Sign in to follow this  
Rudie

Locked containers on Freedom

Recommended Posts

Lockpicking is a PvP mechanic. Leave it there. It doesn't belong in PvE. If you don't like abandoned things on your deed, then don't deed there. Or, spend the time to push them off. If you're worried about the items in the locked containers you can sit and watch it until it decays, like you do with houses on abandoned deeds waiting for that wall to fall. Leave lockpicking to PvP.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't get the obsession with locked containers. It's not like they are causing some sort of health risk by sitting there and there are tons of other places to deed. Simply find another spot, wait out the decay or call a GM if it is so necessary to have that particular spot. And I'm not buying the clutter argument anymore either. I live next to a large abandoned deed that is full of items lying about and I have yet to lose my mind or get lagged out over it. In fact I find it a fitting reminder that others once played there. I content myself with keeping my own deed tidy and leave the rest be. I know an alliance member on PVE who unintentionally let his deed drop for one day while he was on another server. In just that one day it was quickly looted of everything that was not secured or locked. The only things he had left were those items in locked containers. If lock picking was allowed he would have nothing left. And the more I see these posts about lock picking the more I feel like it's all about wanting to steal other players locked stuff abandoned or not. That's what PVP is for so go there and pick all the locks you want. As for PVE if you didn't put it there or don't have perms to it it's not yours so leave it alone! And just imagine the skill gain you could get by harvesting your own mats and making your own tools, etc. instead of looting others.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

That's a reasonable reason to quit no matter how good is the new player tutorial. Time to make a tutorial for veteran on how to be nice to the new players to make them stay.

Reasonable, but I imagine it's not a common one.

 

  

2 hours ago, Katrat said:

steal other players locked stuff abandoned or not.

If it's abandoned then it's not stealing. There's no one to steal from. You are just taking it from the environment that's going to slowly destroy it.

 

  

2 hours ago, Katrat said:

It's not like they are causing some sort of health risk by sitting there and there are tons of other places to deed. Simply find another spot, wait out the decay or call a GM if it is so necessary to have that particular spot. And I'm not buying the clutter argument anymore either.

My argument was that I want the contents. If there's good stuff to be had in say a LMC that the previous player spent hours and hours to acquire then that could either be a really good tool that'll push me ahead, with their signature attached to it as apart of history, and I can also treasure any of their sentimentals they left behind. Like if they had a rose from a lover in the chest, and the environment was going to slowly take it. Imagine a library full of treasures found from abandoned deeds.

 

I understand the argument for "if they come back", but do we at least agree that we should be able to obtain those contents if it's guaranteed they aren't coming back. And possibly that under some circumstances that becomes forfeit just as the rest of their belongings became forfeit? 

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

Reasonable, but I imagine it's not a common one.

 

  

If it's abandoned then it's not stealing. There's no one to steal from. You are just taking it from the environment that's going to slowly destroy it.

 

  

My argument was that I want the contents. If there's good stuff to be had in say a LMC that the previous player spent hours and hours to acquire then that could either be a really good tool that'll push me ahead, with their signature attached to it as apart of history, and I can also treasure any of their sentimentals they left behind. Like if they had a rose from a lover in the chest, and the environment was going to slowly take it. Imagine a library full of treasures found from abandoned deeds.

 

I understand the argument for "if they come back", but do we at least agree that we should be able to obtain those contents if it's guaranteed they aren't coming back. And possibly that under some circumstances that becomes forfeit just as the rest of their belongings became forfeit? 

Who's to define what is actually abandoned? My friend's deed was not. It was only down one day, not even 24 full hours before he re-deeded it. The deed of another friend who was gone for months do to rl circumstances was not abandoned either. He had every intention of returning and indeed did so only to find he was locked inside what was once his mine home by someone else who bashed his mine doors down. Someone who decided for themselves that it was abandoned. That friend quit the game after that. Didn't see the point in doing at that work just for someone else to come along and steal it out from under him the moment he couldn't keep the deed up. I can tell you for a fact that both friends were not at all happy about looters using the mats and items that they spent countless hours harvesting and making! If it was PVP then they would have understood that was way of things but not on PVE. Harvest and make your own stuff. If I can do it so can you. As for the sentimental items why would they want some unknown having them either? Clearly it wouldn't mean the same to the looter as it did to them. You will never convince me that lock picking on PVE should be a thing with week arguments like these. -100

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Who's to define what is actually abandoned?

We are in this post, but I just want to know if for example God came down and told you that it was 100% abandoned. Would you be okay with player's getting the contents of the container? For the sake of the hypothetical you know it's abandoned 100%. 

 

8 minutes ago, Katrat said:

I can tell you for a fact that both friends were not at all happy about looters using the mats and items that they spent countless hours harvesting and making!

And I would be unhappy if I found out that all my stuff that I spent countless hours harvesting and making just decayed into history and nothing about my time in Wurm ever existed. If people were able to loot my belongings then it's possible they could carry on my history. Essentially, why we have Archaeology.

 

10 minutes ago, Katrat said:

As for the sentimental items why would they want some unknown having them either?

Again I'd rather have someone unknown take care and cherish my belonging / sentimental item than for it to turn to dust and never be seen again. Maybe I even come back to the game and it becomes their quest to return it to me.

 

11 minutes ago, Katrat said:

Clearly it wouldn't mean the same to the looter as it did to them.

It wouldn't, but it would still mean something as opposed to nothing. And I'd rather see my goods repurposed then forgotten.

 

11 minutes ago, Katrat said:

You will never convince me that lock picking on PVE should be a thing with week arguments like these.

You aren't engaging with my argument though. I want to know if you'd allow for us to have the contents if you know it's 100% abandoned (Doesn't matter how. It just is for the sake of the conversation)

Share this post


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

Reasonable, but I imagine it's not a common one.

No matter its a common reason or how uncommon it is, create a situation for new players to have a reasonable reason to quit is terrible for a MMO.

The situation: the locked containers being destroyed(lava) are not done by the owner but by the other players intentionally. The owner did nothing wrong but just follow the rule and mechanic of PVE. 

 

1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:

If it's abandoned then it's not stealing. There's no one to steal from. You are just taking it from the environment that's going to slowly destroy it.

First of all, the deed is disbanded but the locked stuff might not be abandoned.

People disbanded a deed but they might still playing on that disbanded deed area and access the locked stuff, or will be returning in the future. People can't say that is abandoned.


Second, as i have mentioned. Because people don't know the owner so well, 

99% of people don't know the locked container owner is actually quit(abandoned) (even if they said to u they quit, some still return, i encountered some of them)

99% of people don't know when the owner return to this game to access the locked container. That means there is a chance they are on hiatus, sleeping, doing daily chores, even if its just two seconds. So people can't call it abandoned because people are not 100% sure most of time. Might be abandoned and 100% abandoned are totally a different thing.
How do people know the locked container is abandoned if they are not the owner? Looks abandoned and confirm 100% abandoned are totally a different thing.

 

So if people see a locked container in PVE environment which don't have permission, and change the items inside the container by any methods. That's stealing.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Coach said:

create a situation for new players to have a reasonable reason to quit is terrible for a MMO.

If it's common, sure. If it's like 1 out of every 1,000 people quit because the stuff they spent 2 days on gets stolen then I don't consider that "terrible" for the game. Bad yes, and we should try to help that 1 person, but that 1 person should also not ruin the experience of the other 999 people.

 

35 minutes ago, Coach said:

The situation: the locked containers being destroyed(lava) are not done by the owner but by the other players intentionally. The owner did nothing wrong but just follow the rule and mechanic of PVE. 

I don't follow what this is being brought up for again, but I do agree that destroying goods without the ability to get them is ###### up.

 

36 minutes ago, Coach said:

First of all, the deed is disbanded but the locked stuff might not be abandoned.

might be yes, but I'm asking you to pretend for just a moment that it is abandoned. How do you feel about this proposal if you knew for a fact that it was. 

 

37 minutes ago, Coach said:

People disbanded a deed but they might still playing on that disbanded deed area and access the locked stuff, or will be returning in the future. People can't say that is abandoned.

And we also can't say that something isn't abandoned. None of us know, unless we agree on a circumstance that determines that which hopefully isn't when the items have decayed and poofed because then it's too late to matter

 

41 minutes ago, Coach said:

Second, as i have mentioned. Because people don't know the owner so well, 

99% of people don't know the locked container owner is actually quit(abandoned) (even if they said to u they quit, some still return, i encountered some of them)

99% of people don't know when the owner return to this game to access the locked container. That means there is a chance they are on hiatus, sleeping, doing daily chores, even if its just two seconds. So people can't call it abandoned because people are not 100% sure most of time. Might be abandoned and 100% abandoned are totally a different thing.
How do people know the locked container is abandoned if they are not the owner? Looks abandoned and confirm 100% abandoned are totally a different thing.

 

So if people see a locked container in PVE environment which don't have permission, and change the items inside the container by any methods. That's stealing.

Why does this matter for the unlocked stuff that is left behind? It is still owned by that person, still possible to be reclaimed by that person if they come back, not yours, but we agree that it's okay to steal it because there's no mechanic from stopping you. If we allow for players to lockpick locked containers it wouldn't be considered stealing because it's not apart of the game. The only reason it's called stealing now is because it isn't apart of the game. You actually can't take the goods and if you found a way to do so then you'd be breaking rules and "stealing".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No to lockpicking. 

 

Maybe if something falls below 10ql the lock is ineffective but no to just picking it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Archaed said:

Maybe if something falls below 10ql the lock is ineffective but no to just picking it. 

What about it becoming lockpickable if it falls below 10QL cause of the DMG, and then you could also make it so if you fail to lockpick it then it gets more damaged. Bringing it closer to destruction >:)

 

That way you wouldn't risk lockpicking an LMC with bad skill. Providing some progression to it too.

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2022 at 1:06 PM, Zuelatak said:

My argument was that I want the contents.

Tough.  They aren't yours to have.

 

You say it isn't stealing, but what you describe is pretty much stealing.  Someone is away; they have their stuff locked in a container;  people want to get the container open so that they can take the stuff.  You even said "I want the contents" apparently regardless of whether or not the actual owner will still want them.  I had a neighbour who had not logged in for a long time, and had a lot of stuff in unlocked containers inside a high QL locked compound.  Someone took a battering ram to the compound wall to gain access and began looting.  As I was nearby I grabbed everything I could and carted it to my own house yard for safekeeping.  When the player finally came back (their computer had died and they could not afford a new one, so they were offline for about 8 months, from memory) all they had left of their stuff was a locked wagon nobody could carry off and all the materials and equipment waiting in my yard.  It could easily have been a case of coming back to nothing but the wagon.  We are talking tens of thousands of units or resources, rare ovens and forges, all sorts of stuff.  That is what happens when people have access to other people's stuff - it isn't a clean up, it is a smash-and-grab.

 

 

On 5/8/2022 at 1:06 PM, Zuelatak said:

I understand the argument for "if they come back", but do we at least agree that we should be able to obtain those contents if it's guaranteed they aren't coming back

It is NEVER guaranteed that a player won't come back.  Therefore "if they come back" is always a consideration.  You say you understand that, so that should be the end of it.

 

No.  Hard no.  No lockpicking on PVE.

 

This is from a player who DOES salvage from undeeds, but only long gone with equipment with very high decay, and after I repair it I store it in my yard for a long time after that.  I am picking up what would be gone soon anyway from places that are overgrown and empty.  Even then, I accept that if the owner comes back, the stuff is theirs.

 

 

Edited by TheTrickster
  • Like 4

Share this post


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

It is NEVER guaranteed that a player won't come back.  Therefore "if they come back" is always a consideration.  You say you understand that, so that should be the end of it.

I can't believe you say I'm trolling when you actively fight me instead of converse with me. You won't take the time to do as I ask and imagine a scenario even if you think it's impossible. I need to better understand what your opinion is on the matter to better find a ###### solution. Having a proper conversation seems to be a more unlikely scenario than my locked goods being stolen.

 

18 minutes ago, TheTrickster said:

Someone is away; they have their stuff locked in a container;  people want to get the container open so that they can take the stuff.  You even said "I want the contents" apparently regardless of whether or not the actual owner will still want them.  I had a neighbour who had not logged in for a long time, and had a lot of stuff in unlocked containers inside a high GL locked compound.  Someone took a battering ram to the compound wall to gain access and began looting.  As I was nearby I grabbed everything I could and carted it to my own house yard for safekeeping.  When the player finally came back (their computer had died and they could not afford a new one, so they were offline for about 8 months, from memory) all they had left of their stuff was a locked wagon nobody could carry off and all the materials and equipment waiting in my yard.  It could easily have been a case of coming back to nothing but the wagon.  We are talking tens of thousands of units or resources, rare ovens and forges, all sorts of stuff.  That is what happens when people have access to other people's stuff - it isn't a clean up, it is a smash-and-grab.

And what you are describing is already in the game on PvE

-Your house prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-Your deed prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-As a deed owner your villagers will leave for an undetermined amount of time, but you aren't responsible for keeping their belongings safe until they come back. However, those goods are not yours, and touching them would be "stealing" but eventually you determine it to be lootable

 

So why can't it also be

-Your locks prevent people from "stealing", but eventually decays and the contents are lootable

 

What makes these locks different? Especially over something like a deed that is a paid privilege. 

 

18 minutes ago, TheTrickster said:

I am picking up what would be gone soon anyway from places that are overgrown and empty

Is the same argument I'm making for locked containers. It is stuff that will be gone soon anyway. I think that lines up nicely with Archaed's idea of allowing us the ability to loot it just before it's gone. 

 

18 minutes ago, TheTrickster said:

Even then, I accept that if the owner comes back, the stuff is theirs.

And I'm sure a decent amount of players (like myself) would be willing to do as well. We aren't discussing the scenario in which they come back, but what happens when they leave.

 

 

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

And we also can't say that something isn't abandoned.

If u can't define the locked container is or isnt abandoned, then let the PVE nature to solve it by default and not destroy it by other players intentionally. That's the mechanic of the PVE, no lockpicking, no stealing the locked container. 

 

55 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

Why does this matter for the unlocked stuff that is left behind?

As i have mentioned, people can ransacked anything but not the things that is locked. We are focusing on the locked stuff, not the unlocked stuff.

 

56 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

but I'm asking you to pretend for just a moment that it is abandoned. How do you feel about this proposal if you knew for a fact that it was. 

1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:

We are in this post, but I just want to know if for example God came down and told you that it was 100% abandoned. Would you be okay with player's getting the contents of the container? For the sake of the hypothetical you know it's abandoned 100%. 

I think u are interested if people know this is 100% confirm abandoned(which 99% people don't know the locked container owner is quit or not). Alright, lets do a hypothetical then.

My thought, If the locked container owner didn't say anything(stay silence) about how to deal with the locked container that Person A don't have permissions. Person A shouldn't lockpick, steal, or destroy it by lava.
Of course Person A might like to take the thing inside the locked container or carry the legacies from the owner, but Person A respect the owner choice before the owner quit or abandon it. Silence or default is a choice and let the locked container be a locked container and stay what it is, that's a default from the owner. Just let it be.

 

Share this post


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

My thought, If the locked container owner didn't say anything(stay silence) about how to deal with the locked container that Person A don't have permissions. Person A shouldn't lockpick, steal, or destroy it by lava.
Of course Person A might like to take the thing inside the locked container or carry the legacies from the owner, but Person A respect the owner choice before the owner quit or abandon it. Silence or default is a choice and let the locked container be a locked container and stay what it is, that's a default from the owner. Just let it be.

I'm interested in you answering my hypothetical. If you want to give your own fine, but do it after you answer mine next time. 

This isn't describing a 100% confirm abandoned scenario as I'm asking for. You just proceeded to describe a 99% scenario which I'm already aware of your feelings on as you keep repeating it. I want to know how you feel in a 100% scenario. It's important to understand where you possibly agree, so we can better understand where you disagree. 

 

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Coach said:

If u can't define the locked container is or isnt abandoned, then let the PVE nature to solve it by default and not destroy it by other players intentionally. That's the mechanic of the PVE, no lockpicking, no stealing the locked container. 

 

11 minutes ago, Coach said:

As i have mentioned, people can ransacked anything but not the things that is locked. We are focusing on the locked stuff, not the unlocked stuff.

 

What we are discussing right now is how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned >.< It has no definition as it is currently not a feature of the game. That is why we are here. Also, prefer refer to my question to Trickster about why this "stealing" is different from other types of "stealing" in the game. 

 

35 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

And what you are describing is already in the game on PvE

-Your house prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-Your deed prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-As a deed owner your villagers will leave for an undetermined amount of time, but you aren't responsible for keeping their belongings safe until they come back. However, those goods are not yours, and touching them would be "stealing" but eventually you determine it to be lootable

 

So why can't it also be

-Your locks prevent people from "stealing", but eventually decays and the contents are lootable

 

What makes these locks different? Especially over something like a deed that is a paid privilege.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you so intent on examining only a situation that is not ever going to happen?  Nothing is ever 100% certainly abandoned.  The situation will not arise, so there is no need for a dangerous change to mechanics to allow for it.  

 

This isn't about preserving stuff, otherwise it would be fine to leave it stored in locked boxes.  It isn't about cleaning up, because it could be pushed out of the way (or even GM relocated).  It is about breaking into someone else's locked box to get their stuff.  Take that to PvP.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be better if answer like this instead?

1 hour ago, Coach said:

I think u are interested if people know this is 100% confirm abandoned(which 99% people don't know the locked container owner is quit or not). Alright, lets do a hypothetical then.

My thought, If the locked container owner didn't say anything(stay silence) about how to deal with the locked container that Person A don't have permissions and the locked container is 100% confirm abandoned. Person A shouldn't lockpick, steal, or destroy it by lava.
Of course Person A might like to take the thing inside the locked container or carry the legacies from the owner, but Person A respect the owner choice before the owner quit or abandon it. Silence or default is a choice and let the locked container be a locked container and stay what it is, that's a default from the owner. Just let it be.

 

1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:

What we are discussing right now is how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned >.< It has no definition as it is currently not a feature of the game.

3 hours ago, Zuelatak said:

I want to know if you'd allow for us to have the contents if you know it's 100% abandoned (Doesn't matter how. It just is for the sake of the conversation)

U said doesn't matter how but u said we are discussing how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned.

U should demonstrate how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned then.

 

99% of people don't know the locked container owner is actually quit(abandoned), its very hard to define when a locked container is considered abandoned or not.

If u can't define the locked container is or isn't abandoned, then let the PVE nature to solve it by default and not destroy it by other players intentionally. That's the mechanic of the PVE, no lockpicking, no stealing the locked container. 

 

1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:

Also, prefer refer to my question to Trickster about why this "stealing" is different from other types of "stealing" in the game. 

Spoiler
1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:
1 hour ago, TheTrickster said:

Someone is away; they have their stuff locked in a container;  people want to get the container open so that they can take the stuff.  You even said "I want the contents" apparently regardless of whether or not the actual owner will still want them.  I had a neighbour who had not logged in for a long time, and had a lot of stuff in unlocked containers inside a high GL locked compound.  Someone took a battering ram to the compound wall to gain access and began looting.  As I was nearby I grabbed everything I could and carted it to my own house yard for safekeeping.  When the player finally came back (their computer had died and they could not afford a new one, so they were offline for about 8 months, from memory) all they had left of their stuff was a locked wagon nobody could carry off and all the materials and equipment waiting in my yard.  It could easily have been a case of coming back to nothing but the wagon.  We are talking tens of thousands of units or resources, rare ovens and forges, all sorts of stuff.  That is what happens when people have access to other people's stuff - it isn't a clean up, it is a smash-and-grab.

And what you are describing is already in the game on PvE

-Your house prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-Your deed prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-As a deed owner your villagers will leave for an undetermined amount of time, but you aren't responsible for keeping their belongings safe until they come back. However, those goods are not yours, and touching them would be "stealing" but eventually you determine it to be lootable

 

So why can't it also be

-Your locks prevent people from "stealing", but eventually decays and the contents are lootable

 

What makes these locks different? Especially over something like a deed that is a paid privilege. 

 

Read the sentences again, Trickster didn't say the looter loot items inside a locked container. Trickster said people want to get the container open . Want to and can be are totally two different things. Trickster said had a lot of stuff in unlocked containers inside a high GL locked compound, looters loot the items in unlocked containers. As i have mentioned, people can ransacked anything(include unlocked containers) but not the things that is locked.

People can loot the items inside a locked container after the locked container is completely decay by the nature of PVE. Just like the house and deed decay situation u were saying.

But people can't loot the items inside a locked container by destroying the locked container with any methods intentionally, because the locked container is not bashable, and i believe they are not suppose to be destroyed by other players intentionally. Just like u can't destroy people house and deed by any methods intentionally. And that's violate the rule if u do.

Do u see the difference? 

 

 

Edited by Coach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheTrickster said:

Why are you so intent on examining only a situation that is not ever going to happen?  Nothing is ever 100% certainly abandoned.  The situation will not arise, so there is no need for a dangerous change to mechanics to allow for it.  

Why are you so intent in not conversing with me? Please. Just answer my questions. I'll gladly continue to answer yours as I have, but I'm tired of having my questions unanswered. You believe it can't happen. I do, so again please just answer my question out of principle, so I can move forward.

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, TheTrickster said:

This isn't about preserving stuff, otherwise it would be fine to leave it stored in locked boxes.  It isn't about cleaning up, because it could be pushed out of the way (or even GM relocated).  It is about breaking into someone else's locked box to get their stuff.

Same goes for this. Please answer my question.

1 hour ago, Zuelatak said:

And what you are describing is already in the game on PvE

-Your house prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-Your deed prevents people from "stealing", but it eventually decays and the contents are lootable

-As a deed owner your villagers will leave for an undetermined amount of time, but you aren't responsible for keeping their belongings safe until they come back. However, those goods are not yours, and touching them would be "stealing" but eventually you determine it to be lootable

 

So why can't it also be

-Your locks prevent people from "stealing", but eventually decays and the contents are lootable

 

What makes these locks different? Especially over something like a deed that is a paid privilege. 

 

 

 

 

Apologies if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing you see the time of it being unowned as 0ql. Why can't we bump it to 5ql or maybe even 10ql as @Archaed mentioned. Allow us to preserve these items before they decay, so that they can potentially be reused, repurposed, remembered. Think of all this history that is being lost that can potentially be given extended life. You're talking about people coming back and feeling like their efforts are gone, but this literally is their efforts becoming gone. I think it's fair to say that most people would rather their items continue living then die in their absence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

10 minutes ago, Coach said:

U said doesn't matter how but u said we are discussing how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned.

U should demonstrate how to define when a locked container is considered abandoned then.

Yes, but these are different points. We are in a forum typing out our long winded responses to one another where in a verbal conversation you would answer the first, and then do the second. Could you please do so here, and just answer my question. I'm trying to establish a foundation of mutual understanding so we can then build off of it with ideas.

 

10 minutes ago, Coach said:

And that's violate the rule if u do.

Do u see the difference? 

No. Yes it's a violation of the rule. That's because the rule is built on the idea that you can't currently do it. That rule would change along with this change. I'm trying to understand why you morally dislike the idea. Saying something like "I don't like the idea, because it's against the rules" (which is what it feels like you're saying) isn't helpful to the discussion because we're discussing why or why not the rule should be changed as suggested.

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Coach said:

Person A respect the owner choice before the owner quit or abandon it

What respect??? Where did this come in. All we know about Player A is that they have quit. What choice that you don't know they made are you respecting?

 

I want to respect their belongings that will be deleted . . . since they quit.

 

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, -1 . No free ride for lockpicking or other stealing in PvE.

 

The mechanics are good as they are, not perfect, but creating such a loophole would be a disgrace, and soon abused. No rights of mayors or deed founders are infringed by containers on the deed area. They can be relocated, in some cases with GM assistance. That is enough.

 

Container protection not only saves containers from fallen deeds, but also from squatters and beginners in the wild. Therefore all "under 10ql" ideas are questionable, as newbie stuff frequently is of low ql. And when it is that close to 0, decay can do the job.

 

That said, I love lockpicking, and at times pick my stuff.

Edited by Ekcin
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

but creating such a loophole would be a disgrace, and soon abused.

What loophole? Even a potential loophole can easily be solved. Everything in this game is logged. Since this would be a massive red flag for the devs they would probably have an emergency shutdown, revert the update, revert the damage, and then do something with the users who exploited the loophole. The patch for the bug would be made and then they would try it again. 

 

  

1 hour ago, Ekcin said:

Therefore all "under 10ql" ideas are questionable, as newbie stuff frequently is of low ql. And when it is that close to 0, decay can do the job.

Fair point. I was thinking about items that become ~10ql due to damage and therefore, had like 90+dmg. I'd like to change my idea to opinion to it being based on damage. That way it accounts for new players that have low ql. We could also possibly consider the idea of requiring a minimum of 10ql for locking too? But I think just switching to damage would be better.

 

Current opinion:

  • Yes to the OP under that condition that they have little health left. Possibly ~80 damage? Because it's sad to picture all of the items that are unreachable and slowly dying to suddenly shatter and be forgotten. All of the time the players before valued those items and worked on them to just be wasted. That history that is forgotten that could be saved, treasured, and remembered.

Additional Idea:

  • Have difficulty of the picking be based on the ql before its effected by dmg.  (Giving incentive to the skillgain)
  • If the picking fails deal more damage to the container.  (Giving incentive to the skillgain)
  • That way things like LMC's would be a lot riskier to attempt to unlock at low skill (Giving incentive to the skillgain)
    • Assumed LMC's were high ql. I would also suggest improving their ql >.< but I also don't know why they're so low
  • Rename "damage" of player made things to "durability" (to better translate to other games)
Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to steel things we have a PvP server waiting for you to join. Come steel anything and everything and instead of steeling from people that are not there.... Come kill people for their things! Leave PvE for the people who don't want there things stolen!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Zuelatak said:

That's because the rule is built on the idea that you can't currently do it. That rule would change along with this change. I'm trying to understand why you morally dislike the idea. Saying something like "I don't like the idea, because it's against the rules" (which is what it feels like you're saying) isn't helpful to the discussion because we're discussing why or why not the rule should be changed as suggested.

The rules are there for reasons, and i am keep giving reasons to why items in locked container should stay what it is, why the rules should still stand, no lockpick, steal, or destroy it by any methods besides nature decaying. 

 

Lets have a summary. 

New players and returners can still enjoy the items in locked containers after hiatus, sleeping, doing daily chores, so that they are more willing to stay in this game. 

 

99% of people don't know when the owner return to this game to access the locked container and 99% of people don't know the locked container owner is actually quit. So, can't say its abandoned and the locked container is still owned by the owner. It's still a private locked container. Privacy is a core of wurm, like private slaying, hermit style place.

 

People who decide to play off deed or off building, they can enjoy access the items from a locked container, a protected container without other people looting. And that's the fun part of PVE server.

 

Show respect to choice of the locked container owner, as default the container decay by the PVE nature, if they didn't leave a message on how to deal with the locked container.

 

Edited by Coach
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Coach said:

Lets have a summary. 

A summary of not an answer to my question . . . Please. If it is guaranteed that someone's stuff is going to decay and become destroyed. Are you opposed to someone saving it before it happens?

Edited by Zuelatak

Share this post


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

If it is guaranteed that someone's stuff is going to decay and become destroyed. Are you opposed to someone saving it before it happens?

 

2 hours ago, Coach said:

I think u are interested if people know this is 100% confirm abandoned(which 99% people don't know the locked container owner is quit or not). Alright, lets do a hypothetical then.

My thought, If the locked container owner didn't say anything(stay silence) about how to deal with the locked container that Person A don't have permissions and the locked container is 100% confirm abandoned. Person A shouldn't lockpick, steal, or destroy it by lava.
Of course Person A might like to take the thing inside the locked container or carry the legacies from the owner, but Person A respect the owner choice before the owner quit or abandon it. Silence or default is a choice and let the locked container be a locked container and stay what it is, that's a default from the owner. Just let it be.

Will let the locked containers to decay and become destroyed naturally, stay whatever it isno lockpick, steal, or destroy it by lava intentionally by other players. Because the locked container owner didn't say anything(stay silence) about how to deal with the locked container. Silence is a choice and made by the owner. Stay silence lead to a decay as default by nature in PVE servers and I repect the owner choice.

I won't say lockpicking, stealing a locked container are saving. I see it as a disrespectful behaviour to the owner choice on PVE servers. But I see it as a respectful behaviour if people do it on PVP servers because that's the core of the PVP.

If the locked container owner rename it to free to loot or free to do whatever u want, that's an owner choice and of course will loot all the stuff inside it if the mechanic allow it, not even a single drop will left if the stuffs are good.

Edited by Coach
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

All we know about Player A is that they have quit.

No.  You don't.  That's the point.  All you know about Player A is they locked their stuff in a container to protect it from getting stolen.

 

Game mechanisms that let you take other peoples stuff don't mean it isn't stealing.  The fact that the OP was pretty much asking to be able to break open locked stuff in order to take the contents shows exactly why there needs to be game-enforced protection, because some people 

 

Also, please stop yelling.  If your arguments are not convincing then making them louder is the opposite of helping.

Also also, please stop insisting on not-gonna-happen hypotheticals.  I already explained why there is no point discussing such hypotheticals - especially as they seem to simply be aimed at finding some kind rationale to justify the theft.

 

Suggestions are proposed solutions to problems.  The "problem" in this case is not actually a problem.  It is a perfectly valid mechanism to protect the hard work of players.

 

And, for the record, the stuff that I salvage is not in any kind of container and is usually over 90% damage.   General the "pile of items" is the last vestige as everything else is long gone.   This is stuff that is weeks (maybe even only days?) from just being gone.  By taking it I am preserving it.  If people want to collect "abandoned" stuff, then this is the closest they are going to get to it.  I can attest that there is plenty out there for those who actually explore.  It might not be attractive to people, though, because after repair is rarely over 20ql.

Edited by TheTrickster
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this