Sign in to follow this  
Aeris

Tragedy at Silent Hill

Recommended Posts

Great to see Enki and the team are working on it.


I'm sure they will figure out the proper wording, so this type of issue can be resolved swiftly by GM's in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye this definitely appears to be in violation of the Freedom cluster, and good to see the GMs are reviewing the matter.


 


If it was on a pvp server, it would fall into a grey area in some ethical aspects. However, its a tactic that has been used by pretty much every faction ever, so people that complain would be typically hypocritical. Overall not an unusual tactic for the server.


 


EDIT: Basically if someone wishes to do stuff like this ingame, thats what the pvp servers are for.


Edited by Klaa
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been actively discussing this issue overnight as there are several conflicts that we s a team must address.  I feel this is not in the spirit of Freedom Isles and is griefing.  As Wurm Online is a sandbox game, we want to be very careful about developing our rules as we prefer not to interfere with the open capabilities in the game world. 

 

This is not the last word on this issue.  We are still reviewing certain aspects of this.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandbox open game should mean anything is allowed.


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandbox open game should mean anything is allowed.

 

That's something you'd never say if someone'd harassed you personally in the game, or stolen stuff worth several hundred euros from you because of a flawed mechanic. It's easy to sit on the stands going "sucks to be you", but if you were in our shoes you'd look at it a bit differently. I don't want this to be the game where you don't dare to hang out with anyone because every deed setting allows for five different abusable features which the culprit gets away with when abusing.

Edited by Aeris
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandbox open game should mean anything is allowed.

 

Which is what the pvp cluster/servers are for, and the original overall design. Something akin to the varying degrees of security space in Eve Online.

 

The Freedom cluster was created some time afterwards for the more carebear player, which turned out to be a substantial enough portion of the playerbase.

 

EDIT: Course a pvp player has to be ready to be both raider and victim. Even the most badass pvper can be caught in a white-mode state of readiness. Consequences to actions and all that, besides matters being chaotic enough.

 

People who abuse loopholes typically are not ready to be raided.

Edited by Klaa
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't that we "left it open", but there are no warnings in the permissions that say that you can bash houses you are not on the writ for so we didn't care much about that setting. It was just generally assumed that only the mayor would have such omnipotent power over deed houses since you need to have the setting checked for lots of other occasions. We've really tried our hardest to keep all the settings up to date so that none of the harmful ones would backfire like this. Can't have everything unchecked for new villagers since that'd end up severly crippling them, leaving them unable to do anything.

 

Thank you, and all others, for the concern you've shown for our losses. If nothing else we can at least raise awareness about the flawed mechanics at work here...

 

I agree that it was logical to assume that houses can not be bashed even with destroyed option on, when not on the writ or holding it, since housewrits are in general higher in permission settings than those of a deed (unless unfinished).

As example you can also NOT repair house walls on a deed when you are NOT on the writ of that house! even if deed setting is allowing to build on that same deed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.jpg?w=400&c=1


 


My condolences to the affected. 


Edited by demondan
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GMs should drop the policing the players only, when the tools are given to the players themselves to keep the law and order.. Until that the non-interference policy just means, that bunch of sheep have been thrown to some wolves. Hopefully this incident will be the reason for some changes (rules.. whatever..).


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree that this is indeed a shameful thing that has happened, as all stealing is. But how does this differ from someone who leaves a boat or a cart or a wagon with no lock on it but is on deed. Without a lock anyone can still pull it, or hitch animals to it and take it. But when someone posts about that happening they get jumped on by everyone and their brother about how THEY are at fault for not having a lock on it, even though the stupid things are ON DEED with all correct deed settings set.


 


This case the deed settings were not set proper. That is not the fault of those that took the items, the mayor of that deed gave the permissions to do so, thus its not stealing. Just like when my cart is driven off deed and emptied out of its content because I did not follow the game mechanics and lock it, I'm told by GM's and people on the forums that it should have been locked,its my fault and I just have to accept it.


 


The intent in all cases is the same, the motive is the same, that is to take something that does not belong to you. One should not be worse then another, just because the volume of damage done is greater then those of us that have lost other items on deed, does not make it any less important.


 


I say these things because if the GM team is indeed going to look into this case and the game mechanics that are involved, they should show no favoritism and look into every case when the game mechanics are abused and items are stolen. I hope they do look in to this case and put safe guards in place, but if they do then they also need to put the same safe guards in place for other areas of the game where people have things stolen.


  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I don't think there should be special treatment. I think justice should be had by all.


  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this was a quite a sadness-flavored christmas sandwich for us to snack on. Loss of items is a familiar thing but it feels especially rotten when you've had someone go through literally all your belongings and grab what they like with the sole intent of making a quick buck.

Hopefully we can reach some form of positive conclusion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's something you'd never say if someone'd harassed you personally in the game, or stolen stuff worth several hundred euros from you because of a flawed mechanic. It's easy to sit on the stands going "sucks to be you", but if you were in our shoes you'd look at it a bit differently. I don't want this to be the game where you don't dare to hang out with anyone because every deed setting allows for five different abusable features which the culprit gets away with when abusing.

 

It's not a flawed mechanic, the settings are working perfectly to allow any combination of deed rights to give majors the most possible freedom for giving permissions to their villagers. It's once again simple preventable player error.

 

Wurm is complicated and hard, that's a good thing. It allows variety, challenge and freedom. Learn from your mistakes and play better next time.

Edited by Judicator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would allow variety and freedom if it didn't leave a lot of things unexplained. Right now we can't be sure what deed settings allows what.


Like, pick-up option on deed overrides planting (yep!), so your lamps/hota statues may be gone next day just because you had it allowed for someone. (or, as it was in my case, your permission settings on deed got bugged)


Edited by Samool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a flawed mechanic, the settings are working perfectly to allow any combination of deed rights to give majors the most possible freedom for giving permissions to their villagers. It's once again simple preventable player error.

 

Wurm is complicated and hard, that's a good thing. It allows variety, challenge and freedom. Learn from your mistakes and play better next time.

what about house writ settings are ALWAYS above deed settings usually? except for bashing them....for some weird reason....you can not even repair them without being on the writ...

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rules need to be covered by the "intent" of the rules themselves, in most cases as the primary consideration when making a ruling. 


 


For example:


 


PVP: Open sandbox, non-interference, everything allowed, minimal GM involvement


 


PVE: Safe place for people to build, craft, be part of a community, goal is to let people have fun without pain


 


Now those definitions can be worked on and some exceptions need to apply however let's use them as rough guides for a few issues mentioned recently


 


1) Cart borrowed - no lock - PVE server - Appeal to common sense, ask for return - Ask GM for help - cart is returned


    Cart borrowed - no lock - PVP server - Protect your stuff - no appeal - cart remains with new owner


 


2) New villager joins village - welcomed with open arms - robs the village - PVE - All stolen items returned - player banned/banished from minimally the island on second offence


   New villager joins village - welcomed with open arms - robs the village - PVP - Allowed behaviour - no action taken


 


3) Horses killed on a deed - PVE  - Restitiution provided by offender - player banned/banished from minimally the island on second offence


    Horses killed on a deed - PVP - Tough luck


 


4) New highway in perimeter - PVE - Work towards a solution that works for all balancing deed owner (who pays for perimeter) with community at large (that wants highway) - Find compromises - GM helps to encourage compromise - ultimately makes ruling


 


In PVE I have to rely on the Rule of Law because I am not provided the tools to take matters into my own hands and serve up justice.


 


In PVP I have those tools (or so I understand - grin)


 


The intent has to play the key role. The game mechanics need to eventually reach the point where they properly support the intent. It isn't enough to say the game works that way - if it allows violation of the intent and spirit behind the PVE areas then the game has critical bugs in those areas that need to be given priority for fixing.


 


Aeris:


 


I will also be sending a few items on your list. Possibly not as high quality or enchant as what you lost but hopefully useful just the same.


 


~Nappy

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it is true that the deed settings allowed this to happen, it is also true that this culprit had knowledge of the fact that this could be taken advantage of and joined this deed with the intent, knowledge and ability (skill level) to bash these many various individual house walls down in order to make these houses no longer secure so that the items within them could be freely taken (stolen). An accepted (condoned) tactic upon the pvp servers but an unintended way to use this ability upon the PvE servers, which in turn justifies GM intervention and further consideration in this instance.


 


Common sense (a hard concept for some to swallow) applied to the PvE servers would plainly point out that players (victimizers, scammers, thieves) of this sort are not desirable upon the PvE servers and disrupt the concept of its community; therefore, GM actions should be taken to remove them from the game, as they have intentionally abused the concepts of the PvE servers. In the process all items should be returned to those from whom they have been taken (stolen).


 


In the interim we should all be made aware of who this culprit is, as well as associated collaborative accounts, so we know who to avoid contact with and more importantly know who Not to purchase these items from. I am now very suspicious (being that way generally anyway) of all Sales and Auction threads that are selling any items resembling these descriptions and would advise others to avoid buying items from other sellers who are not well known generally within the forums for doing so.


 


Hopefully in the end, at least this one miscreant and any associates will be removed for the game, as a testament that the Wurm PvE lands are not designed or tolerate these types of scammer/stealers within them.


 


=Ayes=


  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would allow variety and freedom if it didn't leave a lot of things unexplained. Right now we can't be sure what deed settings allows what.

Like, pick-up option on deed overrides planting (yep!), so your lamps/hota statues may be gone next day just because you had it allowed for someone. (or, as it was in my case, your permission settings on deed got bugged)

 

I'm really sorry to hear that, but also thankful to you for sharing this bit of information. I'm sure that lots of others are unaware of what settings override which

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say: Ban the offenders, because I believe there were more than one (or one with multiple alts) and then let GMs hold a public auction for all their valuables, which can then be used to help compensate victims of crimes like these.  Naturally return any stolen property they were carrying first.


 


This would be the "Your Account(s) will be Liquidated!" clause.


  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this getting so much attention? Its not like this is the first time something like this has ever happened. Why is Enki suddely saying its not in the spirit of Freedom? Tich said that putting in a new permissions set in was what she wanted to work on this coming year. So is all this attention just because the items are for sale on playerauctions or whatever the site was? Otherwise why all the fuss about it? Im not saying it was good that it happened or that something shouldnt be done, just asking why now? Whats so special about this instance vs all the other times this has happened?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this getting so much attention? Its not like this is the first time something like this has ever happened. Why is Enki suddely saying its not in the spirit of Freedom? Tich said that putting in a new permissions set in was what she wanted to work on this coming year. So is all this attention just because the items are for sale on playerauctions or whatever the site was? Otherwise why all the fuss about it? Im not saying it was good that it happened or that something shouldnt be done, just asking why now? Whats so special about this instance vs all the other times this has happened?

 

There's nothing special about this, and that's the problem. We're tired of being victims of flawed and unintuitive game mechanics that leave us robbed of our possessions. This isn't the first instance in which a player has entered a deed with the clear intent of abusing as many functions as possible and we want an end to this kind of behaviour. As it is now Wurm Online has quite a lot of bugs and otherwise abusable functions and settings and the culprits in cases like these are so certain they'll get away with it that they don't even try to deny their crimes.

 

There's nothing special about this case, quite the opposite - It's becoming too common. We cannot defend ourselves against illogical mechanics so we need help when events like this take place.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This case the deed settings were not set proper. That is not the fault of those that took the items, the mayor of that deed gave the permissions to do so, thus its not stealing. Just like when my cart is driven off deed and emptied out of its content because I did not follow the game mechanics and lock it, I'm told by GM's and people on the forums that it should have been locked,its my fault and I just have to accept it.

 

The majority of people who play this game know right from wrong, those who don't have a whole separate set of issues..  Someone intentionally going out of their way to break down someones on deed walls to loot their items is not the spirit of the PVE servers. It is stealing whether the mayor messed up settings or not. I do think the mayor needs to have some culpability in cases like this, but I believe the big difference in your scenarios are that ppl are told time and time again to lock up their carts/boats etc or tuff luck. That helps keep GM support tickets from piling up for simple stuff. Deed permissions, especially for a new deed owner, are not always clear as to what does what, and you have to learn some lessons the hard way. IMO in any case where it's clear malicious intent and not just n00bery it should be looked into and dealt with.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this getting so much attention? Its not like this is the first time something like this has ever happened. Why is Enki suddely saying its not in the spirit of Freedom? Tich said that putting in a new permissions set in was what she wanted to work on this coming year. So is all this attention just because the items are for sale on playerauctions or whatever the site was? Otherwise why all the fuss about it? Im not saying it was good that it happened or that something shouldnt be done, just asking why now? Whats so special about this instance vs all the other times this has happened?

there is no items up on playerauctions and never will be i never posted anything on any website about playerauctions.

edit: i dont even have a account with that site

Edited by nosfirebird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a flawed mechanic, the settings are working perfectly to allow any combination of deed rights to give majors the most possible freedom for giving permissions to their villagers. It's once again simple preventable player error.

 

Wurm is complicated and hard, that's a good thing. It allows variety, challenge and freedom. Learn from your mistakes and play better next time.

 

It may be flawed in that, a mayor may be asked to allow permission for destruction of a wall...in order for a villager to destroy a wall that belongs to that villager, on their own house..which the villager personally has the writ for.

  Unfortunately this setting allows that person to destroy ANY wall, on any house on that deed.  Doesnt matter what the writ settings for that building are, or who actually owns the deed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this getting so much attention? Its not like this is the first time something like this has ever happened. Why is Enki suddely saying its not in the spirit of Freedom? Tich said that putting in a new permissions set in was what she wanted to work on this coming year. So is all this attention just because the items are for sale on playerauctions or whatever the site was? Otherwise why all the fuss about it? Im not saying it was good that it happened or that something shouldnt be done, just asking why now? Whats so special about this instance vs all the other times this has happened?

 

Just to add to what Aeris already said about this not being a "special" instance...

 

I think it's just human nature to feel somewhat disconnected from incidents that happen "far away" and to complete strangers - when it happens somewhere you know, to people you know, your eyes are opened.  Silent Hill has been around forever, and the folks who play there are well known "old timers" in the Independence and Wurm community, so it does suddenly become 'real' for some people.  It's not fair, but it's just the reality.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this