Remove Enchantment Quality Loss

[Ayes 3,715]

Enchants on all items should never loose their original quality; therefore, I suggest that all enchantment quality loss should be removed from the game. Who does this really benefit anyway? Priests, since it broadens their market.

 

Should the game design be tailored to benefit priests in this way at the expense of everyone who uses these enchanted items? I think not. I am not opposed to paying once for a highly enchanted item but to have to do this repeatedly over time the longer one plays the game makes these expenses add up, which seems for no other reason than to give priests more advantage to earn silver coins from other players. Seems a bad reason to have enabled enchantment quality loss and now the one exemption to this (weapon enchants) is added to the profit cycle.

 

This last straw that breaks the camels back makes this load now too heavy for the common player to bear.

*throws up hands*

 

=Ayes=

[bwg 537]

With the restrictions to improving, continuing, digging, mining etc to Priests, I believe this is a good trade off.  Wurm is all about the economy and those who invest time and money in priests should be rewarded in the same way a blacksmith or ship builder is.

 

To that end, I don't agree with removing enchant decay.

[Kegan 3,926]

While i would like to only have to buy one tool for the lifetime of my wurm game it is not good for anyone. The economy would just crash since no one would be buying anything after a few months time. (i have all my high cast tools now i am set for life) 

Edited June 3, 2015 by Kegan

[Elen 1,013]

+1

[SmeJack 5,798]

Wurm isn't really all about the economy, players make it that way and there are many who have zero interest in it. The decay is just another chore to add to chores online.... an annoyance that adds nothing positive to playability

[Reylaark 1,100]

*snip*

Should the game design be tailored to benefit priests in this way at the expense of everyone who uses these enchanted items? I think not.

*snip*

 

This last straw that breaks the camels back makes this load now too heavy for the common player to bear.

*throws up hands*

 

=Ayes=

Should those of us who do not play a priest, but benefit from their enchants, not be understanding of changes made to enhance their experience?  

 

Respectfully, I think the common player (of which I would consider myself) will adapt, as will the market to this new reality.

 

I understand the potential hardships I would face as a result of this change in enchant mechanics, but I think in the long run it will lead to a more equitable and accessible market.

 

 

Wurm isn't really all about the economy, players make it that way and there are many who have zero interest in it. The decay is just another chore to add to chores online.... an annoyance that adds nothing positive to playability

 

Does it not add to the playability of a priest?  Is that less valid than someone else's playstyle?  I don't think it's just about more coin, it could also be about more consistent need and engagement from the community.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Reylaark

[MisterTeddy 284]

Wurm is all about the economy and those who invest time and money in priests should be rewarded in the same way a blacksmith or ship builder is.

 

wut

 

no it isn't - especially on pvp (we give our people free stuff for the greater good)

 

no one likes spending a full day on a 90 chan priest to *maybe* get 90s on all four horse shoes

[akaedis 429]

-1

 

This isn't set up to punish the market, players or anyone. Its set up this way so the system isn't flooded with 101coc items everywhere. Granted their are quite a few in existence already, But if enchants never decayed... the amount would be far higher then what it is now, effectively devaluing the items(And possibly the game) altogether.

 

Games get pretty boring once you have all the best possible stuff forever. Id hate to re-experience what happened with WoW before the expansions, Maxed my character out, all that hard work, working with my guild for the almost best tank gear i could ever acquire, got it then wonder wtf to do with the game then... 

[Kegan 3,926]

wut

 

no it isn't - especially on pvp (we give our people free stuff for the greater good)

 

no one likes spending a full day on a 90 chan priest to *maybe* get 90s on all four horse shoes

There is a whole section with items being bought and sold every day that would disagree with you.

 

Maybe not so much in pvp but for pve players our tools and economy are very important to us. 

[Reylaark 1,100]

wut

 

no it isn't - especially on pvp (we give our people free stuff for the greater good)

 

no one likes spending a full day on a 90 chan priest to *maybe* get 90s on all four horse shoes

Then buy them?

 

Wait, that would be economy, and on PvP we only have eyes for PvP...   Nevermind.

Such a wonderfully multi-faceted game doesn't have to become only about PvP just because PvP happens to also exist.

 

We're derailing the thread though 

So, how 'Bout that decay on enchants eh?  Whewie!

[Kruggan 519]

-1.  Nope.  

[hoof2000 278]

i don't see how it benefits the econemy if i have to pay 10-15s every two months just to get my weapon enchants back. this only benefits the priests and hurts everyone else. and IF woa on horse shoes decay as well thats another 10s per horse. yeah this is very benificial for the econemy.... NOT

[SmeJack 5,798]

Reylaark, I am a vynora priest and I have plenty of engagement with my community without money being involved

[Odynn 2,248]

Once upon a time, enchants never decayed and then on a sad day, they were changed to keep the priests working. Higher enchants is also harder to attain than it was in the past.

 

Is it a bad thing ? No, i don't see that as such, since priest have to get their wemp, cotton, favor from someone, be it their alt, village or some merchant. This improve interactions between the players and stimulate the economy, be it for free on some servers or for some cash on others.

 

Many things are like that, annoying on the surface, but when you look deep inside, can we/you do better and keep everyone happy ?

[faty 423]

-1

 

Edit: TBH i would also like to see a skill decay.. if you don't use a particular skill for an amount of time.. you lose some of it..

Edited June 3, 2015 by faty

[Morrowen 428]

+1 The amount of maintenance this game needs gets exhausting.

[Busted 289]

Oh, Ayes.

 

No. 

[Wurmhole 3,650]

I am selling all my priests and will just use up my enchants until gone. It is a pain getting the high enchants in the first place. I really feel for folks that spent a fortune buying super high enchanted weapons, only to learn that they won't last now. They frankly just got ripped off.

[bwg 537]

Since this fix has been in a while, does anyone actually have any metrics on the rate of decay?  It could be that with 'normal' use they will only lose around 1 point every few months.  We really shouldn't panic until we know the extent of the damage...

[Noizhead 622]

I am okay with enchant decay as a concept, but I would rather see enchanting made more reliable, and for shattering to be removed.

[Elen 1,013]

The idea that a priest is an investment that should "pay off" is rather gross.

[sunsvortex 599]

Ultimately this is nothing more than trying to tweak the lifecycle of items - Garbage in / Garbage out as well as to account for the growing God list and the influx of priests that follow. There are some pretty obvious side effects to handling it this way, but given they really have no other way to deal with it, it becomes the only way to ensure that there are not too many enchanted items in the world. The short term side effect is to pick the pockets of players that dont have priest alts.
 
More Gods = More priests = More enchants = More enchanted items
IF  Enchants on weapons / items do not decay then market is nearly permanently saturated due to existing lifecycle.


 

I used this graphic a while back as a rough approximation of the lifecycle of items.

We have decay on both the tool and the enchant, now we have decay on both the weapon and the enchant.

 

Essentially a Combo 1.5

 

((Enchant Decay > Re enchant) x infinity) this also puts the item at risk for immediate destruction on a bad cast)

 

All thats being done is to increase the amount of items taken out of the game through attrition or decay or both.\

 

Now all that being said wouldnt a better response be to

 

1. Increase dramatically the skill gain on Weapon Smithing

and

2. Provide a medium between the priest and the non priest. (IE, a high level crafter can impart natural bonuses when imping either tool or weapon to a high enough ql level).

Edited June 3, 2015 by sunsvortex

[Tsetse 87]

Decay is an important aspect of Wurm and part of what makes it unique. Its not just good for the economy it also generate need for social interaction and its not that difficult to find a priest who will accept a reasonable exchange of good and services instead of always paying full price silver. Im really surprised that someone plays and knows Wurm can suggest to remove something like this from the game and make it more simple. Its not like you must have 90+ enchants on all your tools. I have a good priest but I still dont use the best enchants and I am fine with that.

 

If they remove decay on enchants then they would have to remove the number value and simply call it Circle of Cunning with a power that is always max 50 strenght because the high strenghts cast are balanced by decay. That would have to be the trade off. Nobody would bother to play a priest and make enchantments so after that change they would have to losen priest restrictions so that everyone can be priest and improve items with the same character.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Tsetse

[Ayes 3,715]

First off players should drop this misnomer of item enchant *decay*. Things that are built off deed decay just from existing within the game. Items left out in the wild decay. Even some things on deed decay as well as in containers. Items loose their quality from decay and use. Enchants only loose their quality from *use*.

 

Another thing, to justify enchant quality wearing off from use on the basis of equating Priests being the "economy" that needs to be preserved by this enchant quality decline from use is pretty self serving to priests, attempting to put them into the position of somehow being the center of it. If anything this policy is the opposite in that it makes a controlled market for them perpetuated in part by this wear off from use effect. This makes them the profiteers of this market who can then choose to do anything they wish with the profits.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I like the idea that some players want to play priests and enchant weapons, since I will purchase them from them and I am very willing to pay that initial price. What I am against here is the game Developer programming these enchants to wear off from use, since players without priests will continually have to purchase new ones, or go through even more trouble with unsure outcome to have them re-enchanted.

 

Possibly this was thought by the Developer to fit in with the rest of the *decay* system within Wurm and that is why players think of this as *decay*. Yet it is a totally different thing which only really benefits priest income and makes the game more expensive to play for everyone else. Only the Developer can see the error of his ways in this respect and change this system by further examining these implications as I have pointed them out rather briefly, true enough.

 

Another fond pipe dream to while away the wee hours of the night just before dawn once again sheds the light of truth upon their stalwart impositions.

 

Safe Travels

=Ayes=

[Reylaark 1,100]

First off players should drop this misnomer of item enchant *decay*. Things that are built off deed decay just from existing within the game. Items left out in the wild decay. Even some things on deed decay as well as in containers. Items loose their quality from decay and use. Enchants only loose their quality from *use*.

 

Another thing, to justify enchant quality wearing off from use on the basis of equating Priests being the "economy" that needs to be preserved by this enchant quality decline from use is pretty self serving to priests, attempting to put them into the position of somehow being the center of it. If anything this policy is the opposite in that it makes a controlled market for them perpetuated in part by this wear off from use effect. This makes them the profiteers of this market who can then choose to do anything they wish with the profits.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I like the idea that some players want to play priests and enchant weapons, since I will purchase them from them and I am very willing to pay that initial price. What I am against here is the game Developer programming these enchants to wear off from use, since players without priests will continually have to purchase new ones, or go through even more trouble with unsure outcome to have them re-enchanted.

 

Possibly this was thought by the Developer to fit in with the rest of the *decay* system within Wurm and that is why players think of this as *decay*. Yet it is a totally different thing which only really benefits priest income and makes the game more expensive to play for everyone else. Only the Developer can see the error of his ways in this respect and change this system by further examining these implications as I have pointed them out rather briefly, true enough.

 

Another fond pipe dream to while away the wee hours of the night just before dawn once again sheds the light of truth upon their stalwart impositions.

 

Safe Travels

=Ayes=

 

I'd like to try something, if I may.  I'm going to change enchant and priest to something else and see how it reads:

 

First off players should drop this misnomer of Blacksmith Item *decay*. Things that are built off deed decay just from existing within the game. Items left out in the wild decay. Even some things on deed decay as well as in containers. Items loose their quality from decay and use. Blacksmith Items only loose their quality from *use*^*.

 

Another thing, to justify Blacksmith Item quality wearing off from use on the basis of equating Blacksmiths being the "economy" that needs to be preserved by this Blacksmith Item quality decline from use is pretty self serving to Blacksmiths, attempting to put them into the position of somehow being the center of it. If anything this policy is the opposite in that it makes a controlled market for them perpetuated in part by this wear off from use effect. This makes them the profiteers of this market who can then choose to do anything they wish with the profits.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I like the idea that some players want to play Blacksmiths and Smith weapons, since I will purchase them from them and I am very willing to pay that initial price. What I am against here is the game Developer programming these Blacksmith Items to wear off from use, since players without Blacksmiths^** will continually have to purchase new ones, or go through even more trouble with unsure outcome to have them re-Smithed^***.

 

Possibly this was thought by the Developer to fit in with the rest of the *decay* system within Wurm and that is why players think of this as *decay*. Yet it is a totally different thing which only really benefits Blacksmith income and makes the game more expensive to play for everyone else. Only the Developer can see the error of his ways in this respect and change this system by further examining these implications as I have pointed them out rather briefly, true enough.

 

Another fond pipe dream to while away the wee hours of the night just before dawn once again sheds the light of truth upon their stalwart impositions.

 

 

^*K, so, enchants only decay on "use".  Wouldn't this sort of work against your argument?  It means the decay on enchants is more forgiving than the decay on anything else in game at the moment.  Am I missing something?  You store your enchanted item and no matter how incredibly long you leave it there, the item itself might decay away but the enchant never will.

 

^**Players without a Blacksmith doesn't make sense, does it.  I know.  However, players who have a priest alt are literally paying for that priest.  There is no useful F2P priest, or am I missing something?  They have that disposable income, it's their money.  They want 5 priest alts?  *shrug*, yippie kayay.

People who's main is a priest, with all those limitations to contend with, are imho masochists and I worry about them.  For the love of Fo, give them some silver so they can afford to go lie down on a royal lounge chaise and talk about why they do this.

 

^***re-smithing something, so to speak, does not run the risk of it being destroyed.  Fair point!  Over in the now reverted weapon enchant reduction thread (that's a mouthful), people were starting to propose ideas for "imping" enchants back up without having to risk losing the item entirely.  Unfortunately, that discussion has been terminated.