Posted January 27, 2012 Compromise: Wait until Rolf fixes bridges. Everyones happy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 If I may interject... The proposed areas are already existing boat routes (Sailboat access only in some parts) and there are already existing land bridges built but it would be nice if the canals were more accessible for larger boats even if it would be difficult to sail through due to the wind conditions. As far as disturbing land access goes... I don't see how making an existing boat canal deeper will disturb land access when there are already land bridges built to allow people to cross with carts and animals. I don't have the time or patience to work on such a project but I will give a thumbs up for it to go ahead. You have my seal of approval. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 Like I said and its being ignored a couiple times already, not only is it annoying, it is also ugly. Read the threads I linked to. If so many people hate canals becuase they look ugly, do you really want to be "that guy" who does it anyways and upsets a giant amount of players just to benefit a few boat users who don't want to sail around/drag their boat? Travel the existing canals and tell me how far you can get in a large ship without having to get out and drag the damn thing. The existing canals are in terrible shape, it's mostly the case of them being: too shallow and not slabbed or just a complete random mess. They are shallow to allow foot crossing . You can get your ship over it by dragging it those few extra tiles, so you can get wherever you want to go with your big ship, or if you dont want to drag it, you could use a smaller boat. Alternatively, you can sail around the landmass if you really have to use a big ship for whatever reasons. There is a compromise for the boat users which you asked for. They have their canals, but they need to drag their boats on some places, so the land travellers can use their routes too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 ... Again i will say that there needs to perhaps be a compromise. Put up your ideas of improvement that can benefit both sides, let's not just stick to "NO CANALS!" submit some improvements and contribute... I haven't seen anyone against canals completely. The main issue is that he hasn't offered any plans other than "I want a big river across Exodus" for no more reason than "it will make it easier for me to deliver bulk goods". Canals already exist, fix them before creating new ones. Although the only one that really needs any work is the Pineview Shallows. That place gets shallower every time I visit it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 I'm actually all for canals, as long as they are clearly marked and at least attempted to be made attractive, and have landbridges that are also clearly marked. Just two nights ago I made the trek from ETP to Avonlea Bay using that series of canals, and TBH, it was a pain. It was difficult to tell what areas were passable and which ones weren't, where the land bridges were, etc. I would be all for this project, as long as it consists of improving the already existing canals. I would also suggest putting up lamps, flags, or other markers along the way to mark the canals and the landbridges. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 I would be willing to produce about 50 torch lamps (because I think the torch on a pole looks smexy outside) In assisting marking out navigable routes through the existing canals. But yes Fix the existing ones first and ensure land traffic is capable of crossing in a few places if it is long. Also we could do a torch planting party of many of use in order to speed the process. 10 people is 5 days of planting compared to 50 days for 1 person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 Just wait for bridges. And besides, people should've deeded in a better place if they wanted better travel access. Nothing is perfect and tbh, it won't stop here. Another person is going to find another reason to dig yet another canal somewhere else. People who moved here to Exo knew of how big of an issue canals and landbridges are and how it causes drama. Also, even if you dig the canal, someone will come along and put dirt back on top of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 Do you want this project inland land trade route? What??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 Some people seem to be ignoring the fact that the waterway already exists so no new canals would need to be dug, just one section would need to be made deeper for large vessel passage. That's it. People already come and go by water frequently and folks have used the landbridge as the crossover point - the only crossover point - since the first week of the server launch. Nothing needs to be changed, only enhanced. The discussion about making new canals is pointless now as there is no need for any new ones on the suggested path. It's only a matter of whether people want to organise to make it better where it's not so great or not. Whether it actually happens or not doesn't really matter as it'll still get used by people as it is now. If the one shallow section gets dredged it'll just make it get used more. Not a bad thing if everything else gets left alone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 +1 Respect to Busted for his ability to evaluate the situation and formulate a totally valid and well thought-out opinion. As I understand it, existing canals are just being made deeper so that larger boats have access. It does not disturb land travel in any way especially when there are already land bridges existing for cart/animals to cross. If you don't want to use the land bridge, you can still dismount and lead your horse across the water anywhere you'd like as is the current situation. I still give a thumbs up for this project. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 What I don't mind: dredging existing waterways to improve boat access. What I DO mind: creating pointless canals to improve the access of a few misplaced deeds at the cut of everyone. Your plan to cut straight through the ETP landbridge is utterly stupid, I would go so far as to consider it griefing myself. I'd like to see what ETP have to say about their major link to the mainland being cut off. If you live on a deed and struggle to get boats in then that's tough. I have no sympathy whatsoever for you if that's the case, which is what it sounds like. As a shipbuilder myself I was careful in choosing where I live - I live on the coast and have excellent boat access. If you want to use boats to get around, then live on the coast!! I can understand why you would want to be able to get from one side of the server to the other easily. But until we have bridges, you would make it easy to get from east to west by boat and harder to get from north to south by land. A massive -1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 27, 2012 Again, I am in favor of dredging existing waterways to make them deeper leaving the current 1 tile wide land bridges intact; the waterways can be dredged without making them look like obvious canals to protect the appearance; torches, unless on deeds, are impractical unless someone want to go and fill them daily. I am against making new waterways and looking at the map I think this would be a fair compromise to just dredge existing waterways. When bridges are implemented I will be the first one out installing the New Pineview Shallows land bridge. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 31, 2012 No, not in favour of this project. And I'm fed up with peeps chopping my trees and trying to plonk a road through my patch without even asking me first. Bleh but anyway Alyeska spelled out most of the reasons I've voted no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 1, 2012 The only area that your map indicates that I know that needs improvement is the New Pineview Canal which was poorly dredged and is also on deeded land and cannot be fixed, except by the deed owner. The only other spot is west of that and the only shallow part is the land bridge New Pineview Shallows Canal and that is at it's deepest point and still passable by carts; I know this because I fixed it yesterday after someone tore up all the slabs and deepened it to get a boat through. Splize has already threatened to deed it and fill it if it gets ruined again, and I'll be delivering dirt to help do it. Take note, the draft of a Knarr is only 8 dirt and should pretty much pass through the whole area with exception to a drag across the fore mentioned land bridge. The settlement of new pineview shallows canal was disbanded weeks ago. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 1, 2012 this is a proposition that would disrupt foot traffic going through a large area of exodus, also, as said before, the majority of people do not own boats, i have found boats only on very specific sections of coastline, specifically: Greater ETP, Greater Ridgedale, lesser Greenbay, greater port macragge, and rarely greater edgewood. [Protunia] -1 [/Protunia] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 1, 2012 The only area that your map indicates that I know that needs improvement is the New Pineview Canal which was poorly dredged and is also on deeded land and cannot be fixed, except by the deed owner. The only other spot is west of that and the only shallow part is the land bridge New Pineview Shallows Canal and that is at it's deepest point and still passable by carts; I know this because I fixed it yesterday after someone tore up all the slabs and deepened it to get a boat through. Splize has already threatened to deed it and fill it if it gets ruined again, and I'll be delivering dirt to help do it. Take note, the draft of a Knarr is only 8 dirt and should pretty much pass through the whole area with exception to a drag across the fore mentioned land bridge. The settlement of new pineview shallows canal was disbanded weeks ago. New pineview shallow canal was disbanded as we did not have it at the top of our priority list, and someone came along and said they would dredge it. It has been deeded once again by that person with a different name (itll always be new pineview shallows to me). The main canal which passes directly infront of new pineview is however almost at the top of my list of jobs and I will start doing that once I get round to it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 1, 2012 Do you want this project inland land trade route? What??? Yeah, I don't quite understand the question myself... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 1, 2012 The only area that your map indicates that I know that needs improvement is the New Pineview Canal which was poorly dredged and is also on deeded land and cannot be fixed, except by the deed owner. The only other spot is west of that and the only shallow part is the land bridge New Pineview Shallows Canal and that is at it's deepest point and still passable by carts; I know this because I fixed it yesterday after someone tore up all the slabs and deepened it to get a boat through. Splize has already threatened to deed it and fill it if it gets ruined again, and I'll be delivering dirt to help do it. Take note, the draft of a Knarr is only 8 dirt and should pretty much pass through the whole area with exception to a drag across the fore mentioned land bridge. The settlement of new pineview shallows canal was disbanded weeks ago. Obviously, if you had read ALL of my post, as I it would be DEEDED by Splize it if it kept getting disturbed; point is mute now as it has been deeded again, and for my understanding the new owner will preserve the land bridge. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 2, 2012 Ok i have look at the post and watch the poll and is concluded that minatory do not want a river across so im closing this project in the interest off the server. Thanks to all that responded and have a concluded toughs about this project. future re-opening off this project will be only in wish off a well dedicated group or large number off people that care for to for-fill and finish's from head to start. Thanks to all that responded from: Theimp Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 2, 2012 Ok i have look at the post and watch the poll and is concluded that minatory do not want a river across so im closing this project in the interest off the server. Thanks to all that responded and have a concluded toughs about this project. future re-opening off this project will be only in wish off a well dedicated group or large number off people that care for to for-fill and finish's from head to start. Thanks to all that responded from: Theimp I like this post. Not because it agrees with me but because you've agreed with the wider community that, overall, we don't want it. (yet lol, re-visit this when we have bridges) Thanks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
