Allow the same server as an option to travel to

[Arvid 64]

18 hours ago, Evilreaper said:

 

dont use it, and it wont affect you

If your'e on a PVP server and you're on the opposite coast from your enemy, it's guaranteed to affect you no matter whether you use it or not.

[Hashirama 870]

1 hour ago, Arvid said:

If your'e on a PVP server and you're on the opposite coast from your enemy, it's guaranteed to affect you no matter whether you use it or not.

 

And I can still travel on the same pvp server to the same enemy living at my opposite coast in 2 minutes regardless. If I am at chaos NORTH, i just need to go to exodus SOUTH, then to pristine NORTH, and then to chaos SOUTH. Tada, in 2 minutes I am already at chaos on the opposite side.

This suggestion gives option to choose chaos(or any other server) so that we can directly go from North to south of that server.

Because currently we cannot plot course to the same server. Not sure why people comment without any knowledge of what is going on

[Arvid 64]

30 minutes ago, Hashirama said:

 

And I can still travel on the same pvp server to the same enemy living at my opposite coast in 2 minutes regardless. If I am at chaos NORTH, i just need to go to exodus SOUTH, then to pristine NORTH, and then to chaos SOUTH. Tada, in 2 minutes I am already at chaos on the opposite side.

This suggestion gives option to choose chaos(or any other server) so that we can directly go from North to south of that server.

Because currently we cannot plot course to the same server. Not sure why people comment without any knowledge of what is going on

Some people would want to make that trip at least a little bit harder rather than easier ;-)

[Slickshot 1,195]

47 minutes ago, Hashirama said:

Not sure why people comment without any knowledge of what is going on

I'll enlighten you mate.  What's going on:  easier travel from server to server.  What you would like to happen:  hopping large distances within the same server.  Leave it as it is.  It's easier now, but it doesn't need to be overkill or it ruins all of the fun.

[asdf 297]

yeah because 3 crossings in 5 minutes (so for many people this means 3 relogs on all the alts, and 3 chances for wurm to break and put you in limbo, or cross you but not your ship, etc) is so much FUN

[Ostentatio 1,970]

Yeah. It's not "fun" to accomplish the same thing with orders of magnitude more frustration.

 

Either let us plot course to the same server, since it's a thing we can do anyway and letting us do it directly would do nothing but alleviate frustration (this cannot be stressed enough!), or, if same-server border-hopping is considered an exploit, add a cooldown timer to course-plotting in order to actually make it infeasible. Either way would at least be consistent in terms of gameplay design.

 

If you honestly think that it's okay to "balance" something only by making it arbitrarily frustrating, then great. Maybe Nahjo should be balanced by randomly disconnecting their priests from the server once every 4-6 hours. Or maybe life transfer can have a 1 in 128 chance of halving your FPS every time it triggers! I mean, evidently the way to counterbalance a powerful feature is to make it extremely annoying without actually reducing its usefulness, so why not?

[Keenan 5,539]

Time to chime in here.

 

Same-server travel was not made an option because it is a technical impossibility at the moment.

 

Currently, when you cross a border, the server you're on now bundles up your boat, passengers, and you and ships you off to the server you're heading to. If I used this same functionality, the server would be trying to communicate with itself, which would not work.

 

I would need to develop a method for intra-teleporting a vehicle with it's contents and passengers intact to another set of coordinates on the same server. There is no exact functionality for that right now, and it's not exactly a priority.

 

This may come with another project I've been working on, but I don't have an ETA on that and I would need to discuss the impact of same-server course plotting with the higher-ups.

 

Trust me, if it was something I could have just flipped on, I would have already had that discussion and if approved it would already be a feature.

 

Edit

 

I'm going to be dangerous and also give my personal opinion on this matter. Do note that my personal opinion doesn't really matter as I don't use that as a basis for what I do officially for Wurm.

 

Personally, I don't see a reason to disallow same-server travel. Since you can accomplish the same thing with a tiny bit more effort and a deal more delay with reloading due to crossing servers, it seems to be a silly restriction to not allow this if it were currently possible. Since restrictions are already in place on PvP servers to prevent using plot course to escape PvP encounters, I can't really see how it would be detrimental there either. Again, it's an easy thing to by-pass by just hopping an intermediate server.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Keenan
Figured I'd walk dangerously.

[Slickshot 1,195]

1 hour ago, Keenan said:

Time to chime in here.

 

Same-server travel was not made an option because it is a technical impossibility at the moment.

 

Currently, when you cross a border, the server you're on now bundles up your boat, passengers, and you and ships you off to the server you're heading to. If I used this same functionality, the server would be trying to communicate with itself, which would not work.

 

I would need to develop a method for intra-teleporting a vehicle with it's contents and passengers intact to another set of coordinates on the same server. There is no exact functionality for that right now, and it's not exactly a priority.

 

This may come with another project I've been working on, but I don't have an ETA on that and I would need to discuss the impact of same-server course plotting with the higher-ups.

 

Trust me, if it was something I could have just flipped on, I would have already had that discussion and if approved it would already be a feature.

 

Edit

 

I'm going to be dangerous and also give my personal opinion on this matter. Do note that my personal opinion doesn't really matter as I don't use that as a basis for what I do officially for Wurm.

 

Personally, I don't see a reason to disallow same-server travel. Since you can accomplish the same thing with a tiny bit more effort and a deal more delay with reloading due to crossing servers, it seems to be a silly restriction to not allow this if it were currently possible. Since restrictions are already in place on PvP servers to prevent using plot course to escape PvP encounters, I can't really see how it would be detrimental there either. Again, it's an easy thing to by-pass by just hopping an intermediate server.

I guess it's a good thing you aren't a "higher up" then. Lol. I say this as someone who disagrees with making server travel even easier than it already is.

[Ostentatio 1,970]

The current situation does not make it "harder"; it only makes it more frustrating and annoying. Frustration and annoyance are not the same as meaningful difficulty, as much as Wurm might have you sometimes believe otherwise.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Ostentatio

[Krockett 2]

 

Sailed around the world in .2 secs!

 

-1

 

[Keenan 5,539]

6 hours ago, Slickshot said:

I guess it's a good thing you aren't a "higher up" then. Lol. I say this as someone who disagrees with making server travel even easier than it already is.

 

My main issue with this statement is the assumption of difficulty.

 

If we had a sailing system requiring the user to gain skill in order to control a boat, and thus based the speed and safety at which someone could traverse a server on that skill and other factors, that would be difficulty.

The current way of traveling does not represent difficulty, the word you are looking for here is tedium.

 

In the long run, faster travel between servers and moving around in general may lead to more new players staying and more subscriptions. As there is absolutely no detriment to older players, meaning there *is* no skill and thus nothing is being taken from you by improving the speed of travel, there is no logical reason to not make improvements in this area. PvP is really the only area where there is a legitimate concern when it comes to increasing movement speed on a server, as there is a definitive game balance issue there. I'm not saying PvP shouldn't benefit from faster travel in the future, but it should be weighed with PvP mechanics.

 

Faster travel in PvE means that players may be more willing to trade and interact with each other. Picking the wrong server when you intended to play with your friends is now no longer a tedious mistake. Relocating to be closer to new friends, exploring the vast lands in Wurm, or pretty much any other travel-related action is now less tedious and can be more enjoyable. You can't tell me you enjoy watching the rocking animation of a boat for hours on end? If so, you should definitely pick up fishing as a hobby.

 

Wurm needs to be more reachable and more friendly for new players, and some older players will likely want to push back against those changes. Really though, modernizing and making Wurm more enjoyable will be a benefit to all.

[KaiH 1,126]

Keenan actually made me change my mind, so +1 only for PvE

[Meldichoir 242]

1 hour ago, Keenan said:

The current way of traveling does not represent difficulty, the word you are looking for here is tedium.

 

I appreciated the tedium of sailing. It required much more consideration of your choices with greater consequences. Time is the cost of everything in Wurm, but I guess there's not enough time in the real world. 

[Ostentatio 1,970]

8 minutes ago, Meldichoir said:

 

I appreciated the tedium of sailing. It required much more consideration of your choices with greater consequences. Time is the cost of everything in Wurm, but I guess there's not enough time in the real world. 

 

Yeah, but that would be an argument against course-plotting itself. Course-plotting is already in.

 

It's not a good argument against being able to plot course to the same server. After all, the current border-hopping shenanigans you have to do don't really take any meaningful time or represent additional meaningful choices, just frustration and endless relogs.

[Meldichoir 242]

Oh, absolutely. Made sence the from the first post. I was commenting on Keenan's comment. 

 

I miss the big world, but I also recognize the need for this compromise. 

 

For clarity: +1 to original suggestion to eliminate unnecessary reloads. Travel too quick now? Put a timer on it. 

[Hashirama 870]

Man it may be impossible, but the amount of "hardworking" people are real on this thread.

The thread is as simple as it can get. It is possible and can be done in 2 more minutes with 2 server reloads and making a person relog the client a few times. Yet people think that keeping it this way will make the game more difficult and fun. Jeez, not even gonna argue on this point.

Bump, make it possible, do the voodoo devs, just do it!

Edited February 8, 2016 by Hashirama

[Hashirama 870]

17 hours ago, Arvid said:

Some people would want to make that trip at least a little bit harder rather than easier ;-)

 

harder by making a person relog the client 2 times and hopping 2 servers which takes 5 minutes at max? Even a retarded person wouldn't consider this hard. 

[Ostentatio 1,970]

2 minutes ago, Hashirama said:

 

harder by making a person relog the client 2 times and hopping 2 servers which takes 5 minutes at max? Even a retarded person wouldn't consider this hard. 

 

Last time I border-hopped like this, it was with an alt as well. I also had to sort of some crazy boat permission issues related to the alt, which may or may not have been a bug. So to border-hop, between all clients, I had to relog like seven times and cross borders once or twice more than should have been needed anyway.

 

Apparently this is fun.

[Hashirama 870]

On 2/6/2016 at 1:25 AM, asdf said:

hahaha people are actually -1ing this

Welcome to Wurm Online, where majority of decisions are taken by people who literally do not know what's gong on.

 

And yea ostentatio I have had the same issues hence this suggestion. This rocket science is too advanced for some I guess.

[Slickshot 1,195]

50 minutes ago, Hashirama said:

Welcome to Wurm Online, where majority of decisions are taken by people who literally do not know what's gong on.

 

And yea ostentatio I have had the same issues hence this suggestion. This rocket science is too advanced for some I guess.

Making a lot of assumptions there bud.  Disagreeing with your ideas does not make us ignorant.  Opinions are opinions.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Slickshot

[Hashirama 870]

No my idea is supreme, those who disagree should stop playing.

[Arvid 64]

22 minutes ago, Hashirama said:

No my idea is supreme, those who disagree should stop playing.

Sounds like you've got quite some ego there. Thank you for letting me know that. I think you have just added yourself to my list of people whose ideas are too influenced by ego to be worthy of any real consideration.

[Hashirama 870]

EDIT for my mistake in posting:

*should stop living

[Arvid 64]

I'm btw strongly in favor of adding a cooldown (1 hour) when plotting courses to and from PVP servers.

[Pandalet 1,848]

Given the level of personal attack in this thread, I'd say it's done.