Nekojin

Andara has talked with Fensalir in the past, and they were receptive to having a Highway in their area. I went up to their Deed last night, and while nobody was home, their gates were open, so I got a good look around (and now know who to talk to). The Deed is fenced in with single gates, so it's pretty clear that the Highway can't go through their Deed. I don't know whether they actually want it to run to the North or South of their territory, but based on some Roads they've put down, it looks like they're expecting it to go along the North side of their Deed. I'll try to get in touch with them and get their plans in greater detail this week. For now, plan to route around their North side. Hi again, SirC. We'll hash something out tonight. I didn't realize that you ARE Markath - I'd thought you'd plopped down between us and Markath. 😅 We have no problem with making alliances. Like I said in a post above, I left a Waystone in your North/South road so that you could connect into the Highway easily. I haven't spoken with the Lonlon people at all, so I don't know what they have in mind; I'm just trying to get a solid connection to Sonata. If you have any insight on the people and territory closer to Sonata that hasn't already been mentioned here, I'd love to hear it. 😺

One point here. I've played Wurm for close to a total of a year, across four separate play "sessions" starting back in 2011. I've seen pretty much every creature (and been killed by more than half of them) that exists in the PvE zoology except dragons. I've never seen a goblin. Is Ground Goblin Skull going to be a problem for people? Also, I note that your Story Talker Elixir has Ground Troll Skull as an ingredient. Was that supposed to be Ground Troll Club, or Ground Goblin Skull?

Speaking as an outsider who is not involved in any of this: @Ainelan- You should probably stop. You're making yourself look worse with every post. You had other Forum-goers against you before the other side had a say. Once they came in to share their side of it with chat logs, your accusations started looking worse and worse. Do yourself a favor and stop. While you're partially correct that toxic communities damage games (not kill them, mind you - League of Legends is notorious as having an extremely toxic community, and it's still going strong), it's not completely clear who the toxic parties are, and your own behavior here is likely to convince people that you are, not the people you're accusing. If you're right, then let it die, and repair your own reputation. You are not some community paladin, charged with exposing bad people, and attempting to set yourself up as such only makes you look bad. Their own misdeeds will eventually be exposed through abusing others. If you're wrong - and you know better than anyone what you did, and whether it was supportive or abusive of the Communities you joined - then you really need to stop and slink away. You're only digging a grave for yourself here. Good communities thrive with communication and cooperation. Good community members improve and highlight the good, not the bad. You're spending far too much time trying to bring others down, rather than trying to fix, repair, and improve.

It actually kinda fits in with many of his other threads. He has this idea that everything is a fierce and intense competition. Starting more than a month later means that he is hopelessly outclassed by people who have grinded their skills to ludicrous levels that he could not possibly catch up with. How can he prove his e-peen is bigger, when he really has no chance at anything? This suggestion is yet another e-peen waving competition. "Duel me! Refuse and you're a coward."

Yeah. And they did that. And they quickly learned that griefers made the game un-fun for the majority of the players, in exactly the same way that Ultima Online revealed, so many years ago (and, honestly, had already been proven in MUDs before that). Unrestricted PvP is not appealing to the vast majority of players, because it becomes a way for old players to abuse new players, which harms player retention. That's why it says Developed around the idea. You start with an idea. Then you polish it, and remove the parts that don't work. This game has 17 years of polishing, and your ideas don't fit.

So you'll be leaving soon, once the server gets too old for your tastes? As Etherdrifter points out, this doesn't add anything useful to the game, it's just an E-Peen measuring system that wouldn't even get used. If people aren't willing to duel you now, why would they do so under your pompous, pretentious framework?

Heinlein, particularly Friday, The Roads Must Roll, and If This Goes On... - The first for having a solid female protagonist, the second for being a very interesting idea on how highways could work other than the car system we use today, and the third for opening my eyes to how propaganda works. If you had to read just one of these, read the last. Spider Robinson, for all of the Callahan and Lady Calahan books. Stories that use humor in the abstract, and essentially taught me (indirectly) that there's always room for humor, even when things are at their worst. Also for showing me that sex, including kinky sex, can be fun, and does not have to be shameful. Lois McMaster Bujold, for writing fantastic space opera, with characters that are well-developed, flawed (and, in the case of her main protagonist, damaged), and human. And for showing, far better than George Lucas did, that science fiction doesn't have to dwell on the science and technology, that can simply be one element that drives some of the stories. And, again (with Shards of Honor and Barrayar, combined in an omnibus Cordelia's Honor; and also Ethan of Athos), showed me quite well that female protagonists can be strong, competent, and confident (even if Elli Quinn isn't actually the protagonist of Ethan of Athos). Jim Butcher, for showing me that you can write some powerful stories off of some of the most ludicrous concepts (finding out the origin of the Codex Alera series is worth researching... after you've read the series), and again for having well-developed, flawed, and capable protagonists. There's been a half-dozen other writers who have entertained me over the years, but I'm out of time, and none of the others have had the impact of these four. Edit: Additional writers who have been important in my reading catalog over the years: Anne McCaffrey (Harper Hall trilogy especially; the Dragon Riders stuff wasn't as interesting to me), Robert Asprin (for the Myth series), Rick Cook* (for the Wizardry Compiled series), Terry Pratchett (all of his stuff, even the less-popular, non-Discworld stuff like the Bromeliad trilogy), and Rowling, of course (the Potterverse stuff, yes - her sociopolitical books are too dry and dull, IMO). I don't really care for some of the currently-popular fantasy big-names like Martin, Jordan, and Sanderson. Classic writers that have also been in my wheelhouse over the years include Tolkien (of course), Arthur Conan Doyle, H.G. Wells, Mark Twain, and even a little Orwell. Special mention goes to DC Comics, Marvel Comics, and Archie Comics for my entertainment over the years, even if they so brazenly stole their stories from themselves, thinking that the readers would never notice. * I mention Cook specifically because the Wizardry Compiled series will never be finished. Cook had some severe medical issues in 2000 that fundamentally changed him. He was looking at a half-completed book in the series, and just could not get himself into the mindset that inspired his writing. He wasn't that writer any more, and had no idea how to get back to that. So he ended up releasing the half-completed book online, and moved on with his life. It doesn't appear that he's been able to write anything else since then, either.

I won't say that this is your worst idea, but it's certainly within the top 10 of the dumbest.

Not a single word of that is in any way a useful suggestion, Darnok. Stop trolling.

@Aerthok- After a break of building some more housing (the job that is never finished!), I'm going to get to work on more Highway in another day or two. The question is: Do you want me to continue working on the way to Sonata (and negotiating with the locals around the big lake), or would you like me to turn Westward and start working more toward your end of it?

Exactly. And the cost for extending your perimeter beyond that is a fraction of a cost compared to extending your actual deed - all you're doing is declaring more land that can't be claimed by anyone, keeping an extended, unowned distance away from you. The best use of this is to ensure that, sometime down the road, you CAN extend into that extra space with a guarantee that someone else's perimeter won't prevent you from doing that.

I think you want to reread the rules, because it doesn't say what you think it says. You are either ignoring important words, or inserting additional meaning that isn't in there. You've been here long enough, you should already know the answer to this. You don't own your perimeter. People trying to enforce their will, and doing it maliciously, will end up with them being stung by GM rulings. Or you can just use the rules as they already exist, and instead of trying to get the rules changed to make two deeds really really close, instead just join forces, share one deed together, and voila, no perimeter between you at all.

No, that change would muddy the waters further. I agree that the current wording is a little hard to understand, but that line is solely about the ability/right of people to remove themselves from the highway, not to remove the highway from their deed. For best clarity, you'd want to make another list point, not add to that one. One of the lesser-known bits of the Highway system is that, with only a few key, specific exceptions, nobody can remove a Waystone except the person that put it there. And if it's in the middle of an active highway chain, you can't even remove it, you can only replace it with a Catseye. Imagine this chain: X-X-X-X-Y-X-X-X Xes are Catseyes, the Y is a Waystone, and this is an excerpt of a fully-activated Highway - there's more Catseyes on both ends of that. Other people can connect to that Waystone. Nobody can remove it except the person who placed it. If I choose to remove that Waystone, I have to replace it with a Catseye as a single action, I can't just take it out. AFAIK, that Waystone is completely indestructible, like the paved road underneath it. The Catseyes are destructible, but it's difficult to do when they're connected, and doing so without having an alternate route that keeps everyone "down-chain" from being disconnected is potentially a GM visit waiting to happen.

What that says is that you retain the right to remove yourself from the highway system, by removing the Waystone that identifies your presence. And then you can remove the catseye chain that connects your deed to the main Highway, because you're not changing the highway, you're just removing yourself from it. The key words there is that you can remove deactivated catseyes once you've removed the Waystone. You can't just remove an unbroken, active string of catseyes that happen to be on your deed willy-nilly. Someone who extends their deed and uses that extension to cut off a Highway without replacing it is a guaranteed GM call, and it will not go well for the Deed owner.

By the rules as written, you're not even allowed to disconnect it like that without first placing a replacement bypass. It doesn't matter that it's now on your deed - the Highway was already planted, and if you want it off your deed, you have to make the changes to ensure that the Highway remains unbroken before you can start ripping it out of your deed.

To the best of my knowledge, you are not capable of turning KOS on if there is any Highway on your Deed in any context, and you cannot place Catseyes or Waystones anywhere on a deed - including your own deed - where the protection radius would fall onto a deed with KOS on, to the same extent that you cannot place a Catseye or Waystone in any place where the protection radius would extend into a deed that you don't have the planting/paving permissions.

Your idea would not prevent dramas nor make our community healthier. It would change what the arguments were about, and how people were abusing the rules, but it would not fix anything that's currently broken, and would add new problems.

You are wrong. I just did. The only place where the Catseyes were a problem were the point where the Catseye protection radius would spill into the Deed. If you'd like to come to Cadence to check it out, the place where I did this is in J-15, only a few minutes West of Sonata.

I planted at least a dozen Catseyes in a perimeter this weekend.

Which still doesn't answer the problem of being able to Highway if you're NOT one of those deeds. You could make a 2-wide road in that narrow gap (provided slope wasn't a problem), but the Deeds being that close would completely block the ability to lay down Catseyes. I ran into this (as only a minor inconvenience, not a big problem) this weekend, when I realized that there was a deed where I'd been intending to put road. I rerouted the road to go past the deed through the perimeter, but couldn't put down Catseyes in places where the Catseye protection radius would go into the deed - even though there was no paved roads that would actually be protected by it. I don't object to this - it was a learning experience, and I naturally don't want to impinge on the deed-owner's rights without their explicit permission. A few extra paved tiles, a little rerouting and an extra catseye or two, and all was good.

This seems to be based on the fallacy that the perimeter is part of the deed, and the owner of the deed owns the perimeter. The perimeter is explicitly no-mans-land - it doesn't belong to the deed owner, it's a way of ensuring that some things are still available and accessible to everyone. Including, among other things, the ability to plan roads and Highways.

The bridges will not support a building with no ground floor. The building will collapse, and then (simultaneously, effectively) the bridges will collapse.

1 tile perimeter x2 is not wide enough for a highway; people attempting to "thread the needle" will not be able to get past them without either going around or getting explicit assistance from one (or both) of the two Deeds. It might even be impossible to do without both deeds changing default permissions related to planting roads and catseyes.

Well, much progress was made this weekend. The path originally planned had to be undone and a new route planned, when I discovered that there was a rather large deed covering a good chunk of the woodland that I intended to Highway through. So I had to go straight further - and do some pathing on the other end as well, so that I'd have a better idea of where to place the diagonal - but ultimately, all went well. The road ended up far closer to the decaying house than I'd intended. So this is the current state of affairs West of Sonata. I'm still working with the residents around the big lake to try to figure out a workable path. If you live in this area, get in touch with me (TopCat in-game). I'm particularly interested in getting in touch with LadyRavenlure - if you're here, Lady, PM me please. If you KNOW LadyRavenlure, prod her to get in touch. She's obviously still playing, but apparently our playtimes aren't matching up, so I haven't been able to talk with her recently.

Why would anyone choose the SB, if they had the flexibility of the Marks that could still given them the SB if that's what they wanted (per TheTrickster's version)? It's a no-brainer - options are always better than no options, all else being equal. But if it were unequal - if your suggestion were the actual offer, and you can have 10 hours of SB, or only 3 hours if you chose the marks, then people who actually want the SB would take that, and people who wanted other things and/or flexibility would take the "loss" of taking the 10k marks. That's a valid comparison, and a valid offer. How balanced it is, that's a different story... and that would rely on devs trying it, and seeing how it plays out, and which one gets chosen more. I agree with this - free mule accounts shouldn't be a way for players to vastly enrich their main. Whatever free accounts get should be tied to them and not tradable. Paid, currently-active accounts should get the more flexible option. So if someone wants 20 accounts' worth of compensation windfall, they will have to have been paying for 20 accounts.