Locath

Members
  • Content Count

    288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Locath last won the day on March 5

Locath had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

273 Excellent

2 Followers

About Locath

  • Rank
    Villager

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1339 profile views
  1. As the full saying goes: “Jack of all trades, master of none, though oftentimes better than master of one.” Well done on sticking to it. It seems that you created the forums account on the same day too so you have a timestamp to go by and celebrate the anniversaries.. I only created the forums account years after my first time playing Wurm because i needed it for reasons. Otherwise i would still be one of the forum lurkers no one ever hears from. I have logs dating back to 2009 but at least one HDD fried before that All the best in the next 10 years of Wurming!
  2. A technical nightmare. Changing the way payments are processed and stored for premium would have to be done for one thing. Bigger issue is switching between the characters. Imagine having 4 toons logged in and swapping between them, camera position has to be updated and world redrawn each time you switch a character. Often my alts are on few different servers too. With multiple clients loaded, each of them is constantly rendering the view and the operating system is handling the toggling between already open and rendered game windows (granted, this is resource heavy but it's up to each player to decide how many clients their PC can handle before we don't want to open another client). If i load up one client with 4+ toons, each in a different place on the map (or not, it makes no difference because the camera would have to detach from one and redraw everything the other one sees every time i switch toons, even if they are on the same tile), on every switch of the toon, you would see the effect similar to crossing server border or portal or being summoned. Having multiple clients open doesn't have that problem.
  3. There was a dip in the mob count on most servers recently (Animal Husbandry update perhaps?). Green are the aggressive mobs so it does seem like it's a valid concern but ~15k aggro mobs on Independence at the lowest point still seems like enough for everyone so perhaps they wander to inaccessible areas? On the other hand, at the lowest point, it's only half of what it was in peak, 9 months ago. Smaller servers show smaller decline but the pattern is there. No mobs on Xanadu, apparently:
  4. @Drayka What i meant is what many other games do. If i play a game which has 20 DLC or expansions or whatever the game calls their new content and i don't pay for 5 out of the 20 released addons, i can still play, i just can't access parts of the world or can't use some items or can't level past certain limit (EQ2 has a habit of adding 10 levels with each expansion for example but if you don't buy it, you can't hit max level). Not paying for one of the DLC doesn't stop me from playing the rest of the content because the game is built with that in mind from the beginning. In WU, say i buy a DLC which includes donkeys or the big planters or rifts. I can't use that on a server which doesn't have the code behind that. On the other hand, if i run a server with all that included, because i paid for the DLC, people who didn't pay, don't have the graphics and client side functionality without mods. Graphics and menus and all the rest can be pushed out from the server to the client (example below) but that means that only server owner has to pay for the DLC for all players to enjoy it because there is no way to validate if the client steam account can access those resources or not, past the client version. This is what i mean by "versioning", perhaps not the right word to use but on steam authentication, client would have to check which parts of the content it can access and server would have to be built to disallow usage if the client didn't pay for it. Having the code public and having the brilliant modders that we have out there, each DLC would have to be purchased only by server owners. Without a steam auth check for each DLC the rest of the players would be able to use it as well. Effectively meaning 1 copy sold per server to accommodate all players on it. I am all for selling the new content to WU players but it might not be as simple as copy-paste. Entire system would have to be built around validating which steam account can access which content, without stopping them from logging on to a server if they didn't purchase a donkey. This beauty comes with the Highway Portals mod and the graphic is sent to the clients so they don't need to download it separately:
  5. I like the idea but wouldn't that mean developing some sort of versioning mechanism? A lot of the changes added to WO since WU was abandoned would require server side and client side DLC at the same time so if you update your server to allow for X, only clients with the same DLC would be able to play? I fully support that kind of monetization for the devs and the idea is great. I would happily pay to have the new skybox and water and distant tree rendering in both, WO and WU but i think a lot of the new functionality would have to be deployed to both, server and client for it to work. +1 anyway, for the bigger brains than mine to find a olution.
  6. Frankly, your suggestions don't hinge on "i have a solution, now i just have to find a problem for it" which is the case for most of the @OP's threads. Basically blowing out of proportion non-issues like resource availability or, of all things, minigames in a perfectly relaxing game, and so on. You can't discuss the pros and cons either because @OP will do both things in one response; make up new non-issues AND ignore your valid points. At this point i honestly think he's just trolling to entertain himself, trying to stir mud in a game he doesn't play. I'm not sure if there is any point wasting perfectly good bytes of transfer replying to suggestions (yes, i see the irony of my self replying here) which are clearly not viable technically or logically and are not posted in good faith. There are people who have good suggestions but don't understand the system limitations or requirements and suggest things in good faith but once explained, they understand the counterarguments. Then there are users who shovel things like this en masse and accept no criticism (constructive or not) or explanation, seemingly just to bump their post counter on their profile. For years i used to be a "keyboard warrior" and defend my opinions, often in anger. I have learned that most of the time, the simplest and healthiest solution for all involved is to read what they have to say and then promptly close the browser tab. No matter how much i want to punch my fist though the monitor. It took a lot of work and i often still type up a whole elaborate post with all kinds of acid spewing but i re-read what i wrote few times until i'm certain that posting it will bring any value to the conversation. Your suggestions are usually well thought through and list the scenarios which are relevant, good or bad. No need to change your writing style, Keep on keeping on.
  7. I'm sure something like this could be cooked up, adding more restrictions and control to it and usage cost/cooldown per player or per portal. It works while mounted on a vehicle or an animal (just have to remount after teleporting so branded horses or lead permissions on destination deed are a must). One scenario i could see being grieffy is if someone places something like that in a pen and visitor doesn't have enough karma/money/tokens to teleport back but i'm sure a requirement can be added that it's adjacent to a highway, much like a wagoner, in which case it can't be blocked by fences etc. By default the deed only has to be connected to a highway network for it to work, doesn't matter where the connection happens. Portal can be placed anywhere, not necessarily near a highway. In current state it doesn't quite match the suggestion but bulk of the good work is done there.
  8. On this page alone the word "should" was used 9 times so far(10 including this response), just for fun; guess who makes demands instead of suggestions without checking.
  9. Carts, it's large carts. It's now many of us started, we lived off a cart.
  10. Because he already has his horses. New players who often rely on wild greys to save their life, can train their taming if they want to survive...
  11. They only exist for 5 years or am i missing something? With current setup they reward cheesy play style while they were introduced as end-game content at the time of implementing. End-game goals have moved as more people reach the current "i beat the game" mark so they need updating or new content needs to be added. With proposed setup they would become the end game content again but effectively exclude large part of the population because "why bother? it's the vets who will rake in the rewards anyway". I don't have a solution but i do agree that they are in need of rework, seeing how many people complain about them. Point distribution currently rewards those who meta through the rift and penalizes those who do the heavy lifting, which, in my book is not ideal. Would i be happy if i did most of the work and got less than someone who risked very little and just tagged the mobs? - No. Would i be happy if i was the one tagging mobs and cheesing it for points and this system was changed? - No. There will always be people who aren't happy with the solution but the current one is almost uniformly hated so those posts, at some point, are bound to give birth to a decent idea or a combination of ideas.
  12. https://www.wurmpedia.com/index.php/Guides:House_Planning_Guide Without trying to sound like an ass but it's the only result google finds...
  13. I have seen something similar in other games and i liked it. Additionally, if this bestiary wasn't in form of an item but more like the cook book recipes, tied to the character, maybe knowing more and more about certain enemy type could give a tiny bonus when fighting it? Because of the knowledge of its weak spots, better tactics while fighting and studying it? PvE is easy enough as is so maybe adjust existing mobs so that fighting against a fully studied enemy works as it does now but with no knowledge of the enemy it's harder? Or the other way around, beef up the mobs a bit to counter the new bonus? Or the yet other way around, add more challenging mobs? Something like this but more granular so that if i killed and studied 100 spiders, i get maybe 0.5% CR against them, another 100 unlocks the picture and adds another 0.5% and so on? Except i don't think it should be in form of transferable item (or any item at all, inventory management!).
  14. But on a more serious note; Maybe it's time to stop listening to the auld gits like you and me who are resistant to change and start listening to some of the players who joined recently (and i raise my hand here, i would oppose a lot of ideas for years which i now think would retain at least some of the players who gave Wurm a try) . Even the most loyal Wurmians burn out eventually, we have seen it happen and it is happening still. Without making the game more friendly to the new player, who in these days has a comparison of thousands of other games and Wurm no longer is one of the 4 or 5 MMOs available on the market, there will be no player retention. We see people quit for a number of reasons, we see obituaries on the forums, we see people quitting quietly too. A lot of those are the players who were here for over a decade. I used to think that some of the changes were bad for the game because they were dumbing it down or making it too easy. Now, seeing how things go, i changed my opinion. It doesn't matter that i don't like the new GUI, it doesn't matter if i think that having a live map in game makes it too easy. If i don't like it, i can quit and nobody will notice. What does matter is the new accounts created daily to stay and it's no longer the times when we had to spend hours messing with files, configs, redownloading stuff for Ultima Online to run. Majority of current audience is used to having things work correctly and efficiently. So the choice someone has to make is whether to cater for the 50 - 100 "old" players and hope we don't all die off at once or adjust to the market and the customer's needs. I know my opinion about the in-game map means absolutely nothing and this is just a suggestion but it's one of probably over a dozen topics suggesting this exact thing. In each of those topics there were people opposing the idea because "immersion", because "too easy", "can't you use landmarks to navigate, you silly goose?" and so on. But then there is the player who can't navigate using the landmarks. There might be more than one. Those players can't play a game which they likely researched before giving it a try and it scratches that itch exactly, except they die and can't find their way back home. They quit (if i had trouble navigating by landmarks, i would probably quit after my first death as well, there were barely any community maps, drawn in paint, because -learn how to navigate or go play diablo- attitude). There are many reasons why people who try out Wurm don't stick around and we will never know majority of those reasons but at least part of them just couldn't be bothered opening some website to look at a map and still not know where they are. This is just one of the suggestions i would bash into oblivion 5 or 10 years ago but now i see that it's one of the very common questions new players ask and react shocked when they hear "yeah, no mate, git gud. Use mountain tops to navigate and there is compass which settles day after tomorrow and there is a sundial compass on each village token". People want it, people are rarely vocal about their inability to navigate by landmarks, in fear of humiliation perhaps. Yes, there are thousands of other games which offer in-game maps and we could tell every player to go play WoW if they want a radar. Sadly, there aren't thousands of Wurm players whom we could say that to.