Content deny strategy

[MightySheep]

Friendly reminder that it's 2026 and there exist no less than a dozen better ways to aggregate and discuss ideas other than a forum using technology that was created when I was 9. Perhaps there was a reason Hammerting made you create a discord account jorb? Hm?

ah yes jorb go to the circlejerk gatekeep discord where the mods made it so all new accounts need their approval before being allowed to join, that should definitely be your only source of opinions

although you may find that all the opinions sound very similar

[SnuggleSnail]

1. 7 year old screenshoot
2. u know we joke about all kinds of things on the discord
3. imo ddosing someone is lowkey less gay than manipulating devs into making the game suit you more even tho you know you make the game itself worse for everyone else
4. you’d 100000% intentionally crash someone to kill them, hows that different from ddosing really

1. the last time I was caught abusing a bug was a similar amount of time ago
2. it was not a joke and anybody involved would confirm
3. ?
4. I literally reported a vanilla crash bug that was insanely abuseable in W15

You're exhibiting the unsportsmanlike behavior you're accusing me of by tacitly agreeing with jorb's most retarded ban ever just because it benefits you tbh

[Dawidio123]

*Looks into the camera again*

[springyb]

It was good while it lasted I suppose

[DonVelD]

i want to be in the screenshot

[loleznub]

Friendly reminder that it's 2026 and there exist no less than a dozen better ways to aggregate and discuss ideas other than a forum using technology that was created when I was 9. Perhaps there was a reason Hammerting made you create a discord account jorb? Hm?

ah yes jorb go to the circlejerk gatekeep discord where the mods made it so all new accounts need their approval before being allowed to join, that should definitely be your only source of opinions

although you may find that all the opinions sound very similar

The best part of the 'official discord' is that it's literally ran by actual, Grade A, Freerange, retards, that don't understand the game. Without this singular platform for them to jerk each other off on, they wouldn't have the confidence or feeling of self-importance to do much IRL so let's not bash them too much

[DonVelD]

who r u again??

[axus]

@Jorb obviously you should make Loftar implement polling in the vanilla client. Like that Minecraft April Fools snapshot where the players could vote on rule changes. Verified users could get 3/5 of a vote.

I'd vote to keep Rage-less safe-palis, maybe give some indication of who is rageless when you're in combat

[Whisper]

It's obscenely retarded ... when safepalis/thicket/skiis/sleds/sleighs/rageless fighters/steel locks are in the game

Bruv, I built this game, clearly my 'tard levels — the original "free serum testosterone levels" — are masculinely high.

... but let's drill into these a bit.

• Rageless fighters/Safepalis: I guess the point here is that we dislike the Rage change from 16.1, and fair enough, it was meant as experimental. I don't quite like the distinction between visitor gates and non-visitor gates, and should like to see that removed. Should we, quite simply, make all gates visitor gates, without further qualifiers? Is there no case to be made for a sprucecap protection program, and no conceivable, good, mechanic, by which noobs can be eased into the game? I love that the predatory gameplay exists, and consider it a core feature, but I feel that I struggle a bit to maintain a healthy eco-system. Tragedy of the commons and such! "If I don't kill this sprucecap, someone else will"! To be sure, alts being useful is also a problem, so new characters should arguably be trivial to kill proper. You see my design problem, I trust? Help me help you!

How about allowing the rageless fighters but up to a certain amount of skill/stat points.As an example, not allowing stats to go above 100 (probably a lower number) without buying rage. That way new people would have some safety while people who are willing to strive for more power in the game need to have the responsibility of engaging with the pvp system. I think it would be a decent middle point as there is no point in bullying sprucecaps that got q10 skins drying.

[FaithfulToadd]

How about allowing the rageless fighters but up to a certain amount of skill/stat points.As an example, not allowing stats to go above 100 (probably a lower number) without buying rage.

I'm not sure I like the idea of not being allowed to advance without opting into the PvP grief-fest. I say this in the context of all gates being visitor gates in W16.1. It seems gross to prevent someone who has invested a lot in their character from entering their base. In World 16, you at least had the option to make a base with no visitor gates.

Perhaps some solution with Rage characters always dealing higher grievous damage; or, higher damage to other hearthlings; or, higher damage, period, (in addition to the higher grievous damage granted by a murderous rage), would suffice? I picture this as an incentive for fighters to learn rage to better defend an objective (They won't be on par with rage fighters if they don't take it). This would allow PvE 'fighters' with competitive stats to defend themselves (close openings), rather than try to K.O. their pursuer, and thus remain on even footing as far as escape is concerned.

I wouldn't mind more differentiation between PvE hunters and PvP soldiers; again, it'd be dumb if I were locked out of PvE content because I don't want to engage in PvP. The game would become a 'trial version' while you don't have rage. Yuck!