Suggested changes to enclosure and highway rules

[Belrindor 663]

 

 

The suggestion is to remove these rules, and replace the newbie situation with another solution. There are quite a lot of good ideas floating around. You should consider making preparations for them being removed within a month, unless we see a showstopper for these.

 

 

Rolf

 

 

 

 

 

*IF* Rolf decides to change the enclosure rule, I highly doubt that the rules will be any different for items built on open land or on perimeters.

 

Read the first quote. That doesn't sound like *IF* to me. That sounds an awful lot like, unless cows fall from the sky, it's gonna happen.

 

Howzabout you go and talk to your boss, get us some REAL insight about what's actually intended here, and then we can all be actually INFORMED instead of letting fears run rampant without any real, solid, explanation of what's truly on the big cheese's mind, eh?

 

Now, toddle off and talk to the king, and don't come back without some actual answers!

[spellcast 983]

the discussion about perimeter is sort of off topic to the thread here, i'm going to stay out of it at this point other than to mention that:

 

some players have chosen to use the enclosure rules to set up enclosures within their perimeter, those enclosures are just as legal as the ones outside of perimeters, but no more or less so, which brings us to WHY this has even come up:

 

The Enclosure rules are not part of the game code, which is why they need to change if the game is to grow.

The intent is to add a mechanism to PREVENT players from breaking into other players enclosures and causing all sorts of hassle,

as opposed to 

using a rule to PUNISH players who have already broken into other players enclosures. 

 

The bad situations rolf mentions in his OP are the players who get broken into and become upset, frustrated, or angry because "its against the rules, why did the game let them do it" Some leave, others lose interest and drift away, others get angry and retaliate, none of these are good responses from a customer service point of view.
 

The extra work for the GM's he mentions that some of you are deciding means we are lazy, is when the cases go back and forth between 2 players or groups constantly breaking into each others areas, messing up roads (which then often get turned into short, but by the rules legal, highways to prevent that), destroying terraforming... etc for revenge ...

again, something that if its prevented calms things down for the players involved as well. 

 

We are able to handle it now, but we if wurm grew by 10,000 players next year, the problem would be hard to manage because there is a disconnect between what the rules allow and what the game mechanics do.  It would be nice to solve that disconnect now so that the mechanics act to prevent the customers from being put into a place where they are frustrated or upset. (obviously you can never prevent all such frustration given the sandbox nature of the game, but removing a source as common as this one should help)  

 

we're trying to apply the old cliche that - "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"  

 

I'm not saying that all current enclosures will remain valid, Indeed i suspect that whatever change gets made there will be a fair amount of adjusting needed.

 

if it was possible to code the game in such a way that would account for all the current enclosures as they are, we wouldn't need to be looking at a change to how they work in the first place. 

[Shidoni 84]

Spellcast--I'm all for a better enclosure rule!  One that CANNOT be bypassed.  And IF that is what Rolf meant, great!  But that's really not how he sounds.  When he leaves these things up to customers (as he has done by creating this thread) you inherently create chaos and speculation, which loses money and business.

IF the whole point of this is to create BETTER protections for enclosures and highways, he really needs some sort of PR person to filter for him before he makes inflammatory posts.

All that said, I do appreciate you attempting to clear some of these things up (18 pages of people freaking out proves it's necessary) and truly hope that you are accurate.

[Lithien 268]

Does anyone not remember this post back in December? http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/93345-feedback-request-on-fence-stuff/

 

See? Did he listen to anything you said then? If he did, I don't see any of it in his "directive with a question mark" here. He gives you his intentions with a question mark at the end and asks you for suggestions he doesn't want to hear. If the did, he would have gone back and read that thread. He replaced flying and jumping with not protecting highways and ignored any comments made.

 

 

 

 

You know what I think? I think this is his way of telling us we are going to have to deal with people flying and jumping over our fences. Deeded or not.

And of course, while we are striving for added realism in a world with dragons, trolls,unicorns, giant spiders, flaming creatures, and giants, we will need flying or riding on giant birds to truly sinch that realistic feel to the world. 

And I won't be deleting this one. There you have it.

 

I have been holding back in this thread, trying to give Rolf and the devs the benefit of the doubt, and finally thought I had a positive comment to make, and then I saw this post.... and I figured I could pretend not to have seen it, but when I went back and actually reread his old post, instead of relying on my memory, I think your assessment is scarily accurate.

 

It looks like I totally misunderstood this thread as him looking for suggestions to improve the workload for the GMs (without some us ever knowing what these troublesome grey areas are), and tbh I had a hard time understanding why the simpler solution of just hiring more GMs wasn't approached, since they are unpaid volunteers and therefore there aren't any financial reasons to keep the numbers down.

 

But when you look at this quote from his flying/jumping over fences thread: "We would try to hold this implementation off for as long as possible since obviously you would need preparations but once a decision is made it would probably happen after a month or two."

 

And then this quote from this thread: "The suggestion is to remove these rules, and replace the newbie situation with another solution. There are quite a lot of good ideas floating around. You should consider making preparations for them being removed within a month, unless we see a showstopper for these."

 

*sigh* and here I was about to ask for details about these  troublesome grey areas in order to make any useful suggestions, and also ask that we get another warning when it was decided what the rules were being replaced with, as I thought I only knew what rules to prepare for NOT being there anymore, but not knowing which rules/mechanics would replace it, it is really not easy to plan for anything at all - then it turns out he has already told us what to prepare for: Flying and jumping.

 

He said we would get 1-2 month warning once the decision was made, and we just got our 1 month warning

[Mordraug 2,542]

"Only deed owner can bash perimeter fences" mechanics, voila, problem solved.

 

Off-deed enclosures, as in fully off-deed (my gatehouses are on-deed, how's that for gray area), no perimeter related to them, no deed related to it......... 

 

I liked the "house fence" concept... house capped at 25 tiles, where some walls act as fences to an open (farmable/grazable) area instead.  Not sure how tricky the code for that is but would fix the newbie protection issue without having to slap ppl in their perimeter.

[Lolabelle 597]

Enclosure rule needs to stay.

Many players have animals like Hell horses or aggro animals off deed for safety reason.

 

My solution is increase the decay rate to off deed wall/building. This should deter the land grabbers.

The new player only needs a temporary place so decay should not affect them much...

This looks like a good solution. requires people to properly maintain.    If you remove the enclosure rules now, alot of people will be very upset.

[Belrindor 663]

all these walls of text ppl post just coz roads arent enclosed anymore? i dont understand this at all, can anyone explain me why this gives a problem?

 

If you can't be bothered to read those so called 'walls of text' and actually educate yourself on the subject at hand, and are taking a tl:dr attitude, then perhaps you should click another thread. You know... one with less words in it...

 

I thought you were being cheeky, but I see you had a serious and honest inquiry. My apologies.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Belrindor

[zalifear 186]

Why is it all back and forth over GM's and problems... Where is the innovation, if we can get them to make what we want we make it right? innovation, solutions? always the problem. Just say what you want as a paid player. There are a buch of things that are outdated still. How about are market system? (just saying) If you do pay then you should have some options here. Come up with more ideas so they can all create something much better than we have. I seen some new and old ideas floating around and even ones form years back. Lets mix and match like the ladies would say.

I think a big part of this is solved with the removal of f2p on p2p servers. yea that solves a whole lot to begin with. then we go on to discuss the other bits like The highway system, or is that even a question for someone who paid to leave the basic server and pay to destroy of flourish? I mean most kids aren't gangbangers moving in next door after hitting the lotto. Decent ppl make it through the ruff part and hear about the freedom islands and come to continue and discover the rich content the game has to offer. I came from that set up and went far and many more I know. Make a new way to guide new players through to paid players.

DEED CONTROL: Details to the deeds: prices are fine prolly, I for one would pay a little more for a lot of "Options" I seen it said a few times here about Micro manage.

I think it's a cool idea to mark highways, I made a few roads I thought were awesome and would like to see around forever and Im sure Tich is out there somewhere along a cliff digging, I'v seen the lady and the shovel in the shadow a few times. Our community builds some great things. I mean doesn't it work: that GM approve roads? I think that's aces really whats the fighting about? Didn't he ask if this is an issue? Everyone jump really fast to a conclusion.

 

[Malokai 74]

I ran out of 'likes' for the day, but OMG that's awesome! And make it really cranked, so it'll one shot the offender and totally bypass armor. Someone would grief once, then never again. Problem solved.

Pfft... one-shot?   Have it take 2 hrs to kill the character, but with a hit-rate fast enough to interrupt any actions.  Throw in stuns, encumbrance....    and make it persist thru a re-log.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Malokai

[zalifear 186]

CONCEPT: construction chart: Made by the player after setting a deed. Paper and board e.g basic. The player then draws a grid which will be automated by the game as it opens. The grid will be the same number of blocks that is currently in use by the set deed by said player. Each block will be lit green meaning it is set on taxed and is covered by all deed rules. The player can then untick those boxes to shape the deed how he/she wants. So it would work like this, you can make a good size deed original cube or rectangle shape, then take away what you don't want, e.g water to your south, mountain to your rear and so forth. This way you can really shape what you pay for, some smaller areas wont have to be on deed and for the forest lovers with no lumberjacks except trained grinders that replant the forests won't die relax.

When it all comes down to it throwing a bunch of random people that come to try this great game out with seasoned people who enjoy the digital farming effect, it just don't work. Also expecting everyone to be open arms and teach every person that walks by, well that just takes a real character (HI, Gumbo) So yea get on with another f2p server.

Edited April 5, 2014 by zalifear

[Belrindor 663]

I guess one of my biggest concerns about all this discussion....is the fact that there is no response from Rolf or any one else in the position to address these issues. He comes here and makes some statements, but then does nothing to help guide or direct the discussion. Instead he leaves it to stew and simmer and the such. As I said before, its almost like calling fire in a crowded room and sitting there watching the chaos, just for the fun of it. If he was not prepared to help guide the discussion in a constructive manner, then it should not have been started at all.

 

There are to many what ifs, and who knows and what now and everything else. There are alot of great suggestions, but there are to many unknown factors involved and silence from the "man" does not help the situation at all. What people fear the most in any aspect of life is the unknown, and right now we have alot of unknowns.

 

Exactly this. If you aren't going to participate, or at the very least delegate someone in authority to do so in your stead, then why in the hell poke the hornet's nest like it's a pinata?!? What did you honestly expect? Either provide constructive guidance, or don't even bother starting these conversations at all and go with your typical ninja nerf and let the pieces fall where they may.

[Malokai 74]

Damn, people.   Put the daggers away.

 

Rolf.  Any showstoppers yet?  Which suggestions do -you- like?

[zalifear 186]

3 STONE SYSTEM: Seen a lot about highway tile type, what if you code a 3 block set that link together and can not be set back to back limiting the number of tiles the set can be away from another set, preventing anyone from paving a parking lot. Nice cobble in the middle and the sides and interesting dirt with tracks lay in them from our heavy cart loads as we pull off to the side for deliveries, make a complete set with intersection pieces turn off left right to single lane roads and so on. the roads have always looked nice when properly done but, a few more options should make it even more interesting. like a dirt pull off with a stone boarder to the outside, envision Wurm's future highway look.

One a highway Stone system is set: it can have a duration, Maybe tie it into ql, better the ql more likely a higher level longer playing player made it. Save the roads lol always wanted to thank everyone that made a road I used and got me away from danger THANKS

[Fairyshine 3,183]

the discussion about perimeter is sort of off topic to the thread here, i'm going to stay out of it at this point other than to mention that:

 

some players have chosen to use the enclosure rules to set up enclosures within their perimeter, those enclosures are just as legal as the ones outside of perimeters, but no more or less so, which brings us to WHY this has even come up:

 

The Enclosure rules are not part of the game code, which is why they need to change if the game is to grow.

The intent is to add a mechanism to PREVENT players from breaking into other players enclosures and causing all sorts of hassle,

as opposed to 

using a rule to PUNISH players who have already broken into other players enclosures. 

 

The bad situations rolf mentions in his OP are the players who get broken into and become upset, frustrated, or angry because "its against the rules, why did the game let them do it" Some leave, others lose interest and drift away, others get angry and retaliate, none of these are good responses from a customer service point of view.

 

The extra work for the GM's he mentions that some of you are deciding means we are lazy, is when the cases go back and forth between 2 players or groups constantly breaking into each others areas, messing up roads (which then often get turned into short, but by the rules legal, highways to prevent that), destroying terraforming... etc for revenge ...

again, something that if its prevented calms things down for the players involved as well. 

 

We are able to handle it now, but we if wurm grew by 10,000 players next year, the problem would be hard to manage because there is a disconnect between what the rules allow and what the game mechanics do.  It would be nice to solve that disconnect now so that the mechanics act to prevent the customers from being put into a place where they are frustrated or upset. (obviously you can never prevent all such frustration given the sandbox nature of the game, but removing a source as common as this one should help)  

 

we're trying to apply the old cliche that - "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"  

 

I'm not saying that all current enclosures will remain valid, Indeed i suspect that whatever change gets maThde there will be a fair amount of adjusting needed.

 

if it was possible to code the game in such a way that would account for all the current enclosures as they are, we wouldn't need to be looking at a change to how they work in the first place. 

Great, someone responding with some feedback.  Thanks!  I see now you are concerned about the current enclosures too but have no way of coding current enclosures.  How about this?  Ask everyone and give everyone a month to replace their current legal enclosures, with the new kind of enclosures, so this means that for a month, everyone can, say, for example, appeal to a GM to come and replace their current uncoded fences with the coded fences.  Limit this to enclosures on deed perimeters and the appeal has to be made by the deed mayor.  Furthermore, if it is a legal enclosure off deed and off perimeter, the enclosure can be maximum of 25 tiles total.  Would this be an acceptable compromise?

[Audrel 2,223]

the discussion about perimeter is sort of off topic to the thread here, i'm going to stay out of it at this point other than to mention that:

 

some players have chosen to use the enclosure rules to set up enclosures within their perimeter, those enclosures are just as legal as the ones outside of perimeters, but no more or less so, which brings us to WHY this has even come up:

 

The Enclosure rules are not part of the game code, which is why they need to change if the game is to grow.

The intent is to add a mechanism to PREVENT players from breaking into other players enclosures and causing all sorts of hassle,

as opposed to 

using a rule to PUNISH players who have already broken into other players enclosures. 

 

The bad situations rolf mentions in his OP are the players who get broken into and become upset, frustrated, or angry because "its against the rules, why did the game let them do it" Some leave, others lose interest and drift away, others get angry and retaliate, none of these are good responses from a customer service point of view.

 

The extra work for the GM's he mentions that some of you are deciding means we are lazy, is when the cases go back and forth between 2 players or groups constantly breaking into each others areas, messing up roads (which then often get turned into short, but by the rules legal, highways to prevent that), destroying terraforming... etc for revenge ...

again, something that if its prevented calms things down for the players involved as well. 

 

We are able to handle it now, but we if wurm grew by 10,000 players next year, the problem would be hard to manage because there is a disconnect between what the rules allow and what the game mechanics do.  It would be nice to solve that disconnect now so that the mechanics act to prevent the customers from being put into a place where they are frustrated or upset. (obviously you can never prevent all such frustration given the sandbox nature of the game, but removing a source as common as this one should help)  

 

we're trying to apply the old cliche that - "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"  

 

I'm not saying that all current enclosures will remain valid, Indeed i suspect that whatever change gets made there will be a fair amount of adjusting needed.

 

if it was possible to code the game in such a way that would account for all the current enclosures as they are, we wouldn't need to be looking at a change to how they work in the first place. 

 

Fair enough. But what is replacing it. If it is a month away, does he have a plan?

[Arkonick 557]

Problem is point blank Some people had to turn there deeds into Legal Enclosures after the price increase. Some people have 25x25 to 30x30 and 40x40 legal enclosures and some have multiple ones clustered in a tight group.

 

Suggestions coming in like min 5x5 or 10x10 would destroy 50% or more of all the time and hard work people put into them to shrink them to these small sizes. These suggestions are throwing gasoline on a fire.

 

We have small abuse and massive abuse like 2 buildings  with 1x1's stretched over 50 tiles yes this is abuse.

 

Then we have people saying why should I pay for my deed and they don't pay for there land.

 

Simply what you get when you buy a deed...

1.Ability to hire spirit Templars to constantly fight off and attack hostel mobs A Legal Enclosure does not.

2.A Writ that allows you to control what people can and can't do on that land A Legal Enclosure does not.

3.No decay on walls Free Maintenance and a bit of other stuff on deed A Legal Enclosure does not. Every wall and every item on a Legal Enclosure decays with the risk of faster decay from someone deeding over them and dropping a perimeter over it. The bigger a Enclosure the more maintenance one has to put out and if they want protection they can build a guard tower but these guards have a radius limit and you must run the mob to them and shout for help or kill them your self.

4.A token to respawn at a legal Enclosure play has only 3 and there all back at the middle of the major spawn of the map.

 

There are perks to deeding your land and none for Enclosures. So you get what you pay for.

 

Personally As mentioned a ton of times by me in other post and again by others in this post Wurm is to expensive as a mmo. In order to enjoy Wurm and full experience you need to own a premium account and a deed. A 5x5 or even a 10x10 is way to small cause the land chunks are way to big in scale. Tiles have item limits and for one to have a nice house and a farm with a animal pin and optional dock or mine if available on said land you need more than what people suggest which is why Enclosures are bigger than what Rolf intended them to be to begin with.

 

I want someone to show me a 5x5 or a 10x10 and squeeze all this on it. I want to see BSB's, FSB's, Animals, Wagon, Cart's, Fenced in yard to hold 4 horse's "min for pulling a wagon", 1 Cow and Bull and there pin, Forge, Oven, Sewing Table, Chest, Coffin, Bed, Table and chairs, Couple of barrels, and a fenced in Farm for crops.

 

You'll people are clearly not thinking about all the items in wurm. I didn't even add on this list a mine or a dock and a boat or to or other animals like deer and chickens or pigs yet you'll want to claim 5x5 or a 10x10 is plenty.

 

Come on people wake up it's simple Hire more GM's if there over worked  and set rules in stone and take them out of the so called grey area. Who put them in the Grey area in the first place?

[Shidoni 84]

3 STONE SYSTEM: Seen a lot about highway tile type, what if you code a 3 block set that link together

 

I like this general idea.  Special "highway" tiles that have protection would be great.  It would be problematic if they can't be destroyed AT ALL, since roads change.  But perhaps they would come with a popup informing that it's a protected tile and alteration must have GM approval.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Shidoni

[Stormblade 617]

Perimeters are public land.  Other than deeding and constructing a house there, both deed members and non-deed members have the same rights, subject to the griefing rules.  (GM's will generally side on the deed's side in conflicts if no other rules are involved though.)

 

If a non-deed member builds a fence (not an enclosure) in a perimeter, the deed members have a right to bash it down. (Unless ruled as griefing)

Like-wise, If a deed member builds a fence (not an enclosure) in their perimeter, a non-deed member has right to bash it down. (Unless ruled as griefing)

 

This is our understanding of the game rules, and this is how we enforce them. 

 

 

*IF* Rolf decides to change the enclosure rule, I highly doubt that the rules will be any different for items built on open land or on perimeters.

 

 

Hate to call bs on this one

 

Go and examine the tiles for yourself this is what you will see.

 

On Deed

[18:35:35] This is within the village of Dragonfoot.

 

On Perimeter

[18:36:21] This is within the perimeter of Dragonfoot.

Public Land

[18:37:37] You see a part of the lands of Wurm.

 

So if the perimeter is Public land as you say it, why does it clearly have the deeds name on.  Since, as far as I can read, there haven't been any clear rules about it, so the majority of the players base have taken as since my names on it, I own it.

 

Really don't see how this can be considered as public land.

 

 

the discussion about perimeter is sort of off topic to the thread here, i'm going to stay out of it at this point other than to mention that:

 

some players have chosen to use the enclosure rules to set up enclosures within their perimeter, those enclosures are just as legal as the ones outside of perimeters, but no more or less so, which brings us to WHY this has even come up:

 

The Enclosure rules are not part of the game code, which is why they need to change if the game is to grow.

The intent is to add a mechanism to PREVENT players from breaking into other players enclosures and causing all sorts of hassle,

as opposed to using a rule to PUNISH players who have already broken into other players enclosures. 

 

The bad situations rolf mentions in his OP are the players who get broken into and become upset, frustrated, or angry because "its against the rules, why did the game let them do it" Some leave, others lose interest and drift away, others get angry and retaliate, none of these are good responses from a customer service point of view.

 

The extra work for the GM's he mentions that some of you are deciding means we are lazy, is when the cases go back and forth between 2 players or groups constantly breaking into each others areas, messing up roads (which then often get turned into short, but by the rules legal, highways to prevent that), destroying terraforming... etc for revenge ...

again, something that if its prevented calms things down for the players involved as well. 

 

We are able to handle it now, but we if wurm grew by 10,000 players next year, the problem would be hard to manage because there is a disconnect between what the rules allow and what the game mechanics do.  It would be nice to solve that disconnect now so that the mechanics act to prevent the customers from being put into a place where they are frustrated or upset. (obviously you can never prevent all such frustration given the sandbox nature of the game, but removing a source as common as this one should help)  

 

we're trying to apply the old cliche that - "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"  

 

I'm not saying that all current enclosures will remain valid, Indeed i suspect that whatever change gets made there will be a fair amount of adjusting needed.

 

if it was possible to code the game in such a way that would account for all the current enclosures as they are, we wouldn't need to be looking at a change to how they work in the first place. 

 

The questions of perimeters can up, and see my first response, is that some of us have terraformed and built on these perimeters.  Whether the intent was for us to do that or not, it appears that the playerbase of deed owners see their village name on those tiles and consider it part of their deed.  What was asked ( my original post ) was what happens to enclosures on those perimeters, would they fall under the unprotected enclosure change.

 

 

As far as a in game mechanism, it already exists, remove all bashing capabilities off deed.  This would protect enclosures, new players ( both pvp and pve ) * side note this can also allow pvp'ers to still catapult off deed structures as well as freedomers ** if a situation comes up that a person does intentionally catapult someone's enclosure then they are in the fault of breaking the rules as far as going out of their way to bring a catapult for the inention of destroying someones enclosure

.

To the statement that it brings extra work and that the players feel you are lazy, nobody has said that, true a lot of folks are probably wondering, man how many griefing claims are brought up, per day that it's such a demanding hassle to handle them.  The problem is, that it is a Gray Area this happens when you have 10 GM's ( just a random number ) looking at the same situation, each will have a different view and depending on mood, time of day, schedule, different ways of handling it.  To me this is poor organization on Rolfs part, he has not giving you or the players a clear cut ruling and guideline to follow, leaving it upto the individuals to interpret in their own way the intent of things.  Yes you have to investigate claims, talk to all parties, ect, removing bashing off deed will give you GM's a clear reference point, i'm sure the server log files can show SoandSo fired catapult ammo hit tile XYZ and go from there.  ( I am assuming that like most games, the server tracks all objects and has a way to log for reference those movements )

 

 

we're trying to apply the old cliche that - "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"  

 

I'm not saying that all current enclosures will remain valid, Indeed i suspect that whatever change gets made there will be a fair amount of adjusting needed

 

 

These two statements just invalidate each other. 

 

Legal enclosures to prevent break ins is our ounce of prevention.

 

In the second statement you're saying enclosures don't prevent anything.

 

 We are able to handle it now, but we if wurm grew by 10,000 players next year

 

I acutally laughed at this one. You might see 10,000 people check out wurm, but actual players staying becoming members of the players base, need to seriously rethink that number.  Don't get me wrong, would love to see an influx of that many people, Paying premium, people, but also consider this, what percentage pays a 1 time real life currency to get started, then how do they continue their premium, in game cash or rl money.  Consider what if those 10,000 people start as F2P and only pay with their premium time using in game silver. Yeah for those that sell silver in game you'll see a heck of a lot more posts wts silver than ever and think, NONE of that money will go towards devolping this game further.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Stormblade

[Rasu 561]

Quoting this shows you have about zero reading comprehension. This quote doesn't prove your point, it absolutely nails in the coffin proves what a lot of us are saying.

 

"The perimeter surrounding a settlement on all sides is purely to stop non-citizens from building or founding their own settlement - there are no other restrictions. You do not own and control the perimeter in the same way as the main settlement. On PvP servers kingdom guards will hunt enemies within the perimeter."

 

All this statement says is that you can't control with the same mechanism you would on your deed, and it doesn't have those CODED protections. But read what is quoted there, and then re-read it until you get it.

 

The perimeter is to stop you from being griefed by people building crap in your perimeter. There are, however, NO OTHER RESTRICTIONS on it's use. Which means if I want to wall that sucker in, I can do so.

 

Add the current (non enforced) 'legal enclosures' rule, and you have what SHOULD BE a protected perimeter.

 

Also note that it says You do not own and control the perimeter IN THE SAME WAY AS THE MAIN SETTLEMENT.

 

Now, who here with some reading comprehension can tell me what this means? Does it mean that you do not own the perimeter? No. It doesn't say that at all. It says you do not own and control it IN THE SAME WAY as you do your main deed. Otherwise, it would simply say: "You do not own and control the perimeter in any fashion and it is completely unprotected. Build there at your own risk."

 

Wow, that would have been really hard to type in the description, no?

 

It always amuses me when people quote the text or rules of some sort to prove their point, and it totally ends up obliterating their argument.

 

It amuses me that you try to twist the meaning of something that clearly says what it is there for and why it is not yours to do with what you please. It also amuses me that not a single one of these self entitled people posting on this thread seems to realize why the enclosure rule is in the game (Ill give you a hint its not so you can make use of land that is not deed, it is to protect newbies).

 

"The perimeter surrounding a settlement on all sides is purely to stop non-citizens from building or founding their own settlement - there are no other restrictions. You do not own and control the perimeter in the same way as the main settlement. On PvP servers kingdom guards will hunt enemies within the perimeter."

[ScarfaceRo 79]

Personally As mentioned a ton of times by me in other post and again by others in this post Wurm is to expensive as a mmo. In order to enjoy Wurm and full experience you need to own a premium account and a deed. A 5x5 or even a 10x10 is way to small cause the land chunks are way to big in scale. Tiles have item limits and for one to have a nice house and a farm with a animal pin and optional dock or mine if available on said land you need more than what people suggest which is why Enclosures are bigger than what Rolf intended them to be to begin with.

I want someone to show me a 5x5 or a 10x10 and squeeze all this on it. I want to see BSB's, FSB's, Animals, Wagon, Cart's, Fenced in yard to hold 4 horse's "min for pulling a wagon", 1 Cow and Bull and there pin, Forge, Oven, Sewing Table, Chest, Coffin, Bed, Table and chairs, Couple of barrels, and a fenced in Farm for crops.

You'll people are clearly not thinking about all the items in wurm. I didn't even add on this list a mine or a dock and a boat or to or other animals like deer and chickens or pigs yet you'll want to claim 5x5 or a 10x10 is plenty.?

Do you realize there are small tricks to maximize efficiency, right?

- More than one BSB can be fitted on a tile by planting it; four of them arranged symetrically even look really nice

- Horses can live very well in the farming area since they graze over crops; many people even say that this look better that steppe

- A house can have more than one level; nothing prevents one from having the workshop at the first floor, the guest rooms at the second level and the private rooms on third level - even reminds me of a lot of RL shops where the owner lives on the second floor

- Trees can easily be placed on a (now) non-legal enclosure on perimeter; really doubt anyone will destroy a petimeter fence just to cut your trees

- Another storage area and smithing area can easily be arranged in the mine

- A much cooler and space efficient solution to docks would be a boat cave

A deed doesn't have to be huge to be sufficient; even a small one can provide anything one needs for being self sufficient if it is used efficient. I planned my 23*23 in such a way that I even have extra space for beautification like a small barbecue area and spave for a few decorative trees here snd there.

Would be nice to afford a bigger one? Sure. But, if not, even a small one would do the trick.

[Arkonick 557]

ScarfaceRo  people are saying 5x5 and 10x10 yet you want to say it is enough and compare your 23x23 saying you had enough room on a 23x23 yes you would. I was stating on smaller than your 23x23

 

Not to mention a noob or ftp player want have the skill to build up high in stories on the house specially a FTP player the max for them would be 2 on a 20 skill cap Max 5 items a tile but this does not include objects like oven forge bsb and fsb on 1 tile.

 

People want to make there place look nice no one wants a place that looks like a hoarder and a pack rate that couldn't move.

 

If Rolf was to make 25x25 new type of Enclosures that where protected I wouldn't have a problem so long as they don't have a perimeter tied to them or a time limit.

 

But all suggestions that have been being made are suggesting a 5x5 or 10x10 which just isn't enough space with the scale of land tiles.

 

I'm sorry if people have to compact every thing so it looks like a hobo's place no one is going to be interested in wurm online and they will go else where.

 

Sad part is Xsyon for example under a ftp account they get the same land mass as a premium account just ftp has a 30 skill cap. They get to claim a chunk of land with out it costing them a dime even premium don't have to pay out of pocket for it. Premium is just paying to unlock there skill cap and it's only 9.99 us non taxed. If Rolf would have not charged for land and made it like Xsyon where the only way to increase land was by adding members to your village then all of this could be avoided.

But this never happen there was a sub fee and a land purchase fee on top a monthly fee. There was also the option to play a perm free play and stake a claim of land.

 

Now people can argue with this statement all they want. "You was suppose to only stake a small claim of land", The size is in the eye of the beholder when there is no set limit.
 

Edited April 6, 2014 by Arkonick

[fatboy 448]

yup, after reading all these comments, this ones not gonna end well. *grabs pop corn and waits for the lynching*

[ScarfaceRo 79]

ScarfaceRo people are saying 5x5 and 10x10 yet you want to say it is enough and compare your 23x23 saying you had enough room on a 23x23 yes you would. I was stating on smaller than your 23x23

[spellcast 983]

actually scarface, some people are talking about 5x5 actual tiles, not radius, and I personally agree that that is too small.

 

On the other hand, 11x11 is 121 tiles, and that is enough for the intended use of the enclosure IMO, giving a new player a chance to experience the basics of what wurm living is about IMO. I used that amount in my suggestion back on page 6 or something because it is the same as a minimum size deed and would allow easy upgrading to a paid deed at a later date if desired.

 

for that matter however i would not have an issue with it being 21x21, or 31x31 as long as its enforced by game mechanics that dont cause the confusion to players that the current rule does when someone breaks in. It should have some restrictions to keep players from using a bunch of free alt accounts to hog a lot of land as well, but the size of a single plot isnt that big a deal if enough can agree that it isnt too large.

 

There is plenty of space in wurm, and rolf is adding a new server so more land is coming. (Indy has 4000 x 4000 tiles, or 16,000,000 tiles, of which roughly half can be used, but thats still 8 million tiles of useful land, or over 8,500 30x30 plots. deli, celebration, exodus, pristine and release are all 1/4 of that size. so all told around 20,000 plots not counting the additional 8500 on chaos or 7000ish on epic, where you want a deed and a group anyhow, since "legal enclosure" has no meaning there.

 

that doesn't even count the new server, however big it ends up being.

[Aum 771]

i have always seen the perimeter as a buffer zone for passage, not to be fenced off

 

i think there should only be a minimum of 1 tile perimeter for each deed.

 

you cannot build fences or houses on it, only terraform and pave it, it is a right of passage

 

you can grab more perimeter but can't build on it until you actually expand the deed

 

currently with the rules, there is so much impassable lands due to fenced perimeters meeting up with each other or other enclosures, this should have never been possible.

 

but with this you would always have a way through and since you cant do anything else with it that's where the highways would end up.