• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Kohle last won the day on August 22 2021

Kohle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

92 Decent


About Kohle

  • Rank


  • Independence
  • Xanadu
  • Acc1
  • Acc2

Recent Profile Visitors

1873 profile views
  1. The above (as "export GDK_BACKEND=X11") solved the "assertion 'GDK_IS_X11_DISPLAY (display)' failed" error for me. Thank you!
  2. I haven't quite accumulated one million channel points yet - which makes this all the more generous of her.
  3. @Malenawas exceedingly generous and incredibly kind to gift me this lovely bit of her art, and it's simply too beautiful for me to keep to myself. With her blessing, I'm sharing with you all.
  4. I appreciate @Etherdrifter sharing the data. I've said so. Repeatedly. Granted, I'm less enthused by characterizations like "in freefall" and "unhealthy", but he's entitled to express his opinion. The numbers are quite public and available for anyone to use to perform their analysis. Except there's really not much analysis of anyone else's own, is there? There's eleven pages of, as @Archaed put it, "this is the result of them not doing what I'd like to see." And I let it roll off my back until @elentari threw down the gauntlet of "I dare any player that argues "you can enjoy wurm without subscribing once" play for an entire year having all their skills locked at 20 and play with those limitations." As for "muddying the post," after eleven pages of "squabbling" about "this is the result of them not doing what I'd like to see," I believe that ship sailed long before now.
  5. Fair point. I admit to using a bit of shorthand. As you point out, all of those statements are, semantically, facts. However, all but the first actually represent underlying opinions. That opinions exist is a fact. That people hold opinions is a fact. That people sometimes base their opinions on underlying facts -- is a fact. None of those makes an opinion into a fact. The implication -- or outright explicit statement -- that so-and-so should do such-and-such is a "fact" -- or that failing to do such-and-such is factual evidence of antipathy, negligence or animosity is wrong. It's also unproductive (in my experience). I want to make very clear that you, @Etherdrifter, are generally staying away from that line of conversation. Since you've now brought it up twice in short order, let me address this: So -- who said that "never-preme" has, or should, contribute noticeably to the game's population? You're welcome to show me where I missed it, but I don't remember once seeing Code Club or Game Chest say, "We expect a noticeable percentage of our player population to be never-premmers." My experience with freemium has always been clearly targeted at "try-before-you-buy." Whatever vague recollection I have of statements made by Code Club would be that they fell somewhere in line with the "try-before-you-buy" model. I disagree that Wurm Online's current free-to-play offering is intended to be, or equivalent to, "never-preme". I therefore reject the inference that Code Club / Game Chest should do away with their free-to-play offering as being based in facts somehow. I'm also going to walk out onto a limb and start sawing by challenging this statement a bit: Reducio ad absurdum, yes. A zero-population game isn't a healthy game. A declining population is not, in and of itself, "unhealthy." The list of games whose populations skyrocketed and then dropped is a long one. If you'd like to argue that every one of those games is unhealthy -- well, it's your right, but it isn't factual. My definition of game "health" is whether the developer and/or publisher are profitable, or are seen by their creditors as likely to be. And the only ones who know that are Code Club, Game Chest and their creditors. Here again we arrive at the paucity of data. (I liked your use of the phrase, so I'm reusing it.) My point, by the way, is not that "I'm right and you're wrong." My point is that you and I define game "health" in different ways, and the "if" of your "cold, hard fact" is neither indisputable nor does it actually promote the opinion of Wurm Online's health into being factual. We care about this game. We are creative. We have professional-level skills. Brainstorming for ideas and giving feedback constructively is a blessing for any community. Sharing data is great. Sharing ideas is great. Being passionate is great. Keep it positive -- or at least neutral. Have empathy. Be excellent,.
  6. @Etherdrifter I don't dispute anything you've said there. So is this a thread about server populations (or population trends), donkeys, or how players think the game ought to be managed and marketed? Is it opinion or fact? "Can't it be both?" Yes, it can. What I object to is conflating the two -- presenting opinion as fact. Server populations have declined. That's a fact. Why they have declined, "given the paucity of data," is the writer's opinion. Whether a decline is "good" or "bad" is an opinion. Is an opinion valid? Usually. Does being valid make that opinion a fact? No, it does not. Server populations have declined. Fact. Some of you don't like it when server populations decline. Opinion. Some of you don't like how Wurm Online has been marketed. Opinion. Some of you don't like the business decision made around Wurm Unlimited. Opinion. Some of you don't like certain changes to Wurm Online. Opinion. Some of you think the work spent making changes you don't like should have been spent making changes that you would like. Opinion. @elentari Lovely ideas. Lovely opinions. Thought out. Reasonable. Your experience? Totally valid and within your rights to express. You might. Absolutely. You might also try that shots-worth of beer, spit it out, and be damn glad you didn't pay 10 euro for the full bottle. Or you might think to yourself, "Hmm. That's pretty good. I'd take a bottle of that," and feel good about spending your 10 euro. Can you sit there, drinking one shots-worth of beer at a time, in between waiting for the bartender to come 'round again, until you've consumed a beer bottle's worth of beer? Yes, you can. Is that why bars or brewers offer free beer? Usually not. Would you enjoy it? Apparently not. Would someone else? They might. Do players like free stuff more than stuff they have to pay for? Almost universally. Wouldn't it be great if we could all get all the free stuff we want? Hard to argue against. Do I believe that you're smart enough to know that's not how reality works? Yes; yes, I do. Do I believe that you are passionate about Wurm Online and that you have come up with, in your opinion, a reasonable compromise that will lead to a long-term benefit to the game? Again, yes. Are these two very different statements? Yes, they very much are - as much as the difference between "it's free" and "it's free, but..." I'm triggered by you -- and many other players -- expressing yourselves by telling me what I should and shouldn't, can and can't, do. by telling Wurm what it should and shouldn't, can and can't, do. Check yourselves. And if you can't be arsed to, then don't be surprised when your passionate and otherwise well-thought-out expressions and suggestions vanish into a dark void.
  7. Highway help

    Looks like Nostalgia in the northwest, in the middle of Samling Fjord. 25x, 11y
  8. Consider me belatedly triggered. Especially this part ... ... when combined with: Enjoyment is subjective. Whether you can enjoy Wurm as a freemium player is out of my control. Whether I can enjoy Wurm as a freemium player is out of your control. Telling me that I "can't" is flat-out wrong. To briefly consider the intended target of your statement "the rest are subjective," my mind boggles at how calling a game "slow" is somehow exempt from the list of subjective statements. That leaves the sole "objective" statement that Wurm isn't free but says it is. That argument isn't subjective versus objective. It's semantics. The base game is free. Full stop. The premium content is not. Nor (in most cases) is the computer on which it runs. Nor (in most cases) is the internet connection on which it relies. So just how ludicrous do we want to be about caveats around "free"? What's actually being argued here is how players think a game "ought" to be marketed. And unless that argument is being made in a court proceeding on legal definitions and merits, it's just as subjective as players' opinions on how "fast" or "pretty" a game should be. Dare accepted post facto. I played over a year as a free-to-play character on Xanadu from May of 2015 to at least November of 2017. I did not buy silver. I was not "tweaked" by any of my premium characters. I did live by a 50 QL guard tower. I was converted to a follower of Fo by a premium player. And I bought (but ultimately never used) a 50 QL toolbelt from another player -- using money I foraged. I didn't go to rifts. I didn't go to unique hunts. I ran from trolls on my own two feet. Frequently. And I enjoyed playing that character in Wurm Online. I'm late to the whole thread. Mea culpa. And you clearly preface this as you venting. Fair enough. Here's my venting: players need to stop trying to justify as "objective" their desire for this game, or any other game, to accommodate their preferences. I don't mean to single you out. This whole forum is filled with players expressing what they want. Nothing wrong with that. Where it goes wrong (yep; in my subjective opinion) is when it is expressed as either objectively correct or with a sense of entitlement. That's my clearly subjective vent.
  9. Nailed it. ... and (though they are few) the paid developer and administrative resources. If they're not paying customers, it's to the business's actual benefit that they take their "business" elsewhere -- because there's no business! I'm not sure why you're not sure. The reasons have been explained by staff and were pretty clear to me even before-hand. You can't continue to pay money out (to developers or servers) when money doesn't continue to come in (from a steady stream of one-time buyers or from monthly subscribers). He never said "filthy". Not only are you implying that he did by putting quotation marks around it, you're attempting to turn his well-reasoned argument into an ad hominem attack -- which it wasn't.
  10. Closed

    Rare shield to Kohle please
  11. "Other games"? What is this witchcraft? I don't have enough hours in the day for Wurm -- much less "other games" (whatever that is)!
  12. Enchanted necklace, bracelet, ring with Glacial. All show "null" as the enchant description, followed by the power. Remains "null" when holding ALT for details. "Examine" shows correct text.
  13. Add this link https://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/91140-premium-payment-problems/ I had an issue with premium not showing up (or being slow to show up - the jury's still out). I went to put in a /support ticket - that pointed me to this (old, but somewhat relevant) link: https://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/1029-failed-payments/ I decided to jump on CA Help and ask if there were known issues. (Keenan had posted about Golden Valley crashing a few days prior.) Bakhita pointed me to the link at the top. That was more helpful. Seems like it would be wise to add that to the hints displayed when a user selects "Payment Issue" as their problem in the Wurm Support Ticketing System.
  14. I know that you already know this, Brash - but in case anyone is interested: https://harmony.wurmonline.com/mrtg/villages.html Growth has definitely slowed, but not stopped or started to shrink. That supports the anecdotal idea that many folks are just relocating.
  15. Feedback, so far (FWIW): Overall, it's much improved. It looks more polished and modern. Even at 90% UI Scale, while comparable to the old UI, it's still "fat", making less information visible without obscuring more of the screen than in the old UI. Some windows (e.g., Crafting) don't collapse to the title bar when double-clicked. I will sorely miss that. I'm not seeing a visual cue for when I can bash or focus. Maybe I need to RTFM, but those cues in the old UI were more obvious. The ginormous "F" and "R" are quite jarring compared to the rest of the UI cues. Worse, since I already mapped those keys to other actions, they're useless cues. Can the UI hide those overlays if the keys are already mapped? I suspect the goal was to "freshen" and "modernize" the UI. In that regard, I'd say you've hit the mark. Nothing above makes the game "unplayable." They're "quality-of-life" setbacks. They're the difference between "forcing" myself to use the new UI, and wanting to choose it. Again, a HUGE thank you to @Samool! I hate doing UI design; it feels like an endless rabbit hole. Bless you for tackling it!