What I Believe To Be The Best Solution For The New Perimeter Issue

[BjornYngvar 35]

Okay so there's a LOT of hubabloo going on about the new update to the game and rules that Enki has put out. A LOT of the f2p/f2p championing players agree with it, and a LOT of the p2p players are against it. I am personally against it. But I see the need for a revision to how the old system worked.

YES. The old system DID allow for griefing by deed owners. However this new system is no better, as it allowed, and even promotes, griefing of paying players, who not only pay to play the game but give the game more money by owning land.

So this is how I propose a new system should work, to determine how and when a deed can or cannot expand over structures.

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.

[yarnevk 257]

After thinking about this as a recently converted f2p now p2p player who has been on both sides of the issue i I am for it because what is good for the goose (f2p) is good for the gander (p2p). Rather than expand outright with all the deeds with perimeters I might ever want to use and paying silver from the start, which is their intent of the change when I had preferred to expand slowly as I can justify the silver upkeep/payout? I am going to preempt the f2p griefers and mine/guard house shack all my potental deed expansions. Bright side to every change, as I spend less silver this way and it is playing legit per the new rule, I would have paid under the old rule but their loss.

Your fix does not solve the issue of salvagable empty land with the writ holder long gone, there is a lot of this on Independence. In that case the offending house is older than the newer deed wanting to claim the long vacant land. The solution there is to delete structures if the player is off that character, someone earlier posted if off 2 month inactive accounts then decay is 3x, but that does not do much for high quality stone buildings which seem to go for years, especially if they can be off on another alt to stay active. Force them to check in on the alt to keep stuff.

I found forum references to the player name on the stuff I deeded over saying they left the game two years ago, and this was a wood house that two weeks to get from 50->100% but that first 50% apparently took two years. The previous owners had high QL stuff all over the place, which is a score for me since it finally fell. Price for leaving the game or alt is you should loose your stuff so the new f2p has somewhere to move where nobody is and become p2p themselves.

Edited November 12, 2012 by yarnevk

[Hussars 511]

I am going to preempt the f2p griefers and mine/guard house shack all my potental deed expansions. Bright side to every change, as I spend less silver this way and it is playing legit per the new rule, I would have paid under the old rule but their loss.

Actually, unless it's deeded, the "f2p griefer" can just build in between your shacks. Since you've clearly defined your expansion plan, they'll be able to plan their own enclosures to maximize their space as well.

No part of the current or past rules prevents this with the exception of if you can prove they are doing it to grief you, or they block direct and open access to your deed.

[BjornYngvar 35]

Your fix does not solve the issue of salvagable empty land with the writ holder long gone, there is a lot of this on Independence. In that case the offending house is older than the newer deed wanting to claim the long vacant land. The solution there is to delete structures if the player is off that character, someone earlier posted if off 2 month inactive accounts then decay is 3x, but that does not do much for high quality stone buildings which seem to go for years, especially if they can be off on another alt to stay active. Force them to check in on the alt to keep stuff.

So add in an inactivity check. It wouldn't be hard.

While checking for age it also checks for the writ holder's last log in time.

If the last log in time was long enough ago that advanced decay has begun, allow perimeter expansion. if not, don't.

Boom.

[yarnevk 257]

Not if I have a fence enclosure. It is against the rules to bash a fence wall, pick-lock a gate and build your own shack within or steal from a fenced shack enclosure. There was basically nothing that could be done to a fenced shack except a nearby deed could expand perimeter, disabling your writ repair ability and effectively evicting you. Now that is gone so a fenced shack is as good as a deed, there is no longer incentive to deed it or lose it. The only incentive to deed now is conferring gameplay features of a deed such as village, guard, decay and rez management; but deed it or lose it is no longer itself an incentive if a fenced shack accomplishes the same thing.

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

Why not instead just let people perimeter over buildings AND allow repairs in perimeter (by the writholder only)

That way, you can expand if the area really isn't going to be used by anyone. But if it is actively used, they get to stay as long as they are making use of the property (and keeping it in good shape)

In effect, it "grandfathers in" anyone living in an area whenever a perimeter is expanded. For as long as they want to stay there, for years if they want. Meantime the expansion-minded deed can go ahead with their progress on other parts of the expanded area knowing it's 'safe' and that no one else can get the property out from under them. If someone REALLY wants to use the so-called 'contested' perimeter areas asap, they can make an offer to the homesteader to buy their writ. Which might give free players a chance to get a first month sub or use towards an actual deed.

As it stands now, since you cannot perimeter at all, you risk someone else beating you to your intended expansion area (thru deed, counter perimeter, or just yet-another new shack) while you wait for a shack to fall/decay/people to quit. This way you call "first dibs" (and pay for the dibs) by expanding perimeter but no one gets evicted or loses their farms. In most cases, the new F2P player will either eventually quit the game in a month or two, or get premium and want a paid deed (which they will have to relocate as they cannot deed in the perimetered area.) The subbed player still has a waiting game, but waiting games always in the long run favor the veterans. Obviously there are still cases where no one is happy with the way it turns out, players will still have conflicts over land, but the long range effect is to reduce most conflicts that seem to be overly unfair to one side or the other. Which is maybe the best we can do anyway.

.

.

Edited November 13, 2012 by Brash_Endeavors

[Klaa 4,872]

This is why we need more siege engines.

[Loremaster 21]

The bulk of the problem isn't with new players not being courteous so much as the premium players who think they own everything in a 200 tile radius around their deed. Even if someone built a shack right outside your perimeter you'll need to deflate your ego a bit and realize that you didn't claim the land. However I do believe that truly abandoned houses last much too long.

[Hussars 511]

"There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives" - US Army Demolitions School

[Protunia 735]

I agree about the deed being there first and the buildings being there after that are next to the perimeter and expanding over them and said something about this in one of the threads. The only question is how far out do you allow this??? 10 tiles 20 tiles 30 tiles?

Also I don't want to get into expanding Perimeter control to tiles that are not even perimeter.

I think being able to repair even if in perimeter might be the one of the better solutions I have seen.

At least then people could expand perimeter it they want too and make the deed larger eventually through time or working out something with the other player.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Protunia

[Bachus 462]

I disagree with this option because it does not solve the problems of f2p or p2p that i see.

Currently there are a lot of abandoned deeds being repopulated by new people who need to be able to perimeter over old settlements in order to have more than a minimum deed.

The new rule makes that much harder because even if a person can plant minumum deed future expansion will be blocked by someone building at the edge of it b4 the old settlement houses fall.

Brashes suggestion of allowing the writ holder to repair is the best I have seen because it allows the person to still expand and an incentive to work out an agrrement with the person who built close to them. In the past when someone built close to me I tried to reason with them showing them a better place that they might even deed later if they wished; rather than squatting on a few tiles between deeds.

[Mhyth 14]

Any 'improvements' or true solutions are not going to legitimize griefing of new or existing players through perimeter evictions.

If abandoned buildings are a problem the best solution lies in increasing the decay rate of off deed structures that are not in active use, and further increasing that rate for buildings where the writ holder has failed to log in to Wurm for significant periods of time.

[Ayes 3,715]

someone earlier posted if off 2 month inactive accounts then decay is 3x, but that does not do much for high quality stone buildings which seem to go for years

I am going to have to correct you on this point Yarnevk. I went with my main account Ayes to build my second deed on Deliverance and was off of Independence for a little over 1 month (maybe 45 days, not sure). On Inde I had a number of off deed stone buildings at 70 QL with under 10 damage on them. When I later returned I was astonished and alarmed when I checked their walls and all buildings, 70 QL stone remember, had in the mid 50's damage on their walls. It seems that since I was not on Inde for that extended period of time, the game mechanic treated my buildings as if I had not logged into the game for the amount of time required for the accelerated decay rate to kick in. As you will note, the statement you made above about decay is incorrect. Also I believe this accelerated decay rate kicks in at perhaps 45 days or maybe even 30 days. Just a little side information for any that may have an interest in it, as well as an advisement that if you leave your server for an extended period of time, make sure to hand all off deed writs over to an alt that will log in every 3 weeks or so to keep the accelerated decay at bay.

=Ayes=

[yarnevk 257]

I met my north neighbor who is a maintenance alt he said he never met the prior owner of my spot and he was active a year ago and now checks in once a week. Said most players he knew in the area left for Celebration opening like him. So maybe they are alting in which is what keeps the stone up. First place I shacked up only pavers no walls, so it eventually does go back to forest. There is a waterfront inn nearby that just had the wood fence vanish, so I can keep an eye on it and see how long it takes for the stone houses to go. No locks at the innkeepers place, will be some nice loot when the walls do go.

Stone walls around my house are 10% dmg, probably 50QL ave though they had a couple week spots at 90%, with the pasture fence long gone, roadway fence half gone. He said I could finish (and thus claim) the boat on his deed which he knows has been sitting there for 2 years when he claimed the place, so unfinished boats don't decay. And I saw a post regarding the player name on my looted tools, saying they left two years ago. I don't mind the fence still being here, will take me a while to skill up to be able to improve it though, glad the house was wood though as it went from 50%->100% in two weeks. Do fence enclosures (surrounding or attached to writ house) suffer less decay or did the former player alt in and keep the house fence up and let the others slide?

Sure logging in the maintenance alt is better safe than sorry just in case decay changes are not broadcast loudly, and if you ever do want to come back you have the alt available to get it ready.

Edited November 14, 2012 by yarnevk

[yarnevk 257]

I met my north neighbor who is a maintenance alt he said he never met the prior owner of my spot and he was active a year ago and now checks in once a week. Said most players he knew in the area left for Celebration opening. So maybe they are alting in which is what keeps the stone up. First place I shacked up only pavers no walls, so it eventually does go back to forest.

Stone walls around my house are 10% dmg, probably 50QL ave though they had a couple week spots at 90%, with the pasture fence long gone, roadway fence half gone. He said I could finish (and thus claim) the boat on his deed which he knows has been sitting there for 2 years when he claimed the place, so unfinished boats don't decay. And I searched for posts regarding the player name on my looted tools found they left two years ago. I don't mind the fence still being here, will take me a while to skill up to be able to improve it though.

Sure logging in the maintenance alt is better safe than sorry just in case decay algortihm changes are not broadcast loudly.