Simplified property fence plan

Glassius · 2019-04-06 00:17:11

I personally value OHOL for minimum magic. Exceptions are naming, Nosaj, ancient stone wall, afterkill slowdown. I hate all of them. In real world, ownership is basing on other's agreement. Jason can make easier ownership claiming, but we still have no reason to do so. In my last game as man I had a locked chest and had NOBODY to give key to it. No one was my kid.

Maybe not permantently, but magical fence would very much push me away from playing OHOL.

To be hones: why not give dogs abitility to protect ownership? Would not it be faster, more consistent and elegant?

Last edited by Glassius (2019-04-06 00:40:01)

BlueDiamondAvatar · 2019-04-06 01:01:34

a use case for property fences- Explorer tracks.

I like to explore and find distant resources, and then bring them back to town. Lately I've been figuring out the closest tarry spot, and then making a road and/or chopping a path to show Tarr or the next "Daddy Diesel" the way to oil.

If the property fence/gate system is added as currently described, I'll be laying down tracks of fence, with gaps ever two or three tiles, to help me and others get back to distant resources and/or nearby towns.

So if I lay down a bunch of property fences in the wilderness, and leave them in the non-blocking "approved property fence" state when I die, what happens next? Can someone else claim them? Can someone else claim them before I die, if I didn't come back and reset them before x minutes?

If I build a bunch of two to three tile property fences, and get them to the permanent "Property Fence" state, but never build any gates nearby, can someone else come along and add gates wherever they want?

Another way of asking this is.. if I come across property fences that someone else built, am I still able to build a gate in them? Is there anything personally identified about the property fence that keeps me from building a gate next to it?

Another Use Case - dangerous zone

There is a part of me that is looking forward to fencing off the tiles of tundra and desert biome that pop up in any town, so that people stop accidentally killing themselves by stopping to feed their babies on the desert tile. I can also imagine using it to permanently protect people from walking into bug infested jungle zones.

Does a fence have to be connected to a gate to become permanent? Will there be anything that keeps me from making a three by three circle with no gate in it? (other than other players...)

Redram · 2019-04-06 01:07:30

BlueDiamondAvatar wrote:

So if I lay down a bunch of property fences in the wilderness, and leave them in the non-blocking ...Can someone else claim them? Can someone else claim them before I die, if I didn't come back and reset them before x minutes?

Jason explained this already. The fences are not owned by anybody. They just exist. Anyone can 'repair them' when required. Once they become 'approved' they exist for 20 minutes but can be knocked down with a hatchet. After those 20 minutes, they become indestructible for 30 minutes. Then they become 'rickety' or something (still indestructible), and if nobody comes by and touches them to fix them up in another 30 minutes, they fall down. So basically once they become approved they could be there for up to 80 minutes, without any further 'touching up'. The last 60 of those 80 they will be indestructible. Only the gates are owned. Gates have no effect on fences.

I think that probably as a trail, they won't be very practical, because they probably won't be maintained. So they'll make a trail for about 80 minutes, and then probably fall down.

Last edited by Redram (2019-04-06 01:19:21)

Greep · 2019-04-06 01:09:10

Well, magic can be ironed out later, TBH. We don't even know how much this will be used. I'm sure if it's a great success a more refined, less magicky version would be settled on.

Thinking about this more, I see this feature acting less as personal/family-property and more as workstation-property. E.g., I work on a stable, or a newcomen multipurpose engine, or iron dump, and I'd give access to people I know would use it responsibly, which statistically are NOT your kids. An obvious example is getting a bunch of iron, which you bestow upon a hard working smithy who you know will use it for something useful.

Which is kind of a huge issue with short lives: By the time you know who to trust to pass on property too, they're usually already about to die of old age. One important inheritance we already have in game is passing on knives in backpacks, and it's awkward that I usually end up giving this to people already middle aged, which will have to pass it on like a hot potato in 10 minutes.

Maybe there isn't even any point in using the property if it's easier to just dump it communally rather than work a while to find responsible young people. And even if I find responsible people, the stuff you worked for isn't really yours, it's just some gift to the community communism style, that I think is not the point of property. Because what is the point of gathering stuff for yourself if you're just gonna die in like an hour and more than half your kids are newbies or griefers and there's no time to discern which is which?

In any case, just brainstorming, I'm sure this will get used for something interesting further down the dvelopment path even if it isn't so exciting at the moment. Hopefully it'll tie in with future work on lineage/family oriented stuff.

Last edited by Greep (2019-04-06 01:20:04)

DestinyCall · 2019-04-06 02:20:21

Greep wrote:

Which is kind of a huge issue with short lives: By the time you know who to trust to pass on property to they're usually already about to die of old age. One important inheritance we already have in game is passing on knives in backpacks, and it's awkward that I usually end up giving this to people already middle aged, which will have to pass it on like a hot potato in 10 minutes.

I feel like this is the major problem with looking at a game like Rust for inspiration. Property rights in Rust work a lot differently from OHOL for many reasons, but one important difference is your relationships with other players and how quickly you must extend trust.

If I meet a random person in Rust and, for some reason, he doesn't kill me immediately, I might decide to extend a little trust and team up for a while to see how it goes. But I'm not going to immediately give him the location of my base and all my access codes. First, I'll want to spend some time getting to know him a bit and testing him in different situations to see if he is just waiting for a chance to shoot me and loot my corpse while my guard is down. In that game, it pays to build complex access networks with airlocks, false entrances, double-locks, inner vaults, and decoy bases so you can give people partial access to your base without trusting them completely and so you can get raided without losing everything you worked so hard to craft or steal for yourself.

Extending trust to random people in Rust is like keeping rattlesnakes as pets. Even if you think you know what you are doing, there is always an element of risk and you can't be too careful.

But in Rust, you are investing many hours of your time and days of your life into your personal property. Gathering supplies to build a base to store and protect even more stuff that you plan on personally using at some point in the future. When you trust someone in Rust, you are risking losing access to a huge investment of your own time and energy. The smartest tactic is to partner up with friends and never trust strangers.

However, the situation is quite different in OHOL. In this game, you only have sixty minutes in one village and EVERYONE is a stranger, even your kids. Any material goods you might accumulate in this life will be gone in the next. Miserly hoarding is pointless, because if you spend fifty minutes gathering valuable resources and store them in your private base "for later", you won't be alive long enough to actually DO anything interesting or meaningful with your treasure. At best, you could give it to someone younger and hope they have a plan for it. At worst, you die alone, cuddling up again a pile of cold iron bars while the village dies around you.

Logic might suggest that you should pass on your valuables to your children, but that is real world logic, not game logic. Anyone in OHOL could be a griefer or a role player or completely clueless or a seasoned veteran. You never know what you are going to get and it takes time and attention to tell good from bad. There is no reason to assume that your children will be any better than your sister's or cousin's kids. And if you are born male and you spend too much of your life working alone, it is difficult to develop relationships with other villagers, especially young ones. Ultimately, there isn't much point to gathering in excess of your own needs, since you will die soon and probably never return. The village is your real legacy and the inheritence that you hope to give to your children. So why bother picking one random person out of the crowd as your "heir" when you could just let whoever wants your unused stuff take what they need? I might give my knife bag to someone who looks responsible, but I don't care who finds my milkweed farm. I cared about it while I was alive, but after I'm dead, I have no more use for it. The only reason why I bother with passing the knife on especially is because knives have a potential for harm.

Redram · 2019-04-06 03:42:05

DestinyCall wrote:

Ultimately, there isn't much point to gathering in excess of your own needs, since you will die soon and probably never return.

Based on the whole graves-as-return-mechanism discussion in one of the other recent brainstorming topics, I think we're eventually going to get the ability to return to your village - Jason responded positively to that idea. Although it's not clear if there will be any way to come back in the specific branch of your family that descended from your earlier life. But if we assume that might be possible, in that context, you might actually make it back to use your stuff again, provided your interim descendants didn't screw it up.

Last edited by Redram (2019-04-06 03:42:47)

jasonrohrer · 2019-04-06 21:47:49

Yes, not sure about returning to family. I'm still torn on that, and this seems like a different issue.

I do think that limited property access will help people complete certain one-life tasks with less interference. I also think it will be a way to organize and communicate about trans-generational projects. "I pass this land to you, cousin. Please finish this house someday, and if you don't, please pass it on to someone trustworthy before you die."

To answer the use case about using fences as cheap road markers.... well, I guess I'd probably make the proposed and approved ones decay after some short time, as an auto clean-up feature. The idea here is not to backdoor a cheap way to mark paths.

Also, I'm still not 100% sure on resources needed to lay these things out. Maybe laying them out should be free, but the "final step" to solidify approved fences should cost something. "What do you think of this?" could be free or very cheap, but "Make this permanent" could be a bit more expensive. For the time being, I'll make the whole thing really cheap, just to see what people do with it unfettered. It's really supposed to be orthogonal to the resource system. "Fire or fences" isn't supposed to be a big choice you have to make.

Though disconnected fences could be a way to mark paths cheaply.... as long as they decay with time, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.

There is no ownership of the approved or planned fences or gates. Anyone can finish or remove any of them. A shaky gate becomes owned by the person who finishes it (which could be different from the person who proposed it). There is no ownership of fences.

Thaulos · 2019-04-06 22:10:41

If you really want to go the magic direction, why not just add a sort of "2-set ownership totem" where you craft it and then you can place both of them (like if you had two shafts), the square they make would be the area affected by them. Add a visual indicator for the square frontier and maybe a hue or overlay on set area while it is being homesteaded. Then remove hue when it becomes permanent. Any "heir" or "access rights" commands needed to be given inside.

Once it is active everyone can enter the marked area but they cannot interact with items (except to drop them).

People can be killed inside normally.

This wouldn't require gates, fences, or anything. It would just be a sort of a claim on a piece of land. Then the player would have the responsibility of building on it.

EDIT: If anyone messes with the totems until the homestead is complete, then the whole thing is cancelled.

To avoid people just sneakly replacing the totems with their own the hue on the area could depend on whether or not it is your claim (green hue for yours, red hue for others).

Homestead areas have frontier lines green or red depending on whether or not you have access to that area.

Totems don't have ownership, they would need to be joined together to be "paired" and could then be placed by anyone.

Once the homestead is complete, totems can only be removed by the owner.

Area access can be revoked by owner. Heir can be designed, defaults to first born still alive, recursively.

If no authorized person enters the area for a certain amount of time, both totems unground themselves and become normal items. Area is gone.

Last edited by Thaulos (2019-04-06 22:17:59)

jasonrohrer · 2019-04-17 16:15:46

Well, hoping to avoid magic wherever possible.

Also, looking to design an imperfect system to increase the chances of interesting interactions around that system. Fences and gates seem simple enough (mostly just ordinary objects) and messy enough that some interesting things will emerge from them.

futurebird · 2019-04-17 16:32:28

I'm not convinced that this system would make curses obsolete. The curse system works rather well IMO. If you have no property fenced then you don't have any way to react to someone who is being a pest, and making it hard for you to play (and get anything fenced in the first place)

I'm both excited and nervous about the changes. In reality this game has very little griefing for an open public single server. Minecraft servers that are open with PVP and nearly unplayable hell-scapes with almost no cooperation in OHOL you have to work with others to get anything done and the odd jerk who wants to set back that work is rare enough that it's more like part of the challenge than something that makes you want to bail from the game or play only with white-listed groups.

Booklat1 · 2019-04-17 16:53:33

jasonrohrer wrote:

Well, hoping to avoid magic wherever possible.
Also, looking to design an imperfect system to increase the chances of interesting interactions around that system. Fences and gates seem simple enough (mostly just ordinary objects) and messy enough that some interesting things will emerge from them.

I particularly think making buildings actually work is much more urgent than spending who knows how many upgrades perfecting this. Fences are OK but the idea of gates alone already broke my immersion. One should be able to force its way through anything but gates seem like the ultimate power creep.

Last edited by Booklat1 (2019-04-17 16:54:09)

Glassius · 2019-04-17 21:59:17

jasonrohrer wrote:

Well, hoping to avoid magic wherever possible

Then don't do it?

Give dogs a possibility to guard a tile and 9 nearbies. Make it work on commands, allow us to name them. Now you've got owned gates. Possible to do only by players knowing how to raise dogs and maybe train them, so noob proof.

If you want cheaper fences, make big branches stackable, carrieable and containable. If we could bring 16 branches/shafts with cart, instead of just 8, we would have really cheap fences. Even if we could just grab 4 branches and bring them, this would mean almost the end to oven base pens.

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2019-04-06 00:17:11

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#52 2019-04-06 01:01:34

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#53 2019-04-06 01:07:30

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#54 2019-04-06 01:09:10

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#55 2019-04-06 02:20:21

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#56 2019-04-06 03:42:05

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#57 2019-04-06 21:47:49

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#58 2019-04-06 22:10:41

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#59 2019-04-17 16:15:46

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#60 2019-04-17 16:32:28

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#61 2019-04-17 16:53:33

Re: Simplified property fence plan

#62 2019-04-17 21:59:17

Re: Simplified property fence plan

Board footer