Suggested changes to enclosure and highway rules

[NeeNee 840]

Frankly at this point, there is no point.

 

 

GM said, they don't wanna deal with this crap anymore, sounds to me like well, honestly and no offense to the GM team, laziness or lack of intrest in being GM's and dealing with the responsibilities that come with being a GM, fine, find someone else willing to take the work load.

 

Everyone talks about enclosure rules being a 'Grey Area'  bs, its posted on the page for anyone to read and for reference.  http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/7-game-rules/

 

 

No where does it say How little or How big that enclosure can be.

Funny enough, GMs still DO see this as 'grey' (no idea why) and have at least in one case allowed the bashing to go unpunished. I don't know if it is lack of interest, but almost all the GMs I have dealt with have been great, but there are clearly some who don't understand or care to enforce the rules (such as they are from day to day).

 

I agree about disabling bashing off deed. If you need to build a highway, or get stuck in an enclosure (pretty common), call a GM. No other bashing allowed.

[Makarus 458]

Someone clarify, are the enclosure protects being taken out completely or are the little newbies still safe?

If someone goes bash happy, is there a punishment still in place for such an action?

 

Can an outlaw system be installed on freedom cluster so the bashers can be hunted by hordes of newbies seeking revenge?

[Kegan 3925]

Someone clarify, are the enclosure protects being taken out completely or are the little newbies still safe?

If someone goes bash happy, is there a punishment still in place for such an action?

 

Can an outlaw system be installed on freedom cluster so the bashers can be hunted by hordes of newbies seeking revenge?

Until you see a rule change post then it is still in place and it has not been changed yet.

[enoofu 206]

Someone clarify, are the enclosure protects being taken out completely or are the little newbies still safe?

If someone goes bash happy, is there a punishment still in place for such an action?

 

Can an outlaw system be installed on freedom cluster so the bashers can be hunted by hordes of newbies seeking revenge?

From what I understand they want to prevent newbie bashing from happening in the first place till they are settle in

[Audrel 2223]

Someone clarify, are the enclosure protects being taken out completely or are the little newbies still safe?

If someone goes bash happy, is there a punishment still in place for such an action?

 

Can an outlaw system be installed on freedom cluster so the bashers can be hunted by hordes of newbies seeking revenge?

Edited April 8, 2014 by Audrel

[rosedragon 2282]

This is going to cause to much problems Chaos will come and raid freedom server's so I will suggest this at this point.

 

If this happens all the freedom cluster of PVE needs to all coordinate and go over to chaos in packs of 500+ people and slaughter and rob every place we can find to teach them all a lesson.

Good riddance. 

[thirtynine 257]

Before I get into the half baked scheme I've come up with I'd like to give a +1 to removing the broken enclosure rules.

 

If we agree that noobs need some level of basic security to get their feet wet then the current enclosure system needs to go. But maybe we can still use the notion that a enclosure is a "fenced in area that surrounds or incorporates a completed building". 

 

Simply (or maybe its tough to code, IDK) give off deed buildings an enclosure aura for some number of tiles around them, lets say five tiles. 

 

So a player constructs a building and then all the five tiles around that building would be tagged in some way as being in the sphere of influence of said building, this would enable any fences on those tiles to be protected from bashing. The effected tiles need not offer any other benefits or protections.

 

Of course a player could make multiple buildings near to each other and link up their un-bashable fences but they would have to build a shack every eleven tiles under my scheme. Or better yet make it so that that enclosure auras cant overlap or abut one another. That would leave a one tile unprotected gap between protected enclosures effectively preventing land hogging.

 

If the idea of non overlapping auras wont work then make it so that those players attempting to commandeer large tracts of land would have to maintain a whole lot of buildings, which might deter some of them. Why not  increase the decay rate on buildings?  Make those land hogs who do try and game the system have to spend their lives repairing shacks.

 

Or maybe make off deed building un-repairable and have a 30 day max lifespan, a land hog would have to rebuild his massive enclosure every 30 days. When we are talking about real noobs i don't think that rebuilding a small house every thirty days is a huge burden, the legitimate noobs of wurm would only have spend an hour or so a month to rebuild their little shacks.

 

I know some people will still not be happy with the possibility of land grabbers under this scheme but as for helping our new players it seems to me this would be a super easy solution to code and police. What say you?!?!?!?!

Edited April 8, 2014 by thirtynine

[Gollum 30]

so the non-bashing only applies to finished houses I hope, would hate to see a series of 1x9's with 1 finished wall, in order to make a big doughnut shaped area that is fully enclosed with non-bashable fences that could easily be bigger than some deeds fully free, and only having to maintain like 8 walls?

[thirtynine 257]

 

 

so the non-bashing only applies to finished houses I hope, would hate to see a series of 1x9's with 1 finished wall, in order to make a big doughnut shaped area that is fully enclosed with non-bashable fences that could easily be bigger than some deeds fully free, and only having to maintain like 8 walls?

Edited April 8, 2014 by thirtynine

[atazs 928]

This is going to cause to much problems Chaos will come and raid freedom server's so I will suggest this at this point.

 

If this happens all the freedom cluster of PVE needs to all coordinate and go over to chaos in packs of 500+ people and slaughter and rob every place we can find to teach them all a lesson.

[rosedragon 2282]

If the idea of non overlapping auras wont work then make it so that those players attempting to commandeer large tracts of land would have to maintain a whole lot of buildings, which might deter some of them. Why not  increase the decay rate on buildings?  Make those land hogs who do try and game the system have to spend their lives repairing shacks.

 

newbies shack decay fast.. it gone in less than a month. However... veterans shack can last forever. I have 50ql stone house off deed that have been around for almost two years without being repaired at all. Honestly the removal of enclosure rule won't affect much those who can make 70ql+ walls, except when they are targeted by people that hate them so much.

[enoofu 206]

I believe thirtynine

wants to cap the fences lifetime, which is a good idea and make them small and non attached to other enclosurers so people are able to go around them

 

Which are good ideas

Edited April 8, 2014 by enoofu

[thirtynine 257]

 

 

... veterans shack can last forever. I have 50ql stone house off deed that have been around for almost two years without being repaired at all.

 

Exactly, that's why the off deed decay rate should be greatly increased or totally normalized to something like one month. 

 

 

If the idea of non overlapping auras wont work then make it so that those players attempting to commandeer large tracts of land would have to maintain a whole lot of buildings, which might deter some of them. Why not  increase the decay rate on buildings?  Make those land hogs who do try and game the system have to spend their lives repairing shacks.

 

Or maybe make off deed building un-repairable and have a 30 day max lifespan, a land hog would have to rebuild his massive enclosure every 30 days. When we are talking about real noobs i don't think that rebuilding a small house every thirty days is a huge burden, the legitimate noobs of wurm would only have spend an hour or so a month to rebuild their little shacks.

[thirtynine 257]

 

I believe thirtynine

wants to cap the fences lifetime, which is a good idea and make them small and non attached to other enclosurers so people are able to go around them

 

Which are good ideas 

 

Not quite.

 

I want to cap the lifetime of the buildings that offer the fences their protection. Once the building and its aura are gone any fences left behind will become instantly bash-able. Perhaps not a complete cap but maybe just a increased decay rate so that you cant construct a building and forget it about it for 6 months, a year or even longer. Though i guess fence decay rates should probably be subject to roughly the same rate as off deed buildings. 

Edited April 8, 2014 by thirtynine

[Phyban 0]

First, thanks Rolf for asking for our input. Thinking about solutions is almost as fun as wurm itself.

 

From the FCC. 'If your actions will actively and negatively affect someone else's gameplay, DO NOT DO IT.'

 

Basically, don't take something that isn't yours. Don't destroy something that isn't yours. Don't build where someone else is building.

 

kinda long. very random. apologies for poor grammar and structure in advance.(for the record, I did read ALL the other posts)

 

Proposals.

- Item/structure ownership. The first person to start to create an object/structure owns it. 

S/he can set the usage permissions to only self/friends/villagers/everyone. 

Someone without permissions can not pick it up(exceptions later).

Items with decay over a certain amount (70?) may be picked up by anyone and repaired(salvaged) to become the new owner.

Structures may not be bashed with less than 70 damage. (eg. the catapult is ineffective against the fence).

This means abandoned chests, etc can not be loaded until they are salvageable.

Carts may not be dragged by anyone but the owner until they decay. (unless of course you own the land).

 

- land ownership. Add option to writs,deeds to purchase land protection. similar to deed protection.

(for settlements the protection would start in the free perimeter). 

no pickup, no build, no destroy, no farm, no dig, no drop, etc. start from building and right click to add ownership for adjacent tiles.

same price as perimeter. (50i initial, 5i/month drawn from writ holders bank account.)

Owning a tile allows you to pick up things that aren't yours and bash adjacent structures(if you own the other side too or the other side is free).

Instead of disbanding when banks runs dry, foreclose and have a bank auction.

Abandoned buildings (no usage for 1 month?) might also be put up for auction.

Sealed bids for a week. Highest bidder wins. check at token for list of foreclosures and locations.

deed foreclosure sales might be fun too.

doors become temporarily unlocked, but other protections remain during length of auction.

owning both sides of a fence, protects from bashing until it decays.

Land ownership eliminates the need for fences to protect things. 

Still need fences to keep animals in/out and to keep crops from being trodden.

Similar method for mine ownership starting from mine door.

I imagine the legal enclosure rule came about as a way for people without a lot of money to get a safe place to stay. 

But since last year, you are able to sell to tokens, etc, anyone can relatively quickly get enough to purchase a few tiles. 

If you don't want people attaching fences to your structures, surround everything by a layer of owned tiles.

If you don't mind attaching fences, just do the internal tiles.

Doesn't have to be rectilinear.

 

- perimeter rule changes. current perimeter rules prevent non citizen repairs. 

This proposal is to change this to only the deed holder is allowed to add land protection in the perimeter.

Protection already purchased by non citizens would remain, allowing that person to continue to repair and build within the perimeter, but not expand.

Noone would be forced off their purchased and taxed land.

 

- Animals. Animals that are being cared for may not be led or tamed.

However, if the caregiver hasn't right clicked on the animal for a certain amount of time (2 weeks), you will be given the option to start caring for the animal. 

(XXX was caring for this animal, but it looks abandoned, do you wish to look after it?)

 

- highways. any road may be designated as a highway. each designation costs money (50i?). 

On perimeter or on deed designations, the money goes to deed owner. otherwise goes to king.

Off deed highways, maybe 1i returns to builder per day (within limit) if highway was used? 

existing highways deeded over cannot be removed/blocked. (subtracted from deed cost?)

templars ignore kos on highways (unless provoked). highways created after deed placement may be changed by deed owner.

maybe highways have white side tiles? Unused/low usage highways return to roads.

maybe a change in side tile color to indicate low usage immentent reversion to road.

Off deed highways may not be changed/blocked (not possible to remove or build across.). must wait until revert to road.

land ownership of highways not permitted. cannot create highway on owned land.

however roads maybe owned (and thereby protected).

 

Looking forward to jumping and flying, especially flying (may even go premium just for that).

as long as the land is owned, others won't be able to do anything, anyway.

 

Oh, allow us to pick locks on salvagable items(70+ damage) without penalty. maybe sunken boats too(remember for salvaged items owner is replaced .

 

Phyban

[Mordraug 2524]

By and by .. Rolf... if your friends login to your game to grief and lose you customers, then pressure you for rule and mechanics changes that will make you lose even more customers.......... are they really your friends?

[belthize 438]

By and by .. Rolf... if your friends login to your game to grief and lose you customers, then pressure you for rule and mechanics changes that will make you lose even more customers.......... are they really your friends?

 

Give it a rest already.  I swear you guys can get so spun up and start believing your own speculative strawmen.  Wurm had no enclosure rule for a lot longer than it had one.  The same doom and gloom predictions happen every 6 to 12 months whenever some change is suggested.  At worst getting rid of it might create a new set of problems for GMs but I seriously doubt it will create more than they already face, they'll just be different.    It's definitely not some secret malicious plot either way.

 

If you have objective ideas or issues great but let the rampant subjective speculation have a few days off, it's getting tired and looking a bit thin.

[Shidoni 84]

Give it a rest already.  I swear you guys can get so spun up and start believing your own speculative strawmen.  Wurm had no enclosure rule for a lot longer than it had one.  The same doom and gloom predictions happen every 6 to 12 months whenever some change is suggested.  At worst getting rid of it might create a new set of problems for GMs but I seriously doubt it will create more than they already face, they'll just be different.    It's definitely not some secret malicious plot either way.

 

If you have objective ideas or issues great but let the rampant subjective speculation have a few days off, it's getting tired and looking a bit thin.

I'm holding off on determining whether or not the sky is, in fact, falling.  If the GMs who replied to this thread are correct, then I'm all for it.  I still stand by my comment that it's laughable to expect your customers to come up with a "codable" solution for you, but whatever.  If, however, it goes the way Rolf himself has worded (which is why everyone is freaking out), I will be most displeased.

[Mordraug 2524]

Basic business: corporate image.

 

Opening this thread this shortly after the MR-Sparta incident went public, then letting this thread go on without any form of official reply to address the more than obvious concerns among the customer base............... 

 

Faith is for the religious, and to my knowledge, in the beginning, no one from Wurm created the heavens and the earth.

[KunAlt 844]

I'm holding off on determining whether or not the sky is, in fact, falling.  If the GMs who replied to this thread are correct, then I'm all for it.  I still stand by my comment that it's laughable to expect your customers to come up with a "codable" solution for you, but whatever.  If, however, it goes the way Rolf himself has worded (which is why everyone is freaking out), I will be most displeased.

[Shidoni 84]

Tbh we should be more than happy with devs asking our opinions to solve something as important for gameplay as this, in most games (and even in this one some times) you just have to face rule changes and choose to swalow or choke.

Opinions, yes, great, awesome.  Codable solutions?  Not my job.  If he comes back with a list of possibilities and wants my opinions, I'll give them.  So far all I see is people trying to come up with things that we have no idea if are feasible or as "easy" as Rolf wants because we didn't develop the game and aren't programmers.

If you ask me if red or blue looks better for your website, that's a reasonable question for a customer.  If you want viable solutions to your CSS errors, hire someone.

Otherwise it turns into 25 pages of this while we get absolutely no response from the person who started it to even guide our suggestions.

[Mykael 15]

Give it a rest already.  I swear you guys can get so spun up and start believing your own speculative strawmen.  Wurm had no enclosure rule for a lot longer than it had one.  The same doom and gloom predictions happen every 6 to 12 months whenever some change is suggested.  At worst getting rid of it might create a new set of problems for GMs but I seriously doubt it will create more than they already face, they'll just be different.    It's definitely not some secret malicious plot either way.

 

If you have objective ideas or issues great but let the rampant subjective speculation have a few days off, it's getting tired and looking a bit thin.

 

What is there to speculate? Whatever.. if the GM team can't handle the current situation, what makes you think they can handle other additional problems after the fact? The whole point is to try and reduce their workload, not maintain their current workload.

 

 

Hi,

 

as you may be aware, the GM team tries to enforce enclosure and highway rules on the Freedom servers. Apparently these often cause pretty bad situations that only cause grief and mudslinging to all parties involved.

 

The reason that the enclosure rule emerged was to help newbies settle in. The rule is however used in other ways today which is unintended and it causes lots of unintended work for our volunteer GM team.

 

The reason for removing the highway rule is the same - unmanageable and inconsistent GM situation. 

 

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. (**"good ideas floating around" is NOT asking for a solution**)

 

If you come up with a manageable and codable solution that makes it possible to protect highways in a better way by players do say. The solution should of course make it possible to remove the protection since it shouldn't be possible to turn someone's surroundings into an irreversible parking lot.

 

Cheers,

 

Rolf

 

 

He's not asking for a solution for enclosures.. that decision has already been made. He's asking for a solution about the highways lol.

 

Let's not forget the new addition to the team...

 

Wurm gets reinforcements

Consultant Mattias Jansson (No, he is not related to Rolf) has been helping out with our graphics engine.

He is now going to start working full time from 7th of April beginning with client performance.

Mattias is highly talented and his latest endeavor was working on developing the frostbite engine for Battlefield 4.

So we can expect some pretty great additions to performance and graphics coming up.

 

 

Speculate to your hearts desire.. but the fact is, as others have already said, he's doing what he wants..

 

It sure looks like a money gimmick at the expense of loyal, paying customers (those who purchase premium) who make use of "legal enclosures".. My points are based on facts, these facts are straight from the source so I don't know what you think the speculation is. Once these rules are removed, a lot of good people will be griefed as a response.. including people who use their perimeter as part of their deed enclosure. Whether it was intended or not, this is what's happened. I don't mean a bunch of new players will run rampant with planks banging on fences either.. I'm talking about the vets who have clepto tendencies and simply want what others have. This change is a huge game changer that will allow all off-deed griefing (perimeter or not). Matter of fact.. with this change.. there's no such thing as "griefing" anymore..

 

I will not do their job for them, either they make a good decision or a bad one.. We are the judges since their paycheck comes from all of us. I'm simply trying to keep you informed, I'm not trying to bash anyone or their views on the subject.. it is what it is.

 

[Shiraek 404]

See, as a game designer I would've made all objects in the game have a String for ownership, so even if it wasn't used for some things right away, later on it could be.  Would have prevented this problem..

 

Better yet a large integer ID

[Shiraek 404]

 

At this point even if Rolf is reading this, there is only One solution

 

REMOVE OFF DEED BASHING

 

This will just make fences the ultimate griefing tool and make tons more GM petitions to remove griefer fences

[Seara 686]

At this point even if Rolf is reading this, there is only One solution

REMOVE OFF DEED BASHING

This will just make fences the ultimate griefing tool and make tons more GM petitions to remove griefer fences

This falls under "Be careful what you wish for."