Horsch

Wurm Population Status Problem Solving.

119 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Hello everyone,

 

I'm curious what the population is like on the server you play on.  Is it packed full of people? Does it need more space?  Does it lack activity?  Is it full of empty land?  Do you play on a PVP or PVE server and why?  Do you think a packed server would be laggy?

 

Please read posts throughout this thread to know the opinions of others who have posted before you post.  Please quote other's opinions if you have the same thinking or even if it's close and comment on your differences.  I would like to know every persons opinion and how their thought process works.  So if you can please explain.

Or post your opinion, then read posts, and modify your opinion as you see fit, if your opinion changes based on others.  It's important that it is what you truly believe and not just going along with the popular vote.  Popular votes in the end aren't what really matter, it's you!

 

MY OPINION

I currently haven't played Wurm in awhile. I'm starting to come back and I play on Epic.  Now I've always played on Epic because when i tried freedom I didn't like the slow skill gains. I have come to realize over the years that freedom is just slower at the start and epic is really slower at the end because of the Epic curve it gets.

 

Since I've always been on Epic it's always been an empty cluster.  I mean the population to maps and size ratio has always been huge spaces of land and abandoned places all over compared to little activity or no one else to talk to pretty much 99% of the time.

 

So the issues of the skill gains being different but yet the same in a sense are not much different.  The population has always been lower then that of space available on the Epic cluster.

Has there been any thought as to joining the communities but creating a new merged server that has PVE only in certain locations? Lets say for instance, maybe 500x500 in 3 different spots around the starter towns for each template kingdom on one combined server and PVP on the rest of the map? That would limit players to building or hunting in those areas to avoid PVP or would get full of players actually living in those areas and would push players to live outside or into a more packed community.

 

Maybe even a reorganization of the current servers by merging them to create a bigger server with the maps of all 4 servers and then only certain parts of the map non PVP, and all other parts PVP. This would combine small communities and make actual kingdoms instead of 1 person kingdoms.  I think the greatest part of this game, is being able to have groups of players to go out and do things together. Building a deed, setting a trap for an enemy kingdom, raiding a deed, or just going out hunting creatures together or grinding skills are great aspects of playing together for groups.  This game is awesome while playing with others and it really should be played in groups for the maximum amount of fun. 

Right now this game is more of a solo game because of the scarce population.  Something needs to be done to increase the population.  Let me know your thoughts on this please.

Please let me know if I'm just ignorant or if anyone else feels sorta similar.  Thank you for taking the time to read.

 

Respectfully,

 

Horsch from Epic Cluster.

 

END MY OPINION

 

BEFORE YOU POST

Please be aware this is not an suggestion or idea thread.  This is my current opinion previous to seeing the posts throughout this thread. 

This thread is meant to gather opinions of  everyone who plays Wurm or would like to improve it for the better and so that an actual idea(s) or suggestion(s) can be PROPERLY formulated and used for the better of all Wurmians.

 

 

CURRENT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED

 

Huge populations cause lag.

Huge servers cause lag.

Wacky spawns of creatures.

PVE don't want PVP.

Scarce populations on Epic cluster.

PVP Don't want safe zones.

New players come from Freedom cluster.

HOTA, hell horses, new shield training speed, karma, valrei spells, SOTG, spell lists for each god, runes.

Lack of PVE on Epic cluster.

Servers to test a Vanilla cluster or Hybrid PVP/PVE Cluster.

Players wish to join their Epic account to Freedom cluster or vice-versa.

 

 

CURRENT OPINIONS TO FIX PROBLEMS

 

Clearly separate PVP and PVE servers from clusters, not just servers.

DONT implement non-PVP areas onto PVP servers.

Implement a PVE server or areas onto Epic cluster.

No HOTA.  No hell horse spawns.  Change shield training back.  No karma.  No valrei items to use for spells means no star gems either.  Remove all paths.  Completely random spell list for each template god (might as well make it all gods can be used by all kingdoms to make it fair). Runes? What are Runes? Well remove these anyways!

Add safe zones for Epic cluster and limit deed sizes within them.

 

 

KNOWN ISSUES TO UNKNOWN CAUSES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED

 

lag for populated areas

lag for huge servers

 

THINGS THAT WONT HAPPEN

 

Merging of server maps. ( said by Budda )

 

 

 

 

Edited by Horsch
Took our all of the commas because people didn't like them.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

i like the epic cluster not for the skillgains, rather for the fact if i dont like someone or they do something against me i can simply kill them.

 

i call this the kick your arse effect.

 

 

EDIT: go back to freedom

 

Edited by odinalf
go back to freedom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really not a bad idea to have mixed pvp/pve servers.
Giant server, please no.   Xan lag and bad mob dispersal already shows giant servers don't work well.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

like I said in the JK global chat, this is how i envisioned the possibility of Wurm servers:

 

1. Merge servers, into a bigger one, let say 3 other freedom servers onto a epic home server.

2. Let them keep the deeds on those maps, but it would be like adding 3 other corners to that home server.

3. It's all pvp, but with a safe zone around the starter town that is centrally located in the bigger map.

4. that would make players want to build deeds around that safe zone, but would get packed full of players fast, forcing players to live outside those zones if they don't want to share with a big community.

5. this would keep a high population on a smaller amount of servers, and would encourage new players to stick around because their would be plenty of communities to help them with the learning curve.

6. others will want to move outside of that safe zone to start their own groups or deeds, which would still allow pvp to occur.

7. even with the safe zones, having the bigger populations that force people out of the zones, would still give incentive to enemies to want to go look for people to kill on home servers.

 

 

I think doing something like this, would not only increase populations on pvp servers, but would also increase overall each village population, and encourage players to do more group type activities at all times of the day for those merged servers.

this would also save company money on servers, by condensing the servers.

This would also still provide players who wish for a non-pvp life, to play the game without that type of activity, or just decrease the current freedom cluster, to be pve ONLY. remove chaos from that equation. 

 

Final thoughts.

 

It makes no sense to have a pve cluster, that has a pvp server, i mean, there is no point to having the epic cluster at all.  the skill gain is slower at higher lvls, but faster at the beginning, and the point of that was to get into the fight faster, but there is no fighting on the epic cluster... cause there is no population!

Edited by Horsch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Greyfox said:

It's really not a bad idea to have mixed pvp/pve servers.
Giant server, please no.   Xan lag and bad mob dispersal already shows giant servers don't work well.   

 

Ok, is that common for all players? Or just a few?  Maybe it's distance from the actual server that is the lag issue for you? or distance + population?

 

I mean, if it's the server, and settings for mobs, then that probably needs to be looked at before doing big servers like Xan.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude leave freedom alone unless you wqant to kill that too

screwing up epic would be bad enough, with already low players, theres not many to hurt

making the main population be scrunched up and live in "apartment" spacing, would have them leave

they went to freedom for the "safe zone" to make a pretty deed

 

just go join your brethren on freedom and stop trying to ruin the game because its not horsch style

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

11 minutes ago, Horsch said:

 

Ok, is that common for all players? Or just a few?  Maybe it's distance from the actual server that is the lag issue for you? or distance + population?

 

I mean, if it's the server, and settings for mobs, then that probably needs to be looked at before doing big servers like Xan.

 


The lag on Xan is well known for everyone. And attempting to travel on xan will have the server loose your position rather often(Your position on the server is not updated move slower) that would cause huge problems for pvp.   Mob dispersal seem skewed towards the north.  Overall mob population is low anyway, so even if evenly dispersed it would be a problem.

Maybe they could do a "pilot" mixed pvp/pve server on small scale just to test how well it works out, and how players like it, and expand on that approach if it works well.


EDIT: you'd also need to limit deed size in the "safe zone"  or you'd end up with maybe 10 people deeding the entire area.

Edited by Greyfox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come to Chaos. We got cookies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Horsch said:

4. that would make players want to build deeds around that safe zone, but would get packed full of players fast, forcing players to live outside those zones if they don't want to share with a big community.

 

So, you're essentially trying to force PvE players (People who often want nothing to do with PvP) into PvP (People who enjoy taking others stuff/having the ability to kill someone who mouths off to them) by having too little room for them to play?

Let me guess, you also want to poorly mark the 'safe zone' border, so you can essentially 'scam' these people by getting them to go over the border when they are trying to do a legit trade and you being just over the border so you can kill them and take what they were trying to trade for something else? (I've actually been the victim of this on Runescape. I lost 1.2 MILLION gold this way by trying to trade some gold for some ore to work on my smelting.)

Your proposal is discussing forcing people to do things they don't want, so no thanks.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If this is a suggestion, is a very poor one, and also in the wrong section of the forums.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Evening said:

 

 

If this is a suggestion, is a very poor one, and also in the wrong section of the forums.

 

no, this is an open discussion on peoples thoughts of the current population status.  And I wasn't aware of lag issues with Xan, so that brings up other issues that wurm servers experience, they aren't good enough to even have big populations, or big servers. who knows.  and just trying to figure out the points of view others have on the population issue.

 

I believe this is the right forum for this.  That, or the description for this forum section needs to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Corsan said:

 

So, you're essentially trying to force PvE players (People who often want nothing to do with PvP) into PvP (People who enjoy taking others stuff/having the ability to kill someone who mouths off to them) by having too little room for them to play?

Let me guess, you also want to poorly mark the 'safe zone' border, so you can essentially 'scam' these people by getting them to go over the border when they are trying to do a legit trade and you being just over the border so you can kill them and take what they were trying to trade for something else? (I've actually been the victim of this on Runescape. I lost 1.2 MILLION gold this way by trying to trade some gold for some ore to work on my smelting.)

Your proposal is discussing forcing people to do things they don't want, so no thanks.

-1

 

I mean, there could still be a strictly PVE server. keep XAN, and convert the rest of the freedom servers into epic cluster. there ya go. an all PVE big server. no other servers are needed for PVE.

 

PVE doesn't need multiple servers. it's all the same kingdom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I like the innovative use of commas in your writing. The single new server under your regime should definitely have a comma in the name. Free, dom.

Edited by Chakron
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chakron said:

I like the innovative use of commas in your writing. The single new server under your regime should definitely have a comma in the name. Free, dom.

 

 I approve this message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no need for any of this. Freedom PVE servers are good the way they are - we don't need any PVP. (That's exactly why we are playing there, after all!)

 

-1

 

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TL;DR

 

1. OP didn't play Wurm in a while.

2. He comes back, plays on Epic, barely anyone online, so he has time to think and develop a strategy to change Wurm into something appealing him (and mostly him).

3. OP suggests shutting down most of Freedom servers, or bringing PvP to PvE.

4. On PvPvE servers, there would be a small safe area around starting towns, where people can live all together (so instead of 1 player with 5 deeds, like we have many on Freedom now, would be one deed with 5 happy players, every one of them owning half a tile and 2/6 of a horse).

5. This would turn Epic in a large community and would bring large batches of new players willing to stick very close to each other, while Freedom cluster would be reduced to one server, because who needs so many freedomers, after all?

 

Wogic at its best (or worst)!

 

(On that note, although each Freedom server, at a given time, has more players than the entire Epic cluster all together, I didn't see many freedomers asking for Epic to be shut down and PvP players moved on one server, just because they are only a few and no PvP happens and there's no need for multiple servers at all).

 

And because this isn't a suggestion thread, but a discussion one, I cannot give a -1. But I will still do it.

-1

11 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad thing is, that guys like him give advice to devs, how to "improve pvp". :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Heh I recall a time when 20 people on at once was the entire pvp Wild server population, and it also meant someone, somewhere was raiding.

 

Now less than 40 people is considered, "dead". :P

Edited by Klaa
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rixk said:

Sad thing is, that guys like him give advice to devs, how to "improve pvp". :)

U used to have good comments in the past which made sense.

 

Nowadays u just joined the anti pvp club. Which are running rampant.

 

I would advice sticking to ur old habits again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Just no. I play Wurm to build stuff. I spend hours, days, weeks, months to build things I like. 

Only to have them destroyed in a few hours? By people who have nothing at all to gain from that?

 

It would utterly destroy the game for me. Deal breaker, quitting reason.

 

Maybe, just maybe the game devs would find a way to merge the playing styles, but it would absolutely certainly cause mass destruction and havoc for ages, ruining game play for as long as it would take to make sure both styles can coexist on one server. And then what do we have? The same as today, only on one server, with restrictions to both styles that would make both of them unhappy.

 

PvP and PvE do not mix. Just abandon this pipe dream and play how you like, but if that's PvP, move along to a place where you can already do that and don't ruin my game for me. I do not wish to play cannon fodder for your dreams of being some mighty warrior all shall bow to. It is no fun for the rest of us and having fun is exactly what we're here for. All of us, not just you.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved this to suggestions as it is being treated like a suggestion rather than a discussion about what we currently have.

 

On a sidenote, I am very happy with the way things are at the moment and PvE/PvP mix servers just do not make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a suggestion thread.

 

This is a get everyone's thoughts or how they feel about the current wurm population, and what THAT person thinks could make it better, not only for themself, but for all players and new, to attract players to stay.

 

this is an information gathering thread. and based off of the opinions of others, only then, can a suggestion or idea be truly formed to create a solution for wurm's problem.

the first step is to truly find out what the problem with wurm is. why it's not packed full of people.

We are in the Problem Framing step.

 

this is the same with everything in life, war, your work environment.

 

6 steps: Problem Framing. COA Development. COA War Game. COA Comparison & Decision. Orders Development. Trasition.

 

1. Problem Framing.  This drives the process.  The purpose of Problem Framing is for DEVs to enhance the gameplay for the players experience, to in the end, earn more money for the game's company and make a good game.  Understanding of the current environment, the nature of the problems (identify what the problems are, why they're a problem, and what needs to be done to increase player experiences while playing).  This step affects the entire decision-making process, if inadequate; everything done in subsequent steps may not address the root cause of the problem.

 

Planners/Players support to Problem Framing.  Players define the nature of the problem from their perspective.  These are things such as bugs, glitches, balancing issues, to many servers and not enough players, lag, spawn rates, and other things that matter to players.

 

 2.  Course of Action Development Step.  During this step planners develop possible solution to solve a given problem.

  (1)  The purpose of COA development is to produce option(s) for accomplishing the goals in accordance with the DEVs intent.  Players will provide an understanding of their issues as stated in problem framing and suggestions on how to fix those issues.  DEVs or whoever the planners are for wurm, should examine the problems, solutions and ensure that they're feasible, acceptable, suitable, distinguishable and complete.  Keep in mind that the game environment is influenced by players and their actions and how they make use of in-game stuff; therefore continuous assessment is important.

  (2)  The "how" is the essence of COA development.

  (3)  Planners/Players develop products in support of the COA development:  Most likely/Most Disadvatageous actions; requirements and resources; task organization; graphic and narrative; and a Information Management plan ( this is not a complete list).

 

3.  Course of Action War Game Step.  During this step planners are critically examing each COA in order to provide the DEVs with the best option to accomplish the goals.

  (1) The purpose of COA War Game is to examine and refine the option(s) in light of all players capabilities and potential actions/reactions to include their effect on the environment and how they could abuse it.  Each friendly COA is wargamed against selected situation type COAs.  Short of actually executing the COA, COA war game provides the most reliable basis for understand and improving each COA.  Wargaming friendly COAS helps planners:

    (a) Validate each COA.

    (b) Identify strengths and weaknesses, associated risks, and assess shortfalls for each friendly course of action.

    (c) Contributes to an enhance understanding of the environment and the nature of the problems.

    (d) Identify branches and sequels.

  (2)  Utilize 2 different groups of players, that are enemy to eachother for testing purposes on the test server, to assist the DEVs in analyzing COAs from each prospective.

 

4.  Course of Action Comparison and Decision Step.  During this step the DEVs then selects the COA that they believe will best accomplish the goals.  This step is commonly known as the Commander's step.

  (1)  The purpose of COA Comparison and Decision is to facilitate the DEVs review of the pros and cons of each option(s) and to decide on the right solution (course of action) that will best accomplish the goals.  During COA Comparison and Decision each COA is evaluated against the DEVs established evaluation criteria and the DEVs compare them against one another using the results of the COA evaluation.

  (2)  The DEVs have options in selecting the appropriate COA: Choose selected COA; modify selected COA; Combine COAs; or start over (not a likely decision, but possible).  The DEVs selected COA becomes the basis of whats to be pushed to the live servers.

  (3)  The planners/players will finalize their estimates and provide input to the DEVs of their testing.

 

5.  Orders Development Step.  During this step, the DEVs decision is communicated in a form that tells players of the changes to the game and can be understood by explaining the details of those changes in order to accomplish the DEVs goals.

  (1)  The purpose of Orders Development is to translate and DEVs decision into oral, written and or graphic communication that informs players of changes.  Orders serve as the principal means by which the DEVs express their decision, intent and guidance for the game.

  (2)  Orders/Plan should be:

    (a)  Communicated in a clear, concise, and useful form that can be understood by those playing the game.

    (b)  Contain only information pertaining to those changes.

    (c)  Approved by the DEVs.

  (3)  Planners/players should participate in orders reconciliation and orders crosswalk.

 

6.  Transition Step.  Trasition is the final step of the Planning Process.  This step facilitates a shift from planning to execution.

  (1)  The purpose of transition is to ensure a successful shift from planning to execution.  It is an orderly handover of explanation of the approved changes to those who will be playing and managing the game.  Essential to transition is an approved order because it contains the goals, the DEVs intent and all necessary planning support tools.  Transition is designed to promote an understanding of the written order/plan by those responsible for playing and managing the game and creating plans.

  (2)  Transition may include explanations, testing by staff, and testing by players.

  (3)  Transition is a continuous process that requires a free flow of information between DEVs, STAFF, Planners, and players by all available means.

  (4)  Planners/players must ensure that there is a transition of the activities to those testing of the changes outlined in the order/plans,

 

Planning Process Comparison.  Although there may be minor differences between processes, such as the title of the step or where a particular activity is conducted within the process, overall they are the same.  The bottom line, if you know and understand the Planning Process you will be able to easily learn the other companies planning processes and be more successful in developing good products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Problem Framing.  This drives the process. 

 

Good: the problem you paint doesn't exist. No one but a few attention deficit suffering bedwetting hooligans would want PvP and PvE mixed so they can destroy stuff for no gain to themselves at all.

 

Process ends.

 

Sorry to be so agressive and flippant about it, but I want to make it perfectly clear that me getting thrown into PvP in any shape or form at all would basically destroy the game for me.

2 people like this

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