Give A Little More Love To F2P

[ReaverKane 363]

To expand my earlier comment about losing deeds when you lose premium (and to play a bit of Devil's Advocate)..

A possible solution which would allow real reason to go premium, and allow those who want to allow the F2P accounts more "freedom".. be warned, I doubt many would like this idea.. but I've been surprised before...

The F2P users could have all skill caps removed (or cap increased to whatever people felt was fair to allow the F2P to feel useful, maybe 30-50 range?), could drive large carts and ride horses, but in exchange, they cannot plant or hold any deeds OR writs, and cannot own anything over a rowboat/sailing boat in storage capacity. So they'd be able to have small boats, and large carts to earn silver to pay for premium...

If you don't renew your premium, deeds cannot have upkeep added until the mayor re-premiums, and off-deed writs start the "prolonged" absence decay rates after 30 days whether you're active or not.

This addresses the "abandoned" deeds/enclosure issue so many people seem to complain about, allows F2P to participate in higher level crafting/hunting without a real limit, and if they are going to go premium, gives the the chance to do so with in-game coin.

Again, not a likely outcome, but a possible one which would seem to meet the requested criteria and stated pain points...

Lol... i really had to scroll up because your second post is almost the opposite of the first.

And about the first. I suggested adding large carts, not as a new thing, but bringing back something that was there for the most part of wurm's life span. That restriction was imposed about 1 and a half or two years ago, maybe, while wurm has 2 years of time. In fact that change came out almost half a year after GV was closed off, and inde became "f2p".

I certanly wouldn't be playing today if i couldn't have used a large cart on GV. Because i wouldn't be hooked on the big projects that i did there, because i wouldn't be able to do them in a normal amount of time.

Also losing deeds on losing premium is all fine and dandy, if players get their silver back. But on the flip side, then you'll lose a chunk of people, like me for instance, that am keeping 2 deeds, but i've let my premium run out since i'm only playing to feed my dogs, since i don't have time to dedicate to Wurm atm. I am planning on returning, but not so far, i do have about 1g in bank, and 300 days in upkeep, and i'm online daily, so yeah, your idea would probably cost a bunch of players. This would be akin to Blizzard wiping out your chars every time you'd miss a month in WoW.

Maybe you didn't get the point of the thread though... This is about getting more people on Wurm, not less.

[Hussars 511]

I got the point, the problem is the same as in a lot of threads.. not a lot of give and a lot more "take".

As I said, is it a realistically possible solution, sure.

Would it help anything, maybe.

Would people like it, No.

But it does address the main points.

• Increase the usefulness/retention of F2P accounts
  
• Provide real reasons to go premium
  
• Provide reasons to maintain premium
  
• Keep some form of separation between the account types which reduces the ability to be easily exploited.
  

Has the additional benefits of removing deeds and structures that have been abandoned or just placed to "annoy" others.

As to the point of getting silver back, why would there be a refund? You would still get your paid for deed time, but you'd not be able to expand/keep the deed beyond the current upkeep without paying back into the character's premium. There is no loss of paid for service/resource, and it would not auto disband until the upkeep expired. However, I would refine it to include a situation of if you bought a boat and can no longer use it (which can happen now if you lose premium status), you keep the property, but still cannot use it.

As a practice in hyperbole, it shows just how far one can take a topic and have it still meet the intent of a change request. If this "idea" missed any points, I'll be happy to expand on it further, but I think it has served it purpose.

Coming back to the original intent. There are many ways to make a F2P character "feel" useful, there are several ways to actually make them be useful, but only the person playing that character can truly choose to be useful. In all things Wurm, the world does not "hand you" anything, you must find ways to do what you can to achieve what you want.

As others have said, if the point is to allow F2P characters to ultimately gain premium, they can dig dirt (on most servers selling for 1.5s or more per 1k - offer a deep discount if the purchaser picks it up or do the work on site), make floor boards/slabs, load/unload pans, do those tasks no one else wants to do, and charge for your services.

If the point is to allow the F2P accounts to be non-premium and still achieve the same things as a premium (or even a majority of those things), why would most of us pay at all?

::edit insert:: Again, I'm not against F2P accounts having expanded usability like riding cows/horses or even use of hitched large carts, but instead of having a system change that reduces/blurs the lines between paying customers and non paying customer (or free alts of paying customers), maybe look at other ways to bring the actual players who might eventually convert into a paying customer and not at ways to allow a free alt to be exploited.

In the spirit of disclosure, yes I also have alts who own deeds, and all of them have premium for at least the next year (and their deeds are paid for upkeep for at least 3 months most for up to a year) except 1 which was made specifically to place a temp deed while waiting for a neighbors deed to fall and buildings to decay.

While I understand not everyone, heck maybe even only a few, can also do this, why should those of us who do, have the perceived value of our silver/euro/dollar diminished? Because if you can do a lot of the same things on a free account, paid accounts do become less attractive, which is why we do have free alts, we don't need them to be paid for to be able to contribute.

And as a FYI, I'm not actually proposing a system as I described be considered, just that the balance between the two account types needs to be carefully thought out. I'd be willing to bet, the change was originally made for the very reason that there was a perceived lack of separation that lead to accounts not needing to pay for silver to go premium.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Hussars

[ReaverKane 363]

Blurring the line isn't good in any way.

I mean, many people are content to get to 50-ish skill and do some stuff, build their village, if you give them that as free, why go premium?

This is about giving people time to experience the game as f2p so they get tempted into Premium, and not about making premium players wanting to quit the game, because if they stop being premium for a while they lose their stuff... And the free players get to do more or less the same stuff...

Also your option would pretty much screw up with the current system allowing even non-citizens to aid in the upkeep of certain deeds (which is useful in stuff like FM, etc), Plus since all money in-game is tied down to real currency, from code club's standpoint, i don't see any advantages in disallowing people from adding upkeep to their deeds if they aren't premium. Better only gaining half the money than none.

Also, anyone can come up with a "possible" yet, not really useful solution to prove a point. But again, this thread isn't about people proving a point, is about not having deserted servers with 70 online players where there should be a few hundreds.

We want f2p to experience more stuff and be more useful, and you want to give them more skill, but on the offset remove the ability to make a house, or even create a small farm or something (which is pretty much a plunder bait without a house to make it a "Enclosure"), which is primarily the factor that gets most people hooked.

Clearly you do understand the point of this thread.

While I understand not everyone, heck maybe even only a few, can also do this, why should those of us who do, have the perceived value of our silver/euro/dollar diminished?

Actually, it seems to have increased a bit, since F2P using carts is a relatively recent change like i already mentioned.

Edited October 20, 2012 by ReaverKane

[Keldun 335]

You know, removing the ability to create Writs from F2P, might be the solution to several problems. In return they can get the ability to ride and drive back.

It would greatly reduce the number of small shacks cluttering the countryside.

It would prevent a lot of people from failing to "go at it alone". Which might have discouraged them from continuing with the game.

They would join a village out of pure necessity and they have better ability to get around and do jobs to earn premium.

And when they decide to go premium they are already integrated in a community and more likely to stay for longer.

[Hussars 511]

My problem with threads like this is that you have two main issues, F2P usability, and player retention/conversion to premium.

Often the latter is used as justification to change the former in a way that really only serves to make the F2P accounts better alt mules. Which leads to my "suggestion" which was not intended to be taken so seriously, just used to illustrate the point about the need to ensure the two accounts are kept different enough to ensure there is a use for the true F2P user, while not making them so useful to not need to go premium at some point or to be easily exploitable as free alt mules. So if we could set it aside at this point and move on please.. i feel like I inadvertantly trolled the thread...

If you want to talk about how to retain customers or bring them back into the fold as it were;

From a business side of things there are two prongs needed to begin to "attack" the player retention issues and upselling to premium:

1. Most of the folks playing in the under 2 to 3 years mark started as F2P (edit insert:: many after F2P accounts could no longer use large carts or horses/cows to ride), so lets look at what Wurm did right to convert these people into long term players and paying customers.
   
   
2. Reach out to those who no longer play (and possibly do not actively particpate in the forums) and ask them directly why they stopped and what would they like to see.changed to bring them back and possibly convert to a paying customer. Maybe offer them a referral they can give to friends who still play or use for themselves if the dev team are able to address the the player's issues with Wurm to see how things have changed. (This potentially gets them back in at little to no risk to themselves and builds a positive PR image) [since this would be a mostly manual process, it would be difficult to exploit without help of staff. This type of referral would be one to customer and transferable only once]
   

We, the active players, can only say what we would like to see or think might address the issues. This may or may not cover the real issues (specifically for the F2P retention and driving the conversion to Premium) To get those, you need unfiltered communication with the target audience, non-paying accounts that are not alts for paying customers and not those who "know folks who...".

No matter which way it goes, best of luck to everyone, this is a question of balance that has plagued the games industry for years...

::edit insert::

I apologize, I tried to let this portion go.. I really did...

We want f2p to experience more stuff and be more useful, and you want to give them more skill, but on the offset remove the ability to make a house, or even create a small farm or something (which is pretty much a plunder bait without a house to make it a "Enclosure"), which is primarily the factor that gets most people hooked.

Clearly you do understand the point of this thread.

As I continue to say, the "suggestion" was a hyperbole, a point taken to an extreme, and not intended to be taken seriously. It was my failure to consider the buttons it was pushing and will avoid doing so again.

As to F2P:

Stop pitying them as some challenged lifeform.

Take them hunting. Have them mine out rock shards for on-deed building, or digging dirt/terraforming coastal areas and pay them in silver or items or both. Show them that even though, yes they cannot do X,Y, or Z, that the grass is greener on the other side. Provide a sense of community, a reason for them to care about where they are and that even if they are limited in their growth ability, that you (as a community not ReaverKane specifically) will continue to embrace them as such.

This is what happened to me when I started, and I went premium to deed the land I was working because those who were nice to me and supportive of me made me want to stay. One provided the nails for my first 1x1, beyond that all they did was chat with me about random elements of Wurm life and the weather. In turn, when I could, I spent my real world money on in-game coin, which I paid out in large quantity for small things to be done around my deed. Or for crops I could produce faster and in larger quantity at higher QL. Invest your time (and if possible silver) in those new players you claim to want to support. Sure, some will still leave, but you just might be surprised by how many stay.

In my opinion, this is the biggest reason for the loss of players. We are all so full of ourselves that we've lost sight of what it means to be a new player. We get so wrapped up in our own little world/politics/drama, thinking we can solve the problems of the game if only they'd listen or "if we did this..." New players are walking into an "Old Boys" club, that if you don't fit in immediately, you get excluded.

Or you buy your way in by purchasing a known account.

Giving them more is fine, but there is a rot no amount of enabling will cure.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Hussars

[Einar 1]

As to F2P:

Stop pitying them as some challenged lifeform.

Take them hunting. Have them mine out rock shards for on-deed building, or digging dirt/terraforming coastal areas and pay them in silver or items or both. Show them that even though, yes they cannot do X,Y, or Z, that the grass is greener on the other side. Provide a sense of community, a reason for them to care about where they are and that even if they are limited in their growth ability, that you (as a community not ReaverKane specifically) will continue to embrace them as such.

I had a long-winded post I was writing as I read the thread, but none of it really compares to this simple suggestion.

I posted about an 85ql stick somewhere up above, what I was alluding to was the attitude toward F2P players coming from premium players. For the most part, my experience in Wurm both awhile ago and now has been pretty much, "if you're not premium, you're just slave labor waiting to happen." I tried the whole digging for silver routine and about 50% of the time I simply wasn't paid. One player actually told me, "the dirt quality isn't high enough," and when I threatened to tell everyone about her lack of payment, she simply told me that nobody would believe a F2P over a premium. That single story is pretty much my experience in this game up until very recently. If Wurm's community wants to grow, maybe it should take up the suggestions Hussars laid out.

[Hussars 511]

While I'd love to take credit for it, Brash said it first in this thread more politely:

... but I think also one of the BEST things we can do for free players, is make them feel more welcomed and wanted, because they CAN be an immensely positive addition to the game. They are the way we will "grow" the game -- even if they don;t become paying subscribers, they are more likely to bring in their friends and say nice things about Wurm on other gaming sites, and some of those may well be our future population.

While I don't care if F2P accounts get some or even all of the things she has outlined, however as described they are all just too easy to exploit. Anything you do add to the F2P will only make the alt mules more useful/likely to be exploited unless there is a very real trade off for them. How about all of the abilities/features suggested have an expiration, like the "glow" and ability to get free food/drink from bartenders new characters get for 24 hours.

Say you get these new perks for 72 hours of play, more than that, it becomes more easily exploitable since you can reuse a single email account for alts. Taking the time to clear the tutorial every couple of days will limit the number of current players willing to use these free alts as mules.

Or that only some the perks expire, maybe you keep the ability to drive the large cart, but lose the ability to ride a horse.

Or you are granted a non-trade/drop one use "pass" to use a horse for X hours in-game. So you choose when the timer starts so you can see if these things make it worth it for you to go premium.

If the intent is truly to give players access to content/abilities as a reason to continue playing and/or to go premium, give them things in a controlled and TEMPORARY manner. Otherwise, the current players' alts just become more useful since these new abilities would count for them as well and provides even less reason for premium players to reach out to non-alt F2P users.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Hussars

[Kianga 219]

Though it is harsh, I think it would be fair to not let F2P hold deeds. Though I would want some leeway to not have deeds falling just because prem was forgotten. So lets say F2P can't found or aquire a deed, and can't hold on to one they themselves had as prem for longer then one month after prem has gone. During that month the F2P does not have access to the settings of the deed. Only things he/she can do to solve the matter before the token falls (regardless of coffers) is to either re-prem, or to give the deed to a prem.

I like the 'ticket for 24 game-hours of horse-riding capability' idea too (could be for more things perhaps, like usage of a small sailingboat, maybe even corbita) - but would like to see horse-and-cart use as permanent, because I think that one is really really important in making F2P players useful so able to earn their way into becoming paying customer at some point.

And yes, I agree that makes free alts more useful to prems also (wish I could think of a disadvantage which would *only* apply to those particular alts and not to new players with one non-prem character - but only way to realisticly do that would involve linking characters of one person together as far as I can see, and that is a giant so unfeasable operation). But I don't think it's a good route to take everything and their grandmother away from new players, just because old players could mis-use the features also.... Being careful, okay, sadly needed - but there has to be an end to 'denial because else prem-alts will use it also' somewhere along the line where it still leaves enjoyable gameplay to real new players.

Not easy to find the right middleground, sigh.

[ReaverKane 363]

I had a long-winded post I was writing as I read the thread, but none of it really compares to this simple suggestion.

I posted about an 85ql stick somewhere up above, what I was alluding to was the attitude toward F2P players coming from premium players. For the most part, my experience in Wurm both awhile ago and now has been pretty much, "if you're not premium, you're just slave labor waiting to happen." I tried the whole digging for silver routine and about 50% of the time I simply wasn't paid. One player actually told me, "the dirt quality isn't high enough," and when I threatened to tell everyone about her lack of payment, she simply told me that nobody would believe a F2P over a premium. That single story is pretty much my experience in this game up until very recently. If Wurm's community wants to grow, maybe it should take up the suggestions Hussars laid out.

Well mate. You got really unlucky. I made over 1 gold digging dirt both as a premium and as a F2P. Also there's not many people that would say that, and even less people that would actually believe a premium over a F2P, specially because the game does a wonderful job of logging every word you write in the chat...

Though it is harsh, I think it would be fair to not let F2P hold deeds. Though I would want some leeway to not have deeds falling just because prem was forgotten. So lets say F2P can't found or aquire a deed, and can't hold on to one they themselves had as prem for longer then one month after prem has gone. During that month the F2P does not have access to the settings of the deed. Only things he/she can do to solve the matter before the token falls (regardless of coffers) is to either re-prem, or to give the deed to a prem.

What would this accomplish? True some people have lots of deeds, and blah... SO WHAT? They had to pay for premium to make the deed, they have to pay UPKEEP to keep the deed. Its not like deeds keep themselves. Sure people all want to settle on the coast and mislike that people with multiple deeds are taking up "their" spot, But is this something that would be good for you? Or good for the game?

Ask yourself:

Does this get more players paying?

No it doesn't, in fact it will discourage players like me, who keep a deed payed and kept even when their not premium, because they're on a break form Wurm. Taking away people's deeds if they aren't premium would be like Other MMO clearing out your character's gear and achievements if you skip a month, instead of just not letting you play.

Does this attract new players?

No. Most starting players have no idea what a deed is. Also those that do know will either look for a deed, or go prem to make one.

Does this help reduce abandoned deeds?

Nope. Upkeep does that.

Also on the rest of the post... Giving temporary buffs isn't the solution. Sure newbies will like to play with the horse (if they find one on the limited time) and such. But then it runs out, and they find themselves without that benefit. And will just help frustrate some (and seriously, even though i am not playing steady i feel like going prem again everytime i need to travel a bit for whichever reason, and i can't take my horse), once you can go that fast its hard to go back, and specially if they can't go back and do anything about it. MAYBE a solution would be to offer a "demo time" (but then again that's what f2p is supposed to be), like giving 10h of premium time for new players once they get 2-3 skills to 20. Should be enough to give them a taste of what they could get if they go premium, without being too much of an exploitable advantage.

But like i said, i think the biggest issue is not this, but giving f2p enough things to do as to keep them interested enough so they will want to go premium, or even just have the chance to work for premium. And again, like i stated earlier, riding a hitched cart would be a GREAT start, and maybe even the only thing required to make f2p interesting enough t keep playing, and eventually going premium.

[Hussars 511]

Again,

Not sure where the idea of "taking away deeds" came from.

The idea stated was that in order for you to pay upkeep into the deed, the mayor had to be premium. The deed would not be removed, no upkeep would diappear, no buildings or structures would be removed. Just that you'd have to have a mayor be premium. So while you're mayor is premium, pay up on the deed, your premium expires, no more upkeep can be added to the pool until the mayor is premium again. Or you transfer the deed from the F2P to another character who is premium already.

The second portion of this was that a previous premium characters that become F2P characters who had not deeded and did not RENEW their premium status, would have 30 days to do so before increased decay took effect on their writs. Again, nothing being removed for/from a character. Just an increase in upkeep requirements on their non-deeded buildings. If their building(s) are on someone else's deed, nothing changes.

The system already limits placing a deed, as well as resizing/moving them, to premium accounts only. However once your account goes to F2P, there is nothing driving your now F2P "mule" to resubscribe to premium unless you want to change something on the deed besides permissions.

Once again, this was only a half joking suggestion in the form of a hyperbole, so can we PLEASE move away from it now? It is getting taken further and further out of context and distorted into somehting it was never meant to be.

As to the hitched carts, I still fail to see how this will convince people to go premium in the numbers being suggested. If anything, I'd expect to see less premium, since now you don't need to have 20.01 or better stats to do something seen a such a huge "advantage". That said, I'm STILL NOT AGAINST this idea. If people really think this would drive an increase in accounts/players staying as well as converting to premium, I say try it, worst that happens is that we lose more premium accounts, which no matter is done, we're likely to do anyway.

As to making coin as a F2P or premium, the community has changed. There are less of the "paying" vet's offering work. A lot of the old accoutns still in-game have been purchased by those who didn't want to take time to skill up or wanted to own the accounts for various reasons, such as not having to pay others for things like enchants or high ql gear/tools.

Look at the number of post in the merchants or selling threads.. and how many of them are for accounts or gold/silver sales, where a year ago it was more about tools and gear? I even have a PC thread for one of my deeds up there...

My final point before I leave this thread, I will say again, asking those who are not primarily F2P users what F2P users want/need is like asking someone what a complete stranger wants out of life.. sure you might get lucky and be able to identify it in one try.. but why not just ask the stranger directly and get it right the first time?

We've all likely spent time as F2P, but what one person feels is missing is not what everyone else may agree with. We cannot even get everyone to agree on what is acceptable behavoir on the PVE servers...

Edited October 22, 2012 by Hussars

[ago 470]

The idea stated was that in order for you to pay upkeep into the deed, the mayor had to be premium. The deed would not be removed, no upkeep would diappear, no buildings or structures would be removed. Just that you'd have to have a mayor be premium. So while you're mayor is premium, pay up on the deed, your premium expires, no more upkeep can be added to the pool until the mayor is premium again. Or you transfer the deed from the F2P to another character who is premium already.

This can be very bad if the mayor of a town leaves for some time (or can't pay for premium). The other villagers can't pay for upkeep and can only watch everything fall apart.

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

This could also backfire if people continue to maintain their former deeds as unpaid "legal enclosures". Money that they would have otherwise have willingly paid as upkeep, now does NOT go into development coffers, but they still keep the land (albeit with higher maintenance).

[Hussars 511]

I really need to turn off the thread tracker...

This can be very bad if the mayor of a town leaves for some time (or can't pay for premium). The other villagers can't pay for upkeep and can only watch everything fall apart.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Hussars

[Loremaster 21]

An idea I had recently was to reintroduce homesteads. These would be primarily for free players and would function similar to a deed with a few restrictions such as no perimeter, a set size (perhaps 5x5,) only one guard, and after a month the homestead benefits would expire. This would give new players a taste of deeds without harming the integrity of the current deed system.

Edit: All new players receive a homestead form when they arrive on their chosen server, and are non-tradeable.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Loremaster

[ReaverKane 363]

An idea I had recently was to reintroduce homesteads. These would be primarily for free players and would function similar to a deed with a few restrictions such as no perimeter, a set size (perhaps 5x5,) only one guard, and after a month the homestead benefits would expire. This would give new players a taste of deeds without harming the integrity of the current deed system.

Edit: All new players receive a homestead form when they arrive on their chosen server, and are non-tradeable.

Nope, not with a guard... People already complain about guards being used as meat mines, imagine if you could make a alt a month to make a meat mine (or several)... Players can build "Homesteads" albeit without a proper "entitlement" by creating a Legal Enclosure as per game rules. Sure it needs more maintenance, sure it has no guards, but then again, guard towers are free, and has little restrictions on Freedom (only place where homesteads as you suggested would actually apply, since on Epic a single guard and a 5x5 aren't that big of a deal, unless since it would have no perimeter, players would make 10+ alts and make conjoined "homesteads" making a line of buildings guarded by tens of guards.

[topkos 504]

One word: No.

They enjoy a lot more features than i do supporting this game with more than time.

they are fine.

they get more than enough, this game needs the little money , we paid players put every month with our subs, in order to get better.

And I really think the game, slowly, got better that it used to be 10 years ago.

And it wasnt thanks to the free players.

[Aeris 3,764]

I am of the belief that if a person doesn't like the game it won't pay for it regardless of whether it can ride a cow or not. And if it does like the game and still doesn't buy premium then it's probably because of one of the following reasons:

1.) He/She is too young to create a Paypal account and that's the way it should be.

2.) They can't afford it.

3.) They play it very casually and don't see a need to invest money in it until they feel they have time for it.

4.) They're cheapskates (it IS cheap, and no matter what some people say it's still an argument). I don't actually have a problem with this, UNLESS you play the game on a regular basis and during intervals long enough that you actually have the time to become upset over not being able to ride a cow. Then you should buy the game time.

Most of us have been free-to-play players once upon a time and most of us probably wouldn't still be here if Rolf hadn't used the premium player money to further develop the game. You can argue that changes like this won't hurt premium but instead interest more people in the game, but I dare to disagree. The free-to-play model shouldn't be TOO comfortable. They're of course an important part of the game, and I'm really happy that there's a free trial - but you shouldn't give the free accounts more perks.

Cow riding

Like you said, it'll be easier for them to defend themselves - this is actually bad. A non-premium player should not be independent. The way the model works is that the free-to-play players should join a village for protection.

FS sparring

The way fight skill works is that you kill your opponent to gain it. Apart from that - See the cow riding point.

Easier cooking recipes

See the cow riding point. They should be encouraged to seek out protection/help from premium players, not be made more independent and powerful themselves.

Cotton finding

Cotton is already fairly easy to find. I ran around with wounds the other week and I picked up several kilograms of cotton in just under 15 minutes. Someone who says this is too hard just haven't tried enough.

Canoe

This will cause more agitation than joy. Imagine being a newbie and create something that useful that you can neither lock nor moor. One day you spend hours creating and playing with it and the next it has been floating across the server.

Sponsorship

It's a nice idea that it should be easier to sponsor a new player, but it's fairly hard to implement in a way that would actually prevent it from just going into alts. I really like the idea though.

It would be nice if some sort of sponsorship was implemented that made a charater be insta-integrated in a village so that the new player will join as a premium player right away and already be part of a village. This way they'd come in direct contact with other players straight away and have guidance as well as company. They'd only have to stay in the village until the trial month was over and then they could leave the village if they felt like it.

I don't think that more love to the free players will come from making the game easier for them, I believe that the players themselves are the key. If we as players make it more interesting for them to play they are going to enjoy the game a fair bit more.

Edit: I just noticed that you promoted sponsoring minor players with premium. That's not good, people shouldn't gain access to pay-to-play features in a game unless they are of age. If their parents disallow them buying premium it would have consequences for Rolf if it was found out that they had gained access to it. This sort of thing needs to be prevented if adding sponsorship to the game.

Edited October 31, 2012 by Aeris

[Martynas5 435]

Playing long time as f2p. Can't complain.

Non prems should be able to command large carts with hitched bulls at least. It's becouse they mostly make lots of bulk items.

Also good way to make coins is to make support beams, floor boards, rafts. Sells good and are able to transport by rowing boat ( unfinished items ). This way i'm finishing one of my goals.

And don't make that F2P would lose deed after their premium is gone.

Edited October 31, 2012 by Martynas5

[ReaverKane 363]

I am of the belief that if a person doesn't like the game it won't pay for it regardless of whether it can ride a cow or not. And if it does like the game and still doesn't buy premium then it's probably because of one of the following reasons:

1.) He/She is too young to create a Paypal account and that's the way it should be.

2.) They can't afford it.

3.) They play it very casually and don't see a need to invest money in it until they feel they have time for it.

4.) They're cheapskates (it IS cheap, and no matter what some people say it's still an argument). I don't actually have a problem with this, UNLESS you play the game on a regular basis and during intervals long enough that you actually have the time to become upset over not being able to ride a cow. Then you should buy the game time.

Most of us have been free-to-play players once upon a time and most of us probably wouldn't still be here if Rolf hadn't used the premium player money to further develop the game. You can argue that changes like this won't hurt premium but instead interest more people in the game, but I dare to disagree. The free-to-play model shouldn't be TOO comfortable. They're of course an important part of the game, and I'm really happy that there's a free trial - but you shouldn't give the free accounts more perks.

Cow riding

Like you said, it'll be easier for them to defend themselves - this is actually bad. A non-premium player should not be independent. The way the model works is that the free-to-play players should join a village for protection.

FS sparring

The way fight skill works is that you kill your opponent to gain it. Apart from that - See the cow riding point.

Easier cooking recipes

See the cow riding point. They should be encouraged to seek out protection/help from premium players, not be made more independent and powerful themselves.

Cotton finding

Cotton is already fairly easy to find. I ran around with wounds the other week and I picked up several kilograms of cotton in just under 15 minutes. Someone who says this is too hard just haven't tried enough.

Canoe

This will cause more agitation than joy. Imagine being a newbie and create something that useful that you can neither lock nor moor. One day you spend hours creating and playing with it and the next it has been floating across the server.

Sponsorship

It's a nice idea that it should be easier to sponsor a new player, but it's fairly hard to implement in a way that would actually prevent it from just going into alts. I really like the idea though.

It would be nice if some sort of sponsorship was implemented that made a charater be insta-integrated in a village so that the new player will join as a premium player right away and already be part of a village. This way they'd come in direct contact with other players straight away and have guidance as well as company. They'd only have to stay in the village until the trial month was over and then they could leave the village if they felt like it.

I don't think that more love to the free players will come from making the game easier for them, I believe that the players themselves are the key. If we as players make it more interesting for them to play they are going to enjoy the game a fair bit more.

Edit: I just noticed that you promoted sponsoring minor players with premium. That's not good, people shouldn't gain access to pay-to-play features in a game unless they are of age. If their parents disallow them buying premium it would have consequences for Rolf if it was found out that they had gained access to it. This sort of thing needs to be prevented if adding sponsorship to the game.

Noticed you left out the carts, and i disagree with you about F2P. They're as much of a part of the game as Premium players. Whether you like it or not, if there weren't F2Ps or people that pay premium through work, most other players wouldn't play for as long because they wouldn't be making the megalomaniac projects they do.

So yeah F2P play their part. And allowing hem to command hitched carts again would improve that role.

Also, like i said earlier, people might hate this game at first (i did) but if they give it a chance they might grow to like it (like i did), thing is Wurm isn't that user friendly, and much less towards froobs, so a little love might go a long way.

Also a big evidence towards this is that last time Rolf gave F2Pers some love (When Freedom was opened for F2P), in a couple of weeks wurm broke the records for players online and premium accounts. Idk if today we're above or below that level, would be nice to see. But you can't deny that last time a big gesture of good will towards Free players was given the game gained as a whole.

[FreddiToxi 0]

It would be nice to see a premium trail when you hit a 20 skill.

+1 for the OP's points raised.

[topkos 504]

-1

Wurm needs the love from paying players. No the other way around.

[JackBurton 903]

I don't care two squirts about freeloader players. Let them eat cake.

[Vroomfondel 1,128]

-1 to any more perks for F2P players. The limitations are there as the incentive to pay to play. This game already gives free players more than most any other game. You can play forever and there is no preference when logging in whether you are prem or F2P. Those reasons alone are more than I see in most other games. Giving them any more perks just gives them reason to play free longer. If they don't like the limitations, time to pay up. Yes, I'm a paying player and I do have a resentment of free players getting more rights. After all, they are basically playing on my dime.

[Macgregor 46]

How long have you people played????

I see a lot of, if your premium expires so does your deed. Don't you understand that this is how it used to be?????? Don't you understand this was a huge FAIL????? Do you not know that the game didn't really start growing until people were allowed to hold a deed after premium expired?????

So sure, let's make deeds expire with premium AGAIN and then watch the population plummet.

Having noobs on the same servers as premium players is good. Having premiums expire but NOT the deeds is good. These two things have helped the population grow. The opposite was a disaster. Why turn things back to the way they were? If you turn back the clock might as well close Celebrity, Exodus and Deliverance and just have Indy and Chaos again.

Just not understanding the noob hostility and the killing deeds thing. It's all good just as it is.

[Hussars 511]

To once again clarify this:

The idea was not that deeds expire with premium. Only that the mayor had to be premium for upkeep to be paid into it.

For example, if you prepaid for a year of upkeep on the deed, and your mayor's premium expired 3 months after founding the settlement, the deed's upkeep would last for the full year. The only change to the current system is that the mayor would need to pay for another month of premium in order to add money to the deed upkeep pool. OR, hand the deed to another premium player (which is also an existing requirement to transfer the deed in the current system).

In the case the mayor went AWOL, use the vote mechanic to replace them with a different mayor.

Continuing to drag this out and re-air and misrepresent the original HYPERBOLE (link included since so many seem to not know what this term actually means), comes off as simply an emotional response ploy to distract any actual conversation on ways to increase F2P account's sense of "in-game worth".

Almost like these types of posts are some kind of an "I-Win" button.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Hussars