-
Content Count
2,825 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
TheTrickster last won the day on October 11 2023
TheTrickster had the most liked content!
Community Reputation
2,240 RareAbout TheTrickster
-
Rank
Mayor
Accounts
-
Independence
Thetrickster
-
Release
Thetrickster
-
Cadence
LokiTrixter
Recent Profile Visitors
6,598 profile views
-
Except people are merely answering the question that was ask of them regarding their own reasons for not playing PVP. It was an honest and useful question and people are giving honest and useful answers. I don't think accusing people that they "want to give PVP a bad rap" is helpful. I think pointing out that people could play PvE on PvP servers is helpful, but I think many (myself included) would need to be convinced that they wouldn't be caught up in PvP (e.g. like being unable to trade/chat/whatever with someone who is "enemy"). Also "relatively safe" sound like it wouldn't be truly PvE.
-
I thought I had commented on this, but apparently not. I voted no. For me, it has nothing to do with WO development at all. Several WU servers have been heavily modified at the code level (i.e. not just prepackaged mods) to fix bugs and provide solutions to known problems as well as QOL improvements as well as introducing creative custom features. To restart WU development now would create yet another fork into a whole other "New WU", which would be incompatible with the modified servers so of no use to those on those servers, anyway.
-
Well, there we go. That issue of bidding in good faith and not knowing. For what it's worth, while the delay could be interpreted as artificially raising the price it could also be interpreted as "ignoring bids" except if no further bids were incoming for a few days that prompted Bipolar to reach out. Again, not a great way to handle it, but not necessarily attempting to manipulate the auction for a higher price. While I do get that the effect of ignoring bids rather than rejecting them does indeed increase the price, I don't believe (and yes, that is my subjective assessment) that this was the intended goal.
-
I have had nothing to do with any of the involved parties, as far as I know. This thread's very name seems libelous, and is at the very least a misrepresentation of the actual facts. There was no "false flag" and it wasn't manipulation to drive the price up. It was an Auction not intended for everybody but posted as a public auction and the disclaimer was unclear. With no background, I assumed that there were individuals that the seller would not do business with and was saying so. Arguably, that was inappropriate, and as many have said this isn't the way to go about it. However, I think the "don't make drama" embedded in that would certainly seem (to me) to be saying that the seller was avoiding disparaging or otherwise calling out people. Poorly handled, maybe, but not what the OP (and follow ups) claim. I honestly cannot seriously consider that anyone thinks the Bipolar was trying to use false bids to drive the price up. What I do think is that SweetSerenade is mighty disappointed not only over missing out but over being hobbled out of the running and not knowing. Fair enough - that would be disappointing and frustrating and probably deserving an apology. However, to instead opt to pillory others rather than seek some kind of rapprochement, is I think totally unwarranted. Probably unpopular views. Likely to upset SweetSerenade, which is not my goal. Hopefully a perspective from outside of this whole thing, seeing it as relational rather than commercial, might be worth something. My 2 irons, adjusted for inflation.
-
Well, this at least looks like an attempt at a public slaying. You cannot force people to do business with you and you should not try to destroy their reputation when they as politely as possible explain that they won't. This is why I am against Wurm's atrocious "Your reputation is your own" because attacking someone's reputation online is just so easy. This whole thread seems to me to be an argument against auction houses, if the seller has no right to choose with whom they do business. Granted the "ignore bids from certain players" could be considered vague, but one could conversely consider it discreet. A PM asking "what certain players?" would have sorted it out early.
-
Not quite 100%. But pretty close.
-
Oh, nice. Middle-Earth-wise (though not LOTR) Gondolin would be fitting for me. Ancient and generally hiding.
-
Sticks and Stones
-
Or perhaps fewer immature players trying to sneak their "artwork" into maps.
-
Are the starter towns now just entirely cosmetic?
TheTrickster replied to Belrindor's topic in Town Square
I started as a newb in Haven's Landing in 2019 (I think) - and was already a kind of mixed bag. There was a forest for the woodcutting part of the tutorial, which had a very rapid self-replant. I can't remember if the mine was the same - but I think it would be a good idea to have a couple of low QL iron veins with unlimited resources. There were "public" garden plots for wemp etc, but no obvious (to a newb) instruction about replanting, so I am sure I picked a bunch of stuff I couldn't yet use and left bare dirt. As to infrastructure, there was almost nothing in town that I could use outside of the tutorial area (which was thoroughly littered with abandoned carts) so I basically wandered off looking to find somewhere to at least temporarily settle while I figured things out. I can't say much about other starter towns, except Sloping Sands seemed to me to be similar - not quite merely decorative but not much more than a spawn point. NFI starter towns were I think more basic but also a bit more novice friendly. I think starter towns almost need two distinct "districts" (or maybe completing the tutorial before selecting a server sorts this out). One for the very very basics of the tutorial, the other for early development and getting the hang of it in relative safety and abundance. -
Travel Between North and South Freedom Isles.
TheTrickster replied to Kingtren's topic in Town Square
From that response: So. The first point isn't a technical difficulty at all - so much as changes that "have yet to be implemented on SFI." Note that "this was done intentionally." "These changes have caused disparity..." simply means the same again; that changes implemented in NFI have not yet been implemented in SFI. The very language used indicates that these changes very well could be implemented on SFI. One could reasonably conclude that the inverse ("un-implementing" the change on NFI) would be as technically feasible. It would seem from a technical stand point, all that really needs to be done is to decide "new" or "old" in relation to each of changes and then implement that on whichever server doesn't have it. This could have been getting done since a couple of months after the NFI launch. It really would seem that all that would be required is the will to move forward. FWIW: I was a pretty strong naysayer to merging the clusters originally, but I have largely changed my position on that. I still think there is a risk to the culture of one cluster and the economy of the other - but I think it will be much smaller both in degree and duration than I was originally thinking. -
😁 So, like a sandbox for the sandbox? I think this is actually a great idea.
-
Travel Between North and South Freedom Isles.
TheTrickster replied to Kingtren's topic in Town Square
I don't think that that was ever actually stated - merely heavily implied. There was a statement that the code base for NFI had been changed and a promise to put together a list of what was changed but we have never had details. -
Remove "New Server: Cadence" from the Portal Map
TheTrickster replied to TheTrickster's topic in Suggestions & Ideas
Actually, there are staff signing up in the petition, so I don't think we can say "no response". There might not be an official response, but that isn't generally up to most of the staff.