Roccandil

+1. I wanna see moose-drawn wagons...

+1

The branding suggestion is simply one possible solution to a real problem, and I'm not arguing for the branding suggestion. I'm simply saying there -is- a problem, and it's not the customer's fault it exists. Personally, I think enclosures should have their own ratios, based on tiles enclosed, and exempt from the effects of the deed ratio (with their tiles subtracted from the deed ratio). That way no one can pack stables with stupid numbers of animals, but neither will stables be impacted by random concentrations of wild animals many tiles and walls away (which just seems bizarre to me).

You made it personal when you insulted the people reporting the problem. I'm simply pointing that out.

I agree. I'm still learning what I'd consider basic stuff from people who have dived into WU code, and really, that's nuts.

+1 to making more useful things from alchemy and non-unique creature parts.

If the developers treated their customers the way you've treated others in this thread, they would soon be out of business.

Random thoughts based on OP: - I like the idea of natural logfalls, if only because it would make forests seem more real. What if when a tree grows to overage, it has a chance to turn into a felled tree instead of shriveled? Leave behind the stump, or even have it uprooted (new graphic, I know). A fallen tree would also be a good place to spawn mushrooms. - As a new player, it wasn't intuitive to figure out that to cut down a tree I had to click the tile beneath it. (Something for a tutorial?) - I like the idea of simple huts, but the real deal is sleep bonus, and beds are hard to make. Along with huts, I'd recommend some kind of rudimentary sleeping device. Packed dirt + log hut + ??? = early sleep bonus. At that, the new player experience can vary from arriving in a peaceful civilization to paradropping into a dangerous wilderness. When I jumped to Freedom from Epic (before update), I knew people already, and they showered me with everything I needed. Epic was different, but still, so many resources had been left lying around (including beds), that I had no trouble. I've never had to start new in a virgin wilderness, relying on nothing but starter tools. I almost feel like a new player would have to deliberately look for that experience....

Except that it was working just fine, and now it's not. From a business perspective, the developers made a change that negatively impacted customers, and it's not unreasonable for the customers to point it out. Also, as far as I can tell, the point of the change was -not- to plague specific deeds with swarms of wild animals; that was a side effect. Again, telling the customers that they just need to suck it up really smacks of elitism.

OK. Thanks for the correction! And no wonder tempering fails so much...

+1.

I see what you're saying, but conversely, the new movement code has seemingly acted like a plague of locusts, bringing droves of -unwanted- animals on deed. We need a better way to distinguish between wanted and unwanted animals. Realistically, each enclosure should have its own ratio. As an extreme example, why should enclosure X on the NE corner of a deed be affected by enclosure Y in the SE, and why should either be affected by wild seals piling up on another corner? That would probably require new mechanics to allow enclosures to act something like houses, but ideally, each dedicated enclosure with its own ratio would not affect the overall deed ratio (that would be for everything else).

Very little CPU usage. 6 cores/12 logical processors. Full-screen is pretty much out as a play method, but I haven't tried it to troubleshoot.

Oops, already +1'd this. Free bump!

Your post self-demonstrates elitism; that is, because I don't think like you, you're hoping I'll leave. Nevertheless, here's how I see it: - OP identifies a real problem multiple people are having with the new movement code; - People describe how reasonable player attempts to prevent the issue are failing; - You come in with a nasty and condescending attitude, and effectively tell them to shut up and take it. As far as I'm concerned, that's bullying and elitism. Who are you to tell them to suck it up? Imagine if the developers acted like you....

+1

+1

What kind of update?

+1

Ah, interesting. Thanks!

Sorry, those weren't real messages, just suggestions.

While I'm thinking about it, it would be cool if when you Examine an impable item, you get reports about imping viability, for example: "You see a lot of areas to improve on." "You have no idea where you would even begin to improve this item."

If it were me, I'd remove failure entirely and allow imp sizes to drop to 0 (i.e., at some point you can't imp at all unless you get better tools/more skill). Failure seems a petty frustration in imping, since imping balance simply requires time. Imping a tool from X QL to Y QL with skill level A and tool QL B should take Z time, and you can implement Z time with larger imps and more failures, or smaller imps and fewer (or no) failures. Based on my own experience grinding mining before and after the Epic update, I know I much prefer small, but steady gains over larger but more RNG-prone gains, even if the overall gain for time spent is exactly the same, (and that applies to imping gains as well as skill gains). In short, failure feels like a punishment for playing the game, which isn't a good thing if you want more customers. By the way, any reason tempering fails so much? Whenever I'm doing any imping involving tempering, I dread it, because it seems to fail far more than any other imp type. And since water is 100QL, that seems odd.

Definitely not: the -time- requirement of skills/crafting is very important to enforce opportunity cost, which in my view is critical to Wurm's gameplay. Repetitive clicking, on the other hand, is nearly meaningless. Fewer clicks doesn't inherently mean less time to grind, so no, we wouldn't power through all content in mere months; the time to grind would remain the same. I'm not suggesting making skillgain quicker; that needs to remain balanced. I simply want to see repetitive clicking reduced as much as possible, while preserving the time requirement. Automation is great for repetitive tasks, but the less repetitive the task, the less useful automation becomes, while in the context of gaming, the less repetitive the task, the better the gameplay. I think the furor here is partly because certain grinding tasks are obvious low-hanging fruit for automation, which inherently means those tasks are poor gameplay. I'm basically a new guy coming in and saying why the frack haven't you automated this nonsense already! I get the sense that people are either being protective of Wurm, and thus glossing over an obvious shortcoming (and objecting to it being pointed out), or, because they had to click a bunch to grind, they want everyone else to have to as well.

Your elitism is showing.... As a relatively new player, I find your attitude exceedingly toxic. I'm very glad you're not representative of the entire Wurm community (I'd probably have moved on by now if that were the case).