Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

Lava · 2019-08-05 15:45:09

I do have proof I joined your fucking VC and heard you spitting shit. The problem is you guys have such a big group no one can do anything about you fucks. Chomp admitted to griefing the town and yikes last night don't try to act slick ya shit. Their so many of you and not enough people calling off your bullshit. We visited your little "base" as well yall are just a bunch of thiefs.

Lava · 2019-08-05 15:48:02

Gitgood wrote:

Lava wrote:
1.) Steals Engine when obviously knowing their intention for iron mine
2) Traps an entire town (Vea) waiting for them to starve
3.) Steals the majority of horses in the rift'
4.) Kills all Sheep in (Love) town
5.) Lures three bears into (Love) town while simultaneously taking all the arrows and iron from the town.
Guess what they were using? OHOL Discord General VC. In any other community, these fools would be ousted but in this game, we somehow accept them into our community with open arms and act like nothing happened.
1) that was just some random dude that mentioned in voice that he hid their engines
2) slinky gave only one kid perms to town so I’d say y’all were asking for that, and one gate ridiculous. It was completely coincidental, no one set out to do it.
3)those horses come from ppl coming to attack us and are found in wilderness, in fact on way back one time I found 2 horse carts and 4 wild horses in random desert.
4) not us, literally takes one guy to do that
5) not us, literally takes one guy to do that.
If we listing names I got a couple:
Slinky- stole some guys plane, which is why he steals engines; killed off a town after having buddy ask for perms for gate
Yikes- accomplice
Get proof before y’all go off accusing, most stuff listed was literally one guy.
Countermeasures:
1) watch engine, put in fence area, locked room
2) 2 gates, give multiple ppl permission
3) fence up horses,blearn how to tame wild ones
4) check on sheep occasionally
5)kill bears in area every 8 hours
If you still mad read my username

The trapping of the town was not coincidental. It was by Eve Green and when there was three of you in the VC there were three people outside enforcing the walls. I saw the eve with a bunch of other people as your VC chat grew larger, and a bunch of people from different families all were bringing in oil and iron to your hideout, so don't act slick bitch. Thats stealing not a private "town".

Last edited by Lava (2019-08-05 15:49:35)

DiscardedSlinky · 2019-08-05 16:12:59

Yeah I griefed your guy's town. It was a fun revenge after all the shit you've all pulled on us. You all have killed me many times, but cry and scream the moment it happens to you. Also I never stole a plane? That plane behind the tree was never yours, and your friend admitted it. He said you guys found it and hid it so people wouldn't lose it.

Plane

Also I never touched it. Idk what happened to it.

You guys act so innocent, but you take everything you can grab and put them in your little private towns, and then run around and kill and grab more stuff. Stealing engines, putting engines in carts, and useless wells.

You hide stuff behind bear caves, and stalk the Tarr Monument and kill everyone there.

You get your friends to give you gate permissions to a town and kill everyone inside over and over and over. Play dumb all you want, You all brag about it in the discord like children.

All you people defending them are the reason this game is going to die. Being griefed constantly isn't fun, and people are getting tired of it. Yes probably half of this problem is Jason's fault for giving them an easy way to grief, but defending the people doing it isn't right.

RedComb · 2019-08-05 16:17:01

What a shame that all this amounts to is tit-for-tat name calling and drama.

As with so many times in the past, I cite a design flaw that is the core aspect of what contributes to this kind of griefing, but people steamroll past it to insult people, only to miss the forest for the trees.

Part of the answer to this kind of problem would be persistent IDs and stripping away the anonymity that comes with each new life.

Simply raging at the guilty individuals does not look at the real problem: OHOL's very design empowers this kind of community destroying behavior!

Take away people's ability to start anew and grief a fresh new batch of people with every new life and the broader community can start to remember certain players who always grief, focus on addressing serial bad apples, and might even have a fighting chance to deal with organized griefing when they encounter it.

But, no... these core design flaws will persist because 1) Jason thinks griefing makes for a rich and interesting dynamic and people blame each other for the griefing and don't look at how the game is supercharging it, 2) the game's community seems to turn away from cooperative play and more and more in favor of griefing as non-griefing players quit in frustration, and 3) the few remaining victims would rather sling mud at the bad apples than dig deeper into how the game's flawed design helps to create this kind of toxic exchange.

It seems people are more interested in focusing on the symptoms of the problem and not the disease that causes these symptoms.

Feel free to keep raging at individual bad actors all you want, but until the underlying causes of the problem are addressed, you're merely tilting at windmills.

Don't even know why I bothered with my previous post. It features a GDC talk where a legendary game designer overtly explains why total anonymity is a huge problem, but people would rather get personal, so it's just a futile exercise.

Edit: Made my post before I saw Slinky's remark about half of it possibly being Jason's fault, so my points don't apply to him/her.

Last edited by RedComb (2019-08-05 16:19:48)

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-08-05 16:19:14

Pop fucking corn.

The OHOL Discord is a kindergarden dominated by socially awkward and mic shy teenagers together with a moderator who arbitrarily abuses her powers at a whim without any repercussions from the server owner, and then bans people who complain about it.

I'm not a part of this aforementioned "griefer group", if it even exists, but I have no trouble believing DarkDrak's post in that the accusations about him griefing are entirely fabricated (most probably based on pure guesses coupled with a mob mentality that is dominant among the most active people on that server). I have two reasons for this:

First, I've played with DarkDrak before and I know him to be a good and mature player.

Second, there have been continuing accusations for months now, mostly by the same two people, that I too am some kind of griefer, when in fact I have never griefed. These sorts of baseless accusations seem quite common on that server.

I was actually tempted to make a forum post cataloging this months-long smear campaign by the aforementioned two individuals, but it's not worth the time and actually now I feel kind of sorry for them after I learned that at least one of them is just a 16 year old girl, who in her own words has been diagnosed with autism. I guess that explains something.

Lava · 2019-08-05 16:20:04

RedComb wrote:

What a shame that all this amounts to is tit-for-tat name calling and drama.
As with so many times in the past, I cite a design flaw that is the core aspect of what contributes to this kind of griefing, but people steamroll past it to insult people, only to miss the forest for the trees.
Part of the answer to this kind of problem would be persistent IDs and stripping away the anonymity that comes with each new life.
Simply raging at the guilty individuals does not look at the real problem: OHOL's very design empowers this kind of community destroying behavior!
Take away people's ability to start anew and grief a fresh new batch of people with every new life and the broader community can start to remember certain players who always grief, focus on addressing serial bad apples, and might even have a fighting chance to deal with organized griefing when they encounter it.
But, no... these core design flaws will persist because 1) Jason thinks griefing makes for a rich and interesting dynamic and people blame each other for the griefing and don't look at how the game is supercharging it, 2) the game's community seems to turn away from cooperate play and more and more in favor of griefing as non-griefing players quit in frustration, and 3) the few remaining victims would rather sling mud at the bad apples than dig deeper into how the game's flawed design helps to create this kind of toxic exchange.
It seems people are more interested in focusing on the symptoms of the problem and not the disease that causes these symptoms.
Feel free to keep raging at individual bad actors all you want, but until the underlying causes of the problem are addressed, you're merely tilting at windmills.
Don't even know why I bothered with my previous post. It features a GDC talk where a legendary game designer overtly explains why total anonymity is a huge problem, but people would rather get personal, so it's just a futile exercise.
Edit: Made my post before I saw Slinky's remark about half of it possibly being Jason's fault, so my points don't apply to him/her.

The problem with your system is that griefers such as their group hold a large population, if they find out who messed with them, all they have to do is simply curse one of us and we get sent to donkey town. Remember they are more than seven people.

Lava · 2019-08-05 16:28:47

FulmenTheFinn wrote:

Pop fucking corn.
The OHOL Discord is a kindergarden dominated by socially awkward and mic shy teenagers together with a moderator who arbitrarily abuses her powers at a whim without any repercussions from the server owner, and then bans people who complain about it.
I'm not a part of this aforementioned "griefer group", if it even exists, but I have no trouble believing DarkDrak's post in that the accusations about him griefing are entirely fabricated (most probably based on pure guesses coupled with a mob mentality that is dominant among the most active people on that server). I have two reasons for this:
First, I've played with DarkDrak before and I know him to be a good and mature player.
Second, there have been continuing accusations for months now, mostly by the same two people, that I too am some kind of griefer, when in fact I have never griefed. These sorts of baseless accusations seem quite common on that server.
I was actually tempted to make a forum post cataloging this months-long smear campaign by the aforementioned two individuals, but it's not worth the time and actually now I feel kind of sorry for them after I learned that at least one of them is just a 16 year old girl, who in her own words has been diagnosed with autism. I guess that explains something.

It is not baseless accusations me and yikes were there we witnessed everything they did, we have screenshots and it wasn't just one person. Like I said I joined their VC and heard everything, the same amount of griefers where the same amount in their VC which kept fluctuating. Now look, I don't believe your a griefer and a lot of people play with these guys who are not griefers but just because you are charismatic doesn't mean your not griefing the game. Just because he's mature, Doesn't mean he can't or his friends cant grief. One of his buddies admitted to griefing yet you defend these people because they were "mature"?

Dodge · 2019-08-05 16:32:57

RedComb wrote:

Part of the answer to this kind of problem would be persistent IDs and stripping away the anonymity that comes with each new life.
Simply raging at the guilty individuals does not look at the real problem: OHOL's very design empowers this kind of community destroying behavior!
Take away people's ability to start anew and grief a fresh new batch of people with every new life and the broader community can start to remember certain players who always grief, focus on addressing serial bad apples, and might even have a fighting chance to deal with organized griefing when they encounter it.

That's not in the spirit of the game to forbid someone (ban him) to play for his playstyle.

But to deal with these issue.

I agree organized griefers that use mods VS regular players is an issue.

But it's not a "flaw in design" it's simply missing content, jason added curses and it was enough up until a certain point but now there needs to be another solution to that issue, you cant curse other families because now raiding and other actions that goes against would be punished but they are part of the game.

The game evolved from isolated settlements to multiple families and towns connected by roads, so measures to deal with those kind off issues have to evolve too.

It's probably one of the main issue he will deal with when coming back from his 2 week vacation.

Also if you're a group of griefers that use mods and make plans out of the game dont tell others to "gitgud"

RedComb · 2019-08-05 16:33:22

Lava wrote:

The problem with your system is that griefers such as their group hold a large population, if they find out who messed with them, all they have to do is simply curse one of us and we get sent to donkey town. Remember they are more than seven people.

It's not my system. It's a point made by a game developer with a lot more respect and experience than even Jason "I now have 16+ years of experience" Rohrer has.

I'm merely pointing out that a major part of the problem is that you never know if the baby you had, your mother, or that person in your village is a serial griefer.

And if you kick them off discord... what then? People like that will still find ways to cooperate. They'll friend each other on Steam, make their own discord server, etc. There needs to be in-game solutions as well, not just enabling and empowering griefers at every turn because it's "inevitable and interesting."

As for a solution that avoids the cursing pitfall you mention, I leave that up to the guy with 16+ years of experience to figure out. It's his job to find solutions to these kinds of design problems after all.

He's of the opinion he's so damn good at game design, so it should be mere child's play to solve a problem like this.

I mean, game devs have been dealing with this kind of stuff for the last 20+ years, so such an amazing dev with so much experience must have all kinds of solutions to these types of issues.... right?

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-08-05 16:37:25

Lava wrote:

yet you defend these people because they were "mature"?

Which people might those be? Last I checked I was only speaking on behalf of Dark and myself.

Lava · 2019-08-05 16:38:04

I dont care if they make theyre own discord and grief but they're using the game's discord to grief and the moderator's arent doing crap. Make your own discord but this is disgusting that we are allowing people in the community to use the GAMES discord to greif.

Lava · 2019-08-05 16:42:33

FulmenTheFinn wrote:

Lava wrote:
yet you defend these people because they were "mature"?
Which people might those be? Last I checked I was only speaking on behalf of Dark and myself.

Dark is defending his whole group and your defending dark which associates you with the others. Im saying Dark is or has been associating with griefers and is trying to defend their Shrill of dignity

RedComb · 2019-08-05 16:50:50

Dodge wrote:

That's not in the spirit of the game to forbid someone (ban him) to play for his playstyle.
But to deal with these issue.

I never said banning people was the sole answer.

I said persistent IDs would allow the community to start to remember individuals who caused problems and then the community could actually address this kind of behavior.

Like, if you have a baby who is a known griefer (because you remember their persistent ID from a previous bad experience), you just let them starve.... or you keep an eye on them, possibly killing them when they do something out of line, or you warn people they might be a problem, etc.

My point is that the lack of a persistent ID is an example of that "missing content" that you mention, and this kind of an omission is totally a design flaw (because any virtual social space that lacks persistent IDs is begging for griefing and abuse of its players).

jason added curses and it was enough up until a certain point but now there needs to be another solution to that issue, you cant curse other families because now raiding and other actions that goes against would be punished but they are part of the game.
The game evolved from isolated settlements to multiple families and towns connected by roads, so measures to deal with those kind off issues have to evolve too.
It's probably one of the main issue he will deal with when coming back from his 2 week vacation.
Also if you're a group of griefers that use mods and make plans out of the game dont tell others to "gitgud"

Yeah, I understand, but I also understand that you can't iterate enough solutions to totally solve a problem like this.

Other games more robust and vibrant than OHOL (with skilled designers) have tried and failed. They implemented tons of anti-griefing measures (all meant to answer griefing with in-game mechanics that would address various issues), and ultimately it proved an arms race against griefers that devs couldn't win, no matter how many solutions they coded into the game.

Here is a description of what I mean (everything from criminal flagging to a reputation system proved that "missing content" wasn't the sole problem):
https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaphKos … Online.php

This is why MMO's today lack all kinds of features earlier MMOs had (like the ability to drop items on the ground). Because, ultimately, game developers realized the solution to 99% of the problems posed by griefers was to sadly take away the freedoms and open-ended features that produced so much emergent gameplay (and problematic edge cases).

And here is a snippet discussing the early attempts in UO to "let the community police itself" and the many futile attempts to code countermeasures to player-killing (i.e., the approach that adding "missing content" would solve these kinds of problem):

You red, you dead
Easily the most amusing – and horrifyingly frustrating – chapters of Koster’s Ultima Online reminiscing revolve around the game’s infamous early PvP mechanics. It’s clear the Origin team struggled with a naive sort of libertarian mindset when developing – or more accurately, not developing – the PvP at launch. As Koster’s now-ancient blog posts relate, the developers truly believed that their laissez faire “let the community police itself” philosophy was the best approach. You don’t even need to read Koster’s account; you can hear it repeated in the plaintive appeals of FFA PvP players even here in 2018, as the wolves desperately try to convince the sheep to come play victim in the service of the simulation.
“We must have playerkillers in UO because the world would suffer if we did not have them,” he once wrote. “But they also must be channeled so that their effect is beneficial and not detrimental. […] We don’t want to exterminate them completely anymore than we want to make rattlesnakes, black widow spiders, and sharks extinct because they fill a valuable role in the virtual ecology.”
Of course, we all know the story of how the rattlesnakes, black widow spiders, and sharks played out in practice: Rampant ganking and griefing and PKing drove players out of the 1997 sandbox by the thousands – “a truly distressing number of our new player acquisitions,” Koster laments – until the developers engineered countermeasures, patch by patch. They tried flagging. They tried a notoriety system. They tried reputation. They tried bounties. They tried a faction system. They tried guild wars. They tried newbie protection mechanics. But for every attempt to curb the PKs the devs put in, the reds invented some fresh hell for their victims, exploiting every ruleset change. It’s hard not to chuckle as Koster rattles off each new idea and how the players thwarted it (especially when I remember it happening!).
And that’s a theme Koster riffs on over and over – that “no matter what you do, players will decode every formula, statistic, and algorithm in your world via experimentation.” In fact, he argues, you don’t even need combat in your game for griefplay to be present (as anyone who’s read any comments anywhere can attest).
Eventually, the team, by then absent Koster, implemented Trammel, effectively creating mirror worlds safe from player-killers. “I wouldn’t have done it, personally, but there is no question that the userbase doubled once this went in,” he says.
“The result [of UO’s PK environment] was an exodus driven not only by the more modern 3-D graphics of [EverQuest] but by the safety. Everything I had thought about the impossible admin load of having a PK switch with a large-scale game was disproven in short order, and players wasted no time in telling me bluntly that I had been drastically and painfully wrong. In the name of player freedoms, I had put them through the slow-drip torture of two years of experiments with slowly tightening behavior rules, trying to save the emergence while tamping down the bad behavior. The cost was the loss of many hundreds of thousands of players. Ultima Online had churned through more than twice as many players who quit than EverQuest even got as subscribers that year.”
Even so, he frets over the loss to the verisimilitude of the virtual world. The griefer environment may not have been realistic, but it did create “endless stories and excitement, the stories that people tell and retell to this day,” as players were forced to work together to overcome the true evil in the game: the PK players themselves. That, he argues, was “empowering” in a way that “casual” post-Trammel player towns never were. Remember Kazola’s Tavern and the multiple PK guilds that ravaged Great Lakes, and the anti-PK guilds that rose up to fight them? I do; I was there, I defended Kazola’s, and I was once guilded with folks from one of the groups he mentions (SIN – I’ve written about that before). How many games have that sort of meaningful history? I can count them on one hand, and it’s no accident they’re all sandboxes. And what if participating in a genuine struggle against evil players – or figuring out ways to deal with the worst elements of society – “means [we] are more likely to dare to do it in real life instead of living in passivity”? In eschewing free-for-all games, are we just “giving up on the hard problem of freedom co-existing with civility”?
It’s intoxicating. But still maybe too idealistic. And Koster admits as much in essays written years after he’d moved on to new “experiments,” clearly having re-examined his ideas under the light of implementation and disaster.
“I like safe and wild zoning now. I really, really didn’t,” he pens. “I used to think that you could reform bad apples, and argue with hard cases. I’m more cynical these days. […] I used to think that people were willing to act communally for the good of the community. Now I know more about the Tragedy of the Commons and the Prisoner’s Dilemma and think that people are mostly selfish. This isn’t Ivory Tower theory gone looking for empirical evidence. It’s experience gone looking for explanation.”
https://massivelyop.com/2018/06/14/magi … ma-online/

Last edited by RedComb (2019-08-05 16:52:53)

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-08-05 17:01:15

Lava wrote:

FulmenTheFinn wrote:
Lava wrote:
yet you defend these people because they were "mature"?
Which people might those be? Last I checked I was only speaking on behalf of Dark and myself.

Dark is defending his whole group and your defending dark which associates you with the others. Im saying Dark is or has been associating with griefers and is trying to defend their Shrill of dignity

So in your mind I'm defending a group of people I don't know, because I'm defending someone that I do know, who happens to be defending said group (tbh I only read him defending himself, but I've admittedly not read through the entire thread). Guilty by association and unless proven otherwise, right? Tsk tsk, there's that mob mentality again.

Btw does this transition of guilt also apply to lawyers defending guilty clients? I'm neither, but I do wonder.

ollj · 2019-08-05 17:12:28

UO history lesson is neat.

FulmenTheFinn is right, discord is full of immature smear campaign and harrasment shit.

main grief countermeasures:

all milkweed/rope to be turned into chests or snares, before they end up as property gates, that just waste everyones time.
all arrows that you find to be removed from the game indefinitely, with a simple dumb ingame glitch. game is more fun with less arrows.
all wool to be turned into snake boots for agility.
bring bearskin to map center and build roads for a community project. it mostly assists eve players.

Last edited by ollj (2019-08-05 17:26:18)

RedComb · 2019-08-05 17:14:31

Lava wrote:

I dont care if they make theyre own discord and grief but they're using the game's discord to grief and the moderator's arent doing crap. Make your own discord but this is disgusting that we are allowing people in the community to use the GAMES discord to greif.

All I'm saying is you can't exclusively blame the community for something the dev doesn't seem to mind:

https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6452

Considering his stance on griefing (and the way he's built a game that empowers it), it goes to reason that the discord will be just another avenue for griefers to do their thing.

This is the wild and crazy train you got on, after all.

"Buy the ticket, take the ride."

Dodge · 2019-08-05 17:25:32

RedComb wrote:

Yeah, I understand, but I also understand that you can't iterate enough solutions to totally solve a problem like this.
Other games more robust and vibrant than OHOL (with skilled designers) have tried and failed. They implemented tons of anti-griefing measures (all meant to answer griefing with in-game mechanics that would address various issues), and ultimately it proved an arms race against griefers that devs couldn't win, no matter how many solutions they coded into the game.
Here is a description of what I mean (everything from criminal flagging to a reputation system proved that "missing content" wasn't the sole problem):
https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaphKos … Online.php

I red that story from your link and basically they failed because they tried to solve the problem for the players instead of giving tools to the players so they can solve the issue.

For example with the town guards and the notoriety system, every system that uses AI can be gamed, if you go that road you play a never ending game of cat and mouse with the "griefers".

But if you give tools to the players so they can use their judgement to a situation and have the ability to act then there is no AI and it's players VS players, it cant be gamed because there is no algorithm, and it's down to who is the more reactive, ressourceful, creative, smart, experienced etc.

So i'm not talking about tools that solve the issue for the players, but tools for the players so they can solve the issue, even against a group of "griefers".

If they act in group, isolate them.

If the players are powerless give them power.

If it's unbalanced, restore balance.

At one point in the game griefing will become as dangerous for the griefer as it will be for the regular player, you will see

RedComb · 2019-08-05 17:39:15

Dodge wrote:

RedComb wrote:
Yeah, I understand, but I also understand that you can't iterate enough solutions to totally solve a problem like this.
Other games more robust and vibrant than OHOL (with skilled designers) have tried and failed. They implemented tons of anti-griefing measures (all meant to answer griefing with in-game mechanics that would address various issues), and ultimately it proved an arms race against griefers that devs couldn't win, no matter how many solutions they coded into the game.
Here is a description of what I mean (everything from criminal flagging to a reputation system proved that "missing content" wasn't the sole problem):
https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaphKos … Online.php
I red that story from your link and basically they failed because they tried to solve the problem for the players instead of giving tools to the players so they can solve the issue.
For example with the town guards and the notoriety system, every system that uses AI can be gamed, if you go that road you play a never ending game of cat and mouse with the "griefers".
But if you give tools to the players so they can use their judgement to a situation and have the ability to act then there is no AI and it's players VS players, it cant be gamed because there is no algorithm, and it's down to who is the more reactive, ressourceful, creative, smart, experienced etc.
So i'm not talking about tools that solve the issue for the players, but tools for the players so they can solve the issue, even against a group of "griefers".

Many of those examples were their later answers to these problems.

From what you wrote, I think it's safe to say you never played UO. That game was FFA full loot PvP everywhere (until the town guard stuff was implemented).

So, players always had the type of tools you talked about to police themselves. They could fight the PKs, they could band together to kill them, they could form huge alliances, there was nothing holding that kind of response back. But you know what happened? Thousands of players still left the game and ultimately the scales tipped in the favor of the wolves as the sheep abandoned the game world for "safer" pastures.

The UO devs only implemented the other stuff as a way to try to give their non-PKs a fighting chance.

The reputation system would flag PKs with a red name (so if you encountered them in the wild, you knew to be on your guard... but there were ways to get around this).

The in-game bounty system created a way that players could put up their own gold for the head of a problem PK. It was essentially a bulletin board and mercenaries could read and then hunt the PKs listed on it for considerable profit. And you know what happened? It became a "high score table" of sorts for PKs.

There was even a point in the game where PKs blocked off one of the exits to one of the towns with furniture placed on the ground. The only open exit was a single tile door, so when players would log in to the town and try to leave it, they were easily killed as they exited through the choke point. The answer to that one? The devs made axes able to chop furniture and players logged in en masse, chopped all the furniture and murdered all the PKs.

There were many examples of this kind of ebb and flow. At the center of it all was the already existent and fully fleshed out tools players had to fight PKs. The townguard stuff only applied in cities (safe zones) and most of the game was spent outside of this kind of place, so it was almost totally player versus player with no AI involvement just like you describe. And even so, the community couldn't effectively police itself. That is a laissez-faire utopian pie-in-the-sky dream.

There has probably never been a multiplayer game that gave more agency or tools to players than UO did. It was less a game and more of a simulation of a virtual world. As somebody who actually played it, and fully understands the solutions they tried to address player-killing, I can tell what you think will work for OHOL will not work.

UO was already a robust and fleshed out simulation at the point they started trying the other stuff. It had so many more tools and player-based counters to PKs than OHOL could ever hope to have. The sheer amount of freedom and boundless creativity players had is hard for most current gamers to grasp.

I apologize if the examples I cited don't fully communicate this fact, but I still contend that Jason cannot iterate himself to the point where players alone can overcome rampant griefing.

And, again, one of the biggest contributing factors to griefing in OHOL is the total lack of a persistent ID. Giving people endless anonymity from life to life makes it way too easy for them to grief with impunity.

Last edited by RedComb (2019-08-05 17:51:09)

Dodge · 2019-08-05 17:52:16

RedComb wrote:

...

No i never played that game, but in the article i red it was clear that they tried to implement AI based solutions.

Keep in mind OHOL is a very different game in the way it works so you cant compare the two.

"they could form huge alliances" for example this isn't in OHOL at least not officially, and it's possible to prevent it from working.

Let me guess griefers formed huge alliances and harrassed regular players to the point they quit the game?

RedComb · 2019-08-05 18:03:21

Dodge wrote:

No i never played that game, but in the article i red it was clear that they tried to implement AI based solutions.
Keep in mind OHOL is a very different game in the way it works so you cant compare the two.
"they could form huge alliances" for example this isn't in OHOL at least not officially, and it's possible to prevent it from working.
Let me guess griefers formed huge alliances and harrassed regular players to the point they quit the game?

So you've never played the game, but can conclude the two can't be compared?

Yes, they tried ONE AI solution (among many), but this was already in a game that had given players all the tools you can imagine and more that would allow them to deal with griefers.

You can't just look at the one thing they did with town guards and assume that none of the other stuff you think will work in OHOL wasn't tried or present.

Having played both, I can tell you it is a fair comparison because both games are a simulation of sorts and both games are sandboxes.

And, in the beginning, UO had NO GUILDS, NO ALLIANCES, NOTHING OF THE SORT. What cooperative groups existed formed organically, or were maintained via forums out of the game. There wasn't in-game whispers, only chat bubbles that you could see on screen, VERY similar to OHOL (some players use a third party chat client called ICQ). Remember, this was the late 90's so there was no VOIP of any kind.

A single PK killed over four thousand player characters (believed to be responsible for thousands of people leaving the game). While PKs would band together, they very often roamed as a single player or just a pair preying on newer players or exploiting game mechanics to ruin another person's fun.

I'm just pointing out that when PKs roamed around and killed people, then some of the "good guys" would form ad hoc groups and fight them, but it was not a long-standing solution to this rampant problem.

Just as you think OHOL will somehow find a balance, the UO devs believed their community would find this balance organically (the failed solutions only came later, only ONE of which was the town guard stuff).

And when you say things like if players are powerless then give them power, don't you get that the griefers get that power too? Whatever content Jason adds for players to fight back, the griefers can use as well...

This is why the comparison to UO works perfectly.

All the tools, power, and abilities normal players had in UO were at the disposal of PKs too (who twisted them to ruin the gameplay of others).

Believe what you will, say it's not a fair comparison if you must, but I know what I know and I can see OHOL making all the same mistakes (and as different as they appear on the surface, the two games do share a LOT of similarities at their core).

Edit to add:

At one point in the game griefing will become as dangerous for the griefer as it will be for the regular player, you will see

Hope springs eternal (and those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it)...

Last edited by RedComb (2019-08-05 18:09:53)

Gitgood · 2019-08-05 18:19:27

Undeniable truths
1) not everyone in game chat is a griefer
2)griefers bought this game too and have the right to do whatever the fuck they want
And y’all have the right to try to stop them
3) not all griefing is organized
4) everyone whining on here is a bitch and y’all can suckle on my nuts if y’all don’t like this

Dodge · 2019-08-05 18:54:34

RedComb wrote:

...

So in that other game, you're also born as a baby to a mother in a family? you also have a life that can only last an hour before being born as another baby? Can you build a full civilisation with the help of other players? etc.

That's my point there not only does it look very different it also plays different, so even if they have some concepts in common they are completely different in their approach.

"And when you say things like if players are powerless then give them power, don't you get that the griefers get that power too? Whatever content Jason adds for players to fight back, the griefers can use as well..."

That's where you're wrong, maybe for individual griefers that's true but not as a group, OHOL is a community/cooperation game, you are born in a family and not as an isolated individual, if you have one griefer born in a family but everyone else is "good" and they have the right tools to deal with it, then they have the advantage of number and the griefer is alone.

If you give power to groups only like families then it becomes useless for the individual and it's pretty easy to make it impossible for griefers to be in group or to be more precise in the same family.

So if they are isolated they eventually become powerless or at least on par with other isolated individuals.

DarkDrak · 2019-08-05 19:20:47

Holy shit, this became a clown fiesta.

Lava, i got no clue on what they did in the last... 4? days. Im not responsible for that and im sure they can defend their own dignity. When i played with them, we mined our own iron, grew our own milkweed farm, made our own oil pumpjack etc. And everyone left their towns by the age of 3-4 and got to the location by the time they were 10 at most. Cant see even the need of stealing stuff. It was indeed just a private town. And when you have a private town with working people, a lot of resources accumulate throughout lives.

Fulmen, thanks for defending me bruh.

Slinky... you and i have a problem here.

DiscardedSlinky wrote:

defending the people doing it isn't right.

Yeah, but accusing people of stuff they didnt do isnt right either.
If you gotta point me out on greifing, at least state what i did correctly.

Lava · 2019-08-05 19:20:59

ollj wrote:

UO history lesson is neat.
FulmenTheFinn is right, discord is full of immature smear campaign and harassment shit.
main grief countermeasures:
all milkweed/rope to be turned into chests or snares, before they end up as property gates, that just waste everyone's time.
all arrows that you find to be removed from the game indefinitely, with a simple dumb ingame glitch. game is more fun with less arrows.
all wool to be turned into snake boots for agility.
bring bearskin to map center and build roads for a community project. it mostly assists eve players.

Olji your just salty that you got kicked out of discord for saying the n-word get ur ass out of here.

Lava · 2019-08-05 19:22:20

DarkDrak wrote:

Holy shit, this became a clown fiesta.
Lava, i got no clue on what they did in the last... 4? days. Im not responsible for that and im sure they can defend their own dignity. When i played with them, we mined our own iron, grew our own milkweed farm, made our own oil pumpjack etc. And everyone left their towns by the age of 3-4 and got to the location by the time they were 10 at most. Cant see even the need of stealing stuff. It was indeed just a private town. And when you have a private town with working people, a lot of resources accumulate throughout lives.

Fulmen, thanks for defending me bruh.
Slinky... you and i have a problem here.
DiscardedSlinky wrote:
defending the people doing it isn't right.
Yeah, but accusing people of stuff they didnt do isnt right either.
If you gotta point me out on greifing, at least state what i did correctly.

Your defending people you have not played in the last four days? Interesting.

One Hour One Life Forums

#26 2019-08-05 15:45:09

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#27 2019-08-05 15:48:02

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#28 2019-08-05 16:12:59

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#29 2019-08-05 16:17:01

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#30 2019-08-05 16:19:14

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#31 2019-08-05 16:20:04

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#32 2019-08-05 16:28:47

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#33 2019-08-05 16:32:57

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#34 2019-08-05 16:33:22

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#35 2019-08-05 16:37:25

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#36 2019-08-05 16:38:04

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#37 2019-08-05 16:42:33

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#38 2019-08-05 16:50:50

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#39 2019-08-05 17:01:15

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#40 2019-08-05 17:12:28

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#41 2019-08-05 17:14:31

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#42 2019-08-05 17:25:32

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#43 2019-08-05 17:39:15

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#44 2019-08-05 17:52:16

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#45 2019-08-05 18:03:21

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#46 2019-08-05 18:19:27

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#47 2019-08-05 18:54:34

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#48 2019-08-05 19:20:47

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#49 2019-08-05 19:20:59

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

#50 2019-08-05 19:22:20

Re: Discord - The breeding grounds Of Griefing

Board footer