Ols

I don't like this idea. There needs to be drawbacks to being a priest so that a proportion of people still need to remain followers. If everyone except was a priest except a few crafting alts, that'd be pretty stupid.

Agree that Elevation should be a challenge server. I would like them to try a variety of concepts and maps, such as a very small close quarters map and an archipelago map. Let people enjoy them for 3 or so months then allow them to take the spoils of war back home with them.

Some other uncategorised ones here https://app.photobucket.com/u/Onklet

@NordlysOkay, I do actually have access to photobucket from back then - here's some screenshots of me building a deed around 2010. https://app.photobucket.com/u/Onklet/a/91e1bd13-82d7-460d-aeef-76060aacaa0c

Lol I was looking for this screenshot a while back. Glad it still survives

Eeyore

I agree that Libila needs Genesis or some kind of "dark" equivalent. Being a top notch breeder should still require a priest. Tbh I think we're getting to the point where a second BL God may be justified, so that BL can get access to certain spells without Libila having everything. Making is so that BL can't just have armies of Lib priests that can do everything would help to counter-balance the change.

Bay of Wolves, located at approximately 3361, 827, has disbanded.

I voted for the RMT ban and character customisation for the same reason - Wurm should be about "your" story in the form of your character, and not about a specific place or the accumulation of material goods. I didn't like the idea of characters being treated as generic avatars to interact with the world. Anything that locks characters to a specific player or makes those characters more diverse and compelling on their own is good, in my view. In fact I think there's a long way to go in terms of adding more cosmetic variety to characters (for instance a variety of different items for slots like tabard, shoulder, cape, neck and belt) and to provide better ways for people to appreciate a character's history ingame.

Umbar is at roughly 3153, 840 and has a highway heading north from it until it meets with the east/west highway. That makes it seem like it runs very close parallel to the highway connecting the Dystopian deeds, but they aren't as close as you might think. I'm wondering if either I have the location for Umbar wrong or Dystopian is shifted too far east. The mayor, Fazeil, is happy for the deed to be included regardless.

Would you accept a commission on Defiance (pvp)? We could provide shovels and pickaxes and it would be close to our deed in any case.

Why though? What advantage does this confer? It seems like a really big stumbling block for someone who has an awkward resource patch near them.

Thanks, but last time I tried I couldn't transmute a resource patch back to dirt under the new transmute rules. I would appreciate some clarity on whether this is intended.

I've just tried digging and levelling two peat tiles down to rock to get rid of them as I need to get to the rock underneath. Unfortunately when I hit rock on all 4 corners of either tile (they are adjacent) the tile remains peat, and I can't do surface mining/tunneling actions there. This leaves me with few options for removing the peat. This seems illogical and unreasonable as its obstructing me from building my deed. Even if this was originally intended, it really shouldn't be a game mechanic and I should be able to dig resource tiles down to rock. This is on Defiance. I've experienced a similar issue to this with a tar patch at my deed on Affliction and received help from Enki to fix it after transmute liquid didn't work. Not sure what the conclusion the GMs reached was.

I put down Annihilation as my choice for PvP but mis-spelled it as Annihalation, so please consider the correct spelling instead.

I did a rift yesterday and decided to butcher and loot the turrets at the end. Interestingly they gave unclassified meat (which is guess is just a weird novelty) and non-specific metal armour chains. The metal armour chains can be combined and made into chain mail which again isn't made of any metal. You can't imp them, and if you try to smelt them they just lose weight but continue to exist as chain mail. As a result I was able to hit smelt over and over until each piece weighed 1g. They're pretty useless since you can't imp them, but it doesn't seem like intended behaviour for these chains. Maybe the chains should instead be made of a random alloy, like electrum, bronze or brass, as a novelty? As for the mystery meat, maybe create a new category of meat such as "weird meat" or "mechanical meat" that could be used in some odd recipes.

Yes, and definitely keep the 150 rule instead of just throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It'd work well if not for the 151 issue.

Don't ask me why I made one. The adamantine hammer doesn't have a model and seems to look like a mallet. It would be nice if I had an actual model.

Come on guys, there can't be that many QR codes to censor.

It's fairly easy to pen a unique using strongwall provided you design an appropriate pen for it to allow you to run it in a circle for 3 minutes.

I assume the game database records who placed any object or entity into the world from their inventory. The person who placed a trader could be allowed to reclaim it for a month before its gone forever, maybe with the caveat that traders off-deed become totally nonfunctional during the transition. If you didn't originally place the trader (or placed it on an account you no longer have access to) then I guess it's tough. I think putting all traders back into circulation for people to place again would result in too many active traders. There has to be some fair and reasonable limit.

I've managed to play Wurm for 12 years (on and off) and not engaged in any RMT. If anything I've had more fun because of it. Everything I own is the result of work I've put in myself ingame, which I find more satisfying. If people can't have fun without RMT then I think that reflects the need for changes to occur ingame, such as reducing the barrier to entry in PvP or making it easier to obtain and train a priest.

I suspect the answer is yes - it was noted before that having one trusted friend log into your account sometimes isn't the issue they're trying to address. Instead, they don't want accounts to be shared by large groups or by people who don't know each other very well.

I suspect you'll need to agree a buyout with the other person. You perhaps could agree that in principle the other person owns it, but you can log in sometimes.

No. In fact it seems the reverse is true.