Rohgahr

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Rohgahr

  • Rank
    Villager

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @jackjones LOL! That actually made me laugh XD nearly got me in trouble at work
  2. At this point I feel like I need to say something about this. I have absolutely no idea why you fly off on an assumption and corresponding accusative remarks. Your arguments themselves makes sense to me, but that accusation above doesn't. My initial motivation for putting this out there can be quite literally taken from the first line of my post, as seen below. So there you go, the only thing I am interested in here is getting as many perspectives on this as possible, and again: spit balling on an idea with people, especially the people that disagree with that idea.
  3. Also would like to add that through a trait there is no way to have this trait put into effect deliberately, as these horses can't be bred there is no way to deliberately breed this trait. Meant this as a good thing
  4. @Seriphina Fair enough, for arguments sake, what are your thoughts on the application of a negative trait that could potentially be removed which would decrease the odds of this horse it's offspring inheriting it's a parent trait and possibly provide a small beneficial effect in return while this negative trait is active?* * Alternative as based on fellow player feedback up to this point (ty Dazama and Lupe) @Dazama I agree with you on that this would potentially decrease the amount of new competitors due to the increased difficulty on the WO platform, not so much for WU though. I gotta say though, your alternative suggestion is pretty interesting as it would provide an increased difficulty across the board, but not one that cannot be overcome. What are your thoughts on that alternative in combination with a minor buff to counter the breeding nerf as Lupe suggested? It does not have to be a speed buff, it can be something as simple as reduced hunger, or a decrease in the rate an animal gets sick while this negative trait is active. Or maybe making it something that would not make it impossible, but simply reduce the odds of having a trait or the number of traits being passed on to their offspring while in effect? @Yiraia To be honest, I do think that "what is best for the game" is not something any of us are able to determine individually as the game is an mmo and by it's very nature requires multiple people that each have their own opinion on things. I would also argue that there is no difference between "What players want" and "What is good for the game." I am glad that you like the idea ^^ would like to add that I am not trying to win an argument here. My intent is literally nothing more than throwing an idea out there that I feel might be interesting and get a dialogue going. It's a public spit balling session of sorts to see if something I felt was/is interesting is also interesting to other players, and if they don't find it interesting to figure out what would be interesting to them. Again, happy to hear that you like the idea, as i was starting to feel a bit depressed here xD (joke) But as I said to Seriphina earlier, I am interested in what people think about this and why, and don't want to derail the spitball too much with pointless arguments if you get what I mean ^^. Got any thoughts on the alternatives? Or if you would like to suggest an alternative yourself, feel free.
  5. @Seriphina I agree that there is competition out there, and while there are ways to find a niche I felt like this could be a gimmick that could provide an additional layer to this aspect of the game, and felt like throwing it out there and get a dialogue started on the pro's and cons as that is what the suggestion section is for. Now I am not interested in getting into a back-and-forth where we derail in a senseless argument, what I am interested in is points to counter why gelding would not be a great idea. What I got from your response is: Taking away the possibility or making it more difficult for potential competitors to start competing using the animals you bred would be pointless as there is plenty of competition out there already. It is better to find a niche in the market such as including traits as "spark" and the like to retain a competitive edge. Would that be correct? @Lupe Fair point(s) that kinda happened on Black Dessert as well where breeding horses is restricted not through gelding, but rather through a limit on how often a horse can breed. Black Dessert is all about competition (which is why i like it) so getting into that aspect of the game felt kind off like an elite ballpark. In addition that distinction an have consequences for the price for both a "Gelded" and "Ungelded" horse. Also, adding a beneficial state to a gelded horse is actually a good idea and could work as it would add benefits to buying a gelded horse rather than one that can still breed if you want to put them in front of a cart or for use as a mount or something. @Finnn That's a pretty sweet argument actually. Due to the time it takes for an animal to be born and raised to the point where it is useful in addition to the RNG factor involved in relation to the traits it inherits from it's parents, there is no immediate impact on the demand if another player starts breeding if the player base is large enough. Which for WO it certainly is. It would still be easier for someone to get their breeding program started but depending on the size of a player base the competitive effects would be rather small, which in turn means that at the very least the gains of the person the animal was bought from would remain more or less unaffected.
  6. @Finnn Euhm....no actually because the alternative I was reffering to is an alternative component of the suggestion: As in: A means for players to apply to an animal sold to decrease the odds of these traits transferring to an offspring as it would not take away the possibility. Regardless of that I get from your response that you are basically sharing your opinion "as is" without further comments or arguments to add, is that correct?
  7. @Jaz My bad, should have been clearer in this. I meant it like this: instead of being able to lead a branded animal back to the settlement it belongs to, you would brand an animal as your personal brand. It would no longer be something that is used to ease leading horses and such, it would be more akin to something that shows up when examining the horse in addition to disabling or decreasing the rate (or even flat out preventing) the transfer of traits from that parent to another horse. @Finnn Okay, I understand you dislike the idea of completely disabling the possibility to breed these horses, but I am having trouble understanding your argument here as the possibility to purchase a breedable horse still exists and no one makes you buy a non breedable horse in a scenario where this feature would have been an actual game play aspect. I am curious though, could you elaborate on your reasons why? For an example, what is your stance on the alternative? A means for players to apply to an animal sold to decrease the odds of these traits transferring to an offspring as it would not take away the possibility but pretty much would have the same result. @Angelklaine Prices are indeed set by supply and demand, and part of why i suggested this has to do with the "Supply" part of that equation. Every bred horse contributes to the "supply" and has the potential to impact it further, which is kinda the point of breeding. The point I am trying to make is that using a 5sp horse to start your own breeding program significantly decreases the threshold to start breeding your own 5sp horses, which makes things far easier for anyone employing this method. The end result is that the people employing this method reap benefits that are far greater than the amount invested before being able to do so. Not everyone breeds for profit is kind of a moot point here isn't it? You still increase the supply while the demand remains the same. The only difference with breeding for profit in this setup would be that there is less money changing hands. It would still affect the Supply vs demand ratio though. In relation to your argument on competition: If the result of him/her lowering their prices is cutting into your share of the market, then you need to offer a better deal to remain competitive. If not gelding your horses is the means to do so, sure. Alternatively you could also just lower your prices to match. There is no reason why this should result in a player being forced to not Geld a horse. About the point on drama: That can happen with absolutely everything involving player trade. Now I understand you dislike the Gelding as a possible suggestion, but I kinda feel like you missed the intent of the suggestion hence the above text.
  8. Ah, that is good to know. Is it possible to influence the area in which they spawn? Or any other method to ensure that they spawn as a member of their corresponding faction? In addition: do you know why it creates a duplicate?
  9. Hi all, One of the players on the Wurm Unlimited server that I am hosting had a rather interesting suggestion in relation to being able to "Geld" an animal. Essentially this means that you sterilise an animal and make it unfit to breed with other animals. This would add a number of interesting aspects to the trade of animals, and makes it so that the gains tied to this aspect of the game correlates a bit better with the investment made by the players involved. Let's take 5 speed trait horses as an example. These horses have an obvious benefit, that benefit being: they are faster horses. This makes them a desirable asset that is very valueable in terms of trade for the following two reasons: Not everyone wants to invest in that aspect of the game Animals expire, and are a perishable commodity These two factors contribute to a steady demand for 5 speed trait horses, and it makes sense that trade would occur as a result thereof. The issue with this is that there is nothing stopping a potential competitor from purchasing a horse from you, and using it to breed his own horses. By itself that is not much of an issue as competition keeps the economy from becoming stagnant. My problem lies with that issue can be best explained through the following two points. This significantly shortens the time and effort it takes for your competitor to reap the exact same rewards. The competitor is able to achieve the same results and gains as you in less time, investing the exact same amount as a player that bought a horse because he/she needed a mount. Being able to geld the animals you bred would enable a player to differentiate between the two. for an example: if another player wants to compete, and take a shortcut using one of your horses to breed his/her own? Then you are able to sell this person a horse at a higher rate without gelding it. If they just want a new mount? Sell them a cheaper horse that cannot be used for breeding purposes. Another alternative would be to enable players to brand animals without restriction and reduce the chances for the offspring from that horse to receive those traits.
  10. Hi all, I have been running a Wurm Unlimited server for about 2-3 months now, and so far I have been able to resolve everything the server threw at me through a basic understanding of things, google, steady doses of rage-countering nicotine and a stupendous amount of stubbornness. There is one thing that I have not been able to resolve (yet) due to time, resources and the fact that it can be solved the moment the issue occurs. The issue is actually a two part problem. The standard deity avatars belonging to their respective faiths sometimes spawn in as a member of the opposing faction. While there have been multiple sightings, we have seen instances where the Avatar of Libila and the Avatar or Magnaron spawned in as a member of one of the other factions rather than their own faction. Note: While spawning as a part of an opposing faction, they are still tied to a mission given to the faction they should associate with (example, Libila spawns in as JK, but is still tied to the HoTS mission to give her shinies) Note: I am assuming this affects all deities, but so far have not been able to spot Vynora or Fo, so it might be that it is not affecting Fo or Vynora. When a deity avatar spawns, it somehow duplicates itself, generating an extra mission for it's corresponding faction. I do not know why this happens, but I think it has to do with the fact that when I first set up the server I used the Ocrea (creative) map as a base for the server before replacing the map with a custom map and setting it to a PvP epic login server. I have some other ideas as to what might be causing this, but I figured it would be best to verify this before resolving this by changing the foundation of the world to Heavenord (PVP map) rather than Ocrea. So, any thoughts on that?