Anarres

Members
  • Content Count

    852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Anarres

  1. Yeah I just noticed the same, and interestingly, Jackal also has 800. That's not exactly old, hehe, why is Jackal with 800?
  2. I did a small test on Freedom with a newbie alt, similar tool as on Jackal. It can be compared with the Jackal log: https://pastebin.com/8pSUQn7F Give or take rng/human margin of error, this is just 1x.
  3. That's really good to know, thank you for being the guinea pig.
  4. I will add to this since the functionality of that window. Also: Cancel button does not appear to work. I opened the window, looked at items, then pressed Cancel. I got an error message in the window, in red, like the OP, saying I need to select something. But I didn't want to select something, just to look at number of points and options.
  5. Very nice idea. It feels like it should be happening already.
  6. From what I saw in other topics, it's WU style of skilling, at 3x rate 3x speed.
  7. Gwyn, I'm just saying this is an old and known behavior. It comes periodically in CA Chat. Really.
  8. Haha. Yes, it works again, thank you Locath!
  9. Yeah, hah. There was a convo ingame that went something like - from memory: - Is there any news about the forum problems, do they say what caused it? - Not that I know of. Um, it's kinda hard to check forum for updates, it's down - ...Oh.
  10. This was the case for as long as I can remember in the new cooking system. You even found old topics describing the same behavior above, it was there a few weeks ago as far as I can tell? Every now and then (not often but recurring) there are questions in CA about different affinity timers and often it turns out it's because people used pre-chopped once and newly-chopped another time. Yes they differ - a lot. You may misremember if you used pre-chopped a few weeks ago, I don't know but it's common for people to not care about it before they know FSB-ed matters. In any case, yes, pre-chopped are more convenient, but lead to less affinity timers. I guess it makes some sense to me too...
  11. Sounds good! The hunting server we've been asking for will be here, and the old world has a bit more challenge too Looking forward to it all.
  12. Thank you for organizing and invite! Will try to be there if I can. ❤️
  13. So for 6 it must have counted the rod with its parts as 1, but nails and ribbon separately, which sounds right. The more interesting thing is that nails and ribbon appear to have their own 'receive' and 'return' checkbox, which also looks right. Maybe it's just a display issue... The probably correct behavior would be that when you check the rod's 'receive' checkbox it doesn't give you the nails and ribbon so that'd prove only display was wonky. I'm not suggesting to do it right now, though, best if you can wait for someone to see, as you intend.
  14. Since the patch, if I try to assign Space to something using the quick bind feature, it displays "null" instead of Space as expected. Space still works, it was apparently assigned, but the display "null" is confusing people, who may believe it didn't work. Other players reported it too.
  15. I can see why the limit is a problem, but, we have it for now. It's current mechanics, that you folks need to work with. And there's something else. In my perception (as accidental witness in Freedom) , a big problem here was waiting for offline players for 11 hours. Think about it. Eleven hours of no one noticing it's ready to cast, is it realistic? Once someone else started gathering people for the cast, you weren't dealing with "a sniper" anymore. You were dealing with a competing group. Does it work to insist on waiting for offline people, rather than work with online people - who all need the cast? It didn't work for offline people today, anyway, they're still without the cast till next time.... I dunno, I'm just trying to suggest to adapt to the current mechanics, wouldn't it work for more people? OKay, in another order than you feel ideal, but wouldn't it have a better chance to work? It would be down to luck - whoever sees the email and can get online -, but their order is down to luck, order in which each needing it gets it. Not getting the cast "ever". Those who can't make it and can't make it, will make it when the whole thing slows down - as it likely will. Do you really believe that some would NEVER have a chance?
  16. I understand the sentiment, but I don't agree. By the same token, should we remove the list shown on twitter with unique killers? I don't think the list displayed causes the pointless drama there. Do you?
  17. Forget the ordered list. Really. Just everyone with the goal not done. If the journal goal is open and you're online, WHY would you be shut off? Edit: interesting, you're posting this for devs to do. Well... people could do it too. I am not sure this part needs a code solution. Maybe, if possible, remove the ability to cast or be a link if you completed the goal and there are at least x online players with open goal?
  18. I have a suggestion, please at least consider it. How about NOT prioritizing by x or y, with the result of waiting for offline players (because it doesn't work too well, does it!), but instead, make a pool of interested players, and send them a forum PM when it's available and/or ingame shout. Make the cast when enough come online and contact you. It will not work for everyone every time, but that's kind of the point, there's a maximum of players who can get it at one time anyway. It will work for someone when they're both informed and able to come online. You don't need alts. Just players who are online or, when notified, come online and get the thing done. Waiting 11 hours for the cast has proven, again, unrealistic, given how damn easy it is for a competing group to gather.
  19. It does show up in the portal. It's just showing up as a bugged option.
  20. Indeed, quite a number of threads and chats ask for a dev-made solution, that is, a different implementation of this feature. Maybe there will be? I dunno. It has changed some in the past, it might change in the future, it's not set in stone I guess. But I'm not aware of any change coming now, and it's obviously more to think about and do than just display who did it, for people to see. Why shouldn't the community have some information to help them work it out in the future?
  21. My preference is surely not for secrecy over sniping casts. You can't enable the community to answer these unless you let them know who the snipers are in the first place. Look, there are essentially three categories of ways to deal with conflict situations over limited resources - devs made (implementation obviously can make it possible / impossible / more or less desirable / etc) - gms handled (in some situations GMs intervene, in this I don't think they do) - community handled. (name and shame, refuse to trade with x, alliance kick, whatever reputation means here in wurm) In the case of global spell snipes, which should it be? I don't know. I know that the last is impossible when people don't even know who sniped them. Their hands are tied. I think it can be better if they are able to answer, and let them decide what their answer will be.
  22. When a global spell is cast, only the caster is displayed in Area History. Display all links too. I'm not aware of a way to see who was linked today. It would enable people to see who make a global cast. An unknown alt casting is one thing, the mains is another. It can be information useful to players and it's only fair to be known. Consider it a stopgap, before the way rites are implemented will/should/might be revised.