Expand On Farming

[Sir Arowhun 473]

 

First you assume there's a excess of farmed goods. (its not an assumption -its a fact) I can assure you there's an abundance of outlets for it,( no there isn't hence everyones full fsb's full of crops) and you'll often find people buying bulk vegetables for HFC grind.(no, you wont)

 

 

I don't think you ever heard of pan filling before. In the past I've done pan filling jobs for people, which involves filling thousands of pans with one veggie and one meat each, so a priest can then put them all in an oven and cook them for a massive hot food cooking skill gain and a massive soul depth skill gain.

 

However, I really think its a stupid grind. I would be happy if it was replaced with something more interesting, like a more complicated cooking system so you make a few really good meals instead of 500000000 crappy ones. Maybe if something like this was added, crop production could then be nerfed.

 

If crop varieties only grow in certain seasons, what would happen if you have half-grown crops when a season changes. Will they all die? Seems a bit annoying.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Sir Arowhun

[sunsvortex 599]

I don't think you ever heard of pan filling before. In the past I've done pan filling jobs for people, which involves filling thousands of pans with one veggie and one meat each, so a priest can then put them all in an oven and cook them for a massive hot food cooking skill gain and a massive soul depth skill gain.

 

However, I really think its a stupid grind. I would be happy if it was replaced with something more interesting, like a more complicated cooking system so you make a few really good meals instead of 500000000 crappy ones. Maybe if something like this was added, crop production could then be nerfed.

 

If crop varieties only grow in certain seasons, what would happen if you have half-grown crops when a season changes. Will they all die? Seems a bit annoying.

IM only going to say this one more time - Your complaint is based on Priests being broken - go start a thread on how priests have to do all this crap to gain SB. That priests have to do this means they are broken. Start a thread on it. It has NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL, to do with farming. Priests are relying on HFC and farming to do their SB grind. that's not a Farming Issue ITS A PRIEST ISSUE.

 

As to your question about crops not ripened at the change of season, this will simply reduce yield, as it would in RL.

[lithi 77]

As much as I would really love to see this happen, as I personally love farming, but at the moment it's just a plain boring waiting game, so as much as I would love to see this happen, I just don't think it ever will. Why? Well simply because from what i've heard from the Wurmians and seen that there's little to no updates to the actual game. So a project as deep as this? Nope.

 

Edit: Forgot to mention that I've always found it hilarious how crops grow in the winter.

Edited September 4, 2013 by lithi

[joedobo 1,187]

Huge -1. I can agree with the overproduction of goods. With the exception of wemp farming to supply rope sacing priests, and SD grinding pan loaders its not feasible to use all the crops players can potentially produce. Over complication in persuite of realim is often not fun.

 

The Devs can't even make it so an animals will pull a cart and walk next to you as you harvest your field. This is a good example of why trying to pursue too much realism is a bad idea. New innovation that realistically would be easy to try out take ages/never happen in this game.

 

Regional crops (in this case regional unique terrain/weather effects on crops) are a bad idea as long a crop's "usage" is not equally valuable. For example whatever region is favorable for wemp would be highly desirable. I strongly oppose any game feature that that makes one piece of land more valuable than another. If every piece of land is equal then every player doesn't have feel resentment towards another. Devaluing potential "real estate" on the server is a bad idea.

 

While the realism aspect of all the season and other hardships mentioned might offer more immersion for some players I betting it will annoy far more. 

 

FYI I'm an avid farmer, 98 skill, have more then 95% of my deed devoted just to farming, I constantly farm and sell farm crops at a bulk market.

[sunsvortex 599]

Huge -1. I can agree with the overproduction of goods. With the exception of wemp farming to supply rope sacing priests, and SD grinding pan loaders its not feasible to use all the crops players can potentially produce. Over complication in persuite of realim is often not fun.

 

The Devs can't even make it so an animals will pull a cart and walk next to you as you harvest your field.(nor should they) This is a good example of why trying to pursue too much realism is a bad idea. New innovation that realistically would be easy to try out take ages/never happen in this game.(hasn't in the past, and I don't live in the past)

 

Regional crops (in this case regional unique terrain/weather effects on crops) are a bad idea as long a crop's "usage" is not equally valuable. For example whatever region is favorable for wemp would be highly desirable.(you assume everyone plays the game the same way you do. Did it ever occur to you that the majority of other people play the game a different way than you?) I strongly oppose any game feature that that makes one piece of land more valuable than another.( Why don't you complain about coastal vs inland then. Coastal is far more expensive to buy) If every piece of land is equal then every player doesn't have feel resentment towards another. Devaluing potential "real estate" on the server is a bad idea.( The desert should be a desert - not grazing land for horses and cattle. there is a reason very few people live in the desert, because its not worth anything, those that do are nomads and live in tents. Obviously you also didn't read the entire post. Did you miss the part about amendments? You can, with careful management of your farm, change any terrains fertility as well as crops have both a range they can grow in and a best range they can grow in. Wemp aka Hemp is very easy to grow and grows in a wide range of latitudes. It grows as far north as Alaska and as far south as Argentina in South America. your not going to run out of good places to grow wemp.

 

While the realism aspect of all the season and other hardships mentioned might offer more immersion for some players I betting it will annoy far more. 

 

FYI I'm an avid farmer, 98 skill, have more then 95% of my deed devoted just to farming, I constantly farm and sell farm crops at a bulk market.( Face it you don't like the idea that someone with 30 or 40 farming could easily compete with you. Your sold on the industry standard of "I have 98 Farming I win.")

Some interesting FACTS about Wemp aka Hemp

 

"Hemp does fit perfectly in the normal crop rotation scheme. Due to the fact the hemp crop is leaving an improved soil structure the next crop will benefit from that."

 

"The best moment for sowing is beginning of may if soil temperature and humidity is optimal. Hemp needs a warm and moistures soil. The harvesting starts early august with mowing the crop. Special hempmowers cut down the crop and cuts the stems in length of 60 cm. After cutting the hemp crop the stalks are left behind in the field, where the bast fibres will be loosened by the effect of rain and dew."

 

 

"Hemp is an herbaceous annual that develops a rigid woody stem ranging in height from 1 to over 5 meters (3 to 19 feet). Hemp stalks have a woody core surrounded by a bark layer containing long fibers that extend nearly the entire length of the stem."

 

 

"Although hemp is well adapted to the temperate climatic zone and will grow under varied environmental conditions, it grows best with warm growing conditions, an extended frost-free season, highly productive agricultural soils, and abundant moisture throughout the growing season. When grown under proper conditions, hemp is very competitive with weeds, and herbicides are generally not required in hemp production. Although a number of insect pests and diseases have been reported on hemp, significant crop losses from pests are not common. High levels of soil fertility are required to maximize hemp productivity. Cultural requirements and production costs are quite similar to those of corn. Reported hemp yields range from 2.5 to 8.7 tons of dry stems per acre."

 

 

"Hemp normally is dioecious having both staminate (male) and pistillate (female) plants, each with distinctive growth characteristics. Staminate plants are tall and slender with few leaves surrounding the flowers, while pistillate plants are short and stocky with many leaves at each terminal inflorescence (Figure 1.). Staminate plants senesce and die soon after their pollen is shed, while pistillate plants remain alive until the seeds mature. Relatively stable monoecious varieties have been developed through breeding and selection."

Edited September 4, 2013 by sunsvortex

[KunAlt 844]

(you assume everyone plays the game the same way you do. Did it ever occur to you that the majority of other people play the game a different way than you?)

 

Interesting idea, maybe you should start following it.

[sunsvortex 599]

(you assume everyone plays the game the same way you do. Did it ever occur to you that the majority of other people play the game a different way than you?)

 

Interesting idea, maybe you should start following it.

Oh I do..i simply don't include the "I want everything for doing nothing subscribers"

[JudusX 199]

I would like to see less tiles produce more but for more work, thats why i agree with what he is asking. If you can manage your crops right then you should get a much larger yield. I think the 2k tile farms are a bit tacky but necessary for the needs of the player. why not make a way that increases gains but in a smaller area, with more work. 

 

All i see is sunvortex asking for a little bit of reality and realism to the game. Would bring me back to farming.

[Kadore 926]

I cant be asked to use an ingame spreadsheet to farm, I'm all for adding some depth, no way I want this much involved.

[As_I_Decay 1,592]

My vote? -1

I spend enough time farming my fields and such now (when i'd honestly rather be doing something else). I, personally, don't need more complexity in that part of the game. 

Cooking could use some complexity. Farming is fine the way it is.

 

 

Oh I do..i simply don't include the "I want everything for doing nothing subscribers"

 

Settle down, bub. Just because someone doesn't agree/like your suggestion doesn't mean they are "lazy" or "want everything for nothing" subscribers. You have suggested an extremely complex system. Even someone like me (who stays with Wurm because it's not "easymode" like most other games out there) is turned off by it. The only ones that are going to agree to your suggestion are those that specifically play Wurm for the farming aspect.... which are very few. Otherwise, to the rest of us, farming is something that must be done daily (because the game requires us to eat), but we have other parts of the game we'd rather be playing.

 

Someone else (I forgot who) in this thread brought up farmville and harvest moon. Those games are VERY popular (and blow Eve's population out of the water) because of the lack of complexity. Easy mode. The common person LOVES easy mode. Now, let's say your complex suggestion gets implemented, Sunsvortex; do you honestly think that making farming more "involved", more "work", is going to bring any new blood into the game? Any more than the current system does now? Do you think that there's a huge group of players just waiting to jump on board with Wurm as soon as its farming system gets more extensive and elaborate and time consuming? Well, I don't. I think you're going to please a handful of people with this, meanwhile annoying most of the player base... both current and future.

Edited September 5, 2013 by As_I_Decay

[Pashka 707]

Not even close to what I want to do in real life or in a game.  my vote is no not even

[Haydn 102]

If you cut this down to like 1/8 of as much content it'd be nice. I like adding more things to skills to keep them interesting, but this is beyond ridiculous imo.

[Alec 730]

If you cut this down to like 1/8 of as much content it'd be nice. I like adding more things to skills to keep them interesting, but this is beyond ridiculous imo.

 

+1

 

 

 

Don't know any farming simulator with this level of detail and depth. And less if it's a medieval farming simulator.

 

True that farming could use a few more freatures (maybe a new alchemy subskill, to produce more in less space? or with more quality?), but this kinda break Wurm.

[sunsvortex 599]

My vote? -1

I spend enough time farming my fields and such now (when i'd honestly rather be doing something else). I, personally, don't need more complexity in that part of the game. 

Cooking could use some complexity. Farming is fine the way it is.

 

 

 

Settle down, bub. Just because someone doesn't agree/like your suggestion doesn't mean they are "lazy" or "want everything for nothing" subscribers.(this is true - I agree - But just keep this in mind - while someone is entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts.) You have suggested an extremely complex system. Even someone like me (who stays with Wurm because it's not "easymode" like most other games out there) is turned off by it. The only ones that are going to agree to your suggestion are those that specifically play Wurm for the farming aspect.... which are very few.(Not sure about that, there are those that have stated or implied they don't farm because its boring. Now its hardly an accurate sampling but none the less.) Otherwise, to the rest of us, farming is something that must be done daily (because the game requires us to eat), but we have other parts of the game we'd rather be playing.(Ok, now come on, you farm daily just to eat.......really......that doesn't sound very accurate. I have 42 farming and I have farmed once in 8 months (other than some test plots when the last set of changes went through) and my FSB is full. I only ever make 5 meals at a time and that last normally a few days. I have well over 300 pumpkins and have just as much cooked meat. Farming is now pretty much non existent for me now as there is no real reason to do it. There is no market for all the goods I could produce even if I wanted to produce them and really if it comes down to it, with the new Foraging volumes...there is no need for me to farm at all, for any reason. So I don't buy the farming daily to eat bit.

 

Someone else (I forgot who) in this thread brought up farmville and harvest moon. Those games are VERY popular(Fine if your marketing to an age group that enjoys oversimplified games. Say the 9 to 18 year old range. Farmville is free...so hardly an accurate comparison there. Harvest Moon is also made for the 9 to 18 market. I would not take WURM near that age range for any amount of money or subs. Plenty of games out there catering to that age group, that market is completely over saturated. All those people that play those games are going to grow up and start looking for something a bit more in depth and immersive, they will also have jobs with disposable income, where should they look?) (and blow Eve's population out of the water) because of the lack of complexity. Easy mode. The common person LOVES easy mode. Now, let's say your complex suggestion gets implemented, Sunsvortex; do you honestly think that making farming more "involved", more "work", is going to bring any new blood into the game? Any more than the current system does now?(Yes  - and here is why - all those people that are playing the oversimplified games are going to grow up, they are going to mature, they are going to become more intelligent and as this happens their tastes will change and they will look for something bigger and better, something in depth something more immersive. WURM can be in that position if they will simply expand a bit on their existing game mechanics. I am not saying to keep this expansion to farming only....all paths need expanding. And as they do this they can create interdependencies. WURM should stay a niche game and it always will be to a large extent unless it gets sold. So if its always going to be a niche game then might as well make it what it is. Build it and they will come.) Do you think that there's a huge group of players just waiting to jump on board with Wurm as soon as its farming system gets more extensive and elaborate and time consuming? Well, I don't. I think you're going to please a handful of people with this, meanwhile annoying most of the player base( Initially this very well may be the case, I don't think so, but I wont say it couldn't happen, but anything can be tweaked to handle most all problems. that it is an unpopular change should not deter from the longer range goals. The system as its been for the past few years has already been oversimplified, has this brought in any new players....Nope, When Multistory came out, greatly increasing the complexity, depth and immersion value of Carpentry and masonry, did this bring in new players - yep. The biggest issue that WURM faces right now is player retention, imo this is largely due to the market to which they spent their very limited advertising dollars on...the 9 to 18 age group. By their very nature this age group will not stay in any game for very long. Its the A.D.D. crowd, now that's not meant to be derogatory in any way, but it is what it is They will always go to the greener grass and rarely if ever stay at one game for very long anyways. If they would change their marketing to target an older age group say 25 and up, then you going to see player retention numbers go up and increase the playerbase. Lots of those people will leave as well but a lot more will stay if you have indepth and immersive game play, not oversimplified mechanics that mimic farmville... both current and future.

Oh and just a quick edit - there was a guy in another thread that threw out an idea about having an option to opt into a mastercraft. I really think this is a good idea as you can do a compromise. You can have simple and complex versions of all paths. I think this is really a good idea as you can go after all age ranges and is a very good compromise.

Edited September 5, 2013 by sunsvortex

[Ronnie 64]

Personaly, right now wurms sitting on the line between mindless gaming and need of thought processes, And over the last 2years a long wurms become so easy I dont really find it worth playing anymore, (As to why Im selling my account) Wurms 2steps away from becoming WoW survival. Seeing as the staff listens more to those that cry about how hard everything is instead of balancing things out to make both sides happy. 

 

 

It would be nice to have this system ingame, even if its just a part of it, but dont make it effect the amount you get let your skill level and rake QL along with number of times farmed take care of that. And this system effect the QL you get, while still leaving the chance of getting max ql if you didnt but not as often. Harvesting skill level crops every time is dull and old. Can be done with adding a thing called a compost bin where you can throw meals,meat,crops,corpses into and over time they decay and become 1/4th the items weight in fertilizer(crops stack based on type). And once harvesting is set to where same crops grow at the same rate so you can harvest all your corn at the same time instead of some now and some later. And have the fertilizer effect the tile for 2 harvest cycles before needing to be replaced. 

 

And then introduces sulfur as something your dust over seedlings about 0.05kg per tile every harvest, and have sulfur stones spawn in large areas of sand that you "mine" and breaks up after x times mined leaving a pile of sulfur of x units based on the stones size. Now your giving the deserts more of a use then just being a hunting ground for the handful that want to grind FS.

 

 

But yes all in all  wurms just starting to follow the easy mode other games are and seeing as how the late 1990's early 2000 gamers are getting older and looking for something thats more of a mental challenge. Look around, MOST of the games that followed Blizzards idea on easy mode are dying out. WoW's starting to loose more players then they are gaining. Wurms still in its infant stage even after being around as long as it has, It shouldnt follow the dying trend, should try and get a jump start on the growing trend that will storm the markets within the next 2years.

[JudusX 199]

the amount of sandbox games that are coming out this year and next are a testament of what gamers want. Wurm is going to see a large rift in players if they dont do something different.

[sunsvortex 599]

OK, for those that brought up the point that the suggestion is too large and that it would take too much resources and this is why it would have a very small chance of being implemented got me to actually wondering, how big a suggestion is too big. So I mailed a dev and asked him that if he had time could he give it a quick read and tell me if he thought it was too big to do or if it was just too much. The answer is just about what I expected with some surprising answers as well.

 

First thing he said was that he had already seen the suggestion - so if you think they don't read all these suggestions, they do.

Next he pointed out some possible issues concerning new players. Im going to edit the suggestion to take those into account

 

Here are also some excerpts from the mail.

 

"and from my perspective it follows the rule of "complex but not complicated".

 

"It would be really nice with more depth to all things in wurm"

 

And the final answer to -  is something like I suggested too big? will it take too many resources to ever have a chance to be implemented?

 

"With our current time frame and workload I don't see this as doable in the near future, but I also don't think it would be impossible to implement at a later date."

 

So for those that would like to see something of the size I suggested or would like to propose a suggestion of this size. They can do it, they would just have to plan for it a bit, its not too large.

 

So it looks hopeful that more depth is incoming, I do however get the feeling they have a very long backlist of items to catch up on and are working on, which is no surprise to anyone.

 

Adding a Part 3 for New Players based on Dev Feedback

Edited September 5, 2013 by sunsvortex

[sunsvortex 599]

Part 3 -For New Players

 

So for new players we need to make sure they can have enough to eat through the farming mechanic. So to make this happen there are several things one could do.

 

1. Allow an option to move to a Mastercraft. If I move my suggestion completely to a mastercraft option then all players not in it would essentially see farming as it is now. All the new variables I listed would have a hard coded base value to allow for farming as it is now or would simply be ignored (with the possibility of a 0 harvest) until you are flagged as someone who goes mastercraft.

 

2. Until the new character is say 21 farming, the new variables have a very diminished effect and they can use the plant maximum yield for the species instead of  that particular variety. But still risk the possibility of a 0 harvest. There needs to be some risk and also a way to let them know they are going to need to learn how to manage their farm. In the event that they do encounter a complete agricultural disaster, there is always foraging so no one is going to starve. Since the 0 harvest is per tile and they get to use the maximum yield for the species, this should ensure that given enough plots planted they should get a return, even if its only one tile that lives to maturity, they should get enough to eat and replant.

 

3. Give new players hidden bonuses to yield and to the farm management variables. Just like they now do with rares. Still they risk a 0 harvest as I cannot bring myself for any reason to support a guaranteed harvest. It just flies in the face of reason and I cant stomach it.

 

Ultimately use whatever works the best as long as there is never again a guaranteed harvest and a risk of loss is always present, whether you have 1 farming or 100 farming.

 

Other Items I forgot to mention in original suggestion

 

Also another item that I forgot to mention - Each harvested item should be able to produce multiple seeds. If you have a pumpkin and open it up youll see there are 50 to 100 seeds easily. You should further be able to modify the seed bearing capacity of plants through selective planting. ( Ill edit the UI piece to include that.) On the flip side you should also have the risk of having plants that are sterile, so no matter how many seeds they produce, they don't plant, still good to eat, but you cant use the seed for replanting.

 

Also another item that I have not mentioned would be the effect on nutritional values a plant variety could have, and not just on players as here we can start building in interdependencies. So if a variety of crop has Really good drought, pest, and disease resistances, it could have a good or bad nutritional value as well. SO if you have 2 farmers growing the same crops in the same region, those crops could be different. And lets say that a person breeding horses down the way is looking to add in some extra bonuses to help him increase the number of good traits his breeding produces. He could look for really high nutritional value crops to feed them. So here the interdependencies start to spider web out and start affecting other areas and other paths.

Edited September 5, 2013 by sunsvortex

[joedobo 1,187]

......Players who are actively involved in some game aspect should be seriously considered. I point out my extreme dedication to farming to show that I have alot of experience with farming. Its highly unlikely a low skill or average farm will be able to keep up with me. I can play 12+ hours a day doing the most tedious of tasks hour after hour with ease. How else do you think I got 98 farming and 90 in a few other skills too. I'm not commenting out of jealousy or fear that some other player will be better then me. Its truly a concern that this would hurt Wurm's potential revenue stream and annoy a lot of players with its severe tedium.

 

......Wemp is just an example. How crops are used by other skills are not balanced nor are the value of crops considered equal by players. This is an example of why my knowledge of farming is important. I'm not telling you how to play by the way. I'm pointing out that your idea would make some land less valuable than other land. Wurm is a business that receives revenues from offering enjoyable experiences to customers. Wurm Adding in mechanics that make land undesirable is essentially nerfing its own revenue. It should be pretty clear from other posts that adding tedium in pursuit of realistic simulation is more likely to annoy then please.

 

Now if devs where to balance how all crafts use crops so all areas can grow equally valuable this idea would be more feasible. Quantity is another issue. 1,000 pumpkins and potatoes will make food for a year. whereas 1,000 wemp fiber can last less then a day.

 

 

The Devs can't even make it so an animals will pull a cart and walk next to you as you harvest your field.(nor should they) This is a good example of why trying to pursue too much realism is a bad idea. New innovation that realistically would be easy to try out take ages/never happen in this game (Joedobo).(hasn't in the past, and I don't live in the past) (Sunsvortex)

lol, it would be very easy to train a draft animal(s) to walk next to you pulling a cart as you harvest and load that wagon. Its a very good example of why lack of coding resources limits realism. Its interesting to see you subscribe to selective realism.

 

 

 

[sunsvortex 599]

......Players who are actively involved in some game aspect should be seriously considered. I point out my extreme dedication to farming to show that I have alot of experience with farming. Its highly unlikely a low skill or average farm will be able to keep up with me. I can play 12+ hours a day doing the most tedious of tasks hour after hour with ease. OK your not seeing it then. In my layout, that you have a very high farming skill, that you can spend hours at a time on the farm doesn't mean that much, it helps, but neither is it the be all and end all of farming. What matters the most is your ability to manage your farm and keep it alive , healthy and happy. If you cant do that, the regardless of all other metrics, your not going to have a yield worth anything, if you have a yield at all. So someone with a 30 farming skill could easily, with careful management of their farm, some decent seed, and a bit of luck, out produce someone that has 90 farming.  How else do you think I got 98 farming and 90 in a few other skills too.(That you have those skills that high means nothing really other than you can get a larger harvest than someone else who has a lower number. If your actual concern is what would happen to those that already have high farming skill? I think that's pretty obvious but maybe not. You don't loose it, that wouldn't work, although it has its merits. You would just need to learn a new way or ways to do things. Once you got the hang of a new system youd still have a pretty large advantage to begin with, but that farming skill number would not be anywhere as important as it is right now. It would be 1 of several metrics used to determine the success rate of any given corrective action or the yield of any given variety of plant. the main reason for this is so everyone can be effective in farming regardless of their actual farming skill. Yes itll always be good to have that number as well as others high, but no one will be relying on a single arbitrary number to define your chance of success. Now even if all your farming metrics are very high there is also the aspect of actual player experience that comes into play. SO if you have all these high numbers but cant figure out how in any given region with any given specific variety of crop to put in a proper corrective action and do so in a timely manner then all those numbers wont mean squat. those numbers may minimize the effect of an improper corrective action but to what degree depends on other factors as well. Having high farming skills will still be an advantage and it will be something you want to have, its just not going to be the only determining factor in a well managed farm. I'm not commenting out of jealousy or fear that some other player will be better then me. Its truly a concern that this would hurt Wurm's potential revenue stream and annoy a lot of players with its severe tedium.

 

tedium [ˈtiËdɪəm]

n

the state of being bored or the quality of being boring; monotony

[from Latin taedium, from taedēre to weary]

 

This is the current state of farming -it is what I would like to see moved away from

 

......Wemp is just an example. How crops are used by other skills are not balanced nor are the value of crops considered equal by players.(Yes and I started addressing this, but interdependencies would take a very long and drawn out section unto itself and is best spoken of in context with several other paths that would be expanded.) This is an example of why my knowledge of farming is important.(Farming is oversimplified - you don't know anything about farming that any other person does because the information about farming is finite and extremely limited due to - there is just not much to it. Its oversimplified.)  I'm not telling you how to play by the way. I'm pointing out that your idea would make some land less valuable than other land.( for farmers, not for everyone. farmers would place a higher value on the areas of land that will grow the specific crop they like to grow. that a farmer places a low value on a particular area of land only means it doesn't suit him and his goals, doesn't mean its worthless to everyone else, just to the farmer. So land values are relative to the goals that one needs them to support.  Wurm is a business that receives revenues from offering enjoyable experiences to customers. Wurm Adding in mechanics that make land undesirable is essentially nerfing its own revenue. It should be pretty clear from other posts that adding tedium in pursuit of realistic simulation is more likely to annoy then please.

 

Now if devs where to balance how all crafts use crops so all areas can grow equally valuable this idea would be more feasible.(No this would put us right back to where we are, and this is what needs to be moved away from.) Quantity is another issue. 1,000 pumpkins and potatoes will make food for a year. whereas 1,000 wemp fiber can last less then a day.( I already addressed this - natural disasters, disease, pestilence,  farming practices, seed variables and crop varieties , all serve as sinks and as positive modifiers at the same time. its a simple matter of balancing input /output based on those variables. there should always be the risk of agricultural disaster, of a complete and total loss, whether this is confined to a single farm or a collection of farms in a region depends on many factors. But that risk always needs to be present.

 

 

The Devs can't even make it so an animals will pull a cart and walk next to you as you harvest your field.(nor should they) This is a good example of why trying to pursue too much realism is a bad idea. New innovation that realistically would be easy to try out take ages/never happen in this game (Joedobo).(hasn't in the past, and I don't live in the past) (Sunsvortex)

lol, it would be very easy to train a draft animal(s) to walk next to you pulling a cart as you harvest and load that wagon. Its a very good example of why lack of coding resources limits realism. Its interesting to see you subscribe to selective realism.(I have already addressed coding resources and have a dev that commented on this. Your example is focused on a visual reference only not a gaming mechanic. The mechanic of planting /harvesting can be achieved in many ways, your suggesting one out of many visual references to overlay on the actual mechanic. You could hire an NPC to harvest for you, You could have a basket to carry your harvested crops in, there are simply many ways to plant /harvest, and you could have any visual reference you want to illustrate it That's not really what im talking about at all in my suggestion although I do mention items to add that would be needed for infrastructure. But this is really small in comparison to the rest of the suggestion as everyone can see items would be needed, which items depends on many things and how much of the actual suggestion would ever make its way into WURM. So the example your using doesn't really point to anything.

Edited September 6, 2013 by sunsvortex

[Ronnie 64]

 

lol, it would be very easy to train a draft animal(s) to walk next to you pulling a cart as you harvest and load that wagon. Its a very good example of why lack of coding resources limits realism. Its interesting to see you subscribe to selective realism.

 

 

Well it would be rather easy to code allowing players to lead two tamed horses/bulls/cows hooked to a cart and "walk" them, Only issue would be the driver seat once someone is leading the two critters(only the one taming them can lead). And seeing as tamed animals are way weaker then wild ones I personally dont see any harm allowing a player to tame two animals at 50 or 70 taming skill(Gives players more of a reason to train the skill other then to tame and breed champs, which is kind of pointless after the breed trait that stops you from gaining exp from doing anything with them).

Edited September 6, 2013 by Ronnie

[Lightonfoot 58]

I like your suggestions sunsvortex. I agree, Wurm Online needs more depth.

 

I don't have time right now to read everything, but what's that about limiting it to deeds? Why is that needed?

 

In most things I like to be manual. So if there's a diseased crop I like to be able to see it directly rather than see it on a GUI window. HOwever, most games are not minimalist and add windows for everything. Wurm Online, since my time here last year, has really been a manual type of game. So adding more windows not only complicates the interface it also is counter to what Wurm Online has been like for me. That's just one gripe I have to add to this.

 

For example.. I'd rather SEE berries/vegetables/etc when I'm foraging rather than the way ti's done now where you activate the skill and it produces the outcome in your inventory. To me, SEEING would be a lot more interesting. In fact, we CAN see apple trees and we can pick apples on them and to me that's the way foraging should be. We already can see bushes and can pick things from them and that's the direction it should be going.

 

This game has 100+ skills, but most of them lack depth and need more to make it interesting. Of course, it needs more than just depth to work, but that would require a couple dozen other threads. A few things it needs are a better in-game help (a welcome screen with top guides and clickable links and viewable tables to name a few things not presently there) and non-linear skill progression (so that players of all skill level contribute in a village).

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (can skip the part below, it's just me ranting about the industry)

 

But ultimately I believe we're wasting our time. Most players want linear things. They want straightforward things. They want direction. They want their hand held. It's just the way the market is and it's fact. So while it will require tens of thousands of development hours to create a deep game, it will ultimately sell like used underwear and won't make lots of money unless a linear system is tacked on top of it which would basically make all that work wasted, since you could have made pacman and made more money. I hate it, but this is how it's. I mean, if people really wanted non-linear complexity then they wouldn't be playing games they'd be out there in reality having fun.

 

A simplistic game that will run on a phone would make a lot more money. All I gotta say.

 

We will eventually have these things, but it'll be slow. Games will evnetually have them. But the reason we will have them is because people liked pacman so much we became rich enough to afford it - a byproduct of it. I mean, without these multi-million dollar companies that make pacman clones the industry would be frozen cold.

 

Having said all that... some players like these sorts of non-linear things. But many don't. For example, I used to think Zelda was a cool game. But nowadays it's called a skinner box. All that awesome adventure and exploration is now reduced to a label and compared to a rat in a box. If a game isn't on rails nowadays, it's not marketed. I've always enjoyed the non-linear games that don't tell you what to do and just drop you into their world, but I'm in a minority. Over the years, I've been forced to admit I'm a minority. It helps to stop me from arguing with others. When you're a minority you end up disagreeing wiht a majority, so it helps to know it's not worth arguing over.

 

You know what else? I liked pacman. I liked Mario Brothers. But I like games that leave you in the dark too. I like not knowing what to do and having to figure it out and feeling like the world around me could exist with or without me. The world in those kinds of games is more like a breathing thing, it doesn't NEED you. You're a visitor. So you see I can like both type of games. What I don't like is when the latter option is ridiculed and even abandoned.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Lightonfoot

[sunsvortex 599]

I like your suggestions sunsvortex. I agree, Wurm Online needs more depth.

 

I don't have time right now to read everything, but what's that about limiting it to deeds? Why is that needed?( good question, and one I don't have a really great answer for atm because I don't know how the existing system sees each land tile. So Instead of making 10000 assumptions I just went with Deed Only as I know the system differentiates between non deeded tiles and deeded tiles. I also know it differentiates between landform types, and I also know that when you have a deed its a specific area so that when you start looking for farmed tiles you can have ownership already assigned within a specific area. It would seem that this gets technically complex in the code depending on how the system identifies each tile, ect ect, so I didn't go there because I have no idea how the code actually works on this level. As when you look at the UI , it needs to know how many tiles are in the farm, and as a shortcut I simply said ok all tiles within a deed, worst case scenario you need to add 2 hidden variables 1. Identify that is a farm tile, which the system seems to be able to do already "I think" not sure about that. and 2. the  farm plot creator. So now this takes care of the question the UI is going to ask 'How Big is your farm?" "How many tiles of farmland are in it?" "Who planted the tile?"this is information you have to know in order for the UI to work. So I have no good ideas for off deed as I simply don't have enough information about how that part works to even make close assumptions. So for purposes of the suggestion I simply went with Deed Only. 

 

In most things I like to be manual. So if there's a diseased crop I like to be able to see it directly rather than see it on a GUI window. HOwever, most games are not minimalist and add windows for everything. Wurm Online, since my time here last year, has really been a manual type of game. So adding more windows not only complicates the interface it also is counter to what Wurm Online has been like for me. That's just one gripe I have to add to this.

 

For example.. I'd rather SEE berries/vegetables/etc when I'm foraging rather than the way ti's done now where you activate the skill and it produces the outcome in your inventory. To me, SEEING would be a lot more interesting. In fact, we CAN see apple trees and we can pick apples on them and to me that's the way foraging should be. We already can see bushes and can pick things from them and that's the direction it should be going.( A good suggestion, If something like this were to ever make it in, and "IF" I had a choice to see windows or a direct visual representation I would prefer your suggestion over mine 100 to 1. It would be great to be able to look at your crops directly and be able to identify issues through a direct visual means rather than adding more UI windows. The reason I choose a windowed UI was for nothing more than a visual aid to assist in explaining the main point and because if your looking at resources, which is lighter on resources? - a windowed UI or creating all the new graphics that would be needed? So yes I like your approach much better assuming such would be available.)

 

This game has 100+ skills, but most of them lack depth and need more to make it interesting. Of course, it needs more than just depth to work, but that would require a couple dozen other threads.(haha yes it would, and im thinking about jumping in on a couple other paths as well) just for kicks and giggles to see what happens when they flesh out and you start adding interdependencies) A few things it needs are a better in-game help (a welcome screen with top guides and clickable links and viewable tables to name a few things not presently there)(I believe something similar to this is incoming) and non-linear skill progression (so that players of all skill level contribute in a village)(Yep a non linear system could work well).

 

But ultimately I believe we're wasting our time.( Im going to disagree here,) Most players want linear things. They want straightforward things. They want direction. They want their hand held. It's just the way the market is and it's fact.( Yes it is, I 100% agree that this is the way the market is, and I made this point a couple times above, but Ill do it again here. It all depends on the market your going after. If that market is say 18 or under then that's exactly what they want, if you start looking at an older market say 25 and above youll see that they have matured beyond the hand holding stage and they have done the oversimplified route and their tastes have changed. they are looking for something different, something more challenging, something more in depth. Now there is also one other issue since were going to speak of the industry. Content Consumption rates. These are extremely high in comparison to the ability to manufacture content. Take SOE for instance, their art director has flatly stated this was an issue and is why they are releasing Landmark. Its so the players can create their own content "and" content for the company. Even SOE with their hordes of developers and extremely deep pockets cannot keep up with content consumption rates. Sandbox games don't suffer from this nearly as much, as most allow you to create a large part of the content. As far as I have seen WURM caps them all on this. We create all the content with a fistful of items the devs give us. There are very few limitations on how creative we can be. And right now the amount of stuff that's going on is exploding. It only take a few items in WURM and it can change huge amounts of content. In example. I used statues, hedges, fountains and high iron fences to completely rework my deed and went from a castle looking thing to something that resembles an old French Monarchy style layout. And I could completely change the look and feel of it again with only a few more items. I only used 4 items to make my deed completely take on a different look and feel. WURM is perfectly positioned to compete even with a small dev team. the market is growing up and there are plenty of older gamers out there from the late 90's and early 2000 that would love to have a home, but all that's out there are oversimplified games for the 18 and under crowd. So I think the market is wide open for an in depth immersive well fleshed out sandbox where you can do anything you like. So while it will require tens of thousands of development hours to create a deep game, it will ultimately sell like used underwear and won't make lots of money unless a linear system is tacked on top of it which would basically make all that work wasted, since you could have made pacman and made more money. I hate it, but this is how it's. I mean, if people really wanted non-linear complexity then they wouldn't be playing games they'd be out there in reality having fun.

 

A simplistic game that will run on a phone would make a lot more money. All I gotta say.

 

We will eventually have these things, but it'll be slow. Games will evnetually have them. But the reason we will have them is because people liked pacman so much we became rich enough to afford it - a byproduct of it. I mean, without these multi-million dollar companies that make pacman clones the industry would be frozen cold.

 

Having said all that... some players like these things, like me and you. But many don't. For example, I used to think Zelda was a cool game. But nowadays it's called a skinner box. All that awesome adventure and exploration is now reduced to a label and compared to a rat in a box. If a game isn't on rails nowadays, it's not marketed. I've always enjoyed the non-linear games that don't tell you what to do and just drop you into their world, but I'm in a minority. Over the years, I've been forced to admit I'm a minority. It helps to stop me from arguing with others. When you're a minority you end up disagreeing wiht a majority, so it helps to know it's not worth arguing over.

 

You know what else? I liked pacman. I liked Mario Brothers. But I like games that leave you in the dark too.

Edited September 6, 2013 by sunsvortex

[cooutlaw119 16]

I love this topic so many complaints I am going on 17 and am all for more immersion +1 from me farmville sucks

[cooutlaw119 16]

I love this topic so many complaints I am going on 17 and am all for more immersion +1 from me farmville sucks