Darnok's creature suggestions

[Archaed 2,280]

17 minutes ago, Drayka said:

Unless you're gonna decide you're going to rise to the challenge of tutoring Darnok in how to post better suggestions, in a way that benefits him and not just the playerbase that want their attitude that he shouldn't be here ratified, that's not a particularly useful attitude for you to hold even for your own benefit. Especially on a thread where the REQUEST for specifically HIS input was quoted in the OP.

I have multiple times, asking for the benefit of working through it and the gameplay loops. 

 

This has been ignored every time, and his continued work continues to show lack of thought regarding the work:reward, gameplay loops, and the goal of the mechanic at all. 

 

So with that in mind, I am tired of trying to help Darnok post reasonings and the goals of mechanics, and will instead post 😭😭😭😭😭 because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what I post, it's not taken on board. 

[Drayka 485]

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Wait so, did you mean pets only for priests?

If the priest does not have the ability to mine, then... goblin can be expanded to such an extent that for the duration of the contract he is treated as a branded animal and you can give him items such as a pickaxe and depending on ql of pickaxe game will calculate your skill gain.

The player selects wall and selects the mining option, his character does not start mining, but goblin will do it

OR

in the goblin's panel you set what tunnel it should be (straight, down, up) and in which direction to mine (NSWE) and how many tiles.
But then the goblin should be limited in how many actions it can perform per hour.

No, I didn't mean only for priests, I stated them as the primary target audience and quoted their forbidden actions.

 

Quote

Gamebreaking how? What causes the problem in finding it?

For 1 example: You added an unnecessary mechanic that it attack vehicles which have even 1 tick of damage on them. The result of which, if it were to be implemented precisely as you suggest, would result in it being considered a public service to annihilate this critter wherever and whenever it spawns. You made it too much of a nuisance to the entire playerbase to be allowed to be easily available anywhere to anyone.

 

Quote

Meaning?

The fact that you put your wolfdog on a defensive position and it helps slow down chase of too strong mobs or players in PvP would be exploded, how?

After all, wolfdog can be killed by another player at any time and he only stays in this position for a few minutes.

That wasn't the only mechanic I thought would be exploited, but it is certainly borderline exploitable itself.

You're making these mobs too complicated. They fail to fulfil their primary function efficiently, and try too hard to appeal to a wider audience right off the bat.

 

Calm it down. Design something very simple, very narrow focus, that does what it's supposed to do as the main event, and then add in some resistance to abusing the mechanic without overdoing it to the point where the target audience gets less back than they could be expected to put in.

 

Don't try to include an additional 50 solutions to peripheral concerns in one set of mobs, because each single mechanic has a massive potential for bugs and exploits you can't see, but veterans can spot instantly.

 

Don't be afraid to scrap and reinvent your earlier suggestions to fit a new purpose. What is posted in this forum is the opposite of set-in-stone, and that can be very liberating if you learn to work with that instead of against it.

 

It doesn't matter if it's boring, if it improves lives. Because, the last but not least priority, is to leave room for the devs to add their own creative flair. It also encourages players to suggest little additions they would like to see, and that means that THEY can get invested in a suggestion, because they HELPED to suggest it.

Edited August 23, 2021 by Drayka

[Drayka 485]

4 minutes ago, Archaed said:

So with that in mind, I am tired of trying to help Darnok post reasonings and the goals of mechanics, and will instead post 😭😭😭😭😭 because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what I post, it's not taken on board. 

As long as you don't mind it being interpreted as you feeling sorry for yourself because you can't explain yourself to him, any better than he can explain himself to you, go right ahead and cry a river for both of you.

[Drayka 485]

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Because on this server, the land is so shaped that even on the highest mountain I can ride on horse.

 

🤣😂

 

Oh boy, gotta luv your priorities mate. Thanks for the honesty.

[Darnok 214]

13 minutes ago, Drayka said:

No, I didn't mean only for priests, I stated them as the primary target audience and quoted their forbidden actions.

 

And any of these "pets" can be used by priests and regular characters with little expansion.

 

13 minutes ago, Drayka said:

For 1 example: You added an unnecessary mechanic that it attack vehicles which have even 1 tick of damage on them. The result of which, if it were to be implemented precisely as you suggest, would result in it being considered a public service to annihilate this critter wherever and whenever it spawns. You made it too much of a nuisance to the entire playerbase to be allowed to be easily available anywhere to anyone.

 

I did not write that 1% damage should be a sufficient condition for a beaver to convert the vehicle/boat into wood scraps, it was only example/inspiration for new feature.

If I have to give a specific value, in my opinion it should be 50+% of damage on vehicle and I think it would be more useful if it was 50% kindling and 50% wood scraps than just wood scraps.

 

13 minutes ago, Drayka said:

That wasn't the only mechanic I thought would be exploited, but it is certainly borderline exploitable itself.

You're making these mobs too complicated. They fail to fulfil their primary function efficiently, and try too hard to appeal to a wider audience right off the bat.

 

Calm it down. Design something very simple, very narrow focus, that does what it's supposed to do as the main event, and then add in some resistance to abusing the mechanic without overdoing it to the point where the target audience gets less back than they could be expected to put in.

 

Don't try to include an additional 50 solutions to peripheral concerns in one set of mobs, because each single mechanic has a massive potential for bugs and exploits you can't see, but veterans can spot instantly.

 

I think you get the wrong impression...

I am offering a lot of features, but that does not have to be everything assigned to one "pet", you can treat some of these functions as alternative additional properties so that the given "pet" is not boring.

And in my opinion, creating a whole mechanic or new animal just for a single use is a bit of a waste of time, suggested mechanisms or animals should have many functions that can be used in various situations.

Horses would be pretty terrible if they could only be used for riding, but could no longer pull carts or wagons, couldn't be bred and wouldn't drop any loot when killed.

But no one says horses are too complex, why? Because you're used to it over years.

 

Animals have different traits, for wolfdog, depending on whether it has traits combat/draft/speed, it can have different additional functions, basic function would still be digging.

For example, wolfdog with output can be used additionally to block tiles. Speed for tracking, draft for pulling a sled (bonus speed on snow) if we get one in-game.

 

Goblins could come from different tribes divided into 4 sides of the world NSWE (something like grapes and wine) and depending on the tribe each could have a different skin color and additional properties:

- a higher chance of mine gem,

- source crystal,

- they would offer a greater range of prospecting in the mine,

- or a tunnel mined by them could for limited time have walls so strong that they would not collapse,

- or a goblin equipped with a pen and paper could draw a mine plan for the player when player is mining or prospecting walls,

- when passing near a wall, goblin could warn player that this wall is about to collapse (but that would probably require a change in the current system, which is random),

- when goblin starts mining, he could also tell you absolute value on what level above sea level it is at,

 

 

 

 

[Drayka 485]

51 minutes ago, Darnok said:

I did not write that 1% damage should be a sufficient condition for a beaver to convert the vehicle/boat into wood scraps, it was only example/inspiration for new feature.

If I have to give a specific value, in my opinion it should be 50+% of damage on vehicle and I think it would be more useful if it was 50% kindling and 50% wood scraps than just wood scraps.

You would still not get that past the playerbase and devs. Ownership is a huge deal, as is persistence of property when the player is not logged in to defend their property from vermin.

Decay tick abstracts the effect of vermin already. Just because you can see 'huge rats' does not mean that there aren't 'invisible regular rats' chewing on things already.

Decay tick already does this, and decay tick is NOT linear, already.

 

Quote

I think you get the wrong impression...

I am offering a lot of features, but that does not have to be everything assigned to one "pet", you can treat some of these functions as alternative additional properties so that the given "pet" is not boring.

And in my opinion, creating a whole mechanic or new animal just for a single use is a bit of a waste of time, suggested mechanisms or animals should have many functions that can be used in various situations.

You aren't offering, you're practically force-feeding. And you're coming off as desperate, to those who don't read you as being deliberately disruptive and cocky.

 

Quote

Horses would be pretty terrible if they could only be used for riding, but could no longer pull carts or wagons, couldn't be bred and wouldn't drop any loot when killed.

But no one says horses are too complex, why? Because you're used to it over years.

No. Horses are 'imported', EXPECTED functionality in a non-industrial setting that provide FAMILIAR references to history. That is totally not the same thing.

 

If you stop trying to appeal to an invisible audience in your head (that doesn't include anyone who posts on your topics) with every suggestion, you will have more success in not alienating 99% of your readership, including the development team itself.

 

Slow down. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with complex suggestions, but there is something wrong in posting too much too soon, given your current communication skills. This is a real playerbase, with real people, real programmers and real investors. It's NOT as simple as an 'ideal reality' situation of fantasy, where everyone else is an impossibly flawless human being with the power of telepathy. And honestly, even if they were, the way your mind works still would be a struggle for the majority of the population to relate to. There is nothing much they can do about that, if you won't even try to meet them halfway.

 

Give yourself a fighting chance to be understood by an ordinary person. You don't have to stop being you, you just have to accept that this whole suggesting-stuff-thing isn't as easy as it 'should' be. Even I struggle to understand your thinking to the level you would need me to, and I've definitely got a better idea where you're coming from than most of your readership.

 

And for the record, I've often wondered about how huge the distance to 'halfway' is myself. It IS hard. It seems impossibly hard at times. But the rewards once I started to be understood by even 1 person, were worth all the effort I'd put in to get there.

Edited August 23, 2021 by Drayka

[Darnok 214]

51 minutes ago, Drayka said:

You would still not get that past the playerbase and devs. Ownership is a huge deal, as is persistence of property when the player is not logged in to defend their property from vermin.

Decay tick abstracts the effect of vermin already. Just because you can see 'huge rats' does not mean that there aren't 'invisible regular rats' chewing on things already.

Decay tick already does this, and decay tick is NOT linear, already.

 

I'm not the only one who see that abandoned boats and vehicles can be problematic. There are two solutions to this problem:
- speed up decay for those vehicles whose owner has been inactive for a long time
- or allow active players to remove this problematic vehicle faster, but ignore rest, a beaver might need several hours to remove each vehicle/boat and can only do so at request of another player who is disturbed by ship/vehicle.

 

Quote

You aren't offering, you're practically force-feeding. And you're coming off as desperate, to those who don't read you as being deliberately disruptive and cocky.

 

For me, the idea matters, not how the readers will feel, if I would try to target some feelings, I would try to manipulate other people, and it seems pointless to me.

 

Quote

 

No. Horses are 'imported', EXPECTED functionality in a non-industrial setting that provide FAMILIAR references to history. That is totally not the same thing.

 

If you stop trying to appeal to an invisible audience in your head (that doesn't include anyone who posts on your topics) with every suggestion, you will have more success in not alienating 99% of your readership, including the development team itself.

 

We differ here, I am not trying to please some audience, I am suggesting solutions that in my opinion are balanced or that are supposed to bring balance where there is none.

 

My favorite example of a 2-handed axe, compare the 2h-axe, 2h-sword and 2h-maul weight.
It will turn out that the weapon that deals the most damage is the lightest.
Is it a balanced solution? In my opinion nope.

Now how to solve this problem?
1. It is possible to reduce the weight of the maul and the sword, but this will even further make dual-wield wrong choice.

2. There is also a solution that harms the group that is taking advantage of this fact at the moment, i.e. users of 2h-axe, and the weight of this weapon should be increased.

Will most of the audience like it? Certainly not.

Is it good idea? Definitely yes.

 

Quote

 

Give yourself a fighting chance to be understood by an ordinary person. You don't have to stop being you, you just have to accept that this whole suggesting-stuff-thing isn't as easy as it 'should' be. Even I struggle to understand your thinking to the level you would need me to, and I've definitely got a better idea where you're coming from than most of your readership.

 

 

Ordinary people/players don't make decisions about whether an idea is good or bad, so why bother?

 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Darnok

[Darnok 214]

2 hours ago, Drayka said:

 

🤣😂

 

Oh boy, gotta luv your priorities mate. Thanks for the honesty.

 

Truth is I bought the first premium to test horse riding, but it was on Melody, then I saw the size of the map matters and Cad was quite nice for rider and that I can hunt with my horse and it stayed that way.

 

As for AH and fixes, one more suggestion, at the moment hunters and AH-player are opponents. Both produce meat, animal parts, hides and pelts.

It would be good to find a solution so that in medium and late game AH-players do not completely destroy profession of hunters.

 

Maybe it would be better if animals bred in captivity, the more traits they have, the lower ql should yield of hides and pelts.
While wild animals would give player fewer resources, but of better quality?

 

Or some resources would be assigned only to wild animals and some only to farm animals (game keeps track of where animals comes from random spawn or bred by player).

[Finnn 3,321]

35 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

Truth is I bought the first premium to test horse riding, but it was on Melody, then I saw the size of the map matters and Cad was quite nice for rider and that I can hunt with my horse and it stayed that way.

 

As for AH and fixes, one more suggestion, at the moment hunters and AH-player are opponents. Both produce meat, animal parts, hides and pelts.

It would be good to find a solution so that in medium and late game AH-players do not completely destroy profession of hunters.

 

Maybe it would be better if animals bred in captivity, the more traits they have, the lower ql should yield of hides and pelts.
While wild animals would give player fewer resources, but of better quality?

 

Or some resources would be assigned only to wild animals and some only to farm animals (game keeps track of where animals comes from random spawn or bred by player).

"makes total sense.." the healthier and better gene'd creature is .. the worse materials you could produce from it?

Is BIO food only overpriced and actually worse?

 

AH breeders do not compete with 'hunters', there's no hunters class or guild in wurm.. or passive side job as such.. most grind fs, and do not bother to look at the kill after the hp bar stops "glowing red", the FS or weapon-skill is gained, time to move on.. there's another a few tiles away.. awaiting it's death. ( 2 reasons here - pve/pvpers grinding weapon skill for a title or mastery preparedness for pve/pvp reasons with events like rift/uniques/exploration update/boredom; fs.. self explanatory - some want to stop being a "nub" vs a crocodile or a troll and have the option to fight/slaughter it instead of only having the "option" to run)

 

Hoarding isn't a problem, game's based on supply and demand, if somebody overstocks on something it's because they do not see the point to sell cheap(resource is more valuable to remain where it is, for future use or trading, whichever is more valuable to the person holding the materials - being meat/hide/NS bits/crops/etc resources) 

* In the end these materials are not on the market to affect anything, other than future possible usefulness of some resource, which can again fill only certain amount of need on the market, nobody is that prepared to fill the needs of everybody unless they do something questionably reasonable with their time or game rules.

 

Pelts.. you need 1-2 pelts for probably year(s), ql100 isn't hard to get or buy.. it's normally 10copper, some gift these around for free, other sell them at virtually no cost - when they are enchanted, you normally pay only for the enchant's cost.

New or "medium" player can not ever scratch the floor of that market, you want IN on that - go grind channeling, or butchering or spend a good amount of coin on butchering imbue.

Game is about skill.. get better or gather scraps that nobody wants, it's normal, nobody wants peasant "food" once they try the good stuff. 

There's nothing unique in the loot-tables for butchering, if there were such.. think halloween event.., you'd get ONE BIG NOTHING - further explanation: the same farming fs/weapon skill and more will go into the woods and literally kill only event or loot-dropping creature type, a new player will be left with very close to 0 chance to win anything from a good drop search when it comes to hunting. You need to get a good mount/vehicle and to spend time to look for such kills, you'll need armor/weapon/enchants do be good at the killing... so whole 'balance' and more power to the nubi-dubis.. is just not happening.

 

Game is already self balancing, and the only thing a new player have to do is work toward improving it's skills.. nobody stops the newbies from clearing their local hunting area from the 20-50 creatures daily and collecting the meat and w/e materials, since they do what they can do.. and that is at the very start - a big "NOTHING", but with every next kill - they get a bit more skill for that weapon, more fs, gain resources and stats.. which all translates into progression with time.

 

You expect faster progression - WELL.. the GAME expects you to play more to get that much "power".

All comes down to what preparedness and knowledge a new player have for whatever it's goal is currently.. being fs/resource hoarding methods or grinding a skill.

 

RPG elements could be implemented to make things different.. but none of this is the way to go, it's needless tedious micromanagement with no reward, a game killer, the crap that mobile games force you to do with every x hours and days you need to do this or you FOMO lost the progression of your life for this season and overall lost a position in the top score chart for years to come.. unless you pay2win return to your old place. It's what any smart person would skip going into, tedious unrewarding mechanics are repulsive and make people not deal with parts of the game or a game entirely. Stick to the stick and carrot.. you want a good and bad thing to balance things, game already have skill for that with new / old players, if new ones feel unrewarded .. well they are new.. they cant expect king's armor if they have only rags and play in the mud.. there's a small ladder to climb to get better and the only blocker is time and paying your premium, nothing that restricting.. if you do not have the time to progress in an mmo, you need single player desktop stew.. it's harm and welcoming and you're king and overpowering from level 1 to the end of the game no matter what, nobody to compete to your awesomeness; great for desktop experience, but that is not at all how mmos roll.

[Drayka 485]

11 hours ago, Darnok said:

Ordinary people/players don't make decisions about whether an idea is good or bad, so why bother?

 

I define a dev as an ordinary person, since I've actually met developers of other games here, and I can't tell them apart from any other player. I couldn't point to any single, ordinary, doesn't-stand-out-from-the-crowd person in this game, and say 'they are not a game developer' and be doing anything but making a complete ass of myself, because they ARE out there.

 

So why should you bother? Because your target audience blends in perfectly with that group. And if you cannot impress the regular guy that devs a different game, and knows what it takes to dev a game, I don't think much of your chances with the WO devs.

 

Stop trying to please some distorted image of a human authority figure, because although that IS what most people do, it's the no.1 way the majority go wrong in making suggestions.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Drayka

[Drayka 485]

11 hours ago, Darnok said:

For me, the idea matters, not how the readers will feel, if I would try to target some feelings, I would try to manipulate other people, and it seems pointless to me.

I understand what you mean by this, because I used to feel the same way. But it's not about 'manipulating' or 'avoiding manipulating', as we would understand the word. It's something that I had never encountered before, because I had never managed to form an 'ordinary' human connection with anyone, even my own blood relatives, before I started playing Wurm.

 

Playing Wurm Online is the only pastime that has enabled me to form peer-relationships. Always before in RL, I focused on authority figures to the exclusion of 'ordinary' people, because authorities were the ones that defined what happened in my life, whereas 'ordinary' people were the ones I avoided making connections with because they had no reason to interact with me, and they made that quite clear.

 

But meeting and interacting with self-appointed authorities in Wurm - my very first mayor for example, who had no other villagers but me - enabled me to start to bridge that gap. Enabled me to start learning how to co-operate with other people. And co- operation, is what this is all about. Being able to work with and alongside other people, instead of having to do everything independently, and shouting across the void to some unknowable authority.

 

A successful developer of an MMO, is someone who can work closely with many, many different people. They are in fact, the very opposite of what I was, with my isolationism and ability only to relate distantly to other people. They turned out to be 'distant', in a completely different way than I understood the word 'distant', in a social context. A way I had instinctively rejected in social interactions as seemingly toxic to me. I was wrong. Their kind of distant, allowed them to have a solid sense of integrity of self, in the middle of what was, to me, a fetid swamp of noise and conflicting interests. Self-integrity was something I could only achieve by staying far away from other people.

 

To quote @Finnn, Play The Game. Don't just exist in it, moving around everyone else and viewing them as competition for resources and the attention of authorities. The true success of an MMO, is in the content that cannot be programmed - the playerbase, and how it interacts with itself. So BE game-content, instead of viewing content as something that can only provided by programmers.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Drayka

[Drayka 485]

12 hours ago, Darnok said:

I'm not the only one who see that abandoned boats and vehicles can be problematic. There are two solutions to this problem:

No. There is a clear third solution to this problem, that can only be enacted by the playerbase itself, and the majority of suggestions revolving around the 'problem of abandoned vehicles' are overlooking even the potential existence of this solution, because they would rather the code dealt with it without them having to do anything.

 

The best-solution is already coded into the game. It requires no further major development of the code to 'fix' it, because the problem is not server-side. It's a puzzle for the playerbase to solve, using the tools already available to them. If there is a patch to the way vehicles are coded, it will probably be to bring it in line with a patch to the permission system, due to resolving something completely unrelated to abandoned vehicles.

[Drayka 485]

@Finnnfeedback: overkill on the formatting. I'm struggling to read your post whilst the distraction of the extreme-emphasised text is on-screen. Instinctual reflex is to skip the entire post and read nothing beyond the opening lines  - which I assume is the opposite of your desired outcome. I literally had to copy-paste to notepad to read this.

 

And having read it ... 🤣 I completely disagree with you. You've taken the praise of the existing mechanics to such an extreme that it's only a short leap to seeing how incredibly broken they really are, in extremis. You're one step short of demonstrating the underlying boom-bust cycle of a civilisation, and that's the opposite of sustainable PvE.

 

Thus, as there isn't a hunter's guild in Wurm, you've just demonstrated just-cause for an abstracted one. In RL, not having one is how we get genetically modified crops and farm-animals, that are so sickly that eating them is to invite chemical poisoning from all the artificial intervention to keep them alive and flourishing.

 

Thus, I suggest that @Darnokseparately suggests, that hunted, foraged and botanised food resources take on trait similar to 'fresh', that rebalances the convenience of farmed, picked and cull meat food sources that, when cooked without being bulk-stored first, confers some sort of health buff, regardless of quality. (As opposed to a nerf to existing, mass-production and storage mechanics.) Wild food is naturally balanced by nature on an ongoing basis, and nature is BETTER at that job than people.

 

This is NOT a newbie mechanic, but a diversity playstyle mechanic that makes it meaningful for naturally nomadic hunter/fighters to contribute a proportional share to the food market, rather than drifting away from the game because they are being bottlenecked in their development to be seen as only good for killing uniques or other players, which leads to unsustainably high-drama on both PvE and PvP servers alike.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Drayka

[Sheffie 1,120]

Welp.

Thanks for being up front about not caring how other people feel.

[Sheffie 1,120]

Point of information.

 

Is there any proof that breeding horses in captivity reduces the number of wild horse spawns? Or is everyone just building card houses on speculation?

(People looking at WU code doesn't count. I don't believe that the WU servers are set up the same way.)

 

OR

 

is it actually the case that people who've been playing the game longer, have more stuff, because they've been playing the game longer?

[Sheffie 1,120]

Complexity of development = moderate to high

Artist cost = high

Testing requirement = considerable

Overall potential to introduce bugs = significant

Benefits to player base = meh

Edited August 24, 2021 by Sheffie

[Drayka 485]

19 minutes ago, Sheffie said:

Complexity of development = moderate to high

Artist cost = high

Testing requirement = considerable

Overall potential to introduce bugs = significant

Benefits to player base = meh unquantified

Fixed it for you.

[Drayka 485]

1 hour ago, Sheffie said:

Welp.

Thanks for being up front about not caring how other people feel.

There's a difference between not caring how people feel, and learning to ignore how people feel as white-noise that is trying to destroy you, if only the difference between perspective of being the person feeling the emotion, and the perspective of the person being assaulted by the emotions of others.

 

Given a limited choice between ignoring emotions, and using emotions as weapons against each other, ignoring how people feel is the more logical solution.

 

Live long and prosper.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Drayka

[Finnn 3,321]

6 hours ago, Drayka said:

@Finnnfeedback: overkill on the formatting. I'm struggling to read your post whilst the distraction of the extreme-emphasised text is on-screen. Instinctual reflex is to skip the entire post and read nothing beyond the opening lines  - which I assume is the opposite of your desired outcome. I literally had to copy-paste to notepad to read this.

 

And having read it ... 🤣 I completely disagree with you. You've taken the praise of the existing mechanics to such an extreme that it's only a short leap to seeing how incredibly broken they really are, in extremis. You're one step short of demonstrating the underlying boom-bust cycle of a civilisation, and that's the opposite of sustainable PvE.

 

Thus, as there isn't a hunter's guild in Wurm, you've just demonstrated just-cause for an abstracted one. In RL, not having one is how we get genetically modified crops and farm-animals, that are so sickly that eating them is to invite chemical poisoning from all the artificial intervention to keep them alive and flourishing.

 

Thus, I suggest that @Darnokseparately suggests, that hunted, foraged and botanised food resources take on trait similar to 'fresh', that rebalances the convenience of farmed, picked and cull meat food sources that, when cooked without being bulk-stored first, confers some sort of health buff, regardless of quality. (As opposed to a nerf to existing, mass-production and storage mechanics.) Wild food is naturally balanced by nature on an ongoing basis, and nature is BETTER at that job than people.

 

This is NOT a newbie mechanic, but a diversity playstyle mechanic that makes it meaningful for naturally nomadic hunter/fighters to contribute a proportional share to the food market, rather than drifting away from the game because they are being bottlenecked in their development to be seen as only good for killing uniques or other players, which leads to unsustainably high-drama on both PvE and PvP servers alike.

you're double trolling...

stick to pvping in-game and not on the forums

 

4 hours ago, Sheffie said:

Point of information.

 

Is there any proof that breeding horses in captivity reduces the number of wild horse spawns? Or is everyone just building card houses on speculation?

(People looking at WU code doesn't count. I don't believe that the WU servers are set up the same way.)

 

OR

 

is it actually the case that people who've been playing the game longer, have more stuff, because they've been playing the game longer?

darnok does not play the game, posts troll threads and invents mechanics not part of the game for the sake of trolling the community, guy's not interested to learn, he's around to troll-"agree" with half or most of a reply.. then chuckle and troll back with a nonsense for some weird enjoyment.

[Darnok 214]

4 hours ago, Sheffie said:

Complexity of development = moderate to high

Artist cost = high

Testing requirement = considerable

Overall potential to introduce bugs = significant

 

I can't estimate it, so ok

 

4 hours ago, Sheffie said:

Benefits to player base = meh

 

You get a whole new kind of animals with new features that are not available in the game at the moment. So addition to game content.

New playstyle - the ability to sneak and avoid fighting in PvE opponents you don't want to fight.

Scouting in both PvE and PvP.

Possibility of introducing an interesting activity in place of 120 seconds of waiting for the meditation to end.

The ability to find a special mob or mobs that will give you resources for crafting new items.
The way to hunt this mob would be something different than just moving around and killing next mob with largest weapon you have.

You would have to hold your breath in and hope that nothing else will attack you when you are close to the beast, because if so, there is a possibility of failure.

 

Wurm needs more content to add the possibility of soft-failure in PvE. At the moment, each action gives you a practically guarantee of success, even if a failure occurs during imp, you can fix it in 5 seconds.

Such gameplay does not arouse emotions in players. If the game is to be exciting this has to change.

 

[Darnok 214]

20 hours ago, Finnn said:

"makes total sense.." the healthier and better gene'd creature is .. the worse materials you could produce from it?

Is BIO food only overpriced and actually worse?

 

You are right that it would not make sense, but it would be easy to implement.

 

Quote

AH breeders do not compete with 'hunters', there's no hunters class or guild in wurm.. or passive side job as such.. most grind fs, and do not bother to look at the kill after the hp bar stops "glowing red", the FS or weapon-skill is gained, time to move on.. there's another a few tiles away.. awaiting it's death.

 

So the argument that the current mechanics are a bit poorly designed.

 

Quote

 

Pelts.. you need 1-2 pelts for probably year(s), ql100 isn't hard to get or buy.. it's normally 10copper, some gift these around for free, other sell them at virtually no cost - when they are enchanted, you normally pay only for the enchant's cost.

 

 

The next two arguments for the fact that raw-resources (pelt) prices are not balancing very well.
The solution to either reduce the amount of pelts or speed up the damage they receive during use, fact that they deteriorate more slowly than steel tools probably also makes little sense.

 

8 hours ago, Drayka said:

 

Thus, I suggest that @Darnokseparately suggests, that hunted, foraged and botanised food resources take on trait similar to 'fresh', that rebalances the convenience of farmed, picked and cull meat food sources that, when cooked without being bulk-stored first, confers some sort of health buff, regardless of quality. (As opposed to a nerf to existing, mass-production and storage mechanics.) Wild food is naturally balanced by nature on an ongoing basis, and nature is BETTER at that job than people.

 

This is NOT a newbie mechanic, but a diversity playstyle mechanic that makes it meaningful for naturally nomadic hunter/fighters to contribute a proportional share to the food market, rather than drifting away from the game because they are being bottlenecked in their development to be seen as only good for killing uniques or other players, which leads to unsustainably high-drama on both PvE and PvP servers alike.

 

I was thinking about something else. I can see several groups of players:
- hunters
- breeders
- all the rest wanting just level up skills

 

Hunters should be specialized in hunting and killing animals maybe type of weapon should affect quality of the obtained resources during hunting (bow + arrows, spear, possibly a sword due to piercing dmg type) should be best set for a hunter who wants to collect high ql pelt and hides.

The choice of fighting style should also have an impact on resource quality. The "normal" style increases accuracy, so it would be perfect for hunting, where you have to hit precisely, so as not to damage the fur and other parts, which we want to get in the best possible quality.

 

Anyone hunting or leveling up with other weapons would also receive pelts and hides, but of lower quality.

And players who only want to level up for PvP would rather focus on aggressive or defensive style, because they are more useful for combat than normal style.

 

Now hunters vs breeders... wild animals have access to an infinite resource of high ql food, but pen-enclosed animals should be somewhat limited.
Maybe the game should count how many tiles there are for a given pen and how many animals are fed there, if this number of tiles is too low per animal, quality of food/grass decreases, i.e. the animal receives hidden trait reducing quality of resources that will be available after killing this animal.

The player could feed penned animals by hand using high ql grass or meat (depending on type of animal) or hay would count as a good, high ql food source to improve quality of pelts and hides on animals bred in captivity.

 

Thus, obtaining high ql pelt or hide would be possible from two sources, but in both cases it would cost a bit of effort.
Hunters would risk going beyond walls and would have to spend time exploring map and searching for right animals.
While breeders could dry grass and feed their animals with hay without any risk, increasing chance of getting good loot from livestock.

Players who would not be interested in resources, but skill levels would only get what they wanted, so resources they would gather would have minimal impact on economy.

 

Balanced idea?

Edited August 24, 2021 by Darnok

[Finnn 3,321]

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

So the argument that the current mechanics are a bit poorly designed.

Nobody complains, it's a sandbox and you have freedom for action, nobody but you feels at a bad spot with current mechanics.

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

The next two arguments for the fact that raw-resources (pelt) prices are not balancing very well.
The solution to either reduce the amount of pelts or speed up the damage they receive during use, fact that they deteriorate more slowly than steel tools probably also makes little sense.

Source?

Pelts come at low trash ql normally, most people have low butchering - it's balanced already. (on purpose not addressing the elephant)

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

I was thinking about something else. I can see several groups of players:
- hunters
- breeders
- all the rest wanting just level up skills

It is not a class specialization game - there are no hunters/breeders/skillers; You have 2 groups Priests and Not-priests: priests on their own separate in their own WL/BL branches and spell-abilities.

If you do come up with 2-3 class names, you might want to think of 100+ names for all skills while you're at it.

If you want to create classes consider recommending that as different suggestion to the devs directly, see how that goes, it's not like it haven't been suggested before and buried.

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Hunters should be specialized in hunting and killing animals maybe type of weapon should affect quality of the obtained resources during hunting (bow + arrows, spear, possibly a sword due to piercing dmg type) should be best set for a hunter who wants to collect high ql pelt and hides.

The choice of fighting style should also have an impact on resource quality. The "normal" style increases accuracy, so it would be perfect for hunting, where you have to hit precisely, so as not to damage the fur and other parts, which we want to get in the best possible quality.

 

Anyone hunting or leveling up with other weapons would also receive pelts and hides, but of lower quality.

And players who only want to level up for PvP would rather focus on aggressive or defensive style, because they are more useful for combat than normal style.

Why? 2Hand Axe.. "Chop it's head!!!" and it's done.. no punching through the thing numerous times, how is that worse than spear/sword/archery.. This only forces playstyle on people.

 Source?

Are you playing the same game?

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Now hunters vs breeders... wild animals have access to an infinite resource of high ql food, but pen-enclosed animals should be somewhat limited.
Maybe the game should count how many tiles there are for a given pen and how many animals are fed there, if this number of tiles is too low per animal, quality of food/grass decreases, i.e. the animal receives hidden trait reducing quality of resources that will be available after killing this animal.

It's pretty finite for farmers, you have limited amount of tiles and deed ratio already(cattle either grazes or you feed them with grass/hay/crops), AH skill still gives you long timers on pve, the promised reduced timers aren't a thing, it's only random few to 11 days not properly scaled to skill level, you breed once and wait for week and a half for ONE calf/young creature which already yields less resources than a grown up. Balanced as it is on pvE.. on pvp it's a different story.

It's rented with real money land with benefits - does not fit the subscription model to mess with people for no reason, no reason to call "wild land rich of high ql food", this stimulates spending less - which overall kills the company's income. Welcome to capitalism IRL.

 

UNNECESSARY, game already provides similar system with new feeding containers and grazing fields with grass/crops have their limits, once they are depleted animals start losing weight and move toward starvation and death. It's already self balancing as it is.

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

The player could feed penned animals by hand using high ql grass or meat (depending on type of animal) or hay would count as a good, high ql food source to improve quality of pelts and hides on animals bred in captivity.

 

Thus, obtaining high ql pelt or hide would be possible from two sources, but in both cases it would cost a bit of effort.
Hunters would risk going beyond walls and would have to spend time exploring map and searching for right animals.

MORE MICROMANAGEMENT (like we do not have enough, and that isn't pushing people away and generating carpals..)

This only forces spending time to get pelts... and kills butchering skill, you can get good pelt ql by grinding butchering skill or buying imbue potions for the same.. forcing players and ignoring skill is against what the game stands for... skilling up to get better with your character's progression.

 

Along with butchering skill/knife skill/QL and imbue.. there's also some RNG unless your imbue ... or skill are too high to give rng too much room to wiggle and troll your results. (applies for pelts/hides/meat/bits) 

 

None of the pelt creatures is high risk to fight, it's rather the search that bothers some.. rest is the chance to obtain a "good" ql100 hopefully.. or whatever you can best pray for according to skill and preparedness.

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

While breeders could dry grass and feed their animals with hay without any risk, increasing chance of getting good loot from livestock.

Hay have proven to be waste of time for other than decorative hay-bales, hay-bed, farming gains.. (personal opinion)

 

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Players who would not be interested in resources, but skill levels would only get what they wanted, so resources they would gather would have minimal impact on economy.

"hunters", pvpers or fs/weapon-skill grinding people already do that.. and slaughter for w/e skill they are after, ignoring the bodies and resources.

 

This is not the proper way to educate how the game works, there's ca-help and community-assistance section in forums, there's also the wiki, ask questions about mechanics if you are interested before you imagine how things work and reinvent them, if you see flaws you'll be better equipped to create suggestions which save devs/mods and player's time.

Nothing bad about suggesting things or having different view about things, but claiming that something works in a specific way with nothing backing it  is the bad part.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Finnn
E

[Drayka 485]

42 minutes ago, Finnn said:

Nobody complains, it's a sandbox and you have freedom for action, nobody but you feels at a bad spot with current mechanics.

Sorry, too much formatting again for the whole thing. But are you saying that I don't have dozens of DMs and Discord convo history in general, from players who no longer play, citing the mechanics as broken beyond playability?

 

Regardless of whether or not you think they are justified in thinking that, they do feel "at a bad spot with current mechanics", and they most certainly have complained. But they concluded that no-one cares about PvP mechanics, so they left.

 

Quote

stick to pvping in-game and not on the forums

There's no-one left to PvP with. All the hunter/fighters left. Nobody roams anymore except a few solo die-hards that can't find anyone to kill but newbies, and anyone who wants to fight those few diehards rather than gank newbies, knowing they can't win, is driven out of the game by their own allies anyway for losing gear that is still being created because it is the only thing left to do anymore. Which doesn't make sense, but then, upset people don't feel any need to make sense, just the need to lash out at somebody.

 

Just because no-one may publicly attack the staff for not creating a better game, doesn't mean that the mechanics are universally popular, and that therefore no-one should suggest any changes, even totally indirect changes, if only as a way to try to hang-in-there and try to be-patient, because there's nothing left to do but dwell on wtf it all went wrong, and how to fix it, whilst trying not to lose faith in the developers ever changing anything ever again, because all anyone does is pick fault with anything and everything implemented.

[Darnok 214]

3 hours ago, Finnn said:

Nobody complains, it's a sandbox and you have freedom for action, nobody but you feels at a bad spot with current mechanics.

 

If you didn't notice, a lot of steam players simply walked away without a word of complaint. I'm a little more stubborn than they are.

 

Quote

Source?

Pelts come at low trash ql normally, most people have low butchering - it's balanced already. (on purpose not addressing the elephant)

 

And my idea from the previous post does not change this mechanic in any way. Still, the butchering skill would play an important role here, except that even if you had 100 skill level, you couldn't get 100ql pelt/hide/meat from a poorly kept animal.

 

Quote

It is not a class specialization game - there are no hunters/breeders/skillers; You have 2 groups Priests and Not-priests: priests on their own separate in their own WL/BL branches and spell-abilities.

If you do come up with 2-3 class names, you might want to think of 100+ names for all skills while you're at it.

 

Challenge accepted 🤔😄

 

 

Quote

 

Why? 2Hand Axe.. "Chop it's head!!!" and it's done.. no punching through the thing numerous times, how is that worse than spear/sword/archery.. This only forces playstyle on people.

 Source?

Are you playing the same game?

 

My solution gives you several gamestyles. You can be a hunter or a breeder, at the moment, as you have stated yourself, you do not have that possibility, because game promotes one gamestyle - animal husbandry is the most profitable source of high ql pelts and hides.

 

Quote

It's pretty finite for farmers, you have limited amount of tiles and deed ratio already(cattle either grazes or you feed them with grass/hay/crops),

 

Yes, but keeping animals in 2x1 tiles should not be profitable.
My idea would be that if you had several animals with a large number of traits output, you could keep them in a 2x1 pen and manually feed them or give them bowl with food and so thanks to high traits you would have a lot of profit as a breeder.

But if you wanted to own a lot of animals and get a lot of high ql pelts, hides and meat from them, but you wouldn't want to feed them, then you would have to give them a lot of space and that would cost you.

So that should be pretty fair, active and a hardworking breeder could afford a large herd on a small deed, but a less active breeder would need a larger deed to maintain a herd of the same size (another level where my idea would be balanced).

 

3 hours ago, Finnn said:

 

Hay have proven to be waste of time for other than decorative hay-bales, hay-bed, farming gains.. (personal opinion)

 

 

Harsh winter (only available plant food during winter) + food to increase quality of resources obtained from animal

these are two ideas for hay that I proposed in this thread.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Darnok

[Lethyria 161]

Not sure what your point on pelts is, if you make the game over complex in every mechanic it will become too tedious and put people off, as it is using a 100ql pelt lasts quite a long time yes, but not indefinitely. If they were to decay much faster high enchants or imbues on pelts would not be viable except to the richest players, this doesn't seem good to me. To my knowledge most pelts are from high butchering people who go out hunting and kill wild cats/mountain lions etc not breeders keeping them for hundreds of pelts, at this point 90ql pelts are often free on NFI.

I keep getting the feeling that you are trying to use a stick to punish playstyles you don't like. Surely a better solution to AH would be to create a system that enables you to get better results than currently when using a smaller herd. As it currently is herds are large because of the rng and time involved in breeding, this is the optimal way of getting the animals you want in the shortest time. Players will always min max at some point and if you give them rng then numbers are the solution. Rare traits have likely meant that herd sizes will have to increase not just those breeding for profit but for anyone who wants the best horses, I personally was on a deed with a very large herd, not intending to sell at all but just trying to quickly get 5 speed horses (pre patch).

If you want to make AH use smaller herds try to come up with a system that would give you a good upside for investing time or a limited resource (like care for) into a few horses to give them a significant benefit, not just ways of making the game more tedious to play in the current meta. I've not got a good suggestion here but coming up with ways of punishing an existing playstyle because of a debated issue doesn't seem like a productive way of moving ah forward. 

Edited August 24, 2021 by Lethyria