Flubb

This can ultimately only work for the driver though, so the option will have to work differently for passengers and drivers...possibly quite substantially so. Sounds like it's more finecky to implement than it lets on at first glance. But if it's doable with reasonable effort, why not at least for drivers. The passengers are probably just alts these days anyway

Or just buff Discard? Rotting touch causing damage/lowering gathered QL to deliberately get low tier stuff for increased difficulty in processing or making skiller tools out of sounds like a good application though. I'm all for offensive spells having some utility on tools, like Flaming Aura smelting ore as it's being mined an such.

I understand the contention with how this is being dealt with, and I'd have no problem with the cast if the caster said "I disagree with this, get on or I'll do it without you", which would at least have given the 3 people online on the roster (not counting myself) a chance to participate to at least clear some spots and is, from how the current system is setup, pretty uncontentious. They knew I was going to wait for a few more hours anyway, not to "plan around" but to wait for the people who signed up and I kinda don't want to backstab, you know? So there was no need to rush it like that. But they went completely guerilla cast on this, and it's doubtful they had 10 people in such short notice, so to call them an "equal competing group" is a stretch for me. They basically reverted to a rogue cast, a snipe, despite best intentions. Happened to me around the first time, too, not gonna lie, and there wasn't even anyone else planning to cast as far as I'm aware. But I find it safe to say they went back on their intention to make this an "organized cast" to fulfill their own needs only, and if they want to come out and say how many links they had, I will retract this conjecture. This is based on my experience with the first cast, though, so it's not without some empirical backing. You'd think one could deal with this like an adult and discuss this, but that was appearantly not an option. That's like 99% of what I found so appalling. And now people pretend like both "groups" were "basically coming from the same place". That view lacks nuance and in practice, what they did was nothing like what was planned. But even if we did try to make a "fully stocked" global cast everytime, I'm rather pessimistic about this giving everyone, in every timezone, with every possible personal life schedule, a fair shot at participating. Not with the system as it is. So the list, as petty as it seems without further introspection, is an attempt to work around the unreasonable demands of this system, not cower to it. Why is respect only owed to people online? Do they stop existing for you when they log off? Every goal has a "demand" for something, but there's absolutely no "competition" in Freedom rifts, it's quite the opposite. You're grasping at straws to make a fallacious "pro status quo" argument. Guys on Chaos and Epic can bash eachothers head in over this - quite literally. But on Freedom, there's no recourse from this other than changing the system up or invoking GM intervention, the latter of which I disagree with on grounds of inconsistency. You don't have a system that encourages bad behaviour only and punish people for indulging in it. It's not just sleep bonus that people miss out on now, like they did during Yellowfingers sniping spree, but now it's also the goal that people would need once, and when they're done, the snipers can start taking the credit and glory all over again with no real harm done. Because now there's a 24 hour window to claim the reward so in that regard, it doesn't matter who casts or when. So by that line of thinking, Gwyn's suggestion for recasting Rites makes a lot of sense to alleviate the friction points. It worked for the rewards at least.

And that last part is just genuinely false. I have a pretty good idea which thread you mean because I responded thoroughly to that allegation with what I actually said. First it was "They're not welcome", now appearantly I told them to "piss off". It's like some screwed up game of phone where the goal is to smear me. This notion seems to persist so despite my attempts to not namedrop them or try to fan some outrage fire against anyone (but the devs, who are the only ones who deserve it), I'll have to post some publicly available knowledge - as it was clear for everyone to read in kchat. I "censored" the casters name out. I basically openly invited them to participate in the next cast and even said how they'd be a benefit to this endeavour. Nothing after that, except the cast. You know, I'm not even that mad on them. No more than anyone else who sniped before for their own gain. It's the shitty system in place that has us pitched agaisnt eachother like that. Whatever blame I'd want to throw at them, at least half has to be redirected to the system, and by extension, the developers. But being antagonised like that in this stupid aftermath is genuinely aggravating me right now.

That's an interesting take. But it feels kind of "incomplete", as this window will have no added benefit to the casts effect, so it's another suggestion that only addresses the issue with attaining the goal without being a guerilla caster yourself, not so much the whole sniping kerfuffle itself. (It avoids the problem on a systematic level though, that's something at least) If subsequent casts had some benefit to the ritual's secondary effect, with diminishing returns, I could get behind this though. Holy Crop gives more yield bonus, Rite of Spring's "boat buff" is extended, Ritual of the Suns Nutrition boost cap increases (nearing 100 nutrition slowly), Rite of Death's head wound damage is repeated. (RoD is a stunted version of itself on PVE anyway, giving them something instead on Freedom is a different issue.) None of that should be too overpowered, but still giving an incentive, if the bonus was halved each time. So RoS can only close in on 48 hours total, RotS very slowly pushes nutrition to 100, RoD wounds can get "bad" at best rather than medium...perhaps diminishing returns should be toned down for HC to make sense, but you get where I'm going with this.

See, your problem is your really weird and distorted definition of "difficult". The fact that other people may take it is an adversarial factor for sure, but where's the "difficulty" gameplay wise except in some weird meta pvp sense? You're even suggesting to actively avoid other populations. In a goal that is clearly meant to be cooperated on. If that isn't a tacit acknowledgement that the system is flawed I don't know what is. But yeah, for what it's worth, I might pick up your advice and just run from the problem. Not even being sarcastic here. If I can't solve the problem here and the devs won't, what other option is there? But you're clearly not seeing the problem to begin with, that is very apparent from your response. I'm not sad about derailing this either, to be honest. Nothing personal against Ekcin at all, but I think trying to regulate/enforce what I'm trying to do is dead in the water as an idea and even everything coming close to it will just be a bandaid on a fleshwound as it will just hamper "normal casts" to take place later (AKA regulating the few to the detriment of the many). The change needs to go deeper.

Of course the hottest garbage take of them all comes from you, with the same line of "reason" you always tow without any sort of reflection. Nobody wants it to be easy. Nobody wants to to be handed to them. We want it to be attainable by our (hard) work without the crap shot chance at the end in which it will be taken away by someone else. And to not sow this stupid amount of discord over what should be a community effort. As I said, OP isn't the solution to that, but to say the system is fine "because it's hard and you just want it easy" is just disconnected from all reason and reality.

Theoretically yes, this is exactly the crux. One may be indefinitely excluded when the cast is always done within but a few hours. And practically...let's just say I don't share your optimism. Also, they attempted to gather people but I'm pretty sure they didn't use all links by far, given the time they "arranged" it in. Either way, I maintain that what you propose is just one step up from elbowing your way to the goal - not with complete disregard to others but a "benevolent indifference" at best. I'm not a complete idealist though. It's still better than nothing, which the what the current "meta" amounts to. You'll have to wait for all links to be taken though, or it just comes off as another guerilla cast. This can take time, more than you may imagine. Time during which a snipe can also happen - because some people won't care to cooperate even under these circumstances. To todays casters credit, they don't fall into this group and I hope the links were maximally used despite my grim prediction that they weren't. It's just that, from a principled position, it's difficult to make a difference in this when you don't behave different at all...the problem with publicly organized casts is that they'll be held to different standards than the rogue casts that are unfortunately the norm. How long will you wait for someone on the list? Will anyone online who's not on the list just get preferrential treatment? What's the point of the list then? Or any attempt on premeditated organization? The best it provides is that I know who to forum PM in the dim hope that they aren't ingame anyway, but can show up on short notice - or else be replaced by someone else. Which, as you can imagine This adjustment isn't easily made without calling the legitimacy of public organization in question. If this comes off as arbitrary elbowing, just done brazenly in "public", people will just revert to rogue casts as nothing seems to be gained from here anyway, because even those meaning well will not be accomodated. And those who only care for themselves will ruin it for the rest either way. Would have worked better for todays scenario, sure. But what's the implication for those signing up here if it was handled that way? Not so much a rhetorical question, but would people who signed up here be okay with it being handled this way? I know a couple who'll say no, and I understandp erfectly why, I'm trying realyl hard here to outline those reasons, but just from a pragmatic viewpoint...Anarres may have a point and we need to use those elbows a bit. But honestly? I'd have this thread closed down then and just ask in kchat when a ritual is up and that's it. I might set up a different system to subscribe to Rituals being available that just "fires and forgets" at everyone involved at a given time so they may have a shot at coming online when they otherwise wouldn't have. But this thread would become pretty moot. Which I'm honestly fine with at this point. Opinions on that by people on the roster?

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not down with OPs "solution" at all. The system needs a change that accounts some sort of personal contribution up to the global cast. The fact that your efforts can be basically taken away is the source of the resentment. As MrGary has pointed out elsewhere, the limitation of availability, on the other hand, (due to possible links) is why there's "fighting" over it at all. Either one has to be addressed by the devs. Trying to work it off in order is a community effort at best, which is why I try to do that - and failing this, make it a case study why the devs need to step up. Not by doing what I do as mechanism, but by making my way obsolete.

Calling for punishment is only fueling the divisive fires. As much shade as I throw myself, I can't bring myself to want to see such punitive, counterproductive measures be put in place - not when it punishes behaviour encouraged by a bad system. Yes, I think today's cast was selfish and the lack of attempt on cooperation was appalling. But I'd be a hypocrite to not acknowledge the anxiety and bad decisions that can come with the current mechanisms. Perhaps it was entirely in bad faith, perhaps this anxiety played a factor...but going forward, calling for the heads of other players rather than a change that will make cooperation an actual "down to earth" option and not a virtuous endeavor is ultimately destructive. Especially to the already small playerbase.

Why do you people keep making me out as the "aggressor" when it's the Caster who have not made a single attempt to consolidate the situation. Yeah, I was just trying to get on their nerves not immediately towing to their whims...what a joke. What am I supposed to tell them? Yes, take it all, at least let us have a share then? You clearly don't understand the endeavour of publicly organzied casts because if you allow the efforts to be held at gunpoint ike that, the problem still persists. And you're a moron if you don't understand that. You're right on this though: People will be asshats given the chance. So take the opportunity away already. At least in this scenario, it's quite feasible and within reach in many conceivable ways. Can't speak for the other instances such as the ones you mention, that sort of unwarranted hostility is just sad. Especially with the low population as it is.

All it it guarantees is that the group will try to include them. Obviously you can't guarantee for other peoples behaviour. Which is why your second sentence is exactly right. But you can either try to engange in something constructive to try and overcome this or feed into this rule of the jungle. For whatever it's worth, it's actual evidence why this system needs a change. They devs may have hoped that people will just play nicer than it was predicted by very vocal feedback, and todays cast is another point how they have misjudged the situation. If I can at least get this out of this sisyphean task, I still get one thing I want.

It was a one-off comment on a thread, not its own suggestion, so kind of hard to find as I don't exactly remember where. On of the threads that were sparked when the goals came out. I might post it again as a suggestion thread if desired, but I feel like it'll just land on deaf ears, especially in light of the now reignited drama and following threads over it.

Absolutely. Had just read that I told the caster "they weren't welcome" which leaves me absolutely livid as I'd have loved nothing more than to have them link up aswell, avoid any possible drama and help them with the goal aswell in the process. But I can't. Not without rolling over someone else in the process. It's a lose-lose-situation trying to organize this publicly and long-term. Are we just supposed to fight eachother over it and feel miserable? Hell, without the limit, even multiple casts would be an okay goal.

A wonderful little fairytale. Here's what actually happened: Caster says "Holy crop is ready, I can give up to 9 links" Great, they have the right idea, but hours before I already gave a heads up that I planned to do this, also with 10 people. Caster: "Is there still space?" Unfortunately not, but here's the thread I try to organize this in: (Yes, I posted the link in the ingame chat) I then noted, however, that the next cast has 6 links free and it would be wonderful to have a 90+ channelling priest on this roster to maximize links then because I wasn't sure anyone in the backlog had that high channelling. Meanwhile, only 3 people on the roster had the chance to even acknowledge the PM I sent out to them. Without any further notice by the caster, no attempt to contact me or post in thread, they went through with the cast. Therefore: -The caster was more than welcome to participate and be guaranteed a slot in the next cast. I openly invited them to do so. -"The people" were 70% not even present as their attempts to organize this in a civil fashion were just steamrolled by selfishness. -And if by "cut your nose to spite their face" you mean it's arrogance or a merely principled argument why people online are not "preferred", see the same thread that neither you nor the caster probably have read at all. I even explained it to Anarres in a short recap in the last repy of mine, for your reading pleasure, but the problem with this dates back even further. There's actual practical implications If people stopped being so damn egocentrical and considered that not everyone can be online 24/7 and to have any hopeful shot at this except random chance, some form of cooperation is needed, then there will be no more sniping. 'cause I can tell you what, there's no way they used up all the 9 links in such short notice. Except with batteries perhaps. What a treat to try to be as accomodating and fair as possible to everyone (not just whoever happens to be online) and read this kind of crap post implying I shat on the caster for not being there earlier or whatever you think this was.

I can see why this would arguably work better; but for whom? This is pretty much the way I operated the first cast in a panic and it left people disappointed - rightfully so. It is just one step up from the same old elbow-y tactics that everyone following the lower instincts will use. The kind of tactics we explicitly want to avoid using here. Sure, perhaps the caster today hadn't felt the need to snipe if I didn't tell them we're full. At the same time, if I operate it this way, it comes down to being lucky that you're online at the time; all that's improved is that there will be an attempt to maximize the link usage. And from that first botched cast, I can tell you this is a good intention that may be left unfullfilled regardless. The problem with "having to be lucky" is that this way, you may or may not be on this list, if I didn't have enough people on the roster, I'll get them from kchat in a last desperate effort. So the queue will be completely moot this way, because even signing up it will by definition not guarantee you that an effort will be made to include you. You can look earlier in this thread to see some of the comments about the first cast and why it's really taking the highest of roads or degenerating in a public sniping group. That's just the sad truth behind the current mechanisms.

It is to some extend, but factoring in personal contribution to charging the goal would alleviate this a lot, and the idea I had proposed for that is rather simple and straightforward. But as Gwyn said - not a suggestion thread. It is also not hard to remove or change up the journal goal to something that cannot be effectively stolen from you. I do like the idea of an incentive to do these casts regularly though, and more often, because it benefits all followers greatly. It's a shame though that this incentive is hamfisted into a rat race goal with charging mechanics that degrade Wurm even more into a button clicking simulator than it already is.

So what you're saying is they did this regardless of the same cost? It's almost like I refuted your argument before you even made it. Yeah, they'll have it easier, you're right with that. But this is the sort of behaviour you want to stop, not simply be made harder. Trying to regulate behaviour on its own with measures that affect everyone to a slight detriment of the few who won't play nice results in terrible incentives and design choices - see Fatigue for reference. Dealing with griefers is the job of the GMs, not the Devs.

You're making this sound like it's purely coming from a place of entitlement. But you don't actually get around that question because who's claiming ownership, really? The people trying to organize the cast in a fair manner so that everyone has a shot at it or the person who just takes it for themselves? (Being fully aware they sniped an attempted organized cast, this is irrefutable as the person proposed to organize a cast of their own. Probably hasn't though, and used the bare minimum of priests to do it in such short notice.) No, I don't own the cast, despite running 15 Fo alts at times to get this crap show going, because that's how the mechanics work. Neither do they though, so my contentions to this clearly selfish behaviour are not rendered invalid by this fact. But for what it's worth, I agree with your sentiment, even if it's reasoned in a way I clearly have to object to. I'm not namedropping myself because shaming is petty and useless, and I don't see the use in making the game do it for me anymore than it already does. I'm with Sme on this. Change this goal up or drop it. As it is, it only creates resentment, division and frustration. Just like everyone with half a brain predicted it would.

Minutes after it being discussed in kchat, Holy Crop was sniped just like Rite of Spring was before even half of the people on the roster could respond, let alone read the message. It's okay. I'll just start up 15 Fo alts again and pray for hours on end because that's the only way to get this going for other people who don't give a crap where the stuff they take comes from. You're welcome.

Soon, friend. Japan has got our backs as it always has. https://www.livescience.com/66071-human-animal-hybrid-embryos.html

And with my proposed adjustment? It'd be subject to the same slope restriction like concrete, but could be used without having to dig up everything, which is unfeasible on a dirt island. Basically a more expensive version of concrete that only bypasses the dirt and "can't use underwater" restriction. Could use electrum for the metal counterpart, to make it especially painful to get lots of mass, and further difficult to get it in high QL. And use up lye aswell as the same amount of fruit juice...I'm all for making this stupidly expensive, because even with the "flow off" it'd be stupidly powerful. Ideally artificial restrictions like "only within x dirts of water level" would not be required because just digging up the rock layer and applying concrete would be more feasible for most cases. But even lifting the underwater restriction won't enable someone to make an island with an accessible rock layer because you potentially cannot even expose the rock layer to begin with? Perhaps it's really easier altogether to buff concrete and allow deeper dredging somehow if you want to be so mad as to build a functioning island from zero.

What if it didn't act like a common transmutation liquid, but more like dirt being dropped? Amount and quality = N "dirts" raised on the existing rock layer/"dropped" on each corner. Eventually, just liked with dropped dirt, it will "flow off", so the resulting layer will be more natural. This would also implement OPs proposal of increased cost per depth. (It'd do that without flowing off, too, but the tall rock layer spikes would indeed be bothersome) Your first concern is kinda vague so I'm not sure how to address that to be honest, but as long as it's absurdly expensive, and perhaps nerfed for PvP, would it be all that bad?

What a lazy response. I humored it regardless and searched for "arched wall" in Suggestions, nothing for 3 pages. If you have a reason say it. Don't send people off to some silly goose chase because you can't be arsed to post a single link. +1 to the OP because no counterarguments are to be seen. EDIT: Alright, I limited the search to topic titles only, the threads date back to 2014-2015 for crying out loud. The first "-1" was basically "stop being lazy" which is incredibly ironic given why I had to find this to begin with. The first "genuine" counterargument I see so far is "resulting structures have less QL", which is just a meh arguement. If you really need to max out some structures QL you'll have to throw some mats at it anyway, and on-deed it's terribly irrelevant. The second is "It still gets item protection as any house does". So what...? The only "negative" I see is 1x1 arched wall houses acting as deed blockers, as is sometimes done already (So you're not stopping these anyway) - sometimes as protection against griefing rather than griefing itself, like protecting off-deed orchards from being deeded over. And appearantly they're lower QL anyway so easier to catapult down if you need to...

Fair enough, I might have read more into the devblog than there was and the team is actually ahead of what they planned. My question doesn't really feel answered - though the answer seems to be "yes, just bugfixes for now"-, but it'll probably answered more clearly in VI 089, if it's coming up? (It's cool either way, I was just hyped for some improvements to combat and that's more on me than anyone else. I don't mean to pester you because "But you said you would...!" etc., I just like knowing what to look forward to. )