Pocket worlds aka "Wurmholes"

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

I am sure there are some who have sometimes wished there was a singleplayer version of Wurm, for those days you need your Wurm fix but just are not in the mood for dealing with people in an MMO setting. Or wish for a small Lan-party "private server" style world where they could play with friends, and toggle their own settings for things like pvp rules or aggro spawns etc.

My idea is that a deed could have a "pocket world". This would work somewhat like epic, in that your character cannot take items/skills between the worlds, you would start with zero skills and you would either not be able to take coins or maybe coins would simply not exist in that alternate space, since it doesn't really need an "economy". There would only be one rather small map/landform common to all of them, but in your version its just you and whoever you allow, you would have control over a huge number of options -- who could get in (maybe permissions like a minedoor, to add names, or a village, or anyone), whether PvP was enabled if you allowed guests, whether dragons and such are common or non-existent. 

Among other things, this would allow Rolf greater security over his code without risking people reverse engineering it (which I think was a usual argument about allowing an offline mode or private servers). People would need a prem account and deed to create a portal to their private pocket, though guests could maybe be F2P. Perhaps there could even be a moneysink item to even create this portal, a 50s cornerstone needed to make the portal. Friends could have a "semi-friendly" game of siege warfare without having gankers wandering through and spoiling their fun. You could have a peaceful farmlike setting just for you, or a combat-heavy, pk-style world for you and your buds. You could set time to freeze when not in use (no decay, no crops/animal aging/dying) if you can only play as a casual weekend player, or have time work as normal. (Probably best to have time stop when not in use, to minimize server load issues).  Skillgains & timers could be sped up, if you chose in the options (2X, 3X, 4X). You could also have a "reset" option to clear the world & characters and start from zero-ground again.

I have no idea whether such a thing would have minimal server load issues or not (maybe a large moneysink item to create one, would help offset any extra costs), was mostly just kinda thinking to myself about ways Wurm might appeal to some who get burned out on the MMO aspect at times, or wanted a "friendly war-zone" for their village to play in. People who love the game but find certain aspects to be "deal-breakers" would still have a reason to pay a monthly sub to have "Wurm, their way".  Maybe call them Wurmholes.

[Aetherwalker 1,863]

Came on this thread to -1 for taking the M's out of MMO, but if your friends can join you then absolutely +1

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

If the game engine can support sandbox gameplay for singleplayer, small groups, and an MMO world, all concurrently,  why limit it to only one small narrow category?  Why not let Wurm continue to be the exception to what everyone else is doing?

The question for me is simply whether this type of coding is something Rolf can easily incorporate by himself and without a lot of additional/complicated work -- if it is not excessively complex and is easily doable, then open up the Wurm universe for many different styles of gameplay. I can see people enjoying at different times different ways of approaching the game, all keeping within his original vision for Wurm.  People who want a timeout from Wurmdrama can escape into their own private Wurmholes for a period, or have little side adventures and smallscale warfare with a party of friends. I think most people though would still continue to spend the majority of their time in the main world. And by giving people more choices, it might actually grow the population for the main "MMO" side of the community, rather than dilute it.

[MrGARY 12,421]

The problem is, this is just like adding more servers (well, it really is) and that's NOT what wurm needs at the moment.  This could just add up to splitting up the community even more.

[vanderkellen 0]

1st -

The problem is, this is just like adding more servers (well, it really is) and that's NOT what wurm needs at the moment.  This could just add up to splitting up the community even more.

The community is the only thing about Wurm that I do not like.  Yes, there are nice people who play, but they are vastly outnumbered by people who steal your carts when you're 15 tiles away or bash fences and steal things because "It's not against the rules."  As if that makes it a good thing to do.

2nd -

Came on this thread to -1 for taking the M's out of MMO, but if your friends can join you then absolutely +1

It's usually that first M that makes MMOs such a pain.

Being able to pick not only your neighbors, but the people who randomly happen by is a HUGE benefit, and the reason that gated communities are the norm for people who can afford them.  Especially since RL fence bashing is illegal.

I suspect that the only reason Minecraft has more users than Wurm is the private server issue.

I also suspect that the real reason the private servers will never be implemented in Wurm is because Rolf wants a PvP game, and everything he does in developing Wurm is designed and intended to make it more PvP.

I don't personally care whether the game is PvP or not.  If I can have a private server, I won't have any PvP people on it.

Wurm is far and away the best computer game I've ever played.  Some others are flashy, and cool, but after a month or 2, I come back and keep playing Wurm.  However, the growing emphasis on PvP and the unwillingness to make a non-PvP server that actually prevents property attacks is accomplishing what even Skyrim couldnt.

So, I've got $1000 US just waiting for the day that the Wurm offers private servers, and I personally won't spend any more money on it until then.

[Guest Docterchese]

I think this could be really cool to have. I would love going to a 512x512 server and just messing about in a sandbox environment.

I would make it so it's literally a sandbox, you have 512x512 tiles and you 'gotta do something with it. Allow people to buff their skills on the pocket server - so everybody could be 70Fs and instead it's about how you design your castle in your own castle-warfare minigame.

However I think this would definately use up a lot of server space. The cost would have to be reasonable and also paid directly to Rolf. This could also make it harder to have big communities on existing servers if everyone else is away in their "Wurmhole." But once Wurm is better marketed and there are more people to go around this could be cool - I would make it so that an in-minigame admin can set skills though. Having people grinding skills in a minigame would certainly detract them from the main game and main community.

[vanderkellen 0]

This could also make it harder to have big communities on existing servers if everyone else is away in their "Wurmhole." But once Wurm is better marketed and there are more people to go around this could be cool - I would make it so that an in-minigame admin can set skills though. Having people grinding skills in a minigame would certainly detract them from the main game and main community.

I wouldn't want to play this as well as the "main game."  I would want this instead.

The main community is overwhelmingly bad.  Dishonest people who enjoy stealing and harassing anyone they can.

Having small private servers would free up a lot of resources currently going to maintaining several freedom servers.  It would get a lot of the "Care Bears" out of general circulation, and lighten the load on the GMs by allowing people who want actual security for their things to live in a different world from anyone they don't know and trust. 

Rolf could focus his development on the PvP to which is so attached, and anyone who wanted to play without PvP would either have to pay for their own server or join someone else's server, and trust that the people that have been allowed onto that server are also committed to playing non-PvP, even if the game allows the attacking of other players.

Show your support for Wurmholes:

http://wurmonline.uservoice.com/forums/12046-wurmonline/suggestions/2763812-private-servers

[Zakiah 66]

Having small private servers would free up a lot of resources currently going to maintaining several freedom servers.  It would get a lot of the "Care Bears" out of general circulation, and lighten the load on the GMs by allowing people who want actual security for their things to live in a different world from anyone they don't know and trust. 

We sort of already have this capability to have our own little worlds that are safe from others stealing from us carebears on Freedom.

It's called a deed.

[nervesplitter 0]

The thing which I hate about Wurm is the need to keep coming back, seriously Rolf, you add a notification email for when a majority of your deed's farm fields are dead and Facebook will buy you out. I don't feel like Wurm yet I'm letting people down and they're not going to be happy when I come back (Last time they kicked me out of the village) but Wurm is just boring at the moment and I want to wait that off.

It's like Minecraft, every now and then there's an update and it brings lots of people back, they get bored after a while and stop playing, servers will close until the next update and it all repeats. The only difference being is that with Wurm if you wait it out you're either paying lots of money to preserve your stuff or starting over again when you come back, with Minecraft you can just stop and come back later. I +1 this idea as long as there's some sort of way to stop it from being pirated, no cracked versions etc, although a nice sandbox world would be nice.

[vanderkellen 0]

We sort of already have this capability to have our own little worlds that are safe from others stealing from us carebears on Freedom.

It's called a deed.

"Sort of" being the operative term.  I have personally had someone standing on my deed killing my deed guard repeatedly screaming "BE MY FRIEND!" for over an hour, but that is apparently not against any rule.

It is, however, unacceptable behaviour from any sane perspective.

It will never be enough to limit people's activities on or around a deed.  So long as people can do anything there will be people who will find ways to abuse the system.  The only real solution, aside from having a constant stream of people quitting that is about the same size as the stream joining for the first time, is to set things up such that players who push these limits can be excluded from polite company.

If there are no repercussions for rude, obnoxious, or uncouth behaviour, then that is explicit encouragement from the developers to continue and expand that bad behaviour.

I've stopped hoping for the FCC to be given teeth, and deeds only go so far.

For me, it's private servers or no Wurm.

[Ord 1]

I gotta +1 this...

It would be awesome

[Kegan 3,926]

I would love a single player/co-op type of version of Wurm i think the game would do really well this way. That said i don't think it will ever happen either but for the sake of hoping i have to add a +1. 

[fatboy 448]

+1 to this idea, Also u could download the client to the pc and it runs checks to the server to ensure no tampering. Thus u dont need another server for it. But you get a fun offline wurm to play with ur friends on . add the ability to make serveral ingame characters for the offline version and tada! fun time when the net is out XD

[Martynas5 435]

+1 for singleplayer

[Enola 53]

+1 to this idea, Also u could download the client to the pc and it runs checks to the server to ensure no tampering. Thus u dont need another server for it. But you get a fun offline wurm to play with ur friends on . add the ability to make serveral ingame characters for the offline version and tada! fun time when the net is out XD

You will have to connect to the servers, if this idea will ever be implemented (which I doubt). For a true singleplayer experience, you'd have to run the server on your own PC and Rolf has stated numerous times that he won't ever give out the server code.

[Ecrir 887]

a one time 50s cost? I can't imagine that being very profitable deal for Rolf if he has to run a ton of extra servers for it, 0.5-1g a month might be closer.

[Ayes 3,715]

As proposed by the OP (who does come up with many positive posts and ideas) this is an absolutely terrible idea. The community is scattered and fragmented enough as is, this private type server idea would just lead to more people being out of touch with the main playerbase. Hopefully Rolf will never have the time and resources available to develop this aspect of the game.

I would like to see more features implimented that make it easier for people to get together on other servers, such as Epic type portals that can be built on any server to connect to locations on any other server.

=Ayes=

[vanderkellen 0]

this private type server idea would just lead to more people being out of touch with the main playerbase.

So, it's preferable to have people quit the game entirely due to the unavoidable interactions (mostly negative and detrimental) with the "main playerbase".

Goodness knows, there are people who feel a strong need to interact with strangers on a regular basis.  There are also some people, like me, who feel that paying money to hang out with crude, vulgar, deceitful, and larcenous people is silly.  I can do that for free at Wal-Mart.

There are those players that are decidedly community minded, and they would remain so, no matter what options exist for non-community activities.

There are those players that are not community minded, and no amount of force will make them so.  You can call it a terrible idea all you want, and I admit it's a quite unlikely idea, but that doesn't change the fact that not everyone enjoys the same things that you do.

a one time 50s cost? I can't imagine that being very profitable deal for Rolf if he has to run a ton of extra servers for it, 0.5-1g a month might be closer.

50 Euro per month is more than enough to secure a respectable VPS.  It would be worth at least that much to me.  Also, this way the servers would stay under the direct control of Rolf.

I would like to see more features implimented that make it easier for people to get together on other servers, such as Epic type portals that can be built on any server to connect to locations on any other server.

Might there exist the possibility that the community is "scattered and fragmented" more because of differing goals and play styles than a lack of travel options?

[BrQQQ 2,854]

Maybe there could be another cluster for this purpose. It could be a server of a size of something like Deliverance (or bigger if there's enough interest). People would be able to rent a piece of land for real money, price depending on the size and to atleast pay how much this project would cost.

Within people's lands, they could do the things they want as described in OP, with some coded limits so people can't spam everything to eat up the server resources for no reason. People would only be able to stay in their own area.

It could be used as a little test area (without the limitations as on the current Test server) or just some space for you (and maybe your friends) to build or do something else.

Maybe if the whole idea is actually realistic and possible, Rolf could ask the community to see if there's enough interest

[Aetherwalker 1,863]

Maybe there could be another cluster for this purpose. It could be a server of a size of something like Deliverance (or bigger if there's enough interest). People would be able to rent a piece of land for real money, price depending on the size and to atleast pay how much this project would cost.

So... deeds?

[BrQQQ 2,854]

Maybe there could be another cluster for this purpose. It could be a server of a size of something like Deliverance (or bigger if there's enough interest). People would be able to rent a piece of land for real money, price depending on the size and to atleast pay how much this project would cost.

So... deeds?

you are taking it out of its context, the OP says what you should be able to do with it

[Garis 210]

So, it's preferable to have people quit the game entirely due to the unavoidable interactions (mostly negative and detrimental) with the "main playerbase".

This straw-man argument is flawed on so many levels.  First of all, there are no unavoidable interactions.  I don't have any bad interactions, because I decided early on that I wanted my own space and shelled out for it.  I have a pretty large deed, I make peace with the people coming through, and try to BE the good influence I want to see in the community.

The part of the world that I live in is fairly remote, difficult to get to, challenging to survive in, and there are no 'bad apples' in the vicinity.  I take time and energy to foster and encourage good neighbors when they arrive, and work hard to keep good company in my village and alliance.  And if I really REALLY wanted to go solo, I would move away from any major roads, deed up, put up some NO TRESPASSING signs, and go crazy with the KOS list and spirit templars.  For everything else there's /ignore.

So, it seems clear nobody is strictly forced to interact with anyone in close proximity to them.  Interactions have not been any shade of 'unavoidable' in my experience.  Most of my interactions with the community have been decidedly positive.  The evidence overwhelmingly refutes the central claim in the argument above.

HOWEVER!  I'm not without sympathy to your own experience, and if there's a real-life business case for this, you could probably make it work. 

Perhaps we need a colonial charter you could buy from the king.  The charter would need a minimum number of signatories, and it would cost something like 50s to sign it.  So, with 20 signatures that's 10g.  The charter would allow the signatories to sail to a new island and colonize it in the name of the king.

The Free Colonies would not be reachable from the tutorial server, but would require access to some sort of colony portal OR some kind of a charted sailing route.  Traveling to a free colony would require either that you are recruited into one of the settlements on that colony, OR that you are a passenger on a ship piloted by a diplomat from one of the settlements on that colony.

The question is whether or not dozens or hundreds of these island colonies could be instantiated inside of a datacenter in a cost effective way for CodeClubAB.  I cannot answer that, but I can offer some business models that foster a 'pay as you go' approach with clawback options, in order to minimize risk for CCAB.  Perhaps larger islands could require more signatories in their colonial charter, perhaps a new island of varying size could be discovered each month, and the first group to amass the required signatures could lay claim to it.  If nobody amassed the necessary signatures, no new islands would be discovered until the current one was colonized.

Signatories to a colony charter would be by invitation only, so the onus would be on the players to make *some* friends on the server and make *some* manner of compromise in their standards.

Colonies would have shipping / sailing access to the Freedom Isles.  Colonized islands would have no equivalent to The Howl, so if you're not a citizen and you die there, you end up back on Independence.

If a signatory to a colonial charter disbands their deed, another must take their place in order to pay the king.  If the balance isn't made up by the other signatories, after some point the king can revoke the charter and issue a new charter for the island.  In other words, rent is fixed.  If someone disbands, everyone pays proportionately more.  They can recruit more signatories in order to keep their charter, but one way or another the king demands his due.

This would let you have your own 'island' of varying size depending on how large of a community you had, allow you to choose your neighbors in a more controlled way, and still give you the option to interact with the rest of the Freedom Isles on your own terms.  The cost and benefit to CCAB is entirely beyond me.

[Hrafnhildr 0]

Wurm + Minecraft = Best game in the universe. 

Minecraft - Wurm = meh 

Wurm - Minecraft = Meh

Rolf + Notch = WOW!!! 

Rolf - Notch = meh 

Notch - Rolf = Interesting but still no.

[Farmerbob 369]

  I've thought of this at length.  Pocket worlds.  Allow access to the rest of Wurm at the will of the owner.

  Want PVP?  Connect the pocket to Epic.  Want PVE, connect the world to Freedom.

  When connected to Epic, the Epic instance of the character is in charge.  Same for Freedom side.

  This would allow PVE folks to build something really cool in secret, then let people explore it, and allow PVP folks to repair their site after it gets flattened by enemies.

  Pocket worlds in PVE would have to have a perimeter of un-towerable and un-deedable land for a staging area though - simply having a portal into tower-protected, deeded land will not make raiding them popular when they are connected.

This will be FAR more interesting if/when there are multistory constructions and fortifications.

So, in short +1

[Makarus 458]

Garis.

Nice.

my thoughts though, is to wait. that currently our population is low and we don't need to spread it out quite that far yet.

currently we have enough, it's possible though not easy to escape the local populations.

maybe if wurm doubles or quadruples in size of population... this would be the way to go about it.