Jorb, why can we modify our road systems?

[jorb]

I might as well ask: So I am dumb because we haven't done everything we ever plan to do?

It's not a half-ass placeholder. It works just fine. Travel weariness is entirely optional to the core functionality which is travel.

How did you, again, expect roads to be defined, if not as a sequence of points?

[painhertz]

Roads are areas that are either cleared or paved allowing unimpeded travel that is faster "because" of the lack of impediments and generally evened out lengths..... You can have a series of points ON a road but a road isn't and never will be defined "as" a series of points unless you have a GPS wired into your brain..... In short, when you described (Teleporting along roads) prior to the release of the game I pictured great amounts of work going into the ability to fast travel along paths created and upkept by people in game. In other words, they would have intrinsic value because of the amount of work needed to advance them that extra mile or two. I still say a speed multiplier of 2x along actual paved roads/paths would be infinitely more elegant a solution but not being a programmer I have no clue how much harder that would be to do. That being said, the current implementation of "roads" just annoys the holy hell out of me so there's no real need to engage me in discussion about it, it's just a pet peeve.

Anywhere i need to go i'm boating, riding or just plain ole hoofing it......

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

Teleportation along roads take the quality of the underlying tiles into consideration when determining (the as of yet unimplemented) travel weariness. The intention is that the makeup of the road will matter.

How did you expect a road to be defined if not as a sequence of points?

Dumbest. Painhertz. Ever.

So I'm dumb because you haven't coded the part that requires an actual "road" to be built? I think not. I can't speak for anyone else but I'd prefer fully implemented systems rather than half ass placeholders that give the wrong impression.... Derp.

I think Painhertz is being perhaps a bit uncharitable, but I too imagined that you would need to actually build a functional road, not just put trail-signs down. Having the above combined with trail-signs would also make a significant amount of sense.

Going back to a comment made about hearthfires, is there a particular reason that roads signs are corporeal in nature? Surely you could have them be both non-corporeal and able to be 'destroyed'? This seems to be the case wit hearth-fires, and solves a great many problems with building roads that are (Insert preferred method of transportation type)-viable.

[user20158301]

Ok, so I haven't derped much with roads since we implemented them, but I played around a bit on the dev server just now. Here's what I've got.

Build primary roadsign A
Extend Roadsign B
Extend Roadsign C
Extend Roadsign D
Destroy Roadsign C

If roadsign B is within range of roadsign D, I can now take "Connect" on roadsign B, get scroll, click roadsign D, and they are now connected.

If roadsign B is not within range of Roadsign D, I instead extend from Roadsign B to create a new Roadsign C, take "Connect" on the new Roadsign C, get scroll, and click Roadsign D, and they are now connected. As verification of this, the option to extend from Roadsign C is no longer available, and Roadsign D now has travel and further extend options, where before it was mute and unconnected.

Working as intended. How does this differ from what you are experiencing?

I tried again, it seems that I can only connect roadsign D to roadsign C in this case, if I use connect of roadsign C and click roadsign D nothing happened. Weird.

[GenghisKhan44]

Even better question, how can it be a "road sign" when there is no fucking road? Dumbest. mechanic. EVAR.

Historically the road came after the markers laying it out. Granted, the "markers" were usually physical landmarks like mountains, rivers, towns, and weird looking things. But it's only after you know the way that you do go and make da tracks.

Makes sense to me. Although, jorbtar, it would be nice if, by walking over an area more and more often - especially if it is on a trail - we could "stamp it to dirt" without artificially landscaping.

[Yasgur]

Although, jorbtar, it would be nice if, by walking over an area more and more often - especially if it is on a trail - we could "stamp it to dirt" without artificially landscaping.

This

[jorb]

Although, jorbtar, it would be nice if, by walking over an area more and more often - especially if it is on a trail - we could "stamp it to dirt" without artificially landscaping.

Yes, yes it would.