Emoo

Members
  • Content Count

    6,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Posts posted by Emoo


  1. For anyone interested I made a full video breaking down the updates and giving my thoughts:

    Spoiler

     


    Overall though, pretty happy with most of the proposed changes. Will be interesting to see if the team can execute on what they've outlined!


  2. Thanks everyone who took the time to put thoughts and feedback here and on Youtube to help with the algo!

    I'd like to work more with my editor (some of you will know him as DaemonDan) to produce more of these styles of videos on different aspects of the game. 

    Obviously there's some demand to look into aspect of the PvE vs PvP aspects of the game and having played both extensively I think I can do a reasonable job on this! I'd also like to look more into Wurm's history and look at key moments in time. Eg. When all servers became pvp or how Wurm Online got it's name etc. 

    If you have suggestions for different topics or even have screenshots or resources that might help please feel free to post here or reach out via forum DM!

    Thanks!!! 


  3. As the title says, is the game worth playing 2024 for new players or old players to come back to?

    I made a 11min video on the topic which while it doesn't dig deep into any particular aspect I think I touch on the biggest facets regarding the question. 
     

    Spoiler

     


    What are other folks thoughts? How does Wurm stack up against other MMO's and Sandbox titles in 2024?


  4. +1 it makes no sense that weekly group collaborative content can be stopped by a single player more interested in fast tracking their journal goal than other players who actually want to complete the content as intended. 
     

    Afaik the early burning of hearts was added to allow groups of players too small to defeat a full rift to finish them and still get some reward. To uphold this burning of hearts should only be possible if:

    •  there is less than 10 players in local

    AND/OR

    • if a rift has been active for more than 2hrs on the current wave

     


  5. 4 hours ago, Cista said:

     

    The discussion is not about what non-Wurm players know before they even start the game.

    The discussion is about is it a GOOD thing for the game to direct new players to NFI, or not?

     

    To be clear I wasn't making a judgement as to whether directing players to NFI was good or bad. I was merely sharing a perspective that I hadn't properly seen discussed that Wurm likely is incentivized to keep directing players to NFI. 

     

    Whether or not this is a bad thing is entirely down to personal interpretation and there's reasonable arguments to make on both sides. 


  6. 19 minutes ago, Cista said:

     

    If you look at the other thread "NFI/SFI for new players", there is vocal support for the opposite: that NFI is for players that don't want to spend RL money. I am also of the opinion that new players can make a living with in-game money on NFI, but not on SFI.


    That only makes sense for already established or partially experienced players. 

    I am talking about truly new players to the game. And none of them is joining NFI because they already understand they can more easily make in game currency. There is simply no way they can know that so it cannot be factored in as a decider. 

    What is a new player likely going to do? Look to buy some land, purchase some basic equipment of course. How will they pay for that?

    • A small amount of players will find out they can earn in-game currency working for other players and earn it that way
    • A larger amount of players will find out they can earn in-game currency working for other players and quit because it's tedious as hell
    • A majority of players will spend their IRL money on getting some basic equipment to allow them to focus on the parts of the game they enjoy

    To be clear for a lot of people, especially those at the top of the market in NFI who are making the money there's an understandable perception that the server is for people who don't want to spend IRL money on the game - because they don't have to. But all that money has to come from somewhere and it's injected into the economy by people purchasing it and where do people have to spend more money to get their average items and materials? NFI.  


  7. I could be wrong but I suspect there's a big incentive for WO to drive players to join NFI. 

    Simply because prices of the market there are x2 - x3 more expensive than SFI for a lot of things. Which makes it more likely that new players are going to spend more of their IRL money on silver. Making GCG far more money in the short run (I think there's an argument to make that it may make them less money in the medium term and about the same long term). But given how bad Wurm's player retention is, focusing on squeezing new players for every bit they can makes sense. 

     


  8. 6 hours ago, Tukodama said:

     I have to disagree slightly.  Putting any money into GCG stock is a speculation not an investment, it is either will be a homerun (10x+) or it goes to zero.  That is the risk/reward of this play.  


    This feels like an argument over semantics. 

    An investment is never guaranteed to make you money, you're just assigning funds hoping they'll return a profit. A "speculative investment" is typically referred to with a higher risk investment (but is a type of investment non the less). 

    The reason I believe the shareholders of GCG are "Investors" as opposed to "Speculative Investors" is because a lot of them have backgrounds in Dental, Hospitality and participation in other companies that have zero relation with GCG's core business practices. Not only that but GCG lacks the trading volume both historically and currently for me to consider it to be properly volatile. Additionally GCG's now moved away from things like App Development and Game Crates as part of their core business to focusing on Wurm, which is simply a much better fundamental business that actually brings in revenue as opposed to developing an app or service that will bring in a big future profit (aka. less speculative).   

    But even if you disagree with how I define things it still doesn't change the question at the end of my post - will they have the stomach to stick with Wurm once they're actively losing money? 


  9. 1 hour ago, Cecci said:

    I also went and had a look today...
    What I found out, other than the price dropping further, is about how much the biggest share owner spent, since I found info on the net.
    One person owns 22%, the rest of top ten owners are under 10% and the list of ten goes down to under 1% of the shares.

    I have personally been pondering how much cash it would take to get a mayority (50%+) together with the biggest share owner.
    The shares are really cheap...

     

    GCG needs to drop their other games/platforms and focus on Wurm that actually brings an income.
    That will prolly only happen if someone(s) who understands the game set the agenda.



    It would be prohibitively expensive. Whilst there's not a huge number of large holders the amount of available shares for a hostile takeover is nowhere near enough. 

    Between PP, Krister the Omeirat family and the Ghafori family they own 50%+ collectively already (Vasa Capital AB is Ghafori owned). 

    That said, we're now at a point where all of the Jan 2023 purchasers are about to start actively loosing money on their investment in GCG. The question will be, do they have the appetite to stomach those losses as they try to make Wurm more new player friendly or will they do something drastic to drive profit growth. 

     


  10. On 1/19/2024 at 7:45 AM, Ostentatio said:

     

    @Emoo

    When is each log from? Do you have an exact date? Also, what servers were you on at the time?


    First log was on the 16th, second log is after the  restart on the 16th/17th so it was 100% something that was changed that patch which has unintentionally changed how Venom and Imbues interacted.

    "[00:54:30] Reason: Small update and a maintenance restart. Downtime up to 30 minutes. Patch notes: https://wurm.gg/PN16JAN2024"

    Prior to update I have logs doing poison wounds on:
    Celebration
    Indie
    Deli
    Release

    Post to update I have logs doing mauling wounds on:
    Pristine
    Exodus
    Indie
    Xanadu

    So it does not appear to be server specific.


  11. 9 hours ago, Baeowulf said:

     

    Imbue takes precedence, rendering Venom useless, this is not a new thing it has always been as such (even before the PvP imbue update)


    Before the update:
    [05:49:08] You poison adolescent scorpion deadly hard in the stomach and damage it.
    [05:49:12] You easily parry with your medium maul.

    After the update:
    [16:23:52] You maul aged unicorn deadly hard in the chest and damage it.
    [16:23:55] You easily parry with your medium maul.

    Same weapon. So just so there is NO confusion as to how the game worked previously as you assert that "it has always been this way".

    As for the rest of your opinions I believe they would be better suited to the suggestions board if you believe that Venom/Imbues should be changed. 


  12. This may be related to this topic and the devs attempts to fix this bug here:


    I've noticed that since yesterdays update my maul that has Venom AND Acid Imbue instead of dealing poison wounds now deals acid damage. 

    The problem with this is that for Venom to bypass glancing it needs to be a poison wound. Which means right now Venom is doing nothing. 

     


  13. 13 minutes ago, Archaed said:

    okay you got me in that technical loophole, but eye witness testimony IS proof, none of this is even a statement of what someone did or what happened, it's literally "I cannot tell you what they did because I fear repercussions but this is enough to judge them on" 


    Which means you can't outright dismiss those that have spoken up about their experiences. It's your prerogative to believe them without supporting "evidence" but it's pretty wild to say that they have zero credibility.  

    As an Ex GM I can say that there is publicly available stories about bad staff experiences that I 100% believe because I have witnessed or been on the receiving end of the same behavior. 

     


  14. 21 minutes ago, Archaed said:

    I have proof, but I can't show you it at all. 

     

    Regardless of whether you have proof or not, claims without any ability or willingness to back them up should be treated with all the credibility to proof. I.E. none


    Which is why eye witness testimony isn't admissible in courts of law all around the world. 

    Oh...wait...