FOUNTAIN-PAN REVISION - CLOSES NOV 1st

[Kadore 926]

What's the end purpose, removing items that circumvent the decay process ( allowing more items in a magic chest that desired by the dev team and code ), allowing more ore to be smelted at one time ( saving time not desired by code or the dev team)?

 

Stopping the have nots from being angry at the people who have said item?, A desire to prove that Wurm fixes all bug no matter how big or small ( lol), a need to show CC is moving in a direction that addresses every issue from every vocal side of an argument which in the end will please no one.

 

The history of the changes made to Traders with a vocal group calling everyone that owned one eventually made the change to allow people to pick up coins off the ground, I feel the change was made to placate a portion of the player base that labeled another portion as cheating Rolf out of his hard earned money and directly stealing money from the game slowing down all future development, in the end the Kings share is still distributed, just spread out to a larger portion of the player base with Rolf not pocketing any more than before.

 

Animal caps, way back in the Freedom days it was popular to post screenshots of animal hoarders for the practice of public shame, we not have animal caps per deed and yet you can still frolic buck naked across all of southern Xanadu with no care in the world. 

 

For years there were no dragon to kill, prior to the release of Deli on onward, the fever that caused with more dragon armor than ever started the uproar that has made current dragons drop enough to make a piece of tissue paper, back when I started in '10, I was fine knowing I'd probably never own dragon armor prior to the release of Deli on further servers.

 

The uproar over joining Release and Pristine to the main servers

 

Solid proof no one is ever happy or in agreement with anything.

 

At any given time it seems some are hell bent of ideals of fairness for all players not taking into account time played, money spent or otherwise, that everything must be equal to all even if the end result is bringing down those who through no fault of their own possess more than the average player, I'll assume by the time its all over the entry level skills will start at 50 to continue to placate the players with that line of thinking.

[Gaeron 551]

This is probably too much coding but

 

The fountain packs get converted into source rifts (heatable please!). and the source rifts can be placed in forges and ordinary containers to retain their current flavour.

 

But..... (and keep reading after the next line)

 

They do not fit in magical containers. The reason being they make a pay for item work like 20 or more of that pay for item which is potentially reducing sales.

 

To mitigate this have source rifts purchasable from a trader and allow a source rift to be applied and consumed to a magical chest to permanently expand its capacity.

 

Those who want to buff up a magical chest can and if they have FP already then they get a "free" start. If they want more capacity they can boost a container or get another.

 

Was thinking about it and everything except the pay for avoidance could be considered trivial. Avoiding paying for a pay for service and a company like EA would first have kittens then declare a fatwa on the infidels doing it. Rolf has been very relaxed about it all so far, perhaps he's tightening up his act now.

[Kadore 926]

This is probably too much coding but

 

The fountain packs get converted into source rifts (heatable please!). and the source rifts can be placed in forges and ordinary containers to retain their current flavour.

 

But..... (and keep reading after the next line)

 

They do not fit in magical containers. The reason being they make a pay for item work like 20 or more of that pay for item which is potentially reducing sales.

 

To mitigate this have source rifts purchasable from a trader and allow a source rift to be applied and consumed to a magical chest to permanently expand its capacity.

 

Those who want to buff up a magical chest can and if they have FP already then they get a "free" start. If they want more capacity they can boost a container or get another.

 

Was thinking about it and everything except the pay for avoidance could be considered trivial. Avoiding paying for a pay for service and a company like EA would first have kittens then declare a fatwa on the infidels doing it. Rolf has been very relaxed about it all so far, perhaps he's tightening up his act now.

This is possible, perhaps items may move in the direction of charges like sculpting wands are, I know a portion of the player base has been strongly against it, be interesting to see how it plays out.

[Retrograde 12,013]

This is possible, perhaps items may move in the direction of charges like sculpting wands are, I know a portion of the player base has been strongly against it, be interesting to see how it plays out.

Not exactly sure how you'd have them work like sculpting wands.

but to reiterate, I don't believe we're looking at introducing another trader item, rather work with existing items and balance it out that way. Introducing new trader items to perform these tasks leads to power creep and it becoming necessary

[tgod 456]

No to craftable item, this would put the power of creating and selling these to a select few who would surely seek to profit.

[Kadore 926]

Not exactly sure how you'd have them work like sculpting wands.

but to reiterate, I don't believe we're looking at introducing another trader item, rather work with existing items and balance it out that way. Introducing new trader items to perform these tasks leads to power creep and it becoming necessary

In the sense of adding nickle and dime style transactions as eluded to in the post I quoted.

 

To mitigate this have source rifts purchasable from a trader and allow a source rift to be applied and consumed to a magical chest to permanently expand its capacity.

[Audrel 2,223]

One of the options listed is an increase of storage space for no decay chests, would this be preferable to creating an entirely new item that causes a co-necessity? (if you get a no decay chest you MUST get this to expand storage, and if you get the expansion, you MUST get a no decay chest to hold it in)

 

Money grab. LOL "We're not taking the silver purchases out of the eqaution. We're only taking the circulation of the silver out."

Edited October 30, 2015 by Audrel

[Kegan 3,926]

but to reiterate, I don't believe we're looking at introducing another trader item, rather work with existing items and balance it out that way. Introducing new trader items to perform these tasks leads to power creep and it becoming necessary

So how would you introduce this new proposed item to expand the magic chest if not by a trader would it be a craftable item? 

 

Edit: Maybe we can kill two birds with one stone and add in saddle bags and they can be the added storage in the magic chests...idk

Edited October 30, 2015 by Kegan

[Retrograde 12,013]

So how would you introduce this new proposed item to expand the magic chest if not by a trader would it be a craftable item?

I believe you're mistaking what I said, I mean just a general change to the current magic chests, an increase of their volume, not an item to expand volume

[whereami 564]

What I think is actually a bit rediculous here is that if you DO go through with your current obsession of making fountainpans unmovable you are basically Officially Broadcasting a Window of Opportunity.

You state that these items that exist in No-decay containers prior to the patch will remain but be unmovable. Therefor anyone who owns one of these and does not place it inside of a no-decay container or cannot afford a no-decay container prior to this patch, gets screwed. I have several fountain pans but I do not currently own a magical chest. (that was not what I bought them for)

So now you are telling me that you are basically making another money grab, by forcing everyone who already owns a 50+ EUR item to purchase yet another 50 EUR item or else the first one will become worthless. (because you will only ever be able to use a fountain pan for one thing after this change)

Absolutely absurd.

Edited October 30, 2015 by whereami

[Retrograde 12,013]

What I think is actually a bit rediculous here is that if you DO go through with your current obsession of making fountainpans unmovable you are basically Officially Broadcasting a Window of Opportunity.

You state that these items that exist in No-decay containers prior to the patch will remain but be unmovable. Therefor anyone who owns one of these and does not place it inside of a no-decay container or cannot afford a no-decay container prior to this patch, gets screwed. I have several fountain pans but I do not currently own a magical chest. (that was not what I bought them for)

So now you are telling me that you are basically making another money grab, by forcing everyone who already owns a 50+ EUR item to purchase yet another 50 EUR item or else the first one will become worthless. (because you will only ever be able to use a fountain pan for one thing after this change)

Absolutely absurd.

Thats incorrect, the aim of this is to bring the fountain containers into balance, as of current their reason for remaining in game has been resolved, and instead of completely removing these items we'd like to work out what can be done.

The ultimate question is, what is an acceptable alternative to removing these items or allowing them to continue as they are

[Ecrir 887]

Thats incorrect, the aim of this is to bring the fountain containers into balance, as of current their reason for remaining in game has been resolved, and instead of completely removing these items we'd like to work out what can be done.

The ultimate question is, what is an acceptable alternative to removing these items or allowing them to continue as they are

 

Yet making them unmovable does anything but make them more balanced. Well, in PvE it might make them more balanced but in PvP it just makes them more overpowered, as by making them unmovable you also make it impossible to loot/steal those items, thus it's owner is assured that nobody can ever take the item from him. That's a rediculous buf. So making them unmovable obviously shouldn't be on the table as it just moves the item more out of balance, the opposite of your aim.

 

For moving them more into balance, why not add alternatives? It should be clear now that the 2 biggest usages (excluding the dye stuff as an alternative for that has been added) of these items are to increase the forge size and to increase the magic chest size. Thus either increasing what a forge can contain, or adding a new bigger forge (like the proposed smelter) would do the trick for forges. For the magic chests increasing the storage capacity of the chests would do the trick, they are magic after all, so it wouldn't be strange if the available space inside of them is greater than their volume when measured from the outside. At this point all other players have been moved to a more equal ground as they can now benefit from increased quality of life just like the fountain owners, so things are a bit more in balance.

Of course fountain owners can then still put their fountains in those items, so perhaps a limit on that would be warranted? Replace the fountain items with a new item as proposed, then add a limit so a container can only contain one of such items at a time, and that you cannot put this new item into another of it's type. This greatly reduces the advantage of these items, but this is fine since forges and magic chests were also increased in storage capacity.

 

To me the above feels like a good middle ground, everybody benefits and it's not overpowered like the proposal to make them unmovable.

[Fooligun 591]

To me, this is a massive waste of time and asking for people's opinion when your just pushing your own change no one seems to agree with is futile. You mentioned IRC and pm chats, will you ever post what people said so it's fairly added to this thread?

Having 16 pages of talk is a waste of time when clearly people saying a good option is to make a trader item for 50s+ as a way of getting money into rolfs pocket and making playing wurm far easier, why isn't that an option?! Instead you want to spend time renaming the items, which will break something else in the game, make them immovable which will break something else, single stackable which will break something else and a bunch of other stuff? Just rest while your ahead...

I wonder if the bug with dual enchanted weapons will be fixed then? They were made by a bug, with only some people allowed these weapons while many cannot have them, I wonder if my support from 2 months ago will ever get resolved after I was killed by a house wall due to the new collision system?

[rixk 830]

The ultimate question is, what is an acceptable alternative to removing these items or allowing them to continue as they are

Stop thinking about the fountain pans as bugged items, yes, they were created by the bug, but let's face it, after so many years in game, they have become a feature. It could've been another xmas gift and then everything would be OK now?

Seriously, what are you trying to fix? What problems is this causing in the game? If they are removed, what will improve?

It is the typical Wurm problem like the traders were, where someone doesn't want/can't afford to spend money to buy one, but at the same time they can't stand someone else having them either. So best course of action is to go complain on IRC/forums and whole team is running around like on doomsday, trying to "fix it". As a remark, I don't own either of those: no trader, no fountain pan.

The game is bleeding players, 100 prem players lost in last week and team is "fixing" the fountain pans.

[Mith 318]

Thats incorrect,

 

No, its spot on.

 

the aim of this is to bring the fountain containers into balance,

 

Yes, we agree, thats the aim. But we are trying to tell you that you are pointing the arrow in quite the opposit direction.

 

as of current their reason for remaining in game has been resolved,

 

If you are thinking about painting ships, thats still not the main reason, YOU may think that is, but I can asure you its not.

 

and instead of completely removing these items we'd like to work out what can be done.

 

I think that is a very good idea.

The ultimate question is, what is an acceptable alternative to removing these items or allowing them to continue as they are

 

Hehe If its the Ultimate question im some what certain the awnser is 42, however in regards to the fountain containers I do believe the only real alternative to letting them be is to make something equivilent. If it is called a black hole or something thats fine, as long as it works like the fountain container in all aspects. If it should be an item for sale on traders or not, is another debate, if they should be given as rewards at some point, is also another debate.

 

Retrograde, you are comming on very strong, almost like a Paladin on a bug/witch hunt. Even if Rolf isnt sure what he has written where when, you seem to know for a fact how things are.

It does seem to me like you are trying to attract all the flames you can. That may not be the best way to get a constructive debate going, but you may get a nice tan now its soon christmas.

And let us keep the dark numbers out of a debate like this, as I can asure you 100% of my IRC conversations about this matter has been in favor of keeping fountain containers as they are, and I have also recived some PMs like that, and if it will change anything, I can get you 100 unike people sending you PMs too. You said you where keeping scores some where. Let us agree whats not in the open is irelevant for an open debate like this.

 

 

Let me give you a little story from my wurm life, that may give a little perspetive.

 

When JKH was closed down, we had to decide if we wanted to go to Indie or chaos. I chose chaos as we where a few towns on JKH that teamed up and wanted to build a town there.

One of the fellas comming was long term afk back then but we got him backed and moved, he later became a really good friend. He logged in a year later and have been playing very active up until a year ago or so. on Chaos I dont think many know Woody, but he was the main force behind THG and later he build Fyrkat alone.

When he went afk he left his gear at my place, I store that in a fountain container in a magic chest untill he returns some day.

 

An Rl good friend of mine, and old fella ingame called Legionaire has some health issues and havent played with us for about a year. He once was one of the mighty Heros of chaos. Him and Lokedott aka. polkadot, The two eternal noobs have made people laugh, flee and wonder, I have their gear in a fountain container in a magic chest in hopes they will return some day.

 

I build a house on my curent deed, for an old friend who helped me on chaos before Indie was created, she is now a mom of two kids and a very busy husband, she logs in now and then to say hi and chat, She was one of those names that could make enemies leave when showing up in local. her gear is in a fountain container in a magi chest.

 

I have had a boat in my docs containing the gear of two of those old friends that came  with us to chaos, I have kept repairing it for 1½ year (I didnt think that was a fun use of my time) in hopes they would return some day, and they did, 1-2 months ago they placed a deed very close to mine.

 

Some time ago a town called Sparta was removed on chaos and the people there lost a very large amount of the stuff they had, Many of them quit as they didnt believe the devs solved the bugs involved there the right way, even if Rolf compensated them later. The remaining of their gear was placed a few places untill they one day hopefully return. I store some in a fountain container in a magi chest. I cant say for sure, but if that gear is also removed by devs, im some what certain they wont return at all.

 

Through the years of playing I have seen alot of people come and go, and return. Wurm is not a game you really quit from once you have passed more than a year ingame time. it becomes an refugium where you can chat with old friends, where you can always find some of those from back then if you need an ear.

 

Through playing such a long time one gets alot of stuff. When playing for such a long time, its only natural other games such as Real Life may demand ones attention for a period of time.

By changing the way fountain containers work, the posibility for old players to enjoy the otium gets changed, If I cant dump the gear of the next friend who have to go afk, for a year or two, in a box and dont have to worry about it till he gets back, the dynamic of taking long breaks and comming back gets changed.

 

If spoken with drama, one could say that it will change the game from being one you never really quit, to one that you cash out and quits for good as your gear cant be kept safe.

Or you can say that changing them is a sign that those of us who paied prem the first week after beta and have been since, are being considered old farts that smells so bad it would be better to replace us and all the junk we have gathered with 10 newbies that dosnt take up so much server space.

 

We are not arguing that bugs are good, we are not arguing that fountain containers are not created by bugs, we are not arguing that we need to keep the exact same 0101010s as they are now. we are fighting for the oppertinuty to keep a storage that alowes us to do as above, and very large forges too. its not the value of the containers thats the issue, its the fact that old afk freinds come and go, and know their stuff is safe.

 

I have full understanding that decay is a very smart way to keep woodscraps away from drowning the database, but it is also the arch enemy of old players who have gathers alot of stuff.

If the functionality of fountain containers is changed, and not replaced by something very similar, I dont think wurm will keep as many of the old players as it does now, but who knows, that may be the intent behind this?

Edited October 30, 2015 by Mith

[Redd 4,281]

I feel as if Retrograde is pushing an agenda and making up a lot of stuff...

[Huserx 189]

I don't own one so ultimately I will not be impacted either way which makes my opinion mute.

 

Although 600 seems like a lot I would have thought the number much smaller.

 

Pretty sure the EULA makes no promises to anything in the game so the fact they are even discussing \ negotiating the change is generous.

 

Again just my .02 opinion.

[Retrograde 12,013]

Thanks for the input on pvp, obviously it being immobile in pvp isnt the best solution

I will most definitely be including the suggestions for a smelting forge though that idea has been around for a long time thus my comment on it being a seperate issue, I'll still be including it and also following up on what it would take to get implemented re: art and code.


As I said before, personally I'd rather see an increase in existing no decay chest volumes rather than a new item that does the same feature as it avoids the need for two purchases to receive the same function.

The purpose of this thread is to collect information, any decisions will be made by the developmental team in the end and could include all, some, or even none of the mentioned ideas, our goal is to generate feedback and provide as much as we can in a constructive manner

Edited October 30, 2015 by Retrograde

[Pashka 707]

The development team may be the one that implements it.  But you are the one that is pushing it.  You have started to remind me of MR.B when he was determined to have several spawns on Indy like there are on Xanadu.  To hell with any of the people in the areas or what they thought but he was going to get it accomplished.  He did get it moved to FM though.  I will have to say that he wasn't very good with public relations and in this thread you haven't been either.

[Retrograde 12,013]

This is not an easy change nor  is  something that has been decided on a whim, and the very fact I'm here discussing it with you all is clear indication that this change wil impact players and we are hoping to make it as painless as possible.

 

The only goal here is to achieve a balance with the item without removing it completely

[tgod 456]

Ya it does seem like there is a hidden agenda #illuminati

[Macadelic 199]

There must be. Nothing else makes sense. #illuminati #newworldorder

Edited October 30, 2015 by Macadelic

[Gumbo 1,563]

Would be very helpful if all the ideas/conversations from IRC or any other media outlet that you were accepting thoughts from, were copy/pasted here (anonymously if need be). Doing so could spark the brilliant solution the staff is looking for. Give a greater population more info to digest, sort of thing. Failure to post all of those conversations here means you're not really interested in finding a solution on these forums, and this thread is moot. IMO those who gave their thoughts on this topic on IRC or whatever, should have been directed to this thread to post their thoughts and told staff was not accepting any ideas unless it was.

 

I own one of these items, paid silvers for it. A Fountain Sauce Pan that I cherish. It's only use ever has been for storing goods in my LMC.

Rename the thing if you want (not even sure why this would be needed). The functionality of them should not change. Sell similar said item on Traders for all to buy.

 

 

I would also like to know, I have a buddy who has been collecting many "legacy" items over the years. These things cannot be made now and some are really cool. His plan was to open a "museum of oddities" one day. I'm wondering if all the things he's collected will also one day be made to "disappear" like what is being asked of Fountain/pan/backpack/etc.

I happen to own a Lavender Fruit Press, was made when you got a small log from cutting down older bushes. Now was that also a bug? If not, why were those small logs removed? Will I have a GM show up at my deed one day and lightning bolt it out of existence because it was a bugged log?

[whereami 564]

Retro, make sure to step back and read what Mith posted. This sort of thing is extremely true, he hit it home with that. These items are not only used to help other players bgy those who own them, but can keep their things safe for their return. Imagine if you removed all of the post-casual players from wurm? Probably a pretty huge player-dropoff.

You want to remove Fountain Pans, that is fine. but we are telling you that if you do, players in this game *need* a way of storing a LOT of items in a very small, transportable no-worry-zone where you can just let it sit till it is needed again. Wurm is far too much maintenance for some, and for those players these items are and have been the only solution. If the team doesn't like the idea of an item that can do what I just described they really should just stop what they're doing and actually try playing their own game for a few months. Maybe then you would understand.

Edited October 30, 2015 by whereami

[KanePT 699]

I don't think this is fair, after people have spent so much money on them, over years. How would people who've ground the hell out of their character, or bought advanced characters, feel if Code Club suddenly said "ok, no one can now sell their toons." People spent money or time grinding the toons knowing if they ever wanted to, they could sell them. They made an investment that is now destroyed. I don't see the sense in changing these items so substantially.

I'm sorry, but one thing is knowing that its ok to trade a character, another thing is trading in a item YOU KNOW was born out of an exploit, and then thinking its not ok that its removed?

It should have never been allowed to be kept in the first place, the fact that you got to keep enjoying the benefits of an exploit that no one legitimately could enjoy this far (also called an unfair advantage, something that most games would ban people for exploiting) is already more than your money's worth!

 

Furthermore, this is AWESOME publicity for a game going on steam now. This game lets you keep the exploited items! Haxxors welcome!