Okay, Shockedfrog, We Can Take The Trees But...

[Dwarfu]

Yes, I actually do agree. In particular, I think it would be reasonable to be able to recognize kin immediately, for exactly the reason you describe. The problem is mainly in determining just how to actually display it. I, for one, don't really want to litter the game view with a lot of GUI-like stuff, since I think that would diminish the immersion. Maybe a tooltip could be acceptable. I'm not really sure.

A hover-over tooltip would be great - that way we get the info we need without it destroying the immersion or cluttering the UI. However you implement it, be it smileys or color coding or whathaveyou, its about getting character-known info to the player.

[Blaze]

Can I participate in the steel race? I've only got one crucible and already used the steel to create a soldier's sword though.

Anywho, we can expect even more rear-ends-in-top-hats as time passes and the game becomes more popular. You guys just had the unfortunate distinction of being the first ones to get hit. I suppose this means you'll need to think of creative ways to protect your property.

While I do believe that what shockedfrog did was far below the belt, personally, if I did it; I'd take the iron too :p. The game doesn't stop you from making multiple characters, indeed it allows you to do so on a single account, unlike most games. This is similar to "rushes" used in some strategy games, where the tactic is frowned upon, but it isn't against the rules of the game. He can take whatever action he wants, providing he has the ability (and guts for that matter, I wouldn't want to get on the bad side of B12's SRS Biznis.). And you're perfectly justified for wanting to gelb him and remove every trace of his existance off the face of the Hearth. Awesome game is awesome, wouldn't you agree?

I suggest setting up a claim far away from your location, build a crucible partially obscured by trees, and only make visits to it at night. I even keep a decoy crucible on my property that is always lit, but doesn't have anything in it.

Edit: Oh, why not implement "Player Trophies" where you can take the bodies' of killed characters and use them to make a totem, which can be placed to give an area-of-effect happiness and stamina recovery boost?

[Laremere]

I think this shows that we need village claiming, or at least an allow list with current property, so that others can fuel it, while still preventing people without stealing to do anything.

Also, as extinguishing has been brought up, it'd be nice to actually be able to do that, so that charcoal can be saved if the smelter is done smelting, but there is still fuel left.

[shockedfrog]

I try to avoid bloodshed, though I think if it comes to it I could probably pick off a few of you here and there, one way or another. This brings back more flashbacks of RPG World Online, where it was possible to burn people by giving them lit campfires.

Loftar, thanks for the post that sums up why the whole thing is so complicated, and allays my fear that I've been so caught up in my own little world that the way I've been seeing the future development of the game was nothing more than a fantasy.

Oh, and I think there were 14 crucibles. I took the iron from 7 (all my inventory could take) and just dropped the coal from the rest.

I was going to write something biggish here on the subject of a friend/villager ID system, but I think it's probably better moved to a Critique topic.

[Blaze]

I think this shows that we need village claiming, or at least an allow list with current property, so that others can fuel it, while still preventing people without stealing to do anything.

Also, as extinguishing has been brought up, it'd be nice to actually be able to do that, so that charcoal can be saved if the smelter is done smelting, but there is still fuel left.

How about a "village board" where members of a village can add their names to a list which would allow them to go on each other's claims without damage? You can set a "village elder" who would have the ability to accept additional members and kick existing ones out. Also, you can set it up so that non-members would appear differently (toggleable hopefully).

I already brought up fuel conservation in a previous thread, I suppose they'll implement that once ovens get their re-implementation.

Edit: By the by, I'm curious to know what was on that runestone you left behind. Could someone inform me, hopefully without breaking any rules on strong language that this forum has?

[WorkerDrone]

He didn't say anything overtly explicit.

I just don't want the bastard communicating at all with pronounced enemies. At this point the white flag has been trampled, and the fool must die.

I still don't want to bother chasing him down, but he's no longer welcomed among us, and any allies to us should take the same stance. This man is a sociopathic ass who will do all in his power to better himself and crush those weaker then himself.

I'm thinking about proposing a Black List of sorts when villages get implemented, sort of like this billboard idea and member accepting. It would let everyone know who was an enemy of that community.

[Trafalgar]

On the subject of never banning anyone, there are problems with that. Eventually you are going to run into people who are going to think anything is a valid tactic, like shockedfrog here, except he apparently either hasn't thought REALLY BIG yet or still has some morals. For example:

Your mine could be forcefielded by an enemy.
Your crucibles could be forcefielded by an enemy.
Any of your other important buildings, stockpiles, anything else public... Why steal what you can forcefield, if you're a griefer?
Your hearth fires could be forcefielded by someone who WON'T agree to remove the forcefield. (until that bug gets fixed, anyways)
Your few remaining apple trees, if any, could be forcefielded... Are you getting the picture?

I'm not sure what mechanic there could be to prevent these things from being used against large villages, besides pre-emptive forcefielding of your own property (which is not acceptable for communal villages). Village-list-based forcefielding would work, though.

I try to avoid bloodshed, though I think if it comes to it I could probably pick off a few of you here and there, one way or another. This brings back more flashbacks of RPG World Online, where it was possible to burn people by giving them lit campfires.

At one point I built and lit a campfire in a wheat field in Brodgar, first to see if I could build one in a wheat field, and second to see if the wheat would catch on fire, which, alas, it did not (Although I didn't really expect it would). It would've been a spectacular sight if it had, though.

[shockedfrog]

Traf, with the exception of hearth fire claiming or any other kind of claiming that intentionally causes a player to get stuck, I would consider of all of those to be reasonable claims. If someone wants to protect something, they shouldn't put it on public land, which is there to be claimed. I realise at this time, controls are limited, though I do think there are current ways of making things secure on public land for those willing to put in a little effort. What's more important is to think to the future when land controls will surely be improved. I wouldn't worry too much about claims, anyway, as I think all issues with those will be sorted through coding.

I'd love to see a burning forest or village out of curiosity. However, that's one of those things that I feel, if implemented realistically, would give too much power to individuals. It could work with some kind of protection, like NPCs focused on putting fires out, and so for a fire to be effective those NPCs would need to be otherwise occupied/dead.

There will probably be a need to ban some players (like the kind who just log on, shout insults at everyone and don't actually contribute anything to the game world, except maybe as training dummies), but I definitely approve of it being a last resort. There's far too many games which have been ruined by staff deciding to ban players because it's easier than coding a system that accomodates them.

[loftar]

If someone wants to protect something, they shouldn't put it on public land, which is there to be claimed.

Actually, that is the premise we are currently working for. It doesn't work quite well right now, since land claiming is as limited as it is, but as villages and more flexible rules for claimed land come into play, I think (or hope, at least) that that will become the reasonable principle.

[RaptorJedi]

I think that at least for now, claiming someones mine is pretty cruel, since they are (or at least were) handed out like candy. And if there is anyone like me, they might have their hearth fire in a mine, which means claiming it would claim their hearth fire as well.