Calan

Members
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Decent

About Calan

  • Rank
    Villager

Recent Profile Visitors

242 profile views
  1. I think that's a really good point. Uniques clearly serve different purposes to different people. For some, they're end-game content and they enjoy the challenge of hunting them down and slaying them privately with a small group. For others, they're a public event much like an impalong where everyone can get together for a short period and get some reward. The current system supports both of these. But it's up to the players finding the unique to decide which way to go. And then there are those who apparently want unique slayings to be something new -- something in between -- these two things. They don't want to have to put in time to hunt down the uniques themselves. They're annoyed when those that do or those who find a unique by happenstance don't have to make the slaying public. They apparently want unique slaying to be forced to be 'public', so they can participate without needing to be involved in hunting/finding them. Yet they also want to restrict how others can participate. These people are not only unhappy that not all slayings are public, meaning they can't attend them all; but they're unhappy that those that are public actually reward people they don't think should be rewarded, leading to fewer rewards than they feel entitled to. They want the unique gate opened 100% for them; and to not only keep a gate in place, but to add new restrictions to stop others from passing through. I find this third view extremely ironic.
  2. I don’t have a strong opinion either way on whether something needs to be done to force public slayings. But I do have an opinion on basing rewards on participation: I really dislike that idea and think rewards should continue to be equally given to every premium player in local. I find it sadly ironic the idea that something needs to be done to force making unique slayings public — but only to the benefit of players who can ‘contribute’ to the public gangbang that sees the unique slayed in minutes and with little risk to any of the ‘participants’. I attended my first public slaying not too long ago and wanted to contribute; at 70 FS, I managed to just get a single hit in before the poor creature was dead. How many weren’t able to get a hit in? How many who got in more were never even hit back? No, I really don’t see why ‘contribution’ should affect rewards. Let public slayings — whether arranged by generous players or forced by a change to the system — remain public events that equally reward every premium player that shows up. If the suggestion to force unique slayings to be public goes hand-in-hand with also limiting rewards based on ‘participation’, then, a big -1 from me. It’s just a new way of gatekeeping uniques. At least with the way it is now it’s down to the players who find the unique to decide whether to open the rewards to everyone, while the suggestion would mean that Wurm itself would be doing the gatekeeping.
  3. Sorry to say I don’t think that’s likely to see the light of day any time soon. The game handles water purely based on level of the land being above/below ‘sea’ level, and I imagine that’s a pretty hefty change needing water physics. Eg, what do you see happening if a neighbouring tile is later dug down? The water expanding to two tiles? And that tile’s neighbour? Would be cool to have streams running down mountains and hills, but I don’t think that’ll be an easy change. What should be easy and what I thought your suggestion would be based on the title - give us a way to make a water source tile (similar to a rod of transmutation). That is, turning a tile into a water source for wells and fountains. Placement of these isn’t usually the first thing you consider when deeding and building, and it’d be nice to be able to choose where to place these rather than being restricted to where the game randomly chose to place one. edit: and maybe I misunderstood, and the second is what you mean!
  4. Erm, no. The need for more diverse skin options (and hair, beard, etc) is a given and should be open to everyone once available. The look and feel of Wurm might be based on medieval Northern Europe, but this is a fantasy game. The population of medieval NE might not have been 20% dark skinned, but neither were there working magic, instant mail, giant spiders, huge ships manned by one person, or giant avatars of gods walking the land. There’d be nothing immersion-breaking with 100% of players playing dark skin characters if that’s what players wanted. Good idea for more skin tone options, but not locked.
  5. Assuming you have an on-deed mailbox, a workaround should you have other remote buyers could be to ask them check mail at your mailbox, not theirs. Does mean they’d need to hold off on other mail, but at least the key won’t be mailed across servers.
  6. How about an exception being branded starving animals don’t unhitch? I assumed this suggestion was more about releasing hitched animals from abandoned deeds, not deeds with upkeep. There’ve been two such abandoned deeds very close to mine in the past couple of months where multiple hitched animals starved to death while everything around them decayed away. I even tried dropping batches of grass to keep them alive long enough for the items they were hitched to to decay, but — wow — those carts and posts decayed slowly.
  7. Hear, hear. That’s what I assumed you were suggesting in the first place - a proper UI element for a player to quickly and conveniently take notes, not a rp method for characters involving crafting, activating, using consumables, adding encumbrance and bringing risk of loss. I currently use the map for this, which is really mind boggling. Why not /t? Because 1) I use different computers based on which room I’m in when playing and 2) some notes are for more than one session and I don’t want to have to refer to chat logs. Yeah, I can use cloud-based notes, but I’d still need to tab away from the game. I’d love to be able to pull up a simple in-game notepad without leaving the game at the press of a hot key to jot down a few reminders. +1 to the suggestion as intended Edit: I'm not against a craftable and editable journal, it's just that I think that an an in-game notepad and a craftable journal serve two different purposes and the notepad is something I would personally use regularly while the journal is not.
  8. Are you overclocking / under-powering your cpu? If so, stop doing so and try again.
  9. As an alternative to the suggestion to make loyalty skins craftable, I’d like to suggest adding to the loyalty store a new ‘all-in-one’ skin reward that can be applied to any item that has had a loyalty skin and applies that skin to the item. The cost could be 3-4x more than the monthly skin reward. Benefits: * buying the monthly skin remains the cheapest (vis-à-vis LP) way to get a skin * but you’d now have a way to pick up a skin you missed, dismissed, or didn’t have the LP to buy when it was available * encourages continued creation of new skins (rather than reissuing old skins, which I think would otherwise eventually happen) * the work to make a skin continues to pay dividends to Code Club AB Nb - This assumes a particular item only ever has one loyalty skin issued. If multiple loyalty skins are ever going to be issued, then a more work would need to be done to implement a skin selection window when applying.
  10. Let’s agree to disagree on this one.
  11. So you mean to just make these standard recipes for everyone who can craft the base item in the first place? Nah, I like these as a loyalty perk: rare and special to see in-game and valuable for trade. They’re a great option for spending loyalty points and have zero impact on gameplay since the base items are open to everyone. Sure, let’s get new craftable recipes for new items, but loyalty skins for existing items are fine as-is.
  12. -1 I don’t think craftable items should be locked behind a paywall (beyond needing premium and the time to reach the required skill level). Doing so would mean buyers of the recipe would have access to make as many of that item as they want and sell them, which I think really goes against the spirit of skins in Wurm being a special, one-off, cosmetic-only micro-transaction.
  13. To the devs, I think this is a really important point - removing public replies to PCs means more PCs, as others will come and ask the same, when they may not have had they read an earlier reply. And people who may just casually scan Trade lose out on passively learning prices that way, too. +1 to going back to public replies to PCs.