New Deed *placement* Perimiter Rule, Good Or Bad

[Keldun 335]

the whole point of the border tiles is to build roads there, possible with fence protection.

[Kegan 3,926]

the whole point of the border tiles is to build roads there, possible with fence protection.

roads are fine you can pave and terraform there but there does not need to be any fence it just blocks people form getting around in that area and that is what it is meant for anyway is a way to get in and out of the deed and have some room for trees and stuff

[BjornYngvar 35]

My two cents:

The arguments go both ways.

YES. A premium player could, with the old system, drop a deed and expand the perimeter over someone elses' house/enclosure to be a jackarse.

BUT this isn't the most common case. The MOST COMMON thing that happened with the old system was some new player, usually a f2p player, would drop a house at the edge of a deed either without knowing the deed was there, or because he didn't understand the courtesy system that exists in Wurm, to make sure an area isn't already claimed before building on it.

In the former scenario I agree with the new update. In the latter scenario I disagree with it.

Overall I disagree with it. And here's my reasoning.

Right now, I COULD go outside to one of the undeveloped lots of land along my street. I COULD build a fence around it and a little wooden shack. And I COULD live there. Does it make that land mine? No, it does not. (In this case I would be the f2p player squatting on a deed's border) If someone went to the bank that owned that land and bought it (the deed owner expanding their deed) they would OWN the land. I would now be trespassing and they'd be well within their rights to evict me and tear down my property.

MY SOLUTION IS THIS:

The game needs to do an age check. When going to expand perimeters of a deed, the game should check two things:

1) The date that the deed was founded

2) The date that any buildings in the perimeter were built

After doing this check, one of two things would happen

1) If the game finds that the DEED is older than the structures in the perimeter, it allows the perimeter to be expanded and restricts any actions by the owner of those buildings. This ENSURES that squatting f2p players who don't understand the courtesy system in this game and griefing CANNOT inhibit the growth of a deed.

2) If the game finds that the STRUCTURES are older than the deed, it DOES NOT allow the perimeter to be expanded and restricts the use of the deed to intentionally or unintentionally expand over the un-owned structures.

I know the game can determine when things were built. These things have logs, and are already used to determine decay on undeeded structures AND the 'collected knowledge' of a deed

[Asciana 303]

That's a pretty good idea actually.

[Hussars 511]

No matter which way it goes.. it just makes me think about the old example of over engineering..

In the race for space, the US and the U.S.S.R needed to have a reliable means of writing in space.. the US spent millions of dollars on research that eventually gave us the modern ink pen.

The U.S.S.R engineers were presented with the same question, discussed it for a few minutes, and the lead engineer walked over and handed the person a pencil.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Hussars

[sunsvortex 599]

Contentious policy indeed it seems. I think I would suggest the following:

I know that perimeter is touted as a way to ensure expansion......Fact is..there are only 2 uses for peremeter now and in the past...1. Landgrab games..or 2. Allowing road access.

A falsehood is thinking that it provides a buffer so people dont build right next to one another.....that doesnt work either as I just sold a deed that had no room for expansion and all deeds around it including my own walled in thier peremeters as legal enclosures....this is nothing new..so a buffer it is clearly not.

So since IMO the peremeter system causes more issues than it solves..by a long shot I might add...why not do away with it entirely.

Allow a 1 tile perimeter with no option of extra perim tiles. Why 1 tile? this allows a single lane road to be built around your deed for access. Only allow roads to be built on this tile. So now if another deed bumps up against yours..youll have a 2 lane..see where this goes....(letting a player say"welll I might need this land later pushes a land grab game and favors first come first serve and a pay to win scenario..which I think is counter productive)Now lets do the following....give new players a "Temporary Deed Form" in that it has a special ruleset.

1. It has a limited size

2. The "Temp Deed" can be converted to a " Real Deed" after a predetermined time frame..such as 1 month.Then during the next week (limited time period to convert is the idea here) after that 1 month..if it is not converted to a "Real Deed" within that 1 week period..then it should be assumed that the player is not going to continue to play and it is auto disbanded, all structures as well as contents are immediately deleted from exisistence, and animals are redistributed across the server. This takes care of a majority of ghost buildings everywhere and allows new people to setup shop with enough time to learn the game and decide if they will continue playing it. If they choose not to.... then there is no waiting on decay and the area is ready to be deeded by those that "ARE" playing..and paying for deeds or even more new players that are looking for a place to setup.

Also for any building that a player wants to build "off deed"..they must use a temp deed (not the same as a new players temp deed as they may never be converted to a real deed). This should be limited to a single temp deed per player. Temp deeds should never be sold and after one has expired it should be a very lengthy wait before another is autogenerated or after the first temp deed is used you must 1. own a "REAL Deed" before you can have another Temp Deed and this temp deed follows the player around in that the player only ever recieves one temp deed but if the player disbands or otherwise moves his or her main deed the temp deed autodisbands as well and they will get another temp deed once they create a new "RealDeed". There are a number of ways a temp deed system could be implemented and if done creatively and with an eye towards past issues could be used to solve a great many current griefing issues.

Its important to note I am not suggesting a particular time frame..just using the ones above as examples.

Bottom line is this... No player should be able to build or modify anything unless its on a deed.A temp deed system could be utilized to address a myriad of issues and IMO should be looked at. The above are simply examples and im sure that if concerted effort were to be put into this system alot of issues could be dealt with.

Also some other improvements id like to see

1. Limited Deed size for all players

2. Limit upkeep to 3 months prepaid for all players

3. No buildings are able to be built off deed..this is only possible under a temp deed system.

4. A "Sweat Equity" system (To address slave labour Issues / griefing)

5. Deed borders count as legal enclosures (no walls need to be built) There are times when i would like to keep certain areas of the deed open and still have it be counted as a legal enclosure.

6. Allow deed expansion in a single direction only...not force a 2 way expansion.

Edited November 13, 2012 by sunsvortex

[Loremaster 21]

Huge +1 to this change. A player is a player and should not be subordinated simply because they do not pay for the game or pay less than their neighbors.

[Sarcaticous 338]

Going to have to see how this plays out. If perimiters are nerfed in a manner that makes it so I can't use them or are reduced in any way I'm outta here.

[Kadore 926]

Will the inability to place perimeter over houses be coded in or just more " Rules ", so offenders can expect to be visited by a GM to remove said perimeter.

I was never a fan of the whole Enclosure rule as it is, making special rules for non payers to force paying customers to comply, just adds more reasons to be a non paying customer, it's your game to run Enki, so if having that warm fuzzy feeling is more important than seeing people who pay get more for their dollar, congrats.

[Shiraek 464]

I like this change. There were numerous complaints in the past about people slapping perimeter over other peoples' houses, and it always sounded really unfair.

I don't like most of the posts in this thread. Some really silly and unnecessary stuff is being suggested...

Also, I don't like how people keep saying that perimeter is only ever used for griefing or "land grab games". Seriously? I maintain a large-ish perimeter on Deliverance (38 tiles in each direction if I recall) and have had exactly one complaint once - in over a year - from guys who wanted to settle in the area. After a 5 minute conversation those guys settled in some free land I pointed out to them - and proceeded to happily hunt in the large perimeter as intended.

At the moment that perimeter is public use land that I and my neighbours use for hunting and forestry. I may expand the deed into it at some point, but more likely if for some reason large perimeters are banned I would just give up on whole the idea since no game mechanic would support it. In actual fact, with the current game mechanics, the system STILL requires co-operation from all neighbours and visitors to the area, which I've also always had - as I have never laid any claim to control the land in question. Again, over a year now.

Regarding available space - I recall my first few months on Indy and understand the impression people have about there being no land left. However, on Deliverance this is simply not the case. There is open ocean front land BORDERING my perimeter, and open lakefront around both lakes nearby. In both cases, areas large enough to deed remain.

Regards,

Shiraek

[spellcast 983]

- Bad that we have yet another rule for GM to enforce, a rule where nothing is stopping you from breaking it. (I feel for those folks who are forced to make perimeter smaller and loose money).

Will the inability to place perimeter over houses be coded in or just more " Rules ", so offenders can expect to be visited by a GM to remove said perimeter.

TO answer this, enki's post is in response to rolf telling US that it is a bug that it can happen (perim over a house not owned by the deed placer) and that he is changing it in the code, so it will not be a GM rule, it is going to be enforced by game mechanics from this point out. (my understanding is that rolf has allready added it to the code he has been working on, I am unsure if it has gone live yet or not)

Enki's post is primarily to act as a heads up, and to inform the playerbase both of the change and that with the exceptions of a couple (i believe 2) cases that are currently being dealt with we will not be going backwards and retroactively changing any rulings made regarding perimiter/deed/housing conflicts in the past.

edit:

I also dont believe we plan to force anyone to reduce existing perimeter if it allready overlaps a house, such cases will most likely be grandfathered in and left as is until the inability to repair the structures causes them to decay away.

[Poragon 23]

Ah Wurm, every update you pump out is abused, even when it is a fix.

People will find ways to mess with just about every deed placement rule, there is rarely a perfect system which works for every situation.

[Asciana 303]

Just like lamps being auto filled on deed was a bug, right? I give it a month or two when people have put up shacks round everyones deeds because they can.

[Xallo 2,599]

TO answer this, enki's post is in response to rolf telling US that it is a bug that it can happen (perim over a house not owned by the deed placer) and that he is changing it in the code, so it will not be a GM rule, it is going to be enforced by game mechanics from this point out. (my understanding is that rolf has allready added it to the code he has been working on, I am unsure if it has gone live yet or not)

Enki's post is primarily to act as a heads up, and to inform the playerbase both of the change and that with the exceptions of a couple (i believe 2) cases that are currently being dealt with we will not be going backwards and retroactively changing any rulings made regarding perimiter/deed/housing conflicts in the past.

edit:

I also dont believe we plan to force anyone to reduce existing perimeter if it allready overlaps a house, such cases will most likely be grandfathered in and left as is until the inability to repair the structures causes them to decay away.

Well that sucks, especially if said deed was only planted in an attempt to drive me away. The deed has nothing on it, and it's off the side of a mountain with the perimeter overrunning my property. The person built his house and an enclosure, which touches my house. I have no way to access my building on the other side, unless I want to swim there. Not only that, my mine was mined into, collapsed, reinforced, and deeded over. The mine had a minedoor over it.

Why does the FCC not cover a case such as the above, or why can a GM not look into it? Is a single person who desires help not important enough? The FCC only seems to cover larger issues, but why does it not cover smaller issues?

I've sent numerous of calls in, as in my opinion, it's obvious griefing, but it seems nobody cares as nobody has answered my calls. I do use the location as a camp for when I hop over to Independence, but I have no way to repair it. I can only hope that my 80QL house walls outlast the obvious griefing deed.

I'm all for this new change, but if a prior bug extremely effects my gameplay detrimentally, the why can it not be addressed?

Edited November 13, 2012 by Xallo

[sunsvortex 599]

Also, I don't like how people keep saying that perimeter is only ever used for griefing or "land grab games". Seriously? I maintain a large-ish perimeter on Deliverance (38 tiles in each direction if I recall) and have had exactly one complaint once - in over a year - from guys who wanted to settle in the area. After a 5 minute conversation those guys settled in some free land I pointed out to them - and proceeded to happily hunt in the large perimeter as intended.

So for over a year you have held land you dont use?...again..for what reason would you hold such a large perimeter? Just because maybe in the future you might need/ want it?...this is a land grab game. You have had people want to settle in the area..but you prevented them from doing so..peacefully settled or not..you still prevented them from settling on unused land that you are "hoarding". this is a land grab game..you were there first..you paid for the perim...also making this type of play lean heavily to a "pay to win" type of activity.

At the moment that perimeter is public use land that I and my neighbours use for hunting and forestry. I may expand the deed into it at some point, but more likely if for some reason large perimeters are banned I would just give up on whole the idea since no game mechanic would support it. In actual fact, with the current game mechanics, the system STILL requires co-operation from all neighbours and visitors to the area, which I've also always had - as I have never laid any claim to control the land in question. Again, over a year now.

Again..you have held it for over a year and still havent expanded into it...it doesnt seem like you will ever do this since as you say..you have been holding it cheaply for the past year..so there is no reason to deed into it. Again..this is a land grab game. You have grabbed up a large portion of surrounding lands and use it for yourself and those you like to hunt on and gather resources from...its not public by any means...public does not entail asking you for permission now does it.

Regarding available space - I recall my first few months on Indy and understand the impression people have about there being no land left. However, on Deliverance this is simply not the case. There is open ocean front land BORDERING my perimeter, and open lakefront around both lakes nearby. In both cases, areas large enough to deed remain.

Here its not about how much land is left. Once Advertising starts I think it reasonable to expect at least a doubling of population if even for a short period of time. Available land will become quite the commodity on all servers. Those hoarding land by maintaining large perims should in my opinion be the first to have to give it up. Perims serve no real purpose other than land grab games and road access. It really should be removed entirely.

Bottom line is that you control that perim..whether it is by friendly means or non friendly is irrealevant. Its not public..its reserved for a time far into the future where you "might" decide to deed into it. The perims need to go.

[Sarcaticous 338]

So for over a year you have held land you dont use?...again..for what reason would you hold such a large perimeter? Just because maybe in the future you might need/ want it?...this is a land grab game. You have had people want to settle in the area..but you prevented them from doing so..peacefully settled or not..you still prevented them from settling on unused land that you are "hoarding". this is a land grab game..you were there first..you paid for the perim...also making this type of play lean heavily to a "pay to win" type of activity.

Again..you have held it for over a year and still havent expanded into it...it doesnt seem like you will ever do this since as you say..you have been holding it cheaply for the past year..so there is no reason to deed into it. Again..this is a land grab game. You have grabbed up a large portion of surrounding lands and use it for yourself and those you like to hunt on and gather resources from...its not public by any means...public does not entail asking you for permission now does it.

Here its not about how much land is left. Once Advertising starts I think it reasonable to expect at least a doubling of population if even for a short period of time. Available land will become quite the commodity on all servers. Those hoarding land by maintaining large perims should in my opinion be the first to have to give it up. Perims serve no real purpose other than land grab games and road access. It really should be removed entirely.

Bottom line is that you control that perim..whether it is by friendly means or non friendly is irrealevant. Its not public..its reserved for a time far into the future where you "might" decide to deed into it. The perims need to go.

All I hear is blah blah blah. I want I want I want. Gimmie Gimmie Gimmie.

Bottom line is you must not have gotten something you wanted so now you troll everyone who had the foresight to place a large perimiter that was allowed by the game. The game says you can make a big perimiter to insure you don't get boxed in so you have room to grow. Not a problem. What was a problem was fixed. Now go away.

[RomaN 890]

Would it be too difficult to enforce something similar to how Salvage Notices work but instead used for deed expansions?

Example: If you want to expand your deed but there is a building in the way, you could perhaps log a "Deed Expansion" request and it will be reviewed by a CM or GM and if the owner of the structure including alts has not logged in for a long time, then the structure may be deemed abandoned the deed owner is allowed to expand over it.

[alaskanbob 225]

Would it be too difficult to enforce something similar to how Salvage Notices work but instead used for deed expansions?

Example: If you want to expand your deed but there is a building in the way, you could perhaps log a "Deed Expansion" request and it will be reviewed by a CM or GM and if the owner of the structure including alts has not logged in for a long time, then the structure may be deemed abandoned the deed owner is allowed to expand over it.

Yes....but there are what, 2-3? Boat salvages every day. Think of the # of possible requests they would get. It is a worthwhile enough idea but I see it possibly being very time consuming.

[Shiraek 464]

So for over a year you have held land you dont use?...again..for what reason would you hold such a large perimeter? Just because maybe in the future you might need/ want it?...this is a land grab game. You have had people want to settle in the area..but you prevented them from doing so..peacefully settled or not..you still prevented them from settling on unused land that you are "hoarding". this is a land grab game..you were there first..you paid for the perim...also making this type of play lean heavily to a "pay to win" type of activity.

Again..you have held it for over a year and still havent expanded into it...it doesnt seem like you will ever do this since as you say..you have been holding it cheaply for the past year..so there is no reason to deed into it. Again..this is a land grab game. You have grabbed up a large portion of surrounding lands and use it for yourself and those you like to hunt on and gather resources from...its not public by any means...public does not entail asking you for permission now does it.

Here its not about how much land is left. Once Advertising starts I think it reasonable to expect at least a doubling of population if even for a short period of time. Available land will become quite the commodity on all servers. Those hoarding land by maintaining large perims should in my opinion be the first to have to give it up. Perims serve no real purpose other than land grab games and road access. It really should be removed entirely.

Bottom line is that you control that perim..whether it is by friendly means or non friendly is irrealevant. Its not public..its reserved for a time far into the future where you "might" decide to deed into it. The perims need to go.

I explained why I have the large perimeter - it's used for hunting and forestry. Please read posts before responding next time, it's a bit of a waste of everyone's time otherwise.

Yes it prevents people deeding it and building houses, and they've tons of other space to do that in. I don't understand what you're saying about "play to win" type of activity? Play to win what? Seriously what are you talking about? The intention from the get go was to keep it as an open space for everyone in the area and visitors to hunt in and to be able to cut wood.

Again correcting you - I *DO* use this land. Like everyone else in the area I hunt there and I cut wood. I also traverse the roads I built like everyone else, and I use the bay for parking ships.

I've been "holding it" yes, to an extent, "Cheaply" yes, but not as cheaply as building an enclosure. Yes, I paid for it with real world money. What's your point?

And I'm sorry, but it *IS* public. Perimeter = public space, and especially my perimeter is public space. No section of it is closed off to the public. You just can't deed it or stick houses on it. Not that anyone's ever asked to put a house on it.

When advertising starts, if the servers get crowded, Rolf will no doubt have enough income to open another ten. Large perimeter is probably the best ratio income vs. server cost he could have, considering how low impact the space is. Right now my deed is a 1S deed with about 4S of perimeter, 5x the income for him for not a single extra building, object or animal to keep track of.

Perimeters should not be removed from Wurm. They're a part of the ruleset, have been for a very, very long time. They are paid for by players so form income for the game and are overall a positive benefit to the game. The only issue they've ever had has been removed with this update.

[ago 470]

Let me put some facts on the table:

Deeds: payed for, has no decay on structures, has theft protection, no 2nd party building

Perimeter: payed for, no 2nd party house building

Free lands: -

Perimeter is payed for and even if some people say it's cheap as hell it only offers a fraction of the value of deed tiles. If someone decides he wants a huge perimeter and wants to pay for land he does not own so be it.

The main problem in my eyes is the enclosure rule. Without that perimeter would just be open space with a high risk of bashed fences whenever there is something valuable.

I'd adjust the enclosure rule to fit it's purpose: protect small undeeded homesteads.

- The homestead must be of reasonable size (at most 10x10)

- The enclosure must not be attached to a deed

- A player can only own one homestead

The size is small enough to limit land grab. It avoids huge walled of perimeters that come as a cheap expansion pack for deeds. And it protects the new guy without a deed.

Once that's done allow repairing of houses in perimeter and reallow putting perimeter over houses. If a house was there first it's going to stay until it decays. But the deed owner still has a reserve on the land he has to pay for. Even if he can never use it because the house is staying there forever. I think the monetary factor will prevent widespread abuse. At least it is less abusable than the previous or the current system.

It's not an issue either that the new player can't put a deed over his house because the other guys perimeter would have been to close to the house anyway.

Edited November 13, 2012 by ago

[alaskanbob 225]

I'd adjust the enclosure rule to fit it's purpose: protect small undeeded homesteads.

- The homestead must be of reasonable size (at most 10x10)

- The enclosure must not be attached to a deed

- A player can only own one homestead

Please, I don't think so. How do you plan on enforcing this 10x10 tile homestead rule? 35345 alts later. This isn't rl where their are restrictions on land. This is wurm where if you see it and its unclaimed, go for it!

[Ayes 3,715]

I recently made a deed with a large perimiter, so from experience I can say that this large perimiter initially costs silver to place for each tile, although at a reduced cost in contrast for a *deed* tile. Also, this large perimiter adds to the monthly maintenance fee of the deed. So the availability of the option to purchase an expanded perimiter beyond the 5 tiles included in the deed setup contributes to Rolfs income initially and each month that follows; thus I think he is wise enough to let this practice continue and not listen to shortsighted advice to discontinue this practice.

On the otherhand, Rolf is generously *giving* free unpaid for land to others by enforcing an enclosure rule and sanctioning it as acceptable practice to be used by those that don't want to pay anything for using this land, in contrast to deeds and large perimiters. Furthermore, with this new *can't place perimiter over existing buildings* practice, he is restricting his income from future deeds and extended perimiters that will no longer be able to be placed. In addition, there will be the loss of deed income from areas that were previously able to be deeded that are now blocked from being deeded by random buildings at larger dispersed intervals which prevent deed placement due to this new perimiter over house restriction. Nice *free* giveaways courtesy of Rolf to those who don't want to pay for the land they are using and also want their buildings to be *protected* from perimiter coverage repair restrictions.

So with the new deed perimiter rulings posted by Enki (link in my OP) Rolf has effectivey reduced the RL moneymaking capacity of his game and actually *encouraged* other players to not bother with purchasing deeds and large perimiters added to them. Seems an odd business practice to me that reduces his income and one that actually hurts and hinders his *paying* customers. A number of interesting suggestions have been made on how to fine tune this new restriction to deed placement but remember, the more involved it is to code some intricate system related to this, the less likely it will be adopted and established; thus I say the chance of any positive helpful fine tuning being done to the benifit of paying deed holders is, Zero.

I think the whole newly instituted restrictions to deed placement per deed perimiter will just have to play out over a period of time and if it turns out to be the fiasco that some other "improvements" to the game have been, a clearer insight as to the negative side effects will be apparent and in conjunction with players pointing the failings out, some changes *may* be made at that time. Meanwhile hopefully the game will continue to be enjoyable in other aspects and the remaining *paying* customers will stick around through these transitional rough patches.

=Ayes=

[ago 470]

Please, I don't think so. How do you plan on enforcing this 10x10 tile homestead rule? 35345 alts later. This isn't rl where their are restrictions on land. This is wurm where if you see it and its unclaimed, go for it!

Sure. Then put a deed down.

How to enforce it? All these perimeter and bashed enclosure disputes go through a GM anyway. It should be pretty obvious if the guy has 1 homestead or 20.

[alaskanbob 225]

How to enforce it? All these perimeter and bashed enclosure disputes go through a GM anyway. It should be pretty obvious if the guy has 1 homestead or 20.

Yup then they have to decide whether someone is an alt or an actual person. Wouldn't look good banning someones friend because they think he's an alt. Lets flood the gms with even more requests about silly things why don't we? So trigger happy.

-1 silly idea.

[Ayes 3,715]

Ahhhh, please stop using asterisks around every other word and overusing quotes. Makes it really hard to concentrate on reading. Now, let me give it a second go.

Dat's *howz* "eye" role *mon*. Get *ovah* ett "ore" aavart *yer* eyze. **Yah**?

=Ayes=