Page 1 of 1
less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Fri Apr 04, 2014 7:47 pmby bocage
It is my understanding that the port puts you some radius out from providence. This would make a semi-circle around providence. It seems too narrow a set of possible locations. I see a lot of claims next to each other and it seems this area is well scouted by raiders. Some of the circle seems to have been marked by pave markers. The port should put you in a location that is less predictable to other players.
Or better, let the user pick the radius. Given a range, not too close to providence and not too close to darkness, but let us pick when we jump whether we want to start out closer to providence, closer to darkness, or in the middle.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:07 amby pistolshrimp
You know how in the movies the local guide brings you only so far and then says, "This is as far as I go, you're on your own from here" and then leaves? In the movies that guy doesn't stop when the guide leaves, he continues on. It is the same in Salem -- you don't build camp where the guide drops you off, you continue on.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:37 pmby monkeybee11
unless by the very slight chance he drops u off at a nice spot o3o
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Mon Apr 07, 2014 11:22 pmby pistolshrimp
monkeybee11 wrote:unless by the very slight chance he drops u off at a nice spot o3o
This is a the bigfoot of Salem. There is a very finely written code which picks out the worst possible location to drop you off. If you actually landed in a good spot I'd say you discovered a bug and should probably report it.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Sun May 11, 2014 2:32 pmby LampostSamurai
pistolshrimp wrote:monkeybee11 wrote:unless by the very slight chance he drops u off at a nice spot o3o
This is a the bigfoot of Salem. There is a very finely written code which picks out the worst possible location to drop you off. If you actually landed in a good spot I'd say you discovered a bug and should probably report it.
It wouldn't get fixed anyway. The devs have abandoned salem.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Sun May 11, 2014 10:10 pmby Dallane
LampostSamurai wrote:pistolshrimp wrote:monkeybee11 wrote:unless by the very slight chance he drops u off at a nice spot o3o
This is a the bigfoot of Salem. There is a very finely written code which picks out the worst possible location to drop you off. If you actually landed in a good spot I'd say you discovered a bug and should probably report it.
It wouldn't get fixed anyway. The devs have abandoned salem.
No they haven't
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Mon May 12, 2014 2:33 amby Mereni
Well, the wilderness port isn't really meant to put you in a place where you should live. It's meant to put you where you are safely out of Boston and the people who will kill you when you leave it.
You stay at your port leanto for a few hours, or maybe a few days if you're not in a hurry, getting some skills and humoring up on foraged foods. Really easy. Finally, you walk away. Head further from Boston, explore around, zigzag, learn to make leantos and do so as you journey. Nothing wrong with wandering for days or weeks before you settls. Find a spot that is a couple hours out that speaks to you and settle there.
Do not settle where the porter put you.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Mon May 12, 2014 4:10 amby LampostSamurai
Dallane wrote:LampostSamurai wrote:
It wouldn't get fixed anyway. The devs have abandoned salem.
No they haven't
Ah?
Jorb wrote:The games are not equivalent from an economic standpoint. We originally began working on Salem -- setting Haven & Hearth aside -- for monetary reasons that no longer are. While we receive the majority of the income that Salem generates (a humble amount), it still remains the case that the game is not entirely ours, but a joint venture with Paradox, unlike Haven. Ceteris paribus our incentives are, naturally, to prioritize our own development. This has always been the case, and our shifting priorities have always simply reflected underlying economics. It is not the case that we prioritize one game over the other just because ***** it, and nor do I believe it an accurate description that our decisions are fickle.
Or
Jorb wrote: Simply maintaining the game is not much of an effort, however, so we are in no immediate rush to get out of the project either. If some kind patrician came along wanting to offer all parties considered due compensation for the game then perhaps there could be room for deliberations on such a matter, but until that situation actually materializes I do not see much recourse other than our keeping keeping on.
To the extent that it is possible you might perhaps consider simply enjoying the game for what it is.
Hell, that whole "Jorb where art thou..." thread paints an... unflattering of the developer's interest in continuing the game.
Re: less predictable wilderness port
Posted:
Mon May 12, 2014 1:59 pmby Dallane
LampostSamurai wrote:Hell, that whole "Jorb where art thou..." thread paints an... unflattering of the developer's interest in continuing the game.
No where did they say they are abandoning the game. They are doing like they have in the past with switching between the 2 games. Fortunately there is more interest in hnh.