Viceren
-
Content Count
180 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Viceren
-
-
-
SpoilerHope it helps.
-
Reasons why people choose PvE in Wurm over PvP:
- People like to create things for themselves. They do not like being forced to create things for others.
- People can securely own their own things. They do not have to pool their resources, nor is there active risk of their land being taken from them by deed drainers outside of PvP.
- People can ply their trades, and actively make money off of it. There is no intrinsic guilt associated with selling your wares outside of PvP.
- People can find belonging and community through alliances, without the hierarchical structure that comes with PvP's communities.
- People like to gather things for themselves. They do not like being forced to gather things for others.
- People dislike being 'given' things by people who hoard what the community itself creates. Even if they created it themselves, they still feel like they're being supported, and not self-sufficient.
- People like to create beautiful things. People dislike having to create spartan or brutalist structures out of defensive necessity.
- People like to create grandiose things. People dislike having to limit the size and scope of their creations due to defensive necessity.
- People hate the feeling of loss. Having things directly taken from you, either through the community hierarchy, or through the inevitable result of death out in the field, does not feel good to most people.
- People hate the feeling of being controlled. Having to change how you play specifically to avoid the inevitable result of death, or to appease the dictates of the community hierarchy, does not feel good to most people.
It's only natural people will pick PvE over PvP. I would argue that the collectivistic hierarchical structure of PvP is one of the greatest weaknesses towards it's ability to recruit, especially when compared to the clear individualistic capitalist structure of PvE.
Then there is the inevitable outcome for all FFA PvP, regardless of game, structure, or design:
One side wins. The other side quits. The winners quit out of boredom, because there is no one left to fight.
This thread pretty much exists because you guys are coming into the tailspin of population decline. I'm willing to bet one side won. Probably JK again since it's always been the heavy favorite of Rolf's. Now there's no MR or HoTS left to fight, right? Welcome to victory, enjoy the peace.
-
2 hours ago, Emi said:You may disagree but go back and look at the data. In a business sense it makes perfect logic, as it adds momentary life support.
Each time you do this however, a consolidation of the existing users would need to happen. So there is only ever 1 split.
Can even go further back, look at the launch of deli, cele, exo, or pristine/release, xanadu - before steam, the data is good.
Short term alt growth due to people actively land rushing.
Followed by long term population reduction. People who didn't get the shiny new land located close to the starter town often get envious and leave. Their previous deeds on the previous server no longer have the same prestige or perceived value, so they lose the reason to stick around.
Watching Indy go from 1000 people to 120 was mortifying. Seeing my alliance dry up over the span of two weeks was mortifying. Going from constant chatter in freedom, to a ghost town - was mortifying.Xanadu was a mistake, and new servers have constantly been a bandaid over a stab wound. Deeds aren't even the main source of revenue anymore due to the lack of merchant contracts, so it won't even have the same financial impact as it used to when even tiny deeds were 10s upfront. If they're desperate for ideas on how to monetize the game without pissing off a sizeable chunk of the fanbase, there are better methods and routes to go.
-
1 hour ago, Tor said:It's not a players fault for them to pay with 10-15 years work on their deed being deleted, for someone elses bad decisions.
Agreed. Let's not make the same bad decisions, shall we?
56 minutes ago, Tor said:When NFI opened, you guys all was raging
I was on hiatus when the Steam release came out. If I was around at the time, I would've been against the creation of new servers.
-
On 4/8/2024 at 10:26 PM, Elarael said:Also thanks to Ashlynne, Saturnfive, Killashandra, Liah, Viceren and Annuile who worked tirelessly through the whole impalong ..
I saw what you did there.
6 hours ago, Lovedragon said:Thank you to all who made it possible. It has been my very first impalong.
Who was the gem in charge of the bar?I'm more of a Lump than a Gem.
-
If Cadence feels overcrowded. Move to the open forests, steppe, desert and mountains away from the heartlands. If you're having a hard time finding unpopulated areas, I can point some out for you off of the top of my head: N9, P11, R13, J9, F13, E13, F14, E21, F22, M22, M23, M24, N24, P24.
The truth of the matter is. New servers afford people new opportunities to own prime real estate in a server destined to become overpopulated by rights of being new, that's why the land rush exists in the first place. The very people accusing others of conservatism only for the sake of personal prestige or profits, are ignoring their own prestige and profit motives for advocating for new servers, as the 'adventure' aspect could easily be replicated by moving to empty and barely touched servers like Xanadu and Harmony and walking out of the heartlands.
We have too much room (Even on Cadence), and too many empty servers.
We don't need new servers. We need proper incentives for people to play on servers other than Cadence, and probably more starting points to create new heartlands to encourage development of new areas in existing servers.
-
Rather than new servers. I think there needs to be incentives to play on servers that aren't just Cadence. All a new server will do, is kill Cadence's primacy as the top dog server, and make the new server the overcrowded one, while every other server languishes.
Maybe it's time to take a page out of Dark Age of Camelot's playbook. Add +XP% bonuses to people living on less populated servers. Make initial deeding cheaper. Make it easier to find treasure chests. Anything to lure people away from Cadence.
All this discussion is doing is showing me that people do not learn from Wurm's past mistakes. People forget how populated Wurm Online was before the catastrophe of Xanadu.
-
1 minute ago, Tukodama said:May I ask why? I have an alt running around Xan right now and it's great. Plenty of room to build and explore, some well established deeds and so far lots of helpful, nice players.
If this were 2014, and I were asked to answer this question on Xanadu's Freedom Chat, there'd be a 4 minute chat lag delay - followed by multiple server outages.
-
They asked this question back in January of 2014.
The answer was Xanadu.
This question was stupid, and the answer was worse. Xanadu was Wurm's greatest mistake.
-
Hey Red.
Deed Changes:
Replace Line 462 with:
Karak Kadrin 2839 1888 New Deed:
Karak Azgal 2795 1888 -
Thanks to everybody who came out! Enjoy the sleep bonus!
-
27 minutes ago, Morbidae said:I can help with Nahimanae I guess. Just a rather short notice this time.
It's either today - or Friday. I asked around and a few people in chat said they'd prefer it done today than have to wait till Friday. (There is a game called Millenia coming out tomorrow, and I'm told a lot of Wurmians are going to be missing next weekend due to this game. Myself likely included. >=P)
I'm making sure to give extra care to get as many benediction priests in as possible to make up for the short notice. Sorry again for springing it up, the cast literally just came up today. (I checked 5 hours ago and it wasn't up, but Rite of Spring showed up on the cast list at around 7, and I checked again and it was up!)
Sorry to all the Aussies and NZ'ers out there. I know you guys are the ones getting screwed the most by this announcement.
-
Reserved.
-
[07:48:11] You sense that Vynora is brimming with power. Maybe you can channel it somehow?
Location of cast: https://cadence.yaga.host/#2811,1812
Summons are available.
Current Benediction Priority List:
- Bloodpriest
- Flore
- xxpistolxx
Current Helper List:
- Greyjoy (Viceren)
- Nahimanae
Priority is first come, first serve. Current main caster (Greyjoy) has 90 channeling. So up to 10 links.
-
If this was ever implemented, you'd be in here complaining about how nobody wants you to live next to them.
-
16 minutes ago, Tor said:I was rising a point about something no one mentioned it before i posted, about the waystone and being ignored (that looks like he lied about idk)
Nothing to do with bias, i don't have a dog in any fights, i don't white knight for anyone, i am not upset. I don't have anything against blue or red, I was simply referring on the hypocricy of the players that say "deed it or lose it" in the forum and in same time manage to get themself mad in game about someone doing something i mentioned. (just in general, not necerssarly in this topic)
My bad. I guess I was the one making assumptions then. I had already removed what you quoted in an earlier edit before you even quoted it, because I even felt it was a bit too directed. Sorry dude.
My reasoning for deed it or lose it is simple. Possession is nine tenths of the law, and without it's existence in Wurm, we have no baseline to guard against disputes. People who exploit it should be punished, but due to how oversimplified the law actually is, that can be hard to prove. It sucks when it happens, but there really isn't a better system without casting a wide net of micro-rules that everybody would be expected to follow like a Wurm version of the Homeowners Association. Of course, I argue that such a scenario is far, far worse than the oversimplified rules we have now.
Everybody just needs to play nice in the sandbox
-
1 minute ago, Darnok said:They already have deeds, quite large ones, with a lot of resources. I'll check tomorrow to see if there's any marble there.
In principle, as I wrote earlier, everyone should first mine resources near their deed, trying to take resources so far from a developed deed should be treated as an aggressive action against another player.This is a PvE server, there is no logical justification for traveling such a distance and organizing a new deed with mass exploitation of resources, only to later throw these resources to ground in form of paving stones.
My area is about the same size as theirs is, and I have zero marble on site. I even hollowed out the mountain, and tapped out the Marble resources as quickly as they were found.
Even then, there are other factors you need to take into account rather than just typing. For instance: QL is also a factor - even for marble. If I wanted 99ql marble, but my deed only had 50ql. I'll have to go off deed to get it. Due to how rare marble is in some regions (Mine has virtually none), you might have to travel far outside of your comfort zone to get what you need.
Because there are no rules to mining off deed, so long as it's not in a person's perimeter, or you didn't have to bash down a mine door to get at it. I see no qualms in mining down veins off deed - no matter how far away it is from your initial home.
-
7 minutes ago, Simyaci said:I've seen people complain about tree cutting when it happens 500-1000 tiles from their deed to a forest that was planted by the person who cuts the trees 50 tiles from his deed. Not once but several times.
Those people exist and while I don't know if some of these people say deed it or lose it, they probably do because it is cool to say it and feels good to say it.
That doesn't mean it is not the correct way to go about it in Wurm. Deed it or lose it. We have to stand by that. If we don't, we go down a slippery slope that'll keep bringing endless drama, infighting and degradation of trust towards the staff.
Oof. I had this happen to me too with a Walnut Forest.
I try to be polite and ask the locals if it's okay if I woodcut grind on the walnut forest in their vicinity now. It shouldn't be an issue anyways since I only chop down overgrown and very old trees. The forest regrows really quick if you don't clear cut it.
Recently though, I just decided to replant every off-deed area with walnut trees for future woodcutters to enjoy. I encourage others to do the same whenever possible. Kill the evil fir/olive forests, and replace them with walnut.
-
22 minutes ago, Ekcin said:Btw., I dislike the "deed it or lose it"
Honestly, the concept of deed it or lose it, is an oversimplification of property rights. There are many ways to secure permissions on your property off deed, and it can be enforced by GM's. (Mining enclosures that're willfully broken into, can be viewed as harassment, but I've had that case ruled against me twice now, so I wouldn't count on it 100% of the time. Including once when I was securing a dragon on deed, that tunneled to the perimeter.)
I also fully understand the horror of permissions failing (Old Bug regarding highways and BCU's, not intentionally exploited by the other user), and someone making off with tens of thousands of high QL silver and gold lumps - and while I'd love to get angry over it, I didn't protect it properly by putting it on a deed, or in a building/enclosure. The other party didn't break any rules, and the person who did it, could very easily make the case that they assumed the BCU was abandoned. I was in the wrong for not properly securing my goods, and I learned my lesson real quick.
13 minutes ago, Tor said:Oh, same. I understand why some people would love to use this opportunity to chant the same words over and over and shout at everyone that ignores it.
Regardless of my "apparently" lack of understanding about how much someone else is being aggressive or ridiculuss, i can speak my mind myself pretty well without having to resort to oversized bold letter or repeat exact same thing that been addressed by 20 other people before me already.
I've seen a fair share of "Deed it or lose it" warriors that turn into overgrown babbies when someone cut a tree around their deed, build a shed, mine something, cast a rite without your approval, build a highway, kill a mob, entering local, selling for cheaper, selling to wrong person, selling to a "private slayer" etc etc
I agree that deed it or lose it can be exploited by bad actors. However, in this case, the mantra could never be more correct.
Being upset over "Deed it or lose it" because of previous bad actors who used it exploitatively, does not reduce the validity of the mantra in this case.
That vein wasn't his, even if he wanted it to be his. Mine it before someone else does. Protect it if you can't. Or - finally - Deed it or lose it.
-
If you do not have permissions over something. It doesn't belong to you. The fastest and easiest way to garner immutable permissions, is to deed over it. That's what "Deed it or lose it" means.
Unless dictated directly by a GM first (Usually to avoid harassment) - Off deed fences can be bashed down, and the GM's will likely do nothing about it. Even mine door permissions can be legally circumvented in some cases, unless you spend time adding supports to every wall in your off-deed mine. Even then, someone else can easily just deed over that mine, and tear down the supports 'legally' - because they deeded it, and thus, OWN IT.
You can not claim that which you do not own, until you own it. Wanting something, does not mean you own it. If something is in the public, and someone else takes it, and you want it. You are then not entitled to call that person names for taking it before you were ready to do so yourself.
You can solve your issues very easily by deeding over something that you want. If you can not afford it. That is not another person's fault, nor problem.
If you truly, honestly feel that this was a case of harassment, your first step should've been to report it to the GM's. Not to name and shame on the forums.
-
Mar 15, 2024, 12:14:45 AM [Redacted] founded Hunters Lodge
The beauty of this whole argument, is that Darnok moved in 8 days ago, and immediately 'called out his intrusive neighbour'.
I can understand why some people would love to use this opportunity to call out people they see as 'staff' and 'deserving of criticism because they hold power', but you are failing to understand how aggressive the original poster is being.
If you can't understand why this is ridiculous. I'll gladly move in directly next to you, and start posting angry threads anytime you cut down a tree, or mine a vein in my general vicinity.
This thread is a joke.
Deed it or lose it.
If you can't do that much, at least handle your neighborly disputes like an adult, instead of petulantly screaming on the forums with callouts. This thread should be locked.
-
2 hours ago, Chakron said:nonsense, these threads are important places for Wurm's xenophobes to post "deed it or lose it" like it's an admirable policy instead of a bandaid
Deed it or lose it.
-
4 hours ago, Darnok said:I suggest you to rather donate charity organization instead of trying to ruin my day.
I hope we won't see each other again at local chat, have a nice day.
This was so passive aggressive that it inspired me to go to mine the marble outside of your deed.
This is Wurm. Deed it or lose it.
When will a new map be available?
in Town Square
Posted
Every new player would be relegated to the non-new server, and won't get to experience the same game the rest of us will be playing. This means they'll feel immediately that they have to pay upfront to actually 'play' Wurm, and thus, will feel cheated when they were originally promised a free experience. This just reminds me of all of those awful gacha games out there, and it leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth just thinking about it.
Veteran players will still bemoan the existence of a new server. Even one with a price tag on it, will effectively cause the exact same problems that I've spoken of before. Older servers will not have the same value as they did before, the population will still be funneled directly into a single server (The newest one), and this becomes a quitting point for players who can't get the premium locations on the newer server and suddenly find their old deeds to be valueless in comparison to how they saw it before. You can't offer players this kind of quitting point when the sunk cost fallacy is such a driving factor for people's long term deed upkeep goals.
I understand people want to make Wurm succeed, but they need to focus on monetizing other desires. Namely the desire to stand out, or be different, especially in what they can build.