Sheffie

Half walls and half fences would add a lot

It seems like the skillgain from improving a finished survey is really low. Is this because it's counted as surveying an area you've already done?

Yes, if they want to. (Players would be smart enough to activate a hatchet and use the Cut Down action instead)

30

Me too. It'd mean I lost 1 or 2 arrows, but I would know quickly that I'd made a mistkae. Fair enough.

If you shoot arrows into something - a troll, say - and after it's dead, you walk over, open the corpse, see your stack of arrows, and try to take them, one of two things will happen You get 20 war arrows. That would be illegal here. You can check the settlement token for the local laws. My suggestion is... fix it so that #2 never happens. This is a serious issue for archers. You can't be certain your target animal is on deed unless you... walk up to it before hand, watching the Event window to see if you entered a deed. That is not how hunting should work. Quality arrows are difficult and time consuming to make. At current NFI prices, it could cost you 20c or more to shoot a tortoise. Possible ways to do this: Prevent players from firing arrows onto someone else's deed (draconian) Prevent players firing arrows onto a deed where they don't have permission to drop / pick things up (not much different) Log a warning message in the Event tab when firing arrows onto someone else's deed, e.g. "The arrow flies onto a settlement and may be lost." (much better) Extend the existing concept of proximity ownership to arrows so that you can pick them up, and no one else can (great) Extend the code around arrows and ownership in a way that solves this problem and lets you get credit for shooting things at a Rift (perfect)

People are buying plenty of silver. It's just that they're buying it by getting subscriptions in multiples of 6 months from the shop. If you want to make the case that the Wurm economy, or the company's finances, are in dire straits, I think you need to be clear about which it is, and you need a theory that's a bit more well laid out than "it looks like a bad thing"

With this head, you can make a pickaxe that you will want to use every day. A seryll rune of Magranon has been attached, so it will increase chance to resist shattering when being enchanted (10%) A gold rune of Jackal has been attached, so it will reduce size (10%) A copper rune of Magranon has been attached, so it will have a higher chance to be successfully improved (5%) and increase the chance of increasing rarity when improved (5%) A copper rune of Vynora has been attached, so it will have a higher chance to be successfully improved (7.5%) Starting bid: 50 c Increment (minimum): 10 c Reserve: no Buyout: no Sniper Protection: no Private Bids: no

Small hide shield: 1 hide 1 rivets 1 leather strip 1 metal ribbon Medium hide shield: 2 hide 1 rivets 1 leather strip 1 metal ribbon Large hide shield: 3 hide 1 rivets 1 leather strip 1 metal ribbon These are the sort of shields that mounted barbarians or nomad warriors would use - lighter than wooden shields, and maintained using leatherworking skills and tools. I think it'd be great for the game to have some more barbaric shield designs, especially if you could paint the surface and the rim differently. It would be nice if they could have a "material type" so that you could have a bison hide shield, a bull hide shield, and so on. These could be implemented as different RGB values on the surface of the shield.

Congrats, Arno.

The issue did not reappear after restarting the client. However, I've seen similar issues in this building several months ago, so I think it's possible that it might return.

Not sure how much I can help debug this other than to say, it happens. It looks like one polygon has lost an edge and one line of its texture is projecting out into space from a distant point. If I move the camera about, it looks fairly consistent - the lines are definitley projected from a specific point in 3D space. It looks very much as though the problematic polygon is the lower edge of the planks that make up the side of the staircase. Hopefully the highlight outline makes this clear. (Apologies for the custom colour).

Given out to some lucky wurmians by the ghost of Christmas past, these beautiful carriers are an alternative to saddle bags offering a much more individual appearance to your personal riding animal, and 21% more carrying capacity. Leather QL 99 3.50 kg https://www.wurmpedia.com/index.php/Saddle_sacks Starting bid: 10 s Increment (minimum): 1 s Reserve: no Buyout: no Sniper Protection: no Private Bids: no

The comma confused me. I thought I was going to read a suggestion for a feature that's like archaeology, but done in a boat. Presumably with a dredge. I'm behind the idea of a portable boat, as long as it just gets one player across the water.

This would certainly put an end to the people asking "why is that person's chat a different colour?"

What I understand from TeeeBOMB is the idea that no player ought to be able to take over a name that has previously been used by another character. And I basically agree. I wouldn't like players to be able to do that either. There are (at least) two complications. Players could buy and sell accounts before Real Money Trading was prohibited, so in a very real sense the old name is being used by a new player. A character that hasn't been premium will be deleted after 90 days of inactivity, and as has been discussed already, a new character with that name can be confused with the old one — not only by players but by the game code itself. Bearing these caveats in mind, I think there's no reason why the game couldn't allow character renaming with the condition that previously used names cannot be re-used. Again, it's important for this to have costs and limits, so that the ability to change names is only used when it needs to be. And it's important for a player to be able to query a name and see if that same character was "formerly known as" something else.

If a player has to dig within +/-5 tiles of a particular spot, then I think the X on the map should have to be within +/-5 tiles also. I mean, sometimes the player has to cover a larger search area, because the maps are a bit vague sometimes. But sometimes they're not. If the X is at a distinctive highway intersection on the north side of the road, then the spot can be determined precisely and the player ought to hit the treasure if they dig there. Introducing a "mapmaker error" that makes them dig on the other side of the road doesn't add anything to the game, and takes away a good deal of player satisfaction from correctly solving the map.

120s

Player A could have played character NastyMcNasterson, and then created character NiceyMcNiceGuy. You have no way of knowing that they are the same person. There's no "name security" in this case. Player A could have played a character QueenOfAwesome, and sold it to player B, before the RMT ban. You have no way of knowing that they are no longer the same person. There's no "name security" in this case. Player A could play character MrPopular, and share the login info with player B. You have no way of knowing who is playing MrPopular. There's no "name security" in this case. Renaming a character is a lot like getting a faith swap or a meditation path change: instead of doing it the slow way (by making a new character, or dropping your faith / med path), you're paying a premium in order to get a head start. I want to restate and emphasize this. Even when renaming a character is not possible. a player can achieve the same result by creating a new character. So, by all means let players change names — assuming the technical questions can all be resolved — but make it a premium service.

Passwords... do the same thing... as player names? That hasn't been my experience. I also don't think increased complexity and load, i.e. decreased performance, is at all similar to collapsing like a house of cards. Of course, it's quite possible that there's an elegant and powerful solution to the problem of renaming characters that allows efficient and simple access from the new name to the old and vice versa, and I confess that my experience of game development really has not focussed on server database access for more than a couple of months, so it wouldn't be at all surprising if I was ignorant of it. Feel free to enlighten.

There are concerns about players abusing this feature, yes, but those can be addressed. I think the major obstacle standing in the way of allowing name changes is at a low level, i.e. the player name is the database key. Allowing the renaming of characters would force every database access to jump through extra hoops, increasing code complexity and server load.

This is good news. Roll on Wednesday!

You can't have good without goo

Current system, up to four titles plus "the" plus two square brackets. Proposed system, up to four titles plus "the" and no square brackets. If you think longer titles are a problem, I'm not going to argue with that...

How does this benefit the game? It encourages players to go out and accomplish things, to earn rewards, to increase their skills. It allows a greater degree of customization, and thus, it adds to player enjoyment and player retention.