Sign in to follow this  
Madnath

Stealthed accounts don't get slay loot

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sheffie said:

How often does this problem occur? How many players benefit from this loophole? How many players suffer? How much of a difference does it make to their bank balance, to their game experience?

cant tell because the player is stealthed

cant tell because the player is stealthed

cant tell because the player is stealthed

oh you're one of the players that shoots down every suggestion with "muh economee" lmao

 

this was actually a really hilarious thing to happen in the past, you'd ride a priest over and spam summon soul stealthed accs over (being summoned doesnt break stealth) and was the whole reason the unique hunting etiquette garbage got put in in the first place and not unique stealing, just a fun part of wurm lore for yall ^.^

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1, There really is no reason not to fix this problem. Unless we are changing the way uniques work... and that is not going to happen.

Share this post


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

 

oh you're one of the players that shoots down every suggestion with "muh economee" lmao

 

 

 

You know, you can disagree with someone without attacking them. In addition to helping counter a culture of toxicity, that makes it less embarrassing in the cases where you misinterpret their post or their position.

Edited by Sheffie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sheffie said:

In addition to helping counter a culture of toxicity, that makes it less embarrassing in the cases where you misinterpret their post or their position.

 

5 hours ago, Sheffie said:

Really? The trouble with unique slayings is that they aren't elitist enough?

 

Here's an idea. If you are in the business of trapping uniques and dictating who gets the loot, and you don't want people in Local, then don't tell them where the slaying is.

Then, anyone who happens to live next door... well, they got lucky. Live with it. Or try harder next time, and trap the unique somewhere more remote. Or accept that you can't control literally everything.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were complaining about the dragon scale being distributed among too many people, were you not?

Did I misinterpret that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sheffie said:

You were complaining about the dragon scale being distributed among too many people, were you not?

Did I misinterpret that?

When did I do that? I am positive I raised the distribution of loot as one of the key factors that slayings go private for, which is true. And fixing that would remove one aspect of slays happening privately.

But guess what?

Not relevant to this thread. I'm also not going to try and go "HA look at past post from ages ago" as an awful attempt at deflecting being called toxic for a bad post that has no relevancy for this thread. I'm going to ask again that we stop trying to take our personal feelings about private slays into this thread, we understand that this suggestion is there to ENFORCE the rules we MUST abide by. This post has said no stance or statement for or against private slays. Please stop bringing your issues with that in here.

Edited by Madnath
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Madnath said:

Please stop bringing your issues with that in here.

 

Honestly I think you've said far more about my opinion than I have.

 

At the end of the day, we have a rule that isn't enforced by the code, and a request to change the code to enforce it. How serious a problem is it? How valuable would this code change be? Well, two people (so far) have said it isn't really possible to answer that, and no one has disagreed with their position. So, I'd be surprised if the devs decide that this is something that's going to make its way to the top of their to-do list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sheffie said:

Honestly I think you've said far more about my opinion than I have.

 

At the end of the day, we have a rule that isn't enforced by the code, and a request to change the code to enforce it. How serious a problem is it? How valuable would this code change be? Well, two people (so far) have said it isn't really possible to answer that, and no one has disagreed with their position. So, I'd be surprised if the devs decide that this is something that's going to make its way to the top of their to-do list.

We aren't here to discuss the likelihood that this gets implemented. I'm pretty sure most of us would be surprised about anything suggested being added.  We are just here to discuss if it SHOULD be implemented. Do you consider the proposed problem to be a problem or not and why? And as a secondary question, would the proposed change cause a problem or not and why?

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

Honestly I think you've said far more about my opinion than I have.

 

At the end of the day, we have a rule that isn't enforced by the code, and a request to change the code to enforce it. How serious a problem is it? How valuable would this code change be? Well, two people (so far) have said it isn't really possible to answer that, and no one has disagreed with their position. So, I'd be surprised if the devs decide that this is something that's going to make its way to the top of their to-do list.

There are a lot of rules that aren't and can't be enforced by code, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't make that the case when we can and when it'd work. Oversights can and will happen. This is something known as risk mitigation.

We've already had code in the thread that'd most likely make this work. A single line of code to prevent something that would require GM investigation, and a lot of awkwardness and potential bans? That seems like a damn good trade off for me. I am not going to argue against a suggestion that works to enforce rules that exist for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how petty does a team have to be to need this? We all see that small teams hunt things for fun.. and then again it resurface that it's for money...

is there a case of at least 1 time and somebody using 1 or 50 alts in a cave be sitting on a bench admiring the view from some hill in just enough distance and *somehow* triggering stealth on 1-50 alts accidentally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

how is this even being "discussed" lmfao. the rules clearly state that uninvited persons at a slay are to not be in the area when drops go. stealth has next to no application in pve, other than letting someone sneak their way into private slayings to take loot from the people who worked for it. 

Stealthing should disqualify you from receiving drops. Seeing as it's likely a very easy change, and would save GM's time having to deal with thieves it should definitely be changed. 

 

39 minutes ago, Finnn said:

how petty does a team have to be to need this? We all see that small teams hunt things for fun.. and then again it resurface that it's for money...

is there a case of at least 1 time and somebody using 1 or 50 alts in a cave be sitting on a bench admiring the view from some hill in just enough distance and *somehow* triggering stealth on 1-50 alts accidentally?

How ridiculous is it to think the people putting in the silver and work finding, penning, and killing uniques don't deserve the full rewards, should they want them?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jore said:

How ridiculous is it to think the people putting in the silver and work finding, penning, and killing uniques don't deserve the full rewards, should they want them?

 

Amen.  It's baffling to me how anyone could fail to recognize this highly significant and glaringly obvious point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't see all the rage about the "uniques". There is one per sever per roughtly two weeks. It is open season for anyone and any group of players to go and search from them. Not even needed to have any significant skills or to be "whales" or whatsoever.

Seriously, why expecting free income from the work of others?

Look around the history on Niarja, check the history on the north and south servers, newer groups are really successful on both. Go, leave deed, team up with your friends, enjoy.

EDIT: and this post is still off the topic, sorry. There are multiple of the same but this suggestion is about to easily incorporate code to force existing rules.

Edited by Jaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Jore said:

+1

how is this even being "discussed" lmfao. the rules clearly state that uninvited persons at a slay are to not be in the area when drops go. stealth has next to no application in pve, other than letting someone sneak their way into private slayings to take loot from the people who worked for it. 

Stealthing should disqualify you from receiving drops. Seeing as it's likely a very easy change, and would save GM's time having to deal with thieves it should definitely be changed. 

 

How ridiculous is it to think the people putting in the silver and work finding, penning, and killing uniques don't deserve the full rewards, should they want them?

How ridiculous is to think they put silver or much work, eventually it turns into a regular walk over relatively same places and times, obviously it's worth their time - else they wouldn't be doing it.

None of that was a topic btw.

 

It's a suggestion.. and it's up for discussion.. there's no proof of existence of such behavior, it's not in the rules to not stealth, pvpers stealth all the time.. somebody could do it and afk.. should the person be banned if that happens? It's not in the unique etiquette.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Jaz said:

Honestly I don't see all the rage about the "uniques". There is one per sever per roughtly two weeks. It is open season for anyone and any group of players to go and search from them. Not even needed to have any significant skills or to be "whales" or whatsoever.

Seriously, why expecting free income from the work of others?

Look around the history on Niarja, check the history on the north and south servers, newer groups are really successful on both. Go, leave deed, team up with your friends, enjoy.

EDIT: and this post is still off the topic, sorry. There are multiple of the same but this suggestion is about to easily incorporate code to force existing rules.

Problem comes from groups timing it.. and not leaving 'normal' healthy gameplay to the 'normal' players to have some water to get wet in it.. 

In a normal mmo you have respawn times every 10hours or so.. or w/e but normally you wouldn't be there to get both spawns, also there are several areas and different bosses or unique/elite mobs to kill for certain loot, instances etc..(all this helps to stabilize the market and have certain resource for everybody in a healthy manner) in wurm it's say 2 weeks, x servers and they are mostly farmed by same people on the clock.. with groups to increase the chances for success, sharing within the group etc.. all that helps a small group.. so far great.. but 0 content for the many. Pretty simple.. should it be addressed.. maybe, probably, maybe not.. does it cause drama.. oh...*pff..* yea.. a lot at times.

Edited by Finnn
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Zuelatak said:

+1 While I agree with everyone that private slayings suck. They do exist and there are rules in place and I judge no one for following a system they did not create. The rule states that you are not allowed to crash slayings, and stealthing is an abuse of that rule. It could create paranoia in those who host private slayings. It's also a lot of work for GMs if hosts are paranoid and ask for an area to be sweeped when there might not even be people there. I think within this current system stealthing should not provide rewards on PvE. PvP should remain untouched as it's okay to steal from slayings. 

 

13 hours ago, Stanlee said:

 


        if (p != null && p.getInventory() != null && p.isWithinDistanceTo(this, 300.0F) && p.isPaying() && (!p.isStealth() || p.isOnPvPServer()))

 

 

Agreed. +1  -> Allow PvE to be PvE.


FUN truancy belongs on PvP. It's highly desirable behaviour on PvP. Nothing wrong with it whatsoever. Indulge freely; on PvP servers ONLY.

 

Either play on PvP, and learn to enjoy lawlessness at the price it comes at.
Or play on PvE, and learn to enjoy lawfulness at the price it comes at.
Or play both, but align your behaviour and decisions to the bias of the server you're on, at all times.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Finnn said:

It's a suggestion.. and it's up for discussion.. there's no proof of existence of such behavior, it's not in the rules to not stealth, pvpers stealth all the time.. somebody could do it and afk.. should the person be banned if that happens? It's not in the unique etiquette.

 

Nobody is proposing that players should be banned for being stealthed on PvE. Only that someone who is stealthed in range of a unique kill does not (however inadvertantly) benefit from something they had no intention of participating in.

I've been on PvE, raw from combat. I've stealthed in reaction to white-name-in-local. I've stealthed to go afk in what feels like enemy territory to my survival reflexes. Nobody's saying that I should be banned for doing that. They're saying that if they happen to kill a unique in range of me because I froze up, I shouldn't get loot for that. I'm VERY okay with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Finnn said:

It's a suggestion.. and it's up for discussion.. there's no proof of existence of such behavior, it's not in the rules to not stealth, pvpers stealth all the time.. somebody could do it and afk.. should the person be banned if that happens? It's not in the unique etiquette.

"Discussing" with you always leads to a headache lmao. Let me break it down for ya :)

Just because the etiquette doesn't specify, "no stealthing," doesn't mean it's okay. There has been instances in the past of people stealthing into kills to steal loot. They use the stealth mechanic because if their name were to pop into local uninvited and they get loot, that's a rule break. Intentional or not, a GM could be called to force them to return the loot or they be banned. So, again, they stealth in order to not be noticed breaking the rules. Therefore, stealthing is being exploited in order for them to break rules and steal from other players.

Nobody is saying to ban people for stealthing buddy, just that it should disqualify them from loot so they can no longer use it to avoid being punished for stealing on pve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unlawful to steal on PvE. Period.

I do NOT want some PvE GM turning up demanding that I give back what I have 'stolen', just because I happened to be where I wasn't legally entitled to be. I do NOT want to have to explain to some hostile board of inquiry, what I was doing stealthed, at that time and place, to someone who doesn't already understand why. And I'm sure the GM wouldn't appreciate my reaction to that situation arising either.

 

As these things are secret, how would I know where I'm not supposed to be? Sounds like I'd better stealth if I see a white-name-in-local, because I could be breaking a rule just by wandering into an area I didn't even know was off-limits.

 

Which is why I do not like to play on PvE servers. At least on PvP, the worst that could happen is that white-name-in-local will try to hunt you down and send you for respawn. But it's not a punishment for breaking a rule; it's a fun game we play together.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 to more papering over the cracks for an awful system.  No matter how ill conceived they are, the rules are the rules.

 

Oh and, while we're at it, if a slaying happens and your deed is in local (but you are not allowed to be there) the GMs should award you a day of premium time and sleep bonus to make up for the lost playtime (it's only fair)

 

Diverted travellers should be given either a free teleport to their destination or a day's premium time and the SB if they have to log off.

 

That way, we're sorting out some other issues too!

Edited by Etherdrifter
  • Like 1
  • Cat 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Etherdrifter said:

+1 to more papering over the cracks for an awful system.  No matter how ill conceived they are, the rules are the rules.

 

Oh and, while we're at it, if a slaying happens and your deed is in local (but you are not allowed to be there) the GMs should award you a day of premium time and sleep bonus to make up for the lost playtime (it's only fair)

 

Diverted travellers should be given either a free teleport to their destination or a day's premium time and the SB if they have to log off.

 

That way, we're sorting out some other issues too!

I don't think it needs to go that far. If you live local to a slay, it seems only fair in my mind you're invited along as a +1 on the basis of it just being you and you're not inviting all your alliance. And if they refuse to invite you, then I think it's on them to try and arrange to do it while you're not playing, or come to another agreement. I agree in flexibility and an extra helping hand for players that by some magic twist of fate do end up inconvenienced by it, but lets not go too crazy, as it's beyond my real point I want to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jore said:

"Discussing" with you always leads to a headache lmao. Let me break it down for ya :)

Just because the etiquette doesn't specify, "no stealthing," doesn't mean it's okay. There has been instances in the past of people stealthing into kills to steal loot. They use the stealth mechanic because if their name were to pop into local uninvited and they get loot, that's a rule break. Intentional or not, a GM could be called to force them to return the loot or they be banned. So, again, they stealth in order to not be noticed breaking the rules. Therefore, stealthing is being exploited in order for them to break rules and steal from other players.

Nobody is saying to ban people for stealthing buddy, just that it should disqualify them from loot so they can no longer use it to avoid being punished for stealing on pve.

Do you claim to know of people breaking rules and you're not sharing that with gms? Why? So far in this thread nobody have shared of knowledge of this being more of a theoretically possible action, but you claim to know of existing cases, several???

Do, tell us more! Or are you just talking nonsense to seem smart there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Finnn said:

Do you claim to know of people breaking rules and you're not sharing that with gms? Why? So far in this thread nobody have shared of knowledge of this being more of a theoretically possible action, but you claim to know of existing cases, several???

Do, tell us more! Or are you just talking nonsense to seem smart there?

 

20 hours ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

this was actually a really hilarious thing to happen in the past, you'd ride a priest over and spam summon soul stealthed accs over (being summoned doesnt break stealth) and was the whole reason the unique hunting etiquette garbage got put in in the first place and not unique stealing, just a fun part of wurm lore for yall ^.^

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2021 at 7:01 PM, Sheffie said:

How often does this problem occur? How many players benefit from this loophole? How many players suffer? How much of a difference does it make to their bank balance, to their game experience?

 

22 hours ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

cant tell because the player is stealthed

cant tell because the player is stealthed

cant tell because the player is stealthed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this