An Easy Solution for All Server Crossing Scenarios Now and Forever

[Eyesgood 2,121]

In software development, hard-coded decisions are always less attractive than customer-driven choices.  With that in mind...

 

I suggest a change to the hard-coded server crossing solution we have now to the following:

 

When a player reaches the edge of a map (any edge of any Freedom map), rather than immediately transporting the player to the existing hard-coded map and coast, a window would pop up with the following options:

 

===============================

Where would you like to go?

 

Select Map:  <List of Freedom Maps>

 

Select Coast:  <North, South, East, West>

 

OK

===============================

 

Clicking OK will take the player to a constant fixed location at the MIDDLE of the chosen coast of the chosen map.  EDIT:  I would guess the existing code used to prevent stacked boats on crossing would still apply.

 

This would completely eliminate the isolation of some maps from other maps and alleviate the single-direction issues that currently exist.  It would equalize the value of every coastline of every map and make the need for working the position of existing and new maps unimportant and unnecessary.  I also think it would not be too difficult to code and make the entire border-crossing issue fixed permanently going forward.

 

Discuss.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Eyesgood

[KanePT 699]

In a way, that's more desirable. On the other hand it breaks immersion (well not as much as being dcd at transfer, or kicked off the boat, but...).

Not only that but from several standpoints there are valid reasons why servers are placed like that. Like why the chose to put pristine and release at one end to keep their isolation although they're now connected, they might have reasons to keep it like this at other servers.

But i'd agree to this specially on servers that are on the same "level". Atm would only be applicable to the current freedom cluster minus chaos, but in the future who knows?

The idea would be that if the current server connection was a table, you'd be able to use this option traveling within the same column, but would have to use the "normal" method traveling between columns. That is if the option wasn't global for some sort of balance requirements.

[Kegan 3,926]

I had suggested this before but it was not with the ability to pick your input spot. In my suggestion before was if you left on the west of the server you would end up on the east of the one you picked. So if i left say Celebration to Xanadu and i left Celebration from the north i would spill into the south sea of Xanadu. Now if i left Celebration on the west i would end up on the east sea of Xanadu. 

 

I also had a side suggestion i guess you can call it where you could set your ship to a destination so if i set my ship on Celebration to Xanadu then each time i left Celebration it would automatically take me to Xanadu. Once i was on Xanadu i could then set the destination on the ship to Celebration. Now with both servers set i could sail back and forth between celebration and xanadu with no more input as the boat would tell the server where it was going. 

 

I do however see the troubles too so realistically i don't ever seeing this happening. I think the best we could ask for is faster top speeds and less wind drag on ships.  

Edited June 2, 2014 by Kegan

[KanePT 699]

Automove is nice, but should be limited to one destination only, no round trips.

[Arkhir 280]

This isn't the ultimate solution as it won't work for pvp, sorry.

[KanePT 699]

This isn't the ultimate solution as it won't work for pvp, sorry.

Why?

Afraid not to be able to run from a fight as efficiently?

Also this is mostly for Freedom, not applicable on Epic, since there the connections need to be fixed, as to avoid too easy raiding from home server to home server. And really connecting 4 servers, isn't really a big headache.

Edited June 2, 2014 by KanePT

[Eyesgood 2,121]

This isn't the ultimate solution as it won't work for pvp, sorry.

 

I was careful to stipulate this as a Freedom solution.  I really do not think Epic needs this.

[Rathgar 959]

Id like to get that on my deed too, I walk out the front door of my house and I get a menu telling me to where I want to go, and I get teleported inmediately after.

 

 

but -1

[Eyesgood 2,121]

Id like to get that on my deed too, I walk out the front door of my house and I get a menu telling me to where I want to go, and I get teleported inmediately after.

 

 

but -1

 

Your sarcasm is cute but doesn't help fringe locations like Celebration south shore, Chaos west shore, etc. deal with the isolation that the current code creates.  Server crossing is a legitimate issue that needs to be addressed in a long-term strategy and I am trying to offer a possible one that's fair.  Besides, we already have teleporting as you describe via several options in Wurm (death spawn at deed, tele over to Epic and back, GV tele to chosen destination, Karma port, etc.). My suggestion is merely an extension of an already existing game mechanic which will greatly improve travel without removing the immersive experience of it.

[Rathgar 959]

Your sarcasm is cute but doesn't help fringe locations like Celebration south shore, Chaos west shore, etc. deal with the isolation that the current code creates.  Server crossing is a legitimate issue that needs to be addressed in a long-term strategy and I am trying to offer a possible one that's fair.  Besides, we already have teleporting as you describe via several options in Wurm (death spawn at deed, tele over to Epic and back, GV tele to chosen destination, Karma port, etc.). My suggestion is merely an extension of an already existing game mechanic which will greatly improve travel without removing the immersive experience of it.

 

Of the examples you named of "it" being already in-game, none is valid.  Where people put their deeds is an in-game choice that you make, what server you establish at, where in the map you are located, and how far or close you are from other servers, etc. are factors that players choose.   I feel incovenienced because I have to walk or ride to the market, because I set my deed far from it.

 

And no, the mechanic as you describe it, doesnt exists in the game.

 

On a diferent note, I dont think Chaos should even be connected to the PvE cluster.

 

Diferent distribution of servers for easier sailing I think would be the most appropiate solution.

[Blasius 4]

-1

[KanePT 699]

Of the examples you named of "it" being already in-game, none is valid.  Where people put their deeds is an in-game choice that you make, what server you establish at, where in the map you are located, and how far or close you are from other servers, etc. are factors that players choose.   I feel incovenienced because I have to walk or ride to the market, because I set my deed far from it.

 

And no, the mechanic as you describe it, doesnt exists in the game.

 

On a diferent note, I dont think Chaos should even be connected to the PvE cluster.

 

Diferent distribution of servers for easier sailing I think would be the most appropiate solution.

Actually there exists NUMEROUS teleport mechanics, including the ones he described, even more Epic as portals linking different servers. Such portals were present in Inde and chaos before deli was released, and were the only link between the servers.

[Marshlander 188]

-1

 

What's so bad about not all locations having the same accessibility? Now we have a spectrum of locations to choose from including community hubs and fringe experiences. Fringe server will end up having smaller, possibly tighter communities and perhaps a more frontier experience.

 

Why try to even all of that out and eliminate distinction, when everyone is free to choose where they want to live?

 

I do think we need more incentives to interact with the native population of the servers, to make stopovers more interesting. Part of that is up to the players, but also we need more elaborate game systems that encourage social interactions (guest logs, tipping urns, just two things off the top of my head).

[Rathgar 959]

Actually there exists NUMEROUS teleport mechanics, including the ones he described, even more Epic as portals linking different servers. Such portals were present in Inde and chaos before deli was released, and were the only link between the servers.

There are many ways of teleporting.  But how many allow transfering of bulk items and its absolutely free of any kind of expense from the player?   The GV teleports is a silly example, those only take you out of the tutorial, Karma teleport uses.... karma, Epic-freedom portals have a cooldown and dont allow transfering anything, in practice its not even a teleport.

 

Respawning at one deed after you die I dont think counts as a teleport.

 

I know there are many ways to transport oneself to other locations, but all have their specific situations and/or their cost.   The described interface by the OP makes the world small, in a world that is already pretty small (untill I actually see Xanadu).

 

The point brought by Marshlander is a very good one too, it adds diversity.   But Im not here to be convinced or to convince others, I am just stating my personal point of view, and how I think the game not only doesnt need this suggestion, but not having it makes wurm better.

[Mark 47]

Add ship enchants so we can go faster.

[KanePT 699]

-1

 

What's so bad about not all locations having the same accessibility? Now we have a spectrum of locations to choose from including community hubs and fringe experiences. Fringe server will end up having smaller, possibly tighter communities and perhaps a more frontier experience.

 

Why try to even all of that out and eliminate distinction, when everyone is free to choose where they want to live?

 

I do think we need more incentives to interact with the native population of the servers, to make stopovers more interesting. Part of that is up to the players, but also we need more elaborate game systems that encourage social interactions (guest logs, tipping urns, just two things off the top of my head).

1) The servers are already settled, so there will be no frontier experience, no, fighter community. The communities are already settled, and except for the ones moving onto xanadu, nothing will change about their behaviour except the way they move around.

You talk about choice, but there's no real choice here. There's lots of people that moved to the west coast of their servers because it was where the best trade routes were because it linked to chaos, thus being the fastest connection between all other servers, now the game was changed, and people can't do anything about it.

 

There are many ways of teleporting.  But how many allow transfering of bulk items and its absolutely free of any kind of expense from the player?   The GV teleports is a silly example, those only take you out of the tutorial, Karma teleport uses.... karma, Epic-freedom portals have a cooldown and dont allow transfering anything, in practice its not even a teleport.

 

Respawning at one deed after you die I dont think counts as a teleport.

 

I know there are many ways to transport oneself to other locations, but all have their specific situations and/or their cost.   The described interface by the OP makes the world small, in a world that is already pretty small (untill I actually see Xanadu).

 

The point brought by Marshlander is a very good one too, it adds diversity.   But Im not here to be convinced or to convince others, I am just stating my personal point of view, and how I think the game not only doesnt need this suggestion, but not having it makes wurm better.

1) The suggestion doesn't actually change much, except wasted time.

2) Small? Are you freaking joking? What's the point on having to spend 4+ hours on a trip when you can do only very limited things? This, unlike what Marshlander says would actually ENCOURAGE people to travel, since it would eliminate the need to spend more time doing nothing while crossing the servers that are simply IN THE WAY, without any use for them

For people with a life that would be like *login*>get on boat> Press Autmove> Rotate boat> Wait> Wait>Transfer server>Wait>Wait>Wait>Wait>Transfer server>Wait>Wait>Wait>Arrive at final server>Move to location>Wait>Wait>Arrive>*Logout*

Yay what a productive day in Wurm. All along staring at a SAIL.

And if you get bad wind? Might as well just start a new home wherever you are when the wind changes.

Edited June 2, 2014 by KanePT

[Eyesgood 2,121]

There are many ways of teleporting.  But how many allow transfering of bulk items and its absolutely free of any kind of expense from the player?   The GV teleports is a silly example, those only take you out of the tutorial, Karma teleport uses.... karma, Epic-freedom portals have a cooldown and dont allow transfering anything, in practice its not even a teleport.

 

Respawning at one deed after you die I dont think counts as a teleport.

 

I know there are many ways to transport oneself to other locations, but all have their specific situations and/or their cost.   The described interface by the OP makes the world small, in a world that is already pretty small (untill I actually see Xanadu).

 

The point brought by Marshlander is a very good one too, it adds diversity.   But Im not here to be convinced or to convince others, I am just stating my personal point of view, and how I think the game not only doesnt need this suggestion, but not having it makes wurm better.

 

Small?  Try sailing down the west or east coasts of Independence in a Cog against the wind, or better yet, circumnavigate it (been there, done that multiple times).  The world of Wurm is anything BUT small.  It is huge!  I do see the point of diversity and the idea of "remote" locations is not bad at all - it is a good thing.  However, no matter how remote you are, players can still get there if they choose to go there.  And that is really at the crux of my OP.  Players get to choose their destination.  

 

One thing that always suffers when a new map is opened is the economies of existing maps.  At least opening up borders as I have described would help local economies no matter where they are.

[Marshlander 188]

Travel is not the getting from A to B in the most convenient way, it's what happens on the journey.

 

And that's essentially where your beef lies: it's too boring.

 

Your solution is to eliminate/minimize the time spent on that activity. If we did that with every activity in Wurm that was boring, what would actually remain of the game?

 

Sea voyages are one of the great themes for adventure, excitement, surprise (and yes, seasickness and boredom, too, sometimes). Let's think of how the state of sea travel can be made to fit. Your suggestion doesn't attempt to do so.

[Ecrir 887]

I think this is the best long term solution for travel between servers (imagine the game having 100 servers and you will see why the travel system currently in place scales horribly). Immersion wise it also makes more sense than the current setup, as why can't I sail directly from for example Indy to Xanadu? We're talking about islands on a vast ocean here, so there being only one route is just completely immersion breaking. This isn't Eve with jumpgates...

 

But while I think it is the best solution, I would personally do it slightly differently. For example I would add in that if you leave a server then that server remembers from where you left. If you decide to return to it later then you will return to that spot. This prevents somebody from hopping from Indy to another server and then back to Indy just to change which side of Indy he is on. It would be really easy to for example head from south to north otherwise. When travelling to a server on which you have never been I'd make the arrival coast either random, or the opposite of the coast you left (so if you left by going east, then you'd arrive on the west coast of your destination server).

[KanePT 699]

Travel is not the getting from A to B in the most convenient way, it's what happens on the journey.

 

And that's essentially where your beef lies: it's too boring.

 

Your solution is to eliminate/minimize the time spent on that activity. If we did that with every activity in Wurm that was boring, what would actually remain of the game?

 

Sea voyages are one of the great themes for adventure, excitement, surprise (and yes, seasickness and boredom, too, sometimes). Let's think of how the state of sea travel can be made to fit. Your suggestion doesn't attempt to do so.

Unless you turn this to pirates online, having a quick travel is the best solution.

[Ecrir 887]

Travel is not the getting from A to B in the most convenient way, it's what happens on the journey.

 

And that's essentially where your beef lies: it's too boring.

 

Your solution is to eliminate/minimize the time spent on that activity. If we did that with every activity in Wurm that was boring, what would actually remain of the game?

 

Sea voyages are one of the great themes for adventure, excitement, surprise (and yes, seasickness and boredom, too, sometimes). Let's think of how the state of sea travel can be made to fit. Your suggestion doesn't attempt to do so.

 

Problem is, what can you really add to make sea voyages interesting? For it to be an insteresting adventure you would require interesting spots to come accross on your voyage, which screams instanced areas to come accross while moving from one server to another (but if they are interesting enough to visit then you just turn your ship around after arriving on the other server in order to do another instance, etc). If you don't use instanced areas then people will deed those interesting areas and gone is your adventure. Combat with sea creatures isn't all that interesting as combat in wurm really isn't all that interesting at the moment, so that's not going to help. Mini games will probably get annoying or dull after a while unless they are really well designed, probably not a good idea with the size of the dev team. I believe that in books/movies the main reasons why sea voyages are interseting is due to the crews and the interesting spots they get to visit. The problem is that in Wurm you are often on your own while sailing, so gone is the interacting, and the interesting spots are deeded more often than not, or they aren't anything special compared to what you have on your home server.

 

So I'd make the argument that there's little that can be done to make sea voyages more interesting than watching a movie. Thus ways to minimize the time spend on those voyages is a better approach than trying to make the voyages themselves more interesting than watching a movie.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Ecrir

[Druidnature 1,118]

I'm half half here. And using the saying "but what about people way off in the distance???" Doesn't work. People live there, and for a reason, they knew what they signed up for, chances are the move to the selected spot to be away from people. (South celebration, north Inde, ect) and this would remove the reason they likely live there.

On the other hand, traveling by ship is.... Crap.

My horse can go 40\km, yet my boat only goes 8-10 on average? Heck with realism here, it's not fun! It's not a part of gameplay many (any?) people enjoy. It should be fun to sail around on that boat you spent 3 hard days working on, but alas, that is not the case.

I'd personally like to see boats go a LOT faster. Winds not have as much of a effect (at least for going against it) or the easy way out, the server hopping. (Though I think choosing which coast you'll be on is asking a bit to much)

Can't really say +1 here, but I want to see ships and traveling made to be fun, not depressing when I have to take a 6 hour trip to north celebration.

[Marshlander 188]

For it to be an insteresting adventure you would require interesting spots to come accross on your voyage, which screams instanced areas to come accross while moving from one server to another (but if they are interesting enough to visit then you just turn your ship around after arriving on the other server in order to do another instance, etc).

Perhaps not instanced, but an ocean server with just smaller islands where you can't deed? Essentially the hunting server that people have asked for. Having a whole world geography consist of semi-squarish islands that are sized in 8, 16, 32km length in one dimension.

 

 

Combat with sea creatures isn't all that interesting as combat in wurm really isn't all that interesting at the moment, so that's not going to help. Mini games will probably get annoying or dull after a while unless they are really well designed, probably not a good idea with the size of the dev team

Agreed.

 

 

I believe that in books/movies the main reasons why sea voyages are interseting is due to the crews and the interesting spots they get to visit. The problem is that in Wurm you are often on your own while sailing, so gone is the interacting, and the interesting spots are deeded more often than not, or they aren't anything special compared to what you have on your home server.

Good points. So one thing we'd need is to move around the ship perhaps, interact with other passengers, continue crafting, etc, when we're not contributing actively to the ship's movement.

 

The other part - and that would be needed for land travel and more interaction in general - is to make it worthwhile to visit other player's deeds. In this game not moving around is rewarded too much (grinding, sleep bonus). Some kind of reward (call it inspiration) from seeing far away places or new types of layouts would be interesting to make up for the effort of travelling. Regional resources have been mentioned time and again, but conceiving something that's interesting enough while not limiting if you don't have access to it is hard. I mentioned some indirect ways of interacting (guest logs, ways to leave a tip - with some subsidy by the king's fund).

 

But all of this isn't easy (see title of this thread).

[eyerobot 202]

I don't agree with this. What I would like to see is the direction your heading actually work like it's supposed to. One giant grid for all servers, And if you cross into a certain set of coords, Your put on that server. Crossing wherever you want at any time destroys the linear feel to travel.

[KunAlt 844]

Of the examples you named of "it" being already in-game, none is valid.  Where people put their deeds is an in-game choice that you make, what server you establish at, where in the map you are located, and how far or close you are from other servers, etc. are factors that players choose.   I feel incovenienced because I have to walk or ride to the market, because I set my deed far from it.

 

And no, the mechanic as you describe it, doesnt exists in the game.

 

On a diferent note, I dont think Chaos should even be connected to the PvE cluster.

 

Diferent distribution of servers for easier sailing I think would be the most appropiate solution.

 

Wen I first logged in wurm, what server to spawn was just a random choice between 4 PvE servers, there was not a single warning on the tutorial about how this choice will affect your future, there was no indication about how the server chain was stabilished, there was not a single clue about the posibility of switching servers by sailing, etc. etc.

 

Of course that was years ago, so maybe now in the tutorial there is a warning sign, given advise of what server to choose, or at least warning you if you choose Celebration you will be crippled by living in the abandoned corner of wurm and if you want to trade with any new future server you need to be prepared to sail 12-15 real life hours to come back home after delivery of 500 bricks.