses, case by case. Example requirement template: 2 buildings minimum (4+ tiles each) or one large Legitimate enclosure with farmland or two+ animals Bed Basic containers (Large chest, Large barrel, Forge or Oven, Food storage bin, Bulk storage bin) Screenshot of conversation with deed owner (Chat logs also suffice) That would be my base minimum as established. If you just made a 3 tile shack and all you have is a BSB and a forge, well you don't apply. Getting the bed would be the first problem with no help, requires fur and only bears and wolves give those. Killing one as a player with no armor at the time is not easy at the beginning. Basically, you can't win just because you've been there for a week, and have 2 houses with nothing in them but 2 chests, a bsb a forge and oven. I'm only considering this as an idea because I don't know how that would work in the end. Sure people will be pissed at the idea because of "Deed it or loose it" will become "Deed it, build up, or loose it" which means exactly that. Deed it, or build it up to the would-be standard of established, or loose it. While I hate to make it a formal thing, because this is a sandbox game, and paid rules non-paid, but there needs to be balance. I don't like the idea of having GM's tell paying players that they're in the wrong for going over someone elses mini-village thing, but something needs to be done or else this will happen, and I've been in that situation before, it aint fun.

I think the new wurm client is hacking. Call the Anti-Hack Police and take this madness away! On a good note- I'm looking forward to these delopments and may end up buying more premium after the one i have runs out, after my series of life-changing events!

I see your point. I never let anyone on my deeds for that reason. I have a thing for walled deeds, both of my deeds had walls and gates, which I only allowed the main road through as access to passer-bys. I feel i just drifted off from the main point here, but what I'm getting at is that by the time they setup shop with their fences and homes, they should be considered established and be untouchable, building wise. Sure you can perimeter over their fence all day long, but you shouldn't be able to do this to their buildings. That in itself should be considered grief. I completely understand that deeded land should rule over undeeded, as its not paid for, you're just holding it until someone else with the cash to do so claims it. If anything the BUFFER PERIMETER should just be that. People can build there, do whatever, but anything other than the buffer (Which is the outer 5 if you purchase more) should be untouchable by writted buildings, like they are now. Typically because they're designed primarily as a.... buffer between deeds, so deeds are not practically in each other, plus it prevents a solid wall of deeds from blocking things. Secondarily, they are expansion lands. If you maintain the default 5, you have no plans for expansion, and have not considered it. That should be their loss, not the person who decided to settle near thems fault. As far as enclosure rules... Those are just things that people rarely bother with. Quite frankly unless you have a great deal of horses, your fences are safe. Of course its a rule, and people can get punished for it, but they GM's can't bring your things out because you decided to not leave things in a house, as far as animals, if they find that it would be a greater deal of trouble to protect them than get new ones, they can build one of these. />http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/5370/ultifreedomfort.png My point still stands though that there should be situations where the freebe should win, else we can't build up a newer player-base because they get the boot every month or 2 when someone walks by and drops a deed near them, and the perimeter overlaps them.

No. Too much greif can come from that on either side of PVP or PVE, requires items to be added in game that... Just no. Simply would make raiding impossible and would make this look like some 10 year olds fantasy fort.

Benefits outweigh the problems it causes. Pros PVE- Privacy PVE- Prevent large ships (I'd prefer WARN) from going in spaces that are probably too small. (ie. Rename fence (No large boats)) PVE- Just some cool junk to build! PVP- Prevent fast boat theft (Now you need to pick/smash the gate to get it out) PVP- Looks awesome at a seaside deed with a dock. Fort Docks. PVP- Easier canal control, of course you can still bash them down on public canals if its owned by a diff kingdom, but imagine the headaches of them all lining each tile boarder of the canal Cons PVE- Greifers, as with 90% of things with wurm, it can be done. PVE/PVP- Possible issues with odd numbered or wide canals (ie. a 3 tile wide canal, a 10 tile canal, etc) PVP- Might just get spammed making canal use nearly impossible, although strategy is strategy. Those are really the only problems I come across. Techincal issues and people being A-holes, but I would assume it takes a deal of skill and material to make (Say, 200 planks/nails to make + metal hinges, rope, metal pulleys, idk, just ideas.- Note, this is PER TILE BOARDER)

Well, most people buy deeds to prevent theft and decay. Thats what I purchased mine for when I owned one. Most paying players prefer deeds, because they can, not because they have to. If all it took was a few fences and a shack attached, people would still buy deeds to prevent decay and theft. I can have a 2.5k tile area all I want, but if I cant maintain the walls without it becoming a community project, then its useless.

Theres only 1 way for noobs to not get deed-blocked. Make 4 gatehouses a bit out of your area in a square-rectangle so people have to purchase a larger perimiter to force you out, which not too many people do unless they REALLY. want your land. But the rule of thumb to prevent being deeded over (At least until your gatehouses decay), 10 tiles out will prevent anymore than 4 perimeter into your area, which should keep your current buildings safe, but if the person has money to toss, you best start packing because they can extend perimiter over you. I personally believe that if you have an ESTABLISHED settling as a freebee, you have the home advantage over deeds. Im talking a few legitimate buildings, fences, animals, a decent sized personal farm, all that good stuff, then it should go against the 'perimeter' rules and you keep your land.

I see the problem here. I think it should be changed so that if the receiver does not either send back, or takes the item, it should be sent BACK to the sender by default, and after THREE WEEKS, it would be destroyed. It basically makes you be able to store stuff for 5 weeks, but it wont break the PVP aspects and what not. I would have tor this to happen to me, and im sure anyone else would too. I mean, it seems ridiculous to destroy the item without allowing its retrieval. Current system Sender---MAIL SPIRITS---Receiver ____________| ________Spirit Volcano (2 weeks go by, item destoys if reciever does not take it out) Proposed system. Sender---MAIL SPIRITS---Receiver ____________| ________Mail Return ____________| ________Spirit Volcano (2 weeks go by, item is sent BACK to the sender, where it sits for 3 weeks before being destroyed if not taken)

I feel that you're missing the point. I understand where you're coming from, the idea that squatters can completley halt the expansion of your deed with a single half-finished shack, but at the same time you need to understand that this is lableled as a long-term bug. Like many other "Game breaking" bugs that were recently fixes that inconvenienced the majority(I cant think of the one, but you may know.). So, because this is a bug it had to be fixed eventually now that it's come to light. Imagine if the game had come up on the idea of not being able to perimiter over buildings, we would probably be fine today. I find this as a win-loose situation. The intention of the perimiter was that you purcahsed it to plan expansion, lets say a 10 perimiter + the buffer. Thats 10 tiles out that you can expand in each way, maybe because you couldn't afford the deed if you owned all of it, or maybe you feel you dont need it yet, but you know you will in the distant future, this is the original intent of perimiter. Buffer zone was just to keep deeds from dry-humping eachother. Im sure you already understand this, but think twice before letting a fixed bug ruin the game for you.

Considering that this is Wurm, its a sandbox game that you can do whatever you want, within reason. Play Wurm alone, and its just minecraft singleplayer. You accomplish so much, but nobody to show it to, or to enjoy it with. This actually encourages local community assistance as well as relationships. Sure, you have some noob that comes trampling all over your place and puts up a shack outside your perimeter where you plan to expand. Either learn to compromise, or convince them to join and give you the writ, or help them relocate. Once they realize that they won't win in the end of the day, you can have your expansion zone back. Should they wish to stay, either ACCOMMODATE them, or help them settle in. Consider the following: If its a complete noob, they'll either become bored after a month or two, or they'll get into it and move on to their own place. If your impending expansion was either important or necessary, you would have extended your deed a long time ago. Also the fact that this has been defined as a long lasting bug means it wasn't meant for a paying player to be able to basically force a non-paying person to move or watch their building slowly fall apart. That right there is a major turn off. EDIT- Although, I think you should be able to put perimiter over players buildings IF THAT PLAYER HAS NOT LOGGED IN IN OVER 60 DAYS. It doesn't take a genious to log in within 60 days. And should they come back after 60 days, they should recieve a nice orange notice about their building taht was expanded over, and that they either need to negotiate with the deed owner, or relocate.

Why not let them be created from metal. Iron or steel. You have you use lead to make an 'anchor ball' and attach it to the buoy. Then it's a finished item and you can go around and 'Plant' them in the water to mark shallow areas, etc. Making them out of wood is pretty weak, although we have wooden boats, they don't rot out fast. This way it can be used for general purpose, instead of just making fishing spots.

Yes. Simply yes. The only reason I choose to live near water, or right on the coast is because hauling stuff with a large cart is the worst. You move what.. 300 dirt at best? Over long distances, forget about it. (My dirt math is probably off here.)

how 2 swim? I don't think we need this. We may have climbing, but when you think about it you cant climb infinitley with nothing on you, even at 70+ skill (Tested on... The test server). But you can however, swim forever with nothing on you. Think of it as an equal trade off.