New bashing animals mechanics

[Arindor 27]

Think of the F2P players. The Game Rules protect them against wall bashing off deed. Why would aggros violate that rule? If enclosures are protected (and they need to be so that F2P players aren't griefed to hell), the aggros shouldn't bash into any enclosure. Deed or not.

Excellent point!

[MasterGeldrin 0]

Think of the F2P players. The Game Rules protect them against wall bashing off deed. Why would aggros violate that rule? If enclosures are protected (and they need to be so that F2P players aren't griefed to hell), the aggros shouldn't bash into any enclosure. Deed or not.

Excellent point!

So now Free 2 Players are saying that gameplay should be forgone due to "Rules"? Oh come on now people are just being idiotic.

[Othob Rithol 700]

If Rolf can code the AI to detect the difference then that is the best course. Otherwise (and meanwhile) keeping bashing aggros from wandering on to deeds should mitigate a lot of the damage.

We certainly do not need to get into the whole prem vs non-prem debate, the validity of enclosures, or which is more important : GM griefing rules of Rolf's game mechanics.

Needless to say a player kiting a troll into a newbies enclosure to break fences and loot is likely going to be treated the same way as manually bashing in. The rules violation is the same, the mechanic used is the only difference.

[Devean 51]

Needless to say a player kiting a troll into a newbies enclosure to break fences and loot is likely going to be treated the same way as manually bashing in. The rules violation is the same, the mechanic used is the only difference.

[Serpentarius 186]

So basically now some aggressive creature (trolls and lava spider/fiends) can walk toward your deed, stay next to your on deeded walls/gates and destroy them. I understand the need for uniques to destroy on deed walls but now trolls and lava spiders just walk toward my deed and destroy the gates/walls.

There was a gate (70ql iron gate) there and it was ondeed but that lava spider really wanted to get on deed to get killed by the guard:

Edit: or maybe it was the troll since i just found his corpse in trees 5 tiles away.

[Ayes 3,715]

Othob,

The term "kiddie proofed" may indeed point to the inferences you named; however, that doesn't change the fact that it is an insulting and demeaning term to use, as are the words peppered throughout your response. Still, I won't take your bait and try to trump your defensive, arrogant and demeaning response, as I have witnessed (on the forums) your tendency to wish to engage others in this manner.

I would suggest you try to learn some tact, as you do present some good ideas at times but this attitude of yours tends to sour them to otherwise receptive ears.

My points stand for those who have the discernment to understand thier implications.

=Ayes=

[PWreset 66]

If Rolf can't code divergent AI and aggro (I don't know if you are correct on this Ayes, but it is feasable I guess) - then he can at least place the aggroes wisely. Like putting the worst ones far out into the mountains, where hardly anyone lives (so only the adventurers seeking them get to regularly see them).

This aside - what I would very much like to see though is just some more respect between (a lot of) the players of this game - respect for the choices and preferences and playstyles of others-then-just-themselves, in this case.

Wanting to always fight, fight now and then, not fight... it has nothing to do with 'kiddy-stuff' at all. If anything, it has to do with the adrenalin-level different kinds of people 'need' to get enjoyment out of a game. And by design as well as by 'all other circumstances weighing in' that level differs per person. How about we just accept that, and try to make the game appealing to a lot of different playstyles instead of just to one, two or three? I'm sure Rolf and his wallet will in the end be happy for such...

[Othob Rithol 700]

Ayes, Arindor, et al:

Nowhere did I state or even suggest that the players opposed to the change were naive, cowardly, childish or immature. I specifically stated that a game mechanic was made into a totally non-threatening form (the meaning of the term "kiddie proof") over the last few years - but I did NOT make any judgement about the players that liked it that way.

You chose to reshape my criticism of a game mechanic and interpret it as a personal attack. To which you retaliated. So any insistence that I'm somehow the sole source of any hostilities in this thread by you or anyone else is utter nonsense. My mistake was in taking the bait and calling you out loudly when I should have just let it pass given your anger level. But when someone is clearly talking badly about you in front of you but not to you, it is insulting. Especially when they are attempting to make disparaging insinuations; which you are clearly skilled at.

This thread and it's many companions are littered with countless insinuations by you and others that anyone that likes this change is a mean spirited PvP junky delighting in the suffering of others. From my perspective that attitude is what has made this about people and not about the game.

Your inference was in error. And because you chose to be offended when no offense was intended, it would not matter what I wrote - you would have chosen to be further offended. It is ironic that your anger stems from your mistaken interpretation of 2 words in a sentence saying I sympathize with your position in a post that includes a suggestion on how to minimize some of the negative effects of the update. It is likewise ironic that the efforts I have made to engage people opposed to this update into a discussion on how to fix it have been pretty much ignored in favor of mud slinging.

This has gone on far enough. I am sorry you misinterpreted what I said and that it caused you emotional distress. Clearly aspects of the game have aggravated you. Perhaps I could have phrased it differently and not provided a place for your (and others) anger to latch on to. But this needs to end. I offer an apology for any part I have had in it.

[Xandra 353]

Hi PWreset,

I think it's not such a good idea. Would big critters only spawn 100 tiles away from a deed, 2 or 3 wisely planted deeds would spoil a very large area for advanced hunters. And it wouldn't solve the problems of players leading "smashing" creatures into populated areas.

Guards aren't a solution, too. They need to be hostile to any aggros, which makes the whole taming skill obsolete: As soon as any aggressive pet untames (and they do sooner or later, unavoidably) the guards will kill it. And if we'd keep our pets outside of the deed where they'd be safe from the guards any wandering troll would bash their pens ...

The problem is the "bashing fence" mechanic as such. What good does it do? Compared to the many problems it causes? Does the good out-wight the problems? If not, it should be removed asap, maybe with the exception of uniques (if at all). IMHO.

The wandering of the mobs is great in my opinion. It adds some challenge to the game play. But the critters shouldn't be allowed to smash our fences, releasing our livestock. This is just retarded in my eyes and ways too wide open to harassment and griefing.

Have a good time!

PS: Now only lava fiends *) and trolls (and uniques) are bashing walls anymore. Bad luck for the people in areas with them. But at least spider light houses might work again! \o/ \o/ \o/

*) Lava fiends spawn in mines. Mines are often in or very near to deeds. They pass mine doors from the inside - and are then right on deed. Wohoo! Many fences to smash!

[PWreset 66]

Hi PWreset,

I think it's not such a good idea. Would big critters only spawn 100 tiles away from a deed, 2 or 3 wisely planted deeds would spoil a very large area for advanced hunters. And it wouldn't solve the problems of players leading "smashing" creatures into populated areas.

Guards aren't a solution, too. They need to be hostile to any aggros, which makes the whole taming skill obsolete: As soon as any aggressive pet untames (and they do sooner or later, unavoidably) the guards will kill it. And if we'd keep our pets outside of the deed where they'd be safe from the guards any wandering troll would bash their pens ...

The problem is the "bashing fence" mechanic as such. What good does it do? Compared to the many problems it causes? Does the good out-wight the problems? If not, it should be removed asap, maybe with the exception of uniques (if at all). IMHO.

The wandering of the mobs is great in my opinion. It adds some challenge to the game play. But the critters shouldn't be allowed to smash our fences, releasing our livestock. This is just retarded in my eyes and ways too wide open to harassment and griefing.

Have a good time!

PS: Now only lava fiends *) and trolls (and uniques) are bashing walls anymore. Bad luck for the people in areas with them. But at least spider light houses might work again! \o/ \o/ \o/

*) Lava fiends spawn in mines. Mines are often in or very near to deeds. They pass mine doors from the inside - and are then right on deed. Wohoo! Many fences to smash!

[MasterGeldrin 0]

Hi PWreset,

I think it's not such a good idea. Would big critters only spawn 100 tiles away from a deed, 2 or 3 wisely planted deeds would spoil a very large area for advanced hunters. And it wouldn't solve the problems of players leading "smashing" creatures into populated areas.

Guards aren't a solution, too. They need to be hostile to any aggros, which makes the whole taming skill obsolete: As soon as any aggressive pet untames (and they do sooner or later, unavoidably) the guards will kill it. And if we'd keep our pets outside of the deed where they'd be safe from the guards any wandering troll would bash their pens ...

The problem is the "bashing fence" mechanic as such. What good does it do? Compared to the many problems it causes? Does the good out-wight the problems? If not, it should be removed asap, maybe with the exception of uniques (if at all). IMHO.

The wandering of the mobs is great in my opinion. It adds some challenge to the game play. But the critters shouldn't be allowed to smash our fences, releasing our livestock. This is just retarded in my eyes and ways too wide open to harassment and griefing.

Have a good time!

PS: Now only lava fiends *) and trolls (and uniques) are bashing walls anymore. Bad luck for the people in areas with them. But at least spider light houses might work again! \o/ \o/ \o/

*) Lava fiends spawn in mines. Mines are often in or very near to deeds. They pass mine doors from the inside - and are then right on deed. Wohoo! Many fences to smash!

Yeah thats right, some ppl will place deeds to create such hunting spots. The Guards, yes they are still a problem, but thats why I am for a domestic system, that once a creature is tamed gets domested, and even if going aggro through taming fails wont be attacked by guards. Here in my opinion is the guard system/taming system the cause.

I don't like that Lighthouses work now again, its just silly having a burning spider inside a House with roof of straw or even Wooden Walls..

Someone said, that creatures that are cared for and are going aggro will not be attacked by guards. I cant really believe it, but is that true or false?

[SkyRaider 0]

Today I heard that uniqes bash housewalls as well as fences

I happen to live in a dangerous place beeing one of those on Independece before the islands were opened I decided to stay where I was. Was happy for the movement of animals as I suddenly started seeing alot more of them, and I don't really mind animals fenced in small boxes bashing their ways out ....

When I logged in today tough I was met by a troll on my settlement That was a bit uncalled for as my deed is fenced of at all borders by tall stone walls.... 3 of them were down. When I ran from the troll within my settlement it decided to bash down a part of my animal pen thus releasing my cows and horses....

I am still one of those that does not mind wild animals behaving like wild animals, but I do wish they would keep of deeds, as if they don't they will eventually force me to move and start all over again. I do hope tough that Rolf hasn't gotten the code for bashing quite tuned yet and that it will be adjusted to certain scenarios if something should or should not happen and not just randomly just cause it feels good.

[Devean 51]

Aggros should not bash fences, deed or not. There wasn't any problem before the change.

[Evilvision 301]

The biggest problem we have is so many people are used to Wurm being safe due to bugs through the last cpl of years. It was never intended to be 100% safe. We had severely reduced mobs due to creature count limit. Bugs that never let mobs come down from the mountain and path correctly. Before the aggro limit was fixed  walking around this map had little to no risk unless you searched it out.

What I see is bugs are finally getting fixed and things are getting back to normal. Since these bugs you can go around to most of the server and not see guards on deeds. Afterall why get a guard when there is no danger.

The only issue I had was with bashing into pens and people losing their breeding stock. I have lured trolls, spiders,scorps,champ bear on my deed in the past few days and i have tried all things but still have yet to get any of them to bash a fence even once. I just hope the pathing for mobs we have seen the last few days wasnt removed from them when he made those types no longer bash.

Todays update fixed most creatures from bashing. Now he just needs to make it so the bashing mobs left will not go on a deed as Othob suggested.

[Ayes 3,715]

Othob,

Actually I regret having gotten into a dispute with you, as in your various posts you have presented many good ideas that show that your intentions are good. It was just that I found your initial remarks directed at me a bit vexing and I responded in kind.

You have my apololgy as well and in the future I hope we can have a more ameniable discussion of our opposing view points.

=Ayes=

[SkyRaider 0]

Now he just needs to make it so the bashing mobs left will not go on a deed as Othob suggested.

[Ecrir 887]

preventing them from going on deeds also has bad side effects. Say new player A has a deed with a guard or two because his fs sucks and if he encounters a dangerous creature nearby then he lures it onto his deed so it gets killed.

The proposal to make it impossible for them to go on deed would make it impossible for him to kill those creatures, eventually he will be locked up on his own deed by them with no way to counter them except for building a tower, but he most likely doesn't have all the materials for that on his deed, to get them he'd need to kill the aggros, for which he'd need the tower, and you see the problem.

Are we sure that's an acceptable side-effect?

How about instead making it so that guards will also protect perimeter from aggros on Freedom? (and aggros only, people on KoS would still be ignored on perimeter as normal) Seems like a win-win option to me, especially for those low fs players who need the guards to kill aggros in their area.

For those who keep aggros on deed, how about having a total of 2 options for guard management:

- attack aggros on deed

- attack aggros on perimeter

by default both are turned on, but you can turn either or both off if you want. Want to keep aggros on deed but keep outside aggros from bashing your stuff, just active attack on perimeter only. That should work for everybody in the game

[Othob Rithol 700]

The other angle needs to be explored as well. People are refusing to hire guards and having them protect the deed because they want to keep aggro pets. Maybe if we had something like "cared for" based on Animal Taming that would allow you to designate a few aggros as "being kept" and those would be treated differently for deed guards and wall bashing.

[Proterus 0]

So does this mean I could get some animals together and use them to break into other people's deeds? 8)

I mean if I were to release some previously tamed animal and it were to break into someone's deed that wouldn't be illegal would it?  I don't see anywhere in the rules that says you cannot release animals near other people's deeds.

[Ecrir 887]

So does this mean I could get some animals together and use them to break into other people's deeds? 8)

I mean if I were to release some previously tamed animal and it were to break into someone's deed that wouldn't be illegal would it?  I don't see anywhere in the rules that says you cannot release animals near other people's deeds.

[Devean 51]

you'd be breaking the enclosure related rules for one, deed land is also owned so you are destroying owned property, which is an obvious form of griefing.

[PWreset 66]

So does this mean I could get some animals together and use them to break into other people's deeds? 8)

I mean if I were to release some previously tamed animal and it were to break into someone's deed that wouldn't be illegal would it?  I don't see anywhere in the rules that says you cannot release animals near other people's deeds.

you'd be breaking the enclosure related rules for one, deed land is also owned so you are destroying owned property, which is an obvious form of griefing.

technically he isnt destroying the stuff, its done by the creature. On the other side, hes doing it by intend, so it would be against the rules. But no one can verify this if not seen him luring the creatures there.

[Ecrir 887]

So does this mean I could get some animals together and use them to break into other people's deeds? 8)

I mean if I were to release some previously tamed animal and it were to break into someone's deed that wouldn't be illegal would it?  I don't see anywhere in the rules that says you cannot release animals near other people's deeds.

you'd be breaking the enclosure related rules for one, deed land is also owned so you are destroying owned property, which is an obvious form of griefing.

technically he isnt destroying the stuff, its done by the creature. On the other side, hes doing it by intend, so it would be against the rules. But no one can verify this if not seen him luring the creatures there.

True, but you could see his tracks and the creature's tracks pretty much overlapping since it's following him, you'd also find the horses at his place since he was talking about taking those and if he messes up you'd also find his tracks on the deed.

So for anybody who does it, the tracks would be a giveaway if they're still around by the time the owner logs in, if the person had then also taken the horses then that would just help confirm it was him and that should be all the proof that's needed.

On JKH there was a similar case (champ scorp lead to somebodies house) in which there was enough to give the guy who did it an official warning, and that didn't even include any property destruction.

[Xandra 353]

Hi,

preventing them from going on deeds also has bad side effects. Say new player A has a deed with a guard or two ]...]

The proposal to make it impossible for them to go on deed would make it impossible for him to kill those creatures, eventually he will be locked up on his own deed [...]

Back in the days when I was a bloody nOOb on GV there was still bears there. One of the most exciting things ever was when a bear would siege my little shack, sitting at my front door, staring at me hungrily.

In these days I learned that any house or pen with just 1 door is a trap, and that having friends in the local is worth gold.

I remember getting raided by an escaped old champ lion back then, and I remember the epic battle me and my neighbor had with it, using up nearly all of my poor doggies. Hours of fighting, and a glorious victory. We were so proud!

Now, on Indi, all of my deeds are made similar: every house, every pen has 2 doors/ gates. Even if a ways too big critter would spawn right on deed, no problem. Either it is in a pen anyways, or it can easily be lured away. Deed = Premium = able to ride, isn't it?

Having guards on deed always seemed a bit 'weak' to me, more a feature for the PvP servers where they'd make sense to protect you against other players. Who would be able to plan, and to accept a little challenge wouldn't need them on the PvE servers. Better make a bigger deed for the money, more tiles to terraform, more tiles to build nice things on.

Those faint of heart can always build a guard tower.

Are we sure that's an acceptable side-effect?

IMHO yes. See above. A bit of challenge doesn't hurt, as long as it's possible to manage it.

For those who keep aggros on deed, how about having a total of 2 options for guard management:

- attack aggros on deed

- attack aggros on perimeter

Such could work, but still leaves much room for exploitation.

Anybody realizing that we have F2P players here, too, unable to deed during their testing of the game? Unable to use a horse to lure away a troll bashing their little pen? These are the ones that should learn to love this game, and to buy premium time later. I doubt that rising the pressure on them even more will help improving the conversion rate.

Trolls are roaming large areas now, and it's very easy for any bad minded Premium player to 'accidentally get chased' near a F2P's shack - come back later, it's not enclosed now anymore, get the livestock, perfectly legally.

What's the improvement in having monsters running around and bash your pens while you're offline? Does it add to the game experience? Or is it just a nuisance, and an open door for exploitation?

I understand that some ppl want that bolder aggros shouldn't be able to be penned. Well, we'll pen them in houses now, right? So this current solution seems not even to work as meant.

If such is really desired, why not doing it this way:

• No aggro ever will bash any structure, like before.
  
• Aggros that aren't meant to be penned behave like the religion animals (boars for instance), and just die quickly when penned (without leaving hides/ scales)?

Wouldn't this work better?

Have a good time!

[bdew 2,462]

Anybody realizing that we have F2P players here