Metallumere

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Metallumere last won the day on April 23

Metallumere had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

40 Decent

About Metallumere

  • Rank
    Villager

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Dwarf Fortress found itself with this exact solution; SoundSense. It's an identical idea too; it reads various logs to see what's happening and plays relevant audio files. The way it handles the actual audiofiles is that there's an "update soundpack" button that pulls from various free websources and any personally hosted custom content. Here's an example of slaughtering a creature, plus audio source. The source code is of course freely available so you can see where various sound files are actually pulled from, or you can probably just rework the whole thing to work with Wurm(I'm not sure what sort of license it's under). So, this is like a super viable and interesting idea. Assuming this got any kind of traction you could probably even convince the Wurm devs to let more happenings be loggable for something like this to better respond to.
  2. Rifts wreck the terrain at a particular location. Jackal had structure generation(technically this isn't a part of Rifts I guess), not that it was very complex. Rifts spawn mobs that (I think?) have higher complexity pathing and attack logic. Rifts spawn harvestable objects at the location. The only point at which this strays from any known mechanics would be the multipart boss, and even then we have animal hitching so we know it's possible to rig several separate creatures together in unison. Point is, i'm almost certain that everything here, short of the rewards of course, can recycle existing code and models. Then again, the rewards could also just recycle stuff, I mostly just sat here listing off stuff that sounded cool as heck. I'd be pretty disappointed if something exactly like this didn't introduce a dragonscale helm though. Or, maybe a dragon crown. Some dragon head-wear, damnit!
  3. The Wurm. Big Brown Giga-Dragon. So big you can't actually reach it, only its four legs. The Suggestion Description: My proposal is that a new unique creature be added, but one that involves a rather entertaining event-siege. This creature is above and beyond any unique before it, quite literally, and the event itself should provide a much better sense of progress compared to the standing-around nature of Rifts. A major goal with the design of this proposal was that a large portion of the content be able to be recycled from existing assets, such as code or models. A lot of this would likely use Rift-code, for example. I envision The Wurm as a multi-part and multi-phase boss. And when I say multi-part, I really mean multiple parts of the creature. Lore-wise I see it as a cataclysmic creature that can never be truly banished, that bestows life force upon world when slain, but strips the very ground it stands on of energy when alive. Destined to regularly walk upon the world without the Ageless to keep it sealed, it is up to us to strike it down until it can conjure itself into existence again. This is simply the natural cycle. Bit of backstory on this: I first heard rumor of The Wurm on Wurmpedia back in late-2012 or so. A man named Draulius slipped in a little something interesting on the Path of Insanity page; The moment I read that, I knew I wanted to pursue the Path of Insanity, just to get a chance to see something that might never have been seen otherwise. Alas, I never did get to see it in-game, and if this ever existed for even a moment in time, it was gone by the time models for dragons were remade. I had dug through the graphical assets to see if it maybe had a texture page, but couldn't find it anywhere. Now for whatever reason, even though the above image has been on the main web page since before even that Wurmpedia edit, I never made the connection that that was it. For many years, actually. It's silly, I know. These days, I can't help but feel that at some point in time this was an actual 3D model. The wings are uncanny like that. But, backstory aside, let me sum this post up for you! TL;DR: Huge emphasis on elemental threats and countering those same threats with an opposing elemental weakness, giving good reason to use flame aura, frostbrand, venom, and rotting touch over the more common bloodthirst and life transfer, plus other damage resistance enchantments. Singular stationary boss entity with multiple body parts that can attack individually and be killed separately. The initial fight; a PVE siege vs a crudely fortified pile of crater and ruin, with new yet somewhat familiar creatures holding the line. War machines now playing an important part in PVE, there's no way to win without them. Victory alters the world for everyone collectively, present or not. New application of a couple skills; stone cutting and forestry! Oooo~ To quote Starship Troopers; Would you like to know more? The Spawn Arena and New Creatures: Similar to a Rift, forwards notice is given to everyone ahead of time that it's about to happen. The world occasionally trembles, growing more and more violent with each passing day(New screen-shake option!). After a couple real days, a crater bursts out of the world at an unoccupied location; again similar to Rifts. The Wurm stands tall within the middle of this, visible no matter where you are in the world like a beacon, towering above all. I'd actually like this crater to be able to most commonly appear in/over water, either temporarily raising an island from the sea as a non-destructive stage, or creating a giant pseudo-bridge-like-structure to walk upon, but this might be very difficult to implement. The crater isn't actually a modification of the land(like a rod of eruption or whatever it was) but a series of structural objects like building walls that only appear to be part of the terrain. The Wurm stays stationary in the middle of the crater, meanwhile the rest of the crater is structured as a sprawling labyrinth inhabited by all manner of new dragon-esque creatures. (Edit: I completely forgot to cite this, but Jackal had structure generation. So, even if it seems like placing down buildings on-the-fly might require new code, it actually already exists, and can be recycled here just like Rift stuff! ) The new critters include things like: Dracogoblins; similar to normal goblins but with an altered appearance and imbued with a random type of elemental damage and resistance, matched with an opposing elemental weakness, capable of casting offensive elemental spells and support spells. Dragon Knights; similar treatment to Dracogoblins, these are trolls adorned with draconic weaponry(usually halberds and spears, sometimes axes, mauls, swords and shields) and armor enchanted with a random elemental damage type and matching resistance plus opposing weakness. Essentially the grunts of this event, they're tough and hit hard. Beargon; half bear, half dragon, completely awesome. It's pretty big, like the size of a normal dragon, and mostly element-immune. Meant to be a very tanky and threatening presence. Occasionally a Dragon Knight will ride these, making them a mounted threat! Cockatrice; the classic tiny terror, essentially just a micro-dragon-chicken-hybrid that can be surprisingly hard to hit, and very annoying if they swarm together. Despite their appearance they don't actually do any kind of elemental damage or attacks, they just bite and peck at you. Dracogoblins summon these! Hell Pig; a mutant-pig brimming with power. Engulfed in flame, crackling with ice, slick with acid, or spined and drooling with venom, this beast is essentially meant to be a very dangerous glass-cannon that causes pain if not dealt with quickly. Anything else fun you could think of? All of these essentially being some common monster or wildlife that's been warped. In actuality, this is so that new assets don't need to be made from scratch, but instead existing models can be morphed to reduce the time needed to create them. Economical! The Fight: The entire fight plays out as an offensive siege, building war machines like trebuchets and catapults and knocking holes through the labyrinth while moving forwards into it, fighting off the threats that retaliate within. Some of these threats, such as Dracogoblins, sit atop the crater-like structures out of reach from melee. This makes them vulnerable only to spells, bows, and ballista-fire(Or you can just catapult the whole wall down). When pushed through to the center, The Wurm now attacks. It is massive. The body is too high up to be damaged, but the legs standing upon the ground are vulnerable. Each leg is individually targetable, and has its own health pool, but cannot be damaged by normal attacks. Instead they can only be damaged by war machines, ballista and battering rams in particular, giving incentive to use them on Freedom. Until the legs are defeated, The Wurm attacks at range from high up with various constantly-changing elemental AoE effects(breath attacks, tail swipes, and throwing a bunch of people at once with wind gusts), encouraging spreading out and regularly switching legs, lest ye be nuked under its concentrated might! Once its legs are sufficiently damaged or crippled, it falls, clearing away most of the labyrinth it was standing above. The proper fight can now begin; Its head, each wing, and its tail are now targetable and damageable by normal attacks, and each attacks players separately. The wings will occasionally move to protect the head, the tail will occasionally stun en-mass, and the head will occasionally drench the area around itself in a chaotic mist of constantly-shifting elemental damage. Otherwise, the parts attack like normal; the tail bruising, wings cutting, and the head piercing and biting. The Wurm is of course stationary all this time, it's far too big and would probably take too much effort to program it and all its parts to actually move in tandem anywhere. It's meant to stand there and fall there, relying on its different body parts to attack at different angles from itself. The Rewards: Throughout the battles, priests are rewarded with small increases in faith similarly to how fighting skill is gained; doing damage and supporting allies. The gods watch from above with glee! Once concluded, with The Wurm slain(it evaporates on the spot leaving no corpse behind), the crater-structures now begin to decay within days and the world is blessed by its incarnated blood spilling forth, causing various effects to happen: The entire battlefield temporarily blooms into a beautiful flowery meadow(if this happened on-land). For a short time water collected from wells/fountains from the battlefield, or waterbodies within the battlefield(or the local area of sea if over the sea is possible) is temporarily transmuted into a new special type of water that can be collected; it restores thirst like normal but also restores stamina like alcohol! Decays and eventually turns into normal water after some time. All over the world random trees advance in growth and spread, crops immediately advance to ready-to-harvest or increase in yield otherwise, random non-reinforced cavetiles collapse and turn into an ore vein of some kind, tamed and branded creatures older than mature age are bumped down a stage(venerable horses become old for example), and other such world-wide benefits! Anything else you could think of? As for actual loot, The Wurm itself grants a golden-colored dragon scale to everyone in local(its earthen-brown now tarnished... in a weird way), and leaves behind large dragon eggs that can be harvested for their moonmetal shells and primordial fluids, similarly to how Rift materials are harvested; using forestry skill and a bucket(since harvesting fluid would be most similar to harvesting maple sap) and stonecutting skill with a chisel(for cracking away at the shell). The moonmetal explains itself(I dunno if it should be all of them at random, seryll, or an entirely new material?), the primordial fluids can be used for a couple things though: It decays quickly like food does, so it needs to be used within a short time. The first possible use is applying it to a creature(all of these effects combined unless stated otherwise): It reduces creature age down one stage but no lower than mature. The creature is instantly fed and fattened, and does not get hungry for some period of time. If it is a dominated monster, zombified creature, or tamed/charmed animal that naturally hunts; It is given an effect that makes it quickly regenerate health for a period of time. If it is a horse(or anything else with variations in the future), the user is prompted on whether they would like to spread it over the creature's coat/skin/whatever, if so they may choose a non-special color/variation or select an option that randomly changes the color/variation but has a chance to be any sort of faster/special color/variation too. If it is a female creature; It will be given a temporary effect that prevents miscarriage for a large period of time. If it is pregnant, the baby's development is accelerated and the mother gives birth with no chance of miscarriage within 1 real-life hour, in addition to the miscarriage-prevention effect. If it is a male creature; It is given a temporary fertility effect that causes breeding with it to be more likely to pass on its traits/characteristics(champion for example), as well as making it extremely likely for there to be more than one offspring to develop(twins or even triplets being born). These effects wear off after some period of time or from a certain amount of breeding. The second possible use is as a cooking ingredient: Used in anything like salt, it gives the resulting recipe an effect identical to Oppulence while still being able to stack with the actual spell, causing it to be more filling and also have higher CCFP fill, and also increasing the resulting dish's weight by some predictable amount. Something that should only make a 2kg meal actually results in 4kg, for example. Magic! And it of course provides the same effect as salt. The third application is when mixed with source salt: It creates a potion of course! This stops the fluid's accelerated decay, but it can no longer be used for the above purposes. The potion can be applied to anything that Mend can be cast on. If it's a tool/weapon/armor; It is imbued to have negated or massively reduced enchantment drain(so the imbue fades over use, but the enchantment doesn't). If it's a material(like a log or lump), it doubles the weight but halves the quality. Of course everyone and their grandmother will use this to double their seryll, or whatever new material if any from the egg shells. Otherwise most of the loot would come from the draconic defenders: Beargons can be butchered for hides which create a unique type of leather or studded leather armor which provides very effective elemental resistances for future Wurm fights(essentially introducing different hide properties similar to different metal properties). Cockatrices can be butchered for draconic-feathers which can be used to create elemental arrows for bows. Draconic weapons dropped by Dragon Knights which are impressively powerful but decay quickly like shod clubs and take a lot of damage with use(can't be repaired or mended of course), and very robust yet brittle Draconic armor pieces(finally, dragonscale helms! ...if only for a short time...) that protect very well against very specific types of damage but leave you vulnerable to other kinds. Very small amounts of random-colored dragon scales from Dracogoblins. Elemental meat from the Hell Pigs which when eaten imbue you with a natural breath attack for a short time! And other such thematic things! Also, fun fact; there exists a texture in the files for golden-dragonscale armor. If you were curious what the golden-scales drop might look like when used to make armor: All in all, I hope this or something like it could be implemented in the future when the development roadmap starts touching on things like the unique rework and PVE-focused content.
  4. It'd be really nice having some kind of public settlement directory. This seems like a decent way to go about it for the least amount of effort and coding required, especially if it lists a few stats by default like citizen count and productivity bonuses. It'd also be really nice if there was some way to export a settlement screenshot along with this.
  5. I wouldn't be asking for further info if I didn't view a response as partially(or entirely) inconclusive on the subject. Surely you'd do the same? By nature of us not being omniscient, we can only inquire further. I don't expect anyone to reply completely concisely or address every possible angle I could examine on the subject matter. Though it's pretty cool when that actually does happen. This response is a lot more eloquent than your first one, thank you~ I suppose this means you, like some others, believe this to be an issue of human nature alone and not anything that can be resolved through game design. Which is understandable. Thanks for mentioning another game too. It's pretty handy being made aware of something else to examine like that.
  6. Technically this is a thing. The Marks Shop provides a meditation path change, but it's gated behind eight months of premium. But, I do feel like all meditation paths just need a rework to make them all equally as desirable/useful as path of love. I seem to recall this having been the case a couple years ago. It's why spell resistance became a thing, though maybe it was always a problem and that change just took a very long time. I also feel like, with spell resistance as it is, it probably wouldn't be too silly for everyone to be throwing spells around. If it was a little too much, favor regeneration could just be massively reduced during PVP, and crushing of gems could have a cooldown on it or maybe some sort of clumsiness debuff that makes chaining gem-crushing together have some sort of casting penalty. I can see something like that making spells in PVP a very tactical and mind-gamey kinda thing, it'd probably also encourage disengaging to get favor back which would theoretically be very risky but also beneficial for both sides of a fight since both would get the opportunity to recharge. What singular mechanic change do you think would have the biggest immediate impact in reducing need for alts?
  7. I suppose I didn't expect this nor was I prepared for it in the slightest. I guess this really is fruitless then. Ooo. You know, automation might actually be a pretty solid solution. I like this. Ahh, okay. So, you conclude that it's a fundamental issue with human nature, not anything that can be resolved within the realm of game design alone. That is fair. Well yeah, that's how you provoke discussion; you shake the tables and get people polarized. I expect people to defend them and actually explain to me why it is they grip so tightly to them, because I don't understand otherwise. Maybe there's a somewhat nicer way to go about it, but a slap in the face is at least somewhat intentional here. It's sort of like that one adage: "If you want to get correct information on the internet, tell people something wrong and everyone will jump at the chance to correct you". It's not lost on me just what kind of posture I've assumed here. You're not the first to suggest that, but I find that difficult if not impossible when a majority of people already have the perception that no change is necessary or no problems are present. I figure it's better to first suggest that there are issues at play not being seen or addressed, than try and prop something up that does nothing to actually form a connection in peoples' minds. Maybe i'm reading into it wrong, but it seems like what you suggest is the equivalent of suggesting that we're on a boat with holes in it, and the outer hull be reinforced or painted or expanded or engraved or whatever. And sure, maybe whoever paints the boat will notice its got holes and we're taking on water, but surely it's better to first say "Guys, I think there's a hole in the boat, but I can't tell for sure because you're all making holes in a lot of places, is this normal?" Maybe i'm wrong though, maybe it is better to just suggest that the boat needs a new coat of paint and let people find the holes more organically. You probably missed the part where I said that nothing there should be considered real viable suggestions then. I'm strictly asking what you feel could or should be done, if anything. What I have posited is more or less intended to be an example of what a suggestion looks like. Not an actual viable suggestion. I think I even said that twice somewhere in there, but I do understand it's all muddy, my bad. Still though, I genuinely don't grasp why anyone would desire the experience be split like that instead of unified. I'd swear that you're inherently devaluing the experience for yourself by playing as-if the restrictions and such aren't actually there. But, if you feel otherwise, that this is enriching the experience for you as it is, then I suppose I can't argue with that. How would you feel if you could actually do that with one character then? Would you be opposed to it entirely? If so, why do you perceive handling it through two characters as being any different? I'm trying to remain impartial in the face of a majority. The intent isn't to turn people over to my side(That would never work of course), it's for me to understand why things are the way they are, and to point out that maybe things don't have to actually be that way. To spark discussion and scrutiny and examination of whether or not something is or isn't detrimental or beneficial is the aim here. So far it's been mostly a disaster with people mostly just telling me "Things are the way they are", instead of considering that maybe things don't have to be the way they are. So, I post this in the hopes of actually coming to terms with it and attaining some better understanding on why things are the way they are. I posted this thread under the basis that people are inherently for change, not stasis. Under the basis that this is fundamentally a cooperative experience above all else, not standalone. I've been cited as wrong in a few places now, and am now coming to terms with that. This is also why I've chosen to poise myself as impartial; understanding that I can and will be wrong. Just not why. You've rendered your points quite clear now though, thank you.
  8. You're misunderstanding the purpose of the discussion. If you wish to steer clear of cooperation at all, do you feel that doing more/getting more done as a single character would be something you desire? Or, is there anything else you would like? Like, why is it that you want to have the experience spread across several characters all doing the same thing when you could be a single character doing all those things anyway? You're already the same person doing it all, why wouldn't you want that unified to a single instance of character? And, just to be clear, my issue with alts is not people making multiple characters to play on Melody and Deliverance and Cadence, my issue is with something like having 4 characters logged in at once to mine the same tile of rock away. So, for something like that, do you not want to just be able to mine one tile of rock that effectively as one singular character without the need to multilog across alts for it? The same applies to priests; If you're making another character to circumvent the priest restrictions so you can play normally without them, would you not want restrictions to just be lifted entirely? You're already playing as-if they don't matter or exist, why not unify that into a single-character experience? You're playing a priest and doing all the normal things you could be doing like imping. What is the divide here where making that work as a single character is a bad thing? Explain. Elaborate. Discuss. I'm truly indifferent towards how you play, I only desire to know what it is you desire. You're not actually telling me anything here. You're providing no real input. You're just saying "How DARE you suggest something change at all that may or may not affect me", without actually explaining why you wouldn't want change of any kind. Sure, you can do what you want, and although I cannot tell you what to do, there are still people at the top of this machine pulling all the levers and adjusting the cogs turning that will affect you whether you want it or not. I feel that as long as that is the case, that we are not actually in control of this machine but instead just getting to ride on it, then the only thing we can do is suggest change of some kind. The above response is probably relevant to this too. Why would you not want that productivity available to a single character if you're the singular person making that happen all the same? Why settle for having it split across multilogging? I'm not understanding this. You're skipping over the possibility of anything being done about that. Do you feel that there is anything at all that could be done to make bringing people together less of a royal pain in the ass? Do you feel there should be some greater incentive or mechanic at play to get people to do projects like that together? Or, anything at all? You're stating how things are, you're not stating how that could change. This is of course a valid point. But, I do still suspect that it's better to focus on the investment of playercount than player payment; one creates the other, not the other way around. In theory, aiming for a greater unique player count would do far more for the game than just having exponentially less people with exponentially less possibility for payments made. The more people you have, the more likely it is that someone is going to be really just dumping money into things. What are your thoughts on this? Do you truly feel that it is better to have 100 people making steady payments vs 1000 people possibly affecting eachother, provoking a more competitive environment, and paying more individually than each would have among only 100? Like, we have empirical evidence of this being the case, that higher playercounts alone spawn greater payments from individuals over all. Something like CSGO skins wouldn't have been as hugely profitable otherwise. Maybe i'm wrong on that, but this is why I suspect that it's always better to aim for greater playercounts than steady player payments. However, I see issue here in that alts are possibly being a detriment towards the expand of greater playercount, rather than encouraging it. Like, I wouldn't be arguing for this if I didn't feel like everyone couldn't win here. We have something to gain as players, and so do staff. It's just a question on whether or not its worth being complacent like this and choosing to sit in stagnation rather than see something done. Do you have any thoughts on other ways more revenue could be generated perhaps?
  9. A fresh analogy for today since my doll analogy doesn't seem to quite deliver on the thoughts of complacency: I see a whole bunch of people in a lunchroom, with cafeteria shutters along the wall and a couple chefs behind them. I see a bunch of people sitting at tables, and occasionally getting food. It is clear that people want more food, or something else. Instead of getting up and banging on the shutters for something, they are sitting at the table and gnawing at the tables. And, although the chefs may occasionally be concerned about the people, they are opening the shutters and seeing people chewing at the tables and going "Oh! They're just eating the tables. I guess they don't want anything", and closing the shutters back. Not only this, but people aren't actually discussing the situation with each other. Rather, new people are walking into the lunchroom, seeing other people around them chewing at the tables, and assuming that's all there is to eat and joining in doing the same. When I say that people appear to be complacent by means of alts, I mean this. You are sitting at the table chewing away at something that was never intended to be the food here. You need to get up and bang on the shutters, discuss the chefs among'st yourselves, discuss the food. More directly, discuss what can be eaten besides the tables. Don't just settle for chewing on the tables. Sure, you can still eat the tables if you want, but why not just get more actual food on the table instead? More literally: Quit playing with alts and actually push for something to be done about why they are necessary. I don't know how else to deliver the message across really. I see everyone simply telling me that they are complacent instead of willing to see something done. Only the chefs can put food on the table here. But they can't do that if you don't go banging on those shutters. More literally; the devs make actual change here, the only thing we can do is make some noise and approach them with our discussions and consensus.
  10. I'm inclined to agree, but i'd argue that people being complacent with a roundabout solution to low population, like alts, means that not enough is actually being stirred up to do anything about the low population. I'd imagine if people didn't make alts, they'd be a lot more vocal about the various reasons as to why the population is as low as it is, or was, or might be. I'd expect there'd be a stronger effort to both gain and retain players, both from devs and players, and to resolve problems at play that might be responsible for low population. Like, yeah, if the game had enough players this wouldn't be the case, but that doesn't address the possibility of alts working against the accumulation of more players. Why not bring up the obstacle itself, discuss it with others, suggest some change be made? If you perceive it as an obstacle, and the most immediate viable solution is to make a duplicate of yourself, is that not considered a problem? Especially in an online game where the design appears to be intended towards cooperation and helping each other with obstacles? Like, i get that i can't say that's the case objectively, maybe the design really isn't to cooperate, but in that case should it be? Similar to the above response, would you not consider that alts may be actively hampering advancement towards greater number of people? It's worth mentioning here that i find no issue with wanting to play multiple characters. I expect this to be the case. I only perceive it as a problem when several characters exist at once doing the same things together by your input. Multiboxing/multilogging/whatever the term may be. Why not just, you know, make it all doable from one character? If you're still going to be one person doing it all. Like, it's clear to me that there are reasons people are doing this, and people are pretty good about citing them, but not very good about stating whether or not change or adjustment should be made in relation. It seems like people are just being very deterministic and saying "Things are the way they are, and that's all there is to it". Would you like that to be possible without alts though? Like, yeah, you're acknowledging that they have a use, this much is clear. Just not whether something should be done about those uses. Unless you mean, "I've mined 1k stone in 30 mins with alts, and i'm actually totally alright with that and wouldn't want it any other way". But in that case, why? Why be complacent with multilogging instead of just unifying the experience to one singular character? If you are the singular person doing it all anyway, does it not make sense to make that possible through a single character? Just wanted to point this out for anyone reading through: We had an example of this for Unlimited, and it was actually really awesome. Uniques could drop treasure maps(there were other ways to get them too), if you dug up the treasure you'd get ambushed by various creatures, which did include more uniques. See Treasure Hunting by Sindusk (Original by Ulviirala) So, I really like this idea a lot. It lines up with the idea of eggs pretty well while applying to more than just dragons. I'm inclined to agree with this, though it doesn't touch on the possibility that alts may be actively hampering the efforts made to draw in new players. I still feel that people would be much more vocal like this if not for the complacency at play. But, working on actually remedying the new player experience would definitely do a lot, yeah.
  11. Then would you agree that more should be done to enable individual accomplishment without the need for multilogging? Consider my perspective on it. Everyone goes somewhere or does something to be personally productive in some way, right? Maybe people go to a park or a mall or something to relax. What i am seeing here, is that people are sitting down right next to each other in a park, and pulling out dolls and pretending to have conversations with themselves, instead of just reaching out to the people who are right next to them doing the same thing. That process of reaching out would accomplish the same thing they are already exercising through dolls. Why not just reach out to the people next to you? Why go out of your way to exist along side them instead of with them? In that same sense, the online presence of Wurm is practically inescapable. You're not going to get away from people until there is some sort of instanced system at play, which means that by design you are meant to be interacting with people at large. While it is valid to say that not everyone wants that, that's just sort of how it is, right? So, would you be in favor of some sort of instanced gameplay? As-in like, localized areas or instances where you alone exist and nobody else can access these spaces without direct invitation. Do you think this would do good for Wurm and the people that play it? I agree in whole. Individual accomplishment shouldn't be degraded in favor of mass-value. But that still poses the question; is there more that can be done on an individual level, whether or not it compels people to congregate together? Maybe I should have titled the post to instead say "How to better cultivate growth of the playerbase", so yeah, my bad. And, I suppose as a whole, would you say this is more-so an issue of human behavior and not game design?
  12. This is valid, but do you mean to say you're happy with this? Or, do you actually want things to be less repetitive and time-consuming? So, you're not under the belief that alts are actively impeding growth of the playerbase and discouraging need for more people to be playing overall? Like, could you elaborate on this? You're absolutely convinced there's no negatives at all? Binding multiple characters to a single account would probably do some good overall, even if alts weren't exploited to circumvent restrictions and limitations and such. I can see a shared bank or such also being beneficial, since as it is now you just end up mailing things to yourself anyway I'd imagine.
  13. I'm maybe somewhat inclined to agree. It may just be the case that people desire what this offers, but find themselves upset that they need to reach out. This is a valid point, but that can be evidence that the functions and mechanics and design of the game need to be adjusted to be more in-line with what people desire and allow cooperation to be more viable. If people are already solving these issues by just doing it by themselves, then what harm is there in actually attempting to apply such solutions to be built-in directly to make that unnecessary? I like your suggestions, I can see how these things would at least make co-existing appealing in subtle ways. Thank you. The intended discussion here is how to correct people circumventing having to play with more people by just playing by themselves. I can see at least some of those things, like sea-based uniques, still maintaining these problems.
  14. I think that's fair really. If you're actively playing between multiple characters, and not multilogging with them strictly for the purpose of circumventing something, that seems acceptable. It's not necessarily that everything needs to be doable alone. Rather, there should just inherently be greater value in cooperation compared to going it solo, which maintains the option of being solo if so desired but creates a snowball effect of "people needing people --> needing people being enjoyable --> more people join in because of the interesting emergent things that wouldn't have happened otherwise". I examined three hypothetical scenarios over discord with someone. I'll share those here too: If it is a question of time invested/productivity that affects the most people overall, then the solution would be to simply adjust action timers to be drastically shorter. We've had the opportunity to play with this before and it seemed to become the standard pretty easily. A number of WU servers typically always had x3 action timers, even if they had normal skillgain. It just felt better, especially for an experience where you inherently have less people present. Does this promote growth towards a larger playerbase though? Probably not, it might only make it more bearable long-term, which means it might maintain numbers for longer periods of time, but i'd still view that as a bandaid solution i feel. If it is a question of cooperating being mostly meaningless, then the solution is to lean cooperation towards being more rewarding or profitable than doing something alone. Let's look at this with smithing: As it is now, you can hammer something to make something, or improve it, whatever right? Let's say this was plugged into a system similar to sermons, where you just inherently create things faster or at higher quality with more people around you actively doing something to partake. Does this promote growth towards a larger playerbase though? Probably not, if anything this just means that alts would become even more prominent due to there now being less value in the individual. If it is a question of individual value, then the solution is to reinforce the value of what can only be done alone, or create more things that are only doable alone. This might seem counter-intuitive, but it does spark congregation to accomplish things in a wider scope, just by nature of how much stuff needs to be done. This is probably where Wurm has tried to aim by design, making the things you can do singularly very valuable and worthwhile, but there being just so much to do that you need others to supplement your labor. Does this promote growth towards a larger playerbase though? Probably not, this by itself would only further reinforce the idea that alts and multilogging and such are necessary for being the best/most productive/doing things fastest. My point with these three scenarios being that there's no way to approach it singularly that doesn't also cause more problems, which means viable solutions are somewhere to be found in discussion from a much wider pool of input and anecdotes and such. A combination of solutions may prove to be what is necessary, but it's outside the reach of any of us singularly. We need to discuss these things together to approach that, ya know? This is really what I hope to see examined here; Is there a problem with the game design, and not just an issue with human nature? I'm inclined to believe it's the fore. If people create alts because others are unreliable, that's a direct detriment towards someone else's value and contributions. The example I was given over discord is that this guy has had positions on his settlement for carpenters a few times now, and each time someone filled that position they'd eventually vanish and leave. Now, that happens and we all know that happens, that people vanish for reasons both ingame and outside of the game. But this means a pattern may exist. If this man has experienced people filling in a position and then abandoning that position, then surely that means that position is worth examining and improving upon to actually maintain engagement and enjoyability, right? Making alts in response to people being unreliable is a direct malice towards this though. If people just go "Must be a problem with the people, i'll just do it myself", and not actually approach why it is people may be abandoning their supposed commitments, whatever the issue is will remain present. And I know that might seem unfair from a design standpoint, but if people are already circumventing these things less singularly then surely that's all the more reason to just improve upon the singular experience, right? But, again, it can be hard and subjective to ask why it is people do anything. The only thing I'd like to point out is that there may be patterns at play. Yeah, I do view alts as the product of issues at play, but they do spawn further issues in return down the line. I mostly agree with what you have to say on the topic, that there's simply much more that needs to be done across the board. Of course not. That's why i'm not suggesting alts be banned or abolished or anything, only that they be made redundant to the experience. What you're pointing out is indeed correct, that there are issues at play that are seemingly impractical without alts present. I feel this is not an issue with how people desire to play, but a necessity by error of design. You're examining the game, as it is now, without alts presents. You're not examining what can be done to make them redundant and unnecessary. If there is a problem, and you perceive those things as a problem, you should examine what can be done to correct those things. Your alts may have done nothing wrong in particular, but that's a mass-mindset at play and that is a detriment towards the game. If you, for example, think "I'm just throwing a pebble into a lake, i'm not hurting anyone", and a huge majority of people around you are doing the same thing, you're collectively making huge ripples and wakes that go everywhere. You're perpetuating a problem by rationalizing that you alone can't be responsible for things happening en-mass, instead of actually sitting down with people and trying to examine the issues and resolve them, if that makes sense. What I mean is; instead of individually settling for a personal solution, why not aim to discuss and examine how that can be made unnecessary? Of course you wouldn't if you literally don't perceive it as a personal problem due to your having solved it for yourself, but that doesn't mean that an infinite amount of other people aren't doing the same thing, and that's not a collective solution to a widespread problem. Ya feel me? So what would you like to see done instead? If the problem is that there's just not enough singular productivity, would you want things to go faster by yourself? I know that sounds like it might be bad, but if you're already circumventing a problem in roundabout ways that aren't actually engaging and interesting, then why not correct the problem to make that unnecessary or more interesting and engaging for others around you? If you perceive the issue being that your ambitions aren't attractive to anyone else, then the problem may actually be your own applied solution. If you and everyone else settle on the idea that "these things are only doable with alts", then of course no one is actually going to step up to the plate with you and help, they're already too busy doing the same thing you're doing. It's a vicious cycle like that, ya know? I know this all touches more or less on human behavior more-so than game design, but I still can't help but feel that peoples' applied solutions to the problem can just be cited as proposed solutions for everyone collectively. If your solution towards achieving your goals is to give yourself more hands, then why not make it more attractive for everyone to lend their hands instead? If the issue is that people are too busy with their own projects to help others, then the solution is still the same; congregating together to work towards a common goal just needs to be more rewarding and worthwhile and engaging en-mass without encouraging multilogging directly. I can't help but feel you're right, which is why I'd propose that skilling just be allowed for priests even partially. If they only exist now as mobile-situational-scenario-resolvers, then that means there's room to improve the experience. And if peoples' solution is to just play another character anyway, then nothing would actually be lost from unifying the experience, rather that there's value to be gained. I'm inclined to agree that more restrictions isn't the solution, but rather that more can be done with restrictions than just "You can't do this ever, and that's all there is to it". I still feel that a system of penitence would work out better, or restrictions be lifted entirely, or something else entirely. There's a lot that can be done and i'm only seeking to spark discussion on what can be done. So far it seems that people are pretty good at pointing out why things are the way they are, but not actually examining how that could be effectively changed or made better, even when they cite that there exists a problem at play. - It seems like people are maybe just getting trapped in the mindset of "I've solved this problem for myself, and that's all there is to it", when literally everyone else is doing that too, so why not resolve it for everyone across the board? More importantly: If we can acknowledge that things are the way they are for a reason and we share these common solutions individually, why not seek to apply solutions collectively? Like priest restrictions, why settle for just making an alt to solve the problems at play instead of sitting down and provoking discussion and suggesting change? It is such a pothole towards progress to just settle for roundabout solutions to things people very obviously also take issue with. Just boycott it, seriously. I acknowledge that alts are a solution to problems at play, but that doesn't actually do anything to solve those issues, it just means we can be lazy about it. Instead of making alts, try living life as a single character. If you're not happy with that, express why and what you feel should be done. Don't settle for alts, or any other sideways solution like that. Propose something be done. I feel that there's infinitely more profit that can be spawned from just compelling more people to get into the mix. Which, yeah, it's a gamble really, but all growth is a gamble. In this case, growth is determined strictly by the people paying and playing. Saying that people don't need more people to get the same things done isn't conducive growth towards people, but yes it does at least ensure growth towards paying. It seems to me like growing the people also grows the paying though, and to do that we need to make having more people necessary.