Darnok's creature suggestions

[Darnok 214]

2 hours ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

not on cele no, but glad we've established it's not a problem on every server 

 

what are your thoughts on the no wild horses warning in the tutorial i suggested, maybe if people were directed towards harmony and melody it'd fix spawns and make all the servers lively

 

55 minutes ago, brattygirl said:

But I just gave you evidence that it does not? You went from saying "I care about the server I am playing on" (which is cadence) to now the problem exists on every server. Make up your mind. 

 

Let me put it this way ... the problem exists on every server where there is an animal limit, but it is visible to players on servers with larger number of active players, it cannot be changed by proposing a detour to players starting the game. On servers with a minimum number of players, the problem also occurs, but it's hidden.

Similarly, on older maps, where players have already reached 5-speed and do not need so many animals on deed, now they only need a small herd that inherits max traits, but problem also exists there, but it is also invisible to players.

 

This problem can only be solved by adding the Harsh winter mechanism (or something that would solve it in similar way). Even the addition of 5 new maps, which would cause the players to disperse, would not solve this problem, but postpone it and hide it for a while.

 

Imagine what would happen if players would decide to bring more horses from these 5 new maps to Cad?
Then we would see absolute zero wild spawns of non-aggressive animals, and if players would went further and brought more and more animals to Cad, from other maps, probably horses on players deeds would start dying for no reason.
And if you go further, a player who would transport horse number 50001 to Cad would crash server, because limit, if I remember correctly, is 50k.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Darnok

[Locath 533]

15 minutes ago, Darnok said:

On servers with a minimum number of players, the problem also occurs, but it's hidden.

By "hidden" you mean that there are plenty of horses for everyone, as evidenced above? To me that means that there is no problem.

 

15 minutes ago, Darnok said:

And if you go further, a player who would transport horse number 50001 to Cad would crash server,

The What? All servers are filling up those slots as much as the limit allows but yet people bring in animals from other servers without issues for a long time. You are making up disaster scenarios which are not possible, to further push your agenda while knowing that animal cages and animal transporting between servers exist for a long time.

 

Once the limit is reached, new animals simply don't spawn until number of live animals goes below the threshold again.

 

It's not like overflowing an integer, it's an arbitrary number which can be changed by the devs at any time at their will.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Locath

[Oblivionnreaver 5,175]

8 minutes ago, Darnok said:

the problem exists on every server where there is an animal limit and a sufficient number of active players, it cannot be changed by proposing a detour to players starting the game.

feel free to prove that there's not any wild mobs, maybe a video of you running around for a bit not finding passive mobs or casting reveal creatures because a quick ride around around on cadence for me shows that there's quite a few wild horses around. being too lazy to check new spots isn't an excuse. harmony only has 25% less deeds/players than cadence and you say nobody plays there, so i'd like to see some evidence that isn't just you throwing out buzzwords

 

17 minutes ago, Darnok said:

it cannot be changed by proposing a detour to players starting the game.

if cadence has this issue, but harmony doesn't, then it's somewhere around 105-110 players on a server average that causes this. multiply this by how many servers are currently out (16) gives us 1600 players average with no issues if they're all spread out evenly. of course, it's a completely asinine idea that'd never work in practice but it's a darnok thread so we can just say it's the only way to fix the game and it's instantly perfect.

[Ekcin 2,417]

31 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

feel free to prove that there's not any wild mobs, maybe a video of you running around for a bit not finding passive mobs or casting reveal creatures because a quick ride around around on cadence for me shows that there's quite a few wild horses around. being too lazy to check new spots isn't an excuse. harmony only has 25% less deeds/players than cadence and you say nobody plays there, so i'd like to see some evidence that isn't just you throwing out buzzwords

 

if cadence has this issue, but harmony doesn't, then it's somewhere around 105-110 players on a server average that causes this. multiply this by how many servers are currently out (16) gives us 1600 players average with no issues if they're all spread out evenly. of course, it's a completely asinine idea that'd never work in practice but it's a darnok thread so we can just say it's the only way to fix the game and it's instantly perfect.

It is all rubbish. I saw several streams from cadence revealing that there are indeed wild farm animals of every kind, and of course aggressive mobs. And that was the case even months before with a 3fold population. If it were about players per terrain, Melody should have the same if not slightly worse problem, as they have 1/4 of the terrain, 1/4 of the populace, but 1/3.6 of the settlements, so the situation cannot differ significantly.  Argueing with Darnok is waste of time and bandwidth.

[ChampagneDragon 974]

On 7/29/2021 at 5:38 AM, Darnok said:

 

Want to pay money to maintain a huge deed that serves as a storehouse for animals that other players can't use? This is supposed to be fair?

I read through half of this thread, and noticed @Darnokuse the word "Fair' repeatedly.

 

Here's the thing: life isn't fair. Some have advantages, some don't.  Once you grow up you realize this and work within the confines you've been given until you can break those confines and achieve whatever your dream is. Or not. It's totally up to you. But in doing so we can't trample on some else. We can't stomp our feet and DEMAND that everyone be given the same privileges. It doesn't work like that.

 

Wurm is the same. Some have "advantages" , whether it be an open credit card they want to use to advance in the game (in this aspect by paying for a huge deed)  or simply by having played for many years to grind and accumulate. Is it "fair" to tell them that they are not allowed to use those advantages? Is it "fair" to say "hey, you grinded up AH to 80, but this person who has touched the grooming brush once in their two years of playing DESERVES to be able to breed horses and bison just like you" Is it fair to say "Your deed is too big and new players are finding it hard/impossible to maintain a small deed, so everyone is now limited to minimal size deeds."

 

Fairness is allowing everyone to advance as they can. Fairness is working your a$$ off to get to a point where you CAN do what you want. It isn't giving the new or casual  player(dare I say lazy?? not meaning every casual player is lazy, but specifically those who have played a long time but ignored certain aspects of the game because they're "boring") every advantage others have worked hard for just so they don't feel left behind.

/end rant

[Darnok 214]

1 hour ago, ChampagneDragon said:

I read through half of this thread, and noticed @Darnokuse the word "Fair' repeatedly.

 

Here's the thing: life isn't fair. Some have advantages, some don't.  Once you grow up you realize this and work within the confines you've been given until you can break those confines and achieve whatever your dream is. Or not. It's totally up to you. But in doing so we can't trample on some else. We can't stomp our feet and DEMAND that everyone be given the same privileges. It doesn't work like that.

 

 

Life is fair, man-made societies have unfair rules not life, because of groups that like higher profits and privileges, and since most of people think that every rule is invented by other people, they think life is unfair.

 

2 hours ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

feel free to prove that there's not any wild mobs, maybe a video of you running around for a bit not finding passive mobs or casting reveal creatures because a quick ride around around on cadence for me shows that there's quite a few wild horses around. being too lazy to check new spots isn't an excuse. harmony only has 25% less deeds/players than cadence and you say nobody plays there, so i'd like to see some evidence that isn't just you throwing out buzzwords

 

Show me video of wild horses or bisons instead, there is no point showing empty space 🙂

 

Quote

if cadence has this issue, but harmony doesn't, then it's somewhere around 105-110 players on a server average that causes this. multiply this by how many servers are currently out (16) gives us 1600 players average with no issues if they're all spread out evenly. of course, it's a completely asinine idea that'd never work in practice but it's a darnok thread so we can just say it's the only way to fix the game and it's instantly perfect.

 

Har and Cad have their problems, there are players who have not played on Cad, but have been creating deeds for storing horses and hell horses from the very beginning of Cad.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Darnok

[Oblivionnreaver 5,175]

12 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Show me video of wild horses or bisons instead, there is no point showing empty space 🙂

I'm not the one wanting changes based on mob density, burden of proof's on you to give legitimacy to your claims and to why the change should be made. 

[Brattygirl 919]

37 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Show me video of wild horses or bisons instead, there is no point showing empty space 🙂

You make all these claims in your suggestions, but won't provide evidence to support them. But demand other players provide evidence. Then after these players provide evidence, you tell them they are wrong and go back to square one with your claims. It's a never ending cycle. Prove evidence for your claims, or don't make them at all. Go troll another game. 

[Drayka 485]

12 hours ago, Darnok said:

It's about balancing mechanisms and attracting players, not getting rid of them. Unfortunately, every game is a zero-sum game and while balancing mechanisms you have to take something away from privileged groups.

Well there's part of the issue right there. I think you have grossly misunderstood the concept of zero-sum vs non-zero-sum, applied to an evolving system.

 

I can't find a webpage that explains it more succinctly than I could summarise here:

• Unless it's win-win, it's inimical to growth.
• Win-lose only works on underscrutinised inorganic models - those which simplistically ignore quantum mechanics.
• For organic systems - especially those which include human social dynamics - win-lose is almost indistinguishable from lose-lose, over time.

 

QED Scrap thinking of win-lose scenarios as 'necessary' and 'fair' - because it's effectively the definition of unfair - and focus on finding the more elusive win-win scenarios. It may be 10x harder, but it's 100x more effective.

 

This has been my go-to truism for over two decades now, and it has never ONCE failed me, even in the very WORST moments of my life:

Nobody wins unless we all win.

[Darnok 214]

2 hours ago, brattygirl said:

You make all these claims in your suggestions, but won't provide evidence to support them. But demand other players provide evidence. Then after these players provide evidence, you tell them they are wrong and go back to square one with your claims. It's a never ending cycle. Prove evidence for your claims, or don't make them at all. Go troll another game. 

 

2 hours ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

I'm not the one wanting changes based on mob density, burden of proof's on you to give legitimacy to your claims and to why the change should be made. 

 

I am only one discussing here, that actually is playing on Cad and you write that you know better after 10 minutes on server.
Show screenshots, videos or statistics, ideally there would be official statistics showing the number of wild horses, branded and on deeds. Everyone would see the chances of finding anything.

 

1 hour ago, Drayka said:

Well there's part of the issue right there. I think you have grossly misunderstood the concept of zero-sum vs non-zero-sum, applied to an evolving system.

 

I can't find a webpage that explains it more succinctly than I could summarise here:

• Unless it's win-win, it's inimical to growth.
• Win-lose only works on underscrutinised inorganic models - those which simplistically ignore quantum mechanics.
• For organic systems - especially those which include human social dynamics - win-lose is almost indistinguishable from lose-lose, over time.

 

QED Scrap thinking of win-lose scenarios as 'necessary' and 'fair' - because it's effectively the definition of unfair - and focus on finding the more elusive win-win scenarios. It may be 10x harder, but it's 100x more effective.

 

This has been my go-to truism for over two decades now, and it has never ONCE failed me, even in the very WORST moments of my life:

Nobody wins unless we all win.

 

There is no non-zero-sum game created by human 🙂

This is because creating such a game is impossible.

There is no win-win scenario, always one of the "win" gets a bigger profit, while other smaller one.

Balance is a constant struggle with groups that derive higher profits.

 

EDIT:

Do a simple experiment, lock up in a very small room with a few friends and secure the windows and doors so that no air enters. After a dozen or so minutes you will notice that even breathing is a zero-sum game, and this is the simplest and with fewest rules game human can create.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Darnok

[ChampagneDragon 974]

1 hour ago, Darnok said:

Life is fair, man-made societies have unfair rules not life, because of groups that like higher profits and privileges, and since most of people think that every rule is invented by other people, they think life is unfair.

AKA:

 

I want someone else to work harder to create benefits that I can enjoy while not working as hard...

 

 

[Darnok 214]

43 minutes ago, ChampagneDragon said:

AKA:

 

I want someone else to work harder to create benefits that I can enjoy while not working as hard...

 

 

 

No, same rules for everyone.

For those who started a year ago and managed to collect a lot of horses, bisons and other animals and for those who will start the game tomorrow, so that they have a chance to gather exactly the same amount of the same animals at the same time. And enjoy the game just as much as more advanced players, because the fact that at the beginning of the map you could get a few horses from each trip beyond the deed was fun for many players, now it should be the same.

 

AKA Harsh winter is only solution for this problem 🙂

 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Darnok

[TheTrickster 2,287]

6 hours ago, Drayka said:

Well there's part of the issue right there. I think you have grossly misunderstood the concept of zero-sum vs non-zero-sum, applied to an evolving system.

 

I can't find a webpage that explains it more succinctly than I could summarise here:

• Unless it's win-win, it's inimical to growth.
• Win-lose only works on underscrutinised inorganic models - those which simplistically ignore quantum mechanics.
• For organic systems - especially those which include human social dynamics - win-lose is almost indistinguishable from lose-lose, over time.

 

QED Scrap thinking of win-lose scenarios as 'necessary' and 'fair' - because it's effectively the definition of unfair - and focus on finding the more elusive win-win scenarios. It may be 10x harder, but it's 100x more effective.

 

This has been my go-to truism for over two decades now, and it has never ONCE failed me, even in the very WORST moments of my life:

Nobody wins unless we all win.

There is an old youth group simulation game called "WIN, as much as you can" which is an object lesson in this principle.  The instruction in the game title is given, and not elaborated.  It is only when tallying up scores that the cat is let out of the bag and it is the total score of all players that was meant to be maximized.  If they had chosen win-win options then everyone gets a little less than they would have on the win side of a win-lose but significantly more in total than the zero net sum of win-lose outcomes.  The thing is players choose their own option and essentially the win-win turns into a win-lose anytime one player opts to break ranks.  It is interesting to see the almost panic-attack level of frustration from those who figure it out early compared to those who keep on trying to maximize their own win at the cost of everyone.  If you win the largest personal win of the game then you will cause your entire team/cohort to lose big time.

Edited August 4, 2021 by TheTrickster

[Drayka 485]

20 hours ago, Darnok said:

There is no non-zero-sum game created by human 🙂

This is because creating such a game is impossible.

There is no win-win scenario, always one of the "win" gets a bigger profit, while other smaller one.

Balance is a constant struggle with groups that derive higher profits.

 

EDIT:

Do a simple experiment, lock up in a very small room with a few friends and secure the windows and doors so that no air enters. After a dozen or so minutes you will notice that even breathing is a zero-sum game, and this is the simplest and with fewest rules game human can create.

Pure sophistry.

Most banal example: If I am happy and I smile at someone, and they smile back because they are happy, we can both end up feeling even happier. Where's the win-lose in that?

[Ekcin 2,417]

21 hours ago, Darnok said:

EDIT:

Do a simple experiment, lock up in a very small room with a few friends and secure the windows and doors so that no air enters. After a dozen or so minutes you will notice that even breathing is a zero-sum game, and this is the simplest and with fewest rules game human can create.

Your "experiment" exposes the mindset of a pervert. In reality, where such a situation would occur, you may observe that the older consider to sit closer to the floor and breathe flatly so that the younger and the children have a chance to survive. There have been examples of such conduct. It may be alien to you as you are alien to decent and mentally healthy humans.

 

Edit: This is not meant as an insult. You should seriously consider to get psychological advice and assistance instead of pestering the forums.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Ekcin

[Ekcin 2,417]

Given the latest development of this "discussion" I politely ask the forum administration to lock the thread and remove all contributions considered inappropriate (mine included of course if considered so).

Edited August 4, 2021 by Ekcin

[Darnok 214]

4 hours ago, Ekcin said:

Your "experiment" exposes the mindset of a pervert. In reality, where such a situation would occur, you may observe that the older consider to sit closer to the floor and breathe flatly so that the younger and the children have a chance to survive. There have been examples of such conduct. It may be alien to you as you are alien to decent and mentally healthy humans.

 

Edit: This is not meant as an insult. You should seriously consider to get psychological advice and assistance instead of pestering the forums.

 

The experiment shows that even in the simplest situation, where there is a limited resource (air), we are dealing with a zero-sum game, similar in Wurm, each game element that is limited (number of animals per map) also creates a zero-sum game.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Darnok

[Madnath 3,113]

1 hour ago, Darnok said:

 

The experiment shows that even in the simplest situation, where there is a limited resource (air), we are dealing with a zero-sum game, similar in Wurm, each game element that is limited (number of animals per map) also creates a zero-sum game.

 

And it's not relevant because animal spawns aren't suddenly turned off to make it limited and there's ways to bring creatures from other servers for your own use

 

5 hours ago, Ekcin said:

Given the latest development of this "discussion" I politely ask the forum administration to lock the thread and remove all contributions considered inappropriate (mine included of course if considered so).

maybe when they can be bothered. 6 pages of weak arguments for this suggestion where Darnok is getting dabbed and flamed on, but people act a wee bit upsetti spaghetti in the stealthed alts thread and it's locked. really activates the almonds.

[Darnok 214]

8 hours ago, Madnath said:

 

And it's not relevant because animal spawns aren't suddenly turned off to make it limited and there's ways to bring creatures from other servers for your own use

 

 

Like I said before

 

On 8/3/2021 at 8:42 PM, Darnok said:

 

No, same rules for everyone.

For those who started a year ago and managed to collect a lot of horses, bisons and other animals and for those who will start the game tomorrow, so that they have a chance to gather exactly the same amount of the same animals at the same time. And enjoy the game just as much as more advanced players, because the fact that at the beginning of the map you could get a few horses from each trip beyond the deed was fun for many players, now it should be the same.

 

AKA Harsh winter is only solution for this problem 🙂

 

[Finnn 3,321]

By 'same rules for all', what's wrong with using the core game mechanics and bound results to skill, you get better skill - you get better results, instead of spinning wheel of fate for rng rolls?

Get better in certain skill - get better results.

Nobody binds you or other to start from 0 traited wild animals, old system allowed even f2ps to clone 5speeds at not reliable but quite doable rate which allowed total noobs to make 5speed horses for own use or even to sell such(not that lucky to often score good results - again f2p.. 20 skill.. no reason to expect them to get 5 traits with 20 skill at all).

 

What's wrong with new players buying or getting gift or finding fallen deed's old herd of 5speeds and 'cloning' them to jumpstart a zero to hero status with good reliable results?

It's a well known, familiar and liked mechanic with the trait cloning and binding results to skill, rather than using rng as lottery to get good or mostly bad results, it offers progression and something to work towards.. to get more reliable outcomes from actions.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Finnn
100 typos.. fix one.. 101 typos left..(treasure hunt)

[Darnok 214]

If your FS is 15+ higher than FS of the mob you are fighting then character takes 100% damage on hit (normal amount of dmg, like right now):

- additionally your horse/mount takes 33% damage, but chance to hit is calculated separately according to horse's combat traits (can be also diminished by barding),

- if you are hunting with a cart or a wagon, additionally vehicle takes 66% damage, but chance to hit is 100% and even if the mob does not hit the player, vehicle will take 66% of damage, and each animal attached to vehicle takes 15% damage also at 100% chance to hit (can be diminished by barding and combat trait).

 

Thanks to this, an ordinary newbie traveling on foot or on a donkey will not feel any changes or extra problems.
The average player fighting bear (25FS) on his horse or cart with 30-35FS also won't be more vulnerable than he is now.
When fighting/escaping from a stronger mob, average player will not be more vulnerable than at the moment.

 

But if player with 60+ FS wants to kill all the weak mobs in sight, it won't be that easy for him.

He will need a good horse with combat traits even on PvE servers (breeders should like this idea) and barding OR a vehicle with good ql (crafters should like this idea).

Trade-off either you travel fast 5-speed/5-draft or you have a mount 5-combat or hybrid of speed and combat traits.

 

And that was the last suggestion, see you in game 🙂

 

[Archaed 2,280]

21 minutes ago, Darnok said:

If your FS is 15+ higher than FS of the mob you are fighting then character takes 100% damage on hit (normal amount of dmg, like right now):

- additionally your horse/mount takes 33% damage, but chance to hit is calculated separately according to horse's combat traits (can be also diminished by barding),

- if you are hunting with a cart or a wagon, additionally vehicle takes 66% damage, but chance to hit is 100% and even if the mob does not hit the player, vehicle will take 66% of damage, and each animal attached to vehicle takes 15% damage also at 100% chance to hit (can be diminished by barding and combat trait).

 

Thanks to this, an ordinary newbie traveling on foot or on a donkey will not feel any changes or extra problems.
The average player fighting bear (25FS) on his horse or cart with 30-35FS also won't be more vulnerable than he is now.
When fighting/escaping from a stronger mob, average player will not be more vulnerable than at the moment.

 

But if player with 60+ FS wants to kill all the weak mobs in sight, it won't be that easy for him.

He will need a good horse with combat traits even on PvE servers (breeders should like this idea) and barding OR a vehicle with good ql (crafters should like this idea).

Trade-off either you travel fast 5-speed/5-draft or you have a mount 5-combat or hybrid of speed and combat traits.

 

And that was the last suggestion, see you in game 🙂

 

Oh good, now you can play and realise just how bad that is 

[Darnok 214]

15 minutes ago, Archaed said:

Oh good, now you can play and realise just how bad that is 

 

If you have 75+ FS you can hunt trolls on foot and use your horse only to run away, but from other of my suggestion I wanted to add a progress bar when mounting your horse/vehicle and with time depending on the type of armor, heavier armor it should take longer to jump on horse/vehicle.

 

In other threads, I suggested adding stronger mobs 70+ FS (werewolves, bandits, mammoths - a few months ago), so even if you were close to 90FS, you would have something to hunt for and not worry about this mechanism.

 

 

[Archaed 2,280]

Can you define the problem this change solves? 

[Votip 1,618]

-1 another dumb idea