Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

Kinrany · 2019-12-14 22:10:23

Sopbucket wrote:

So, if you're standing right next to the king when he issues the order, you don't hear it until your baron or whatever gets to you? That seems kinda silly.
Would it be better if everyone would get the message within a radius of the issuer, but only immediate followers could spread it within their own radius?

Well, it does make sense for orders that need to be adapted for each branch. When the king says "collect milkweed", it may make sense for the baron to order someone to find a cart, instead of expecting everyone to just charge off into the wilderness with baskets and sharp stones at random.

Grim_Arbiter · 2019-12-14 22:32:27

In all seriousness, I'm gonna mail you a kazoo and a couple bonus flutes. I don't think I can handle another use of that ding.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-14 22:46:30

Well, if you're standing right there, you will see the king speak the message out loud.

But yeah, messages are only passed down from your personal leader.

Kinrany, I do currently have the message being passed down... otherwise, what's the point? B/c they only pass when you are near someone, it wouldn't make sense for them to ONLY go to your direct followers and stop there. B/c they would only go to your direct followers when they were near you, and then you might as well tell them directly, right?

I do like the idea of letting sub-followers split up the task. WE NEED MILKWEED becomes YOU FIND SEEDS, YOU FIND SOIL, and YOU FETCH WATER. But how would the Dukes know which sub-group was supposed to do what?

Now, the way it's implemented, the Dukes COULD overrride the King's message if they wanted, before interacting with their followers. Each person only has one "live" message that they're carrying. They can replace that message at any time by issuing their own order.

We'll see how it pans out. It may need to be tweaked.

Wuatduhf · 2019-12-14 22:49:28

Uh-oh, that might need modification.

Do Orders also have any form of signature on who initially issued the Order being passed down?

Messages being intercepted and transformed by someone "down the chain" and their legitimacy being questioned could eventually become a problem, should Hierarchies continue to be used after this week.

Will typing /ORDER show you your current message you are holding onto?

Last edited by Wuatduhf (2019-12-14 22:50:20)

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-14 22:56:26

Orders cannot be modified on their way down.

Orders are received with an originator stamp that cannot be changed as they are passed down. The DING message looks like this:

ORDER FROM YOUR BARON TOMMY JONES:
EVERYONE COME TO THE WELL. WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE WATER CRISIS.

This is true even if the order passed through your Lord before it reached you. You find out who issued the order, not who told you the order.

That /ORDER command isn't in place currently... maybe in a future update. Will people want to review orders?

If you're not following anyone, and then you join, you will hear the latest order, assuming that you haven't heard it yet. Each order has a serial number, and you only hear one if it is newer than the previous one that you heard (or issued).

jcwilk · 2019-12-14 22:57:22

jasonrohrer wrote:

Got this working.
Interesting wrinkle is what happens when you're exiled. You are blocked from receiving the message yourself, but it is still passed down to your followers, who hear it as long as they aren't exiled themselves. These followers are seen as dubious.
So you can exile a mid-tier leader without ruining the chain of command. The lower-downs will still get the King's messages, and hopefully jump ship so they can stop being dubious.
I also realized this could be used to bypass the language barrier. I'm making sure that it doesn't work that way. You leader's orders will arrive in that leader's language.

It seems really weird to me that exiling excludes orders but doesn't block them from following and the orders somehow propagate past them. This means that the exiled can keep poisoning his followers with misinformation as they're receiving information from the king and can overwrite the kings proclamations by just being spammy even though the exiled can't see the orders themselves. Also the exiled can get information about the orders from their followers.

It's just a lot of rules and complications that doesn't seem categorically better than any of the following options:

1 - exiling blocks the exile from following the exiler or any of the exiler's downstreams. The exiled and all of their followers are severed from the exiler's tree until the exiled's downstreams jump ship and follow someone else. Basically it's the king saying to all of the duke's villagers "he's out, if you want to keep following him then you're out too". Maybe he'll even broadcast this right before exiling. Downside is he can't broadcast it afterwards, but that seems like the single and only downside which seems small. Another bonus is this gives people opt-out control from being followed which means that strategic secrets can be shared via the order system. Because they won't be able to see themselves as exiled in this case, there should be a top corner notification that they were exiled by so-and-so. This won't be spam, it can only happen once since they will no longer be in the hierarchy afterwards and can't rejoin it. Maybe there will be a notification if they try and fail to rejoin also.

2 - make orders unaffected by exile. This has the strength of simplicity. If you're following someone you get orders from someone, no exceptions to keep in mind and teach noobs.

3 - make the exiled unable to issue orders until they unfollow so that they can't overwrite upstream orders, perhaps with a notification. Still weird and unintuitive but slight improvement at least.

I'm more of a fan of 1, it seems very strange to me that exiling someone doesn't remove them from your political hierarchy, isn't that literally what exiling means? It seems like there should be another word used if someone is still part of a political hierarchy after being exiled from it. The argument against this was, iirc, that the follower should be able to find and argue their case but how does staying in the hierarchy enable this? They can just as easily do this from outside the hierarchy.

jcwilk · 2019-12-14 23:03:28

jasonrohrer wrote:

That /ORDER command isn't in place currently... maybe in a future update. Will people want to review orders?

Yes please

jasonrohrer wrote:

If you're not following anyone, and then you join, you will hear the latest order, assuming that you haven't heard it yet. Each order has a serial number, and you only hear one if it is newer than the previous one that you heard (or issued).

Could you clear out the last heard serial whenever someone follows a new person? That way you'll get an old but still standing order when you change your position in the hierarchy which can be a kind of way of exploring the hierarchy, like... "i wonder what order is active in this branch, oh that person issued a new order i wonder what the last one was from their leader... etc"

Edit: also if someone is being spammy with orders you might want to just go over their head and follow their leader, in which case you'd want to know what the last order was before all the spam

Edit edit: i guess this could also be solved by the /order command

Last edited by jcwilk (2019-12-14 23:06:20)

Carrot-Seedling · 2019-12-14 23:15:11

jasonrohrer wrote:

I do like the idea of letting sub-followers split up the task. WE NEED MILKWEED becomes YOU FIND SEEDS, YOU FIND SOIL, and YOU FETCH WATER. But how would the Dukes know which sub-group was supposed to do what?

Let leaders organize people with markings. For example, someone with a badge and a red dot on their chest/badge, and make organizing work kind of like exiling. So said Duke would tell Sally "Sally is in Red Group" and Sally would get a red dot. That allows for a whole bunch of things like awards of honor and town organizing.
(Really, I just want to write "dunce" on someone's forehead.)

Also, I like the idea of the noticeboard. People read a lot more than you think when they get bored, and that would allow bored people to find jobs. And as for "oh no making more content," I think everyone wants content.

antking:]# · 2019-12-14 23:35:42

What if leaders got a ding, if a direct follower is threatened, or killed? doesn't tell the leader where it's happing but notifies that their followers are in danger.

This with the order system could create a strong anti grieving system as leaders could tell followers to be on guard because of murders in the area, this would also make leaders have more of a protective role over their citizens

Wuatduhf · 2019-12-15 00:02:40

antking:]# wrote:

What if leaders got a ding, if a direct follower is threatened, or killed? doesn't tell the leader where it's happing but notifies that their followers are in danger.
This with the order system could create a strong anti grieving system as leaders could tell followers to be on guard because of murders in the area, this would also make leaders have more of a protective role over their citizens

Too much info being given to the top, that should be gathered by them as a default. Good leaders have to be made, not born into a system that gives them everything. We're still 10 days away from being able to start properly evaluating Hierarchy, so don't take anything currently happening ingame as the be-all end-all experience of leaders.

jcwilk · 2019-12-15 00:03:50

Wuatduhf wrote:

antking:]# wrote:
What if leaders got a ding, if a direct follower is threatened, or killed? doesn't tell the leader where it's happing but notifies that their followers are in danger.
This with the order system could create a strong anti grieving system as leaders could tell followers to be on guard because of murders in the area, this would also make leaders have more of a protective role over their citizens

Too much info being given to the top, that should be gathered by them as a default. Good leaders have to be made, not born into a system that gives them everything. We're still 10 days away from being able to start properly evaluating Hierarchy, so don't take anything currently happening ingame as the be-all end-all experience of leaders.

Plus there's no way to block people from following you yet so that could get spammy if the leader doesn't necessarily give a shit about whoever is following them

Kinrany · 2019-12-15 00:10:45

jasonrohrer wrote:

Kinrany, I do currently have the message being passed down... otherwise, what's the point? B/c they only pass when you are near someone, it wouldn't make sense for them to ONLY go to your direct followers and stop there. B/c they would only go to your direct followers when they were near you, and then you might as well tell them directly, right?

I mean, at least the direct follower hears the order first and can follow up with his own order.

But yeah, this doesn't solve the problem of splitting tasks very well anyway.

I think there's a risk of making hierarchies very flat. As if middle leaders were just proxies or an implementation detail, and only the king really mattered.
Ideally all rules would work as if you could only interact with your direct leaders and followers. Right now I think it's mostly true. For example, you could say that every character has a private "exiled" list, a private "redeemed" list, and a public, dynamically calculated "exiled" list based on the private lists and the leader's public list. Similarly, the list of allies is the leader's list of allies plus all of the followers.
This could be just a purposeless sense of purity though.

jcwilk · 2019-12-15 00:33:26

Kinrany wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
Kinrany, I do currently have the message being passed down... otherwise, what's the point? B/c they only pass when you are near someone, it wouldn't make sense for them to ONLY go to your direct followers and stop there. B/c they would only go to your direct followers when they were near you, and then you might as well tell them directly, right?
I mean, at least the direct follower hears the order first and can follow up with his own order.
But yeah, this doesn't solve the problem of splitting tasks very well anyway.
I think there's a risk of making hierarchies very flat. As if middle leaders were just proxies or an implementation detail, and only the king really mattered.
Ideally all rules would work as if you could only interact with your direct leaders and followers. Right now I think it's mostly true. For example, you could say that every character has a private "exiled" list, a private "redeemed" list, and a public, dynamically calculated "exiled" list based on the private lists and the leader's public list. Similarly, the list of allies is the leader's list of allies plus all of the followers.
This could be just a purposeless sense of purity though.

I wonder if having kids automatically follow their mom rather than follow their mom's leader would make sense... Every benefit of having them follow their mom's leader would still function but the mom would also be able to use orders on her children, like real life, and it would prevent hierarchies from being really flat and boring

Last edited by jcwilk (2019-12-15 00:34:03)

DestinyCall · 2019-12-15 01:06:35

jcwilk wrote:

I wonder if having kids automatically follow their mom rather than follow their mom's leader would make sense... Every benefit of having them follow their mom's leader would still function but the mom would also be able to use orders on her children, like real life, and it would prevent hierarchies from being really flat and boring

I think this is an excellent suggestion!

Wuatduhf · 2019-12-15 02:27:59

DestinyCall wrote:

jcwilk wrote:
I wonder if having kids automatically follow their mom rather than follow their mom's leader would make sense... Every benefit of having them follow their mom's leader would still function but the mom would also be able to use orders on her children, like real life, and it would prevent hierarchies from being really flat and boring
I think this is an excellent suggestion!

Jason already addressed this when he initially conceptualized Hierarchies and doesn't 'want moms instantly becoming countesses' or something along those lines.

jcwilk · 2019-12-15 02:36:42

Wuatduhf wrote:

DestinyCall wrote:
jcwilk wrote:
I wonder if having kids automatically follow their mom rather than follow their mom's leader would make sense... Every benefit of having them follow their mom's leader would still function but the mom would also be able to use orders on her children, like real life, and it would prevent hierarchies from being really flat and boring
I think this is an excellent suggestion!
Jason already addressed this when he initially conceptualized Hierarchies and doesn't 'want moms instantly becoming countesses' or something along those lines.

I see... I guess that makes sense, but it seems like the new order functionality which was added since then is more important than the completely functionless rank name. Oh well, guess it's better to see how it pans out first anyways

DestinyCall · 2019-12-15 02:46:56

Wuatduhf wrote:

DestinyCall wrote:
jcwilk wrote:
I wonder if having kids automatically follow their mom rather than follow their mom's leader would make sense... Every benefit of having them follow their mom's leader would still function but the mom would also be able to use orders on her children, like real life, and it would prevent hierarchies from being really flat and boring
I think this is an excellent suggestion!
Jason already addressed this when he initially conceptualized Hierarchies and doesn't 'want moms instantly becoming countesses' or something along those lines.

I see no problem with elevating our elders into royal ranks if they raise healthy kids and treat them well. If I don't like my mother or grandmother, I can unfollow. If I find someone who I trust more, I can follow them. Otherwise, I can just keep following my mom.

I'd much rather automatically follow someone I have actually met and interacted with for three minutes of my life, instead of being required to follow someone I have never seen.

Wuatduhf · 2019-12-15 03:01:01

DestinyCall wrote:

I'd much rather automatically follow someone I have actually met and interacted with for three minutes of my life, instead of being required to follow someone I have never seen.

Boy, I'm sure the 3rd estate would've loved that!

DestinyCall · 2019-12-15 03:06:47

Wuatduhf wrote:

DestinyCall wrote:
I'd much rather automatically follow someone I have actually met and interacted with for three minutes of my life, instead of being required to follow someone I have never seen.
Boy, I'm sure the 3rd estate would've loved that!

Next update ... guillotines!

Punkypal · 2019-12-15 04:33:09

Great. People are using leadership and hierarchy to organize mass murders. Fun.

DestinyCall · 2019-12-15 06:59:57

Did you really expect any other outcome?

jcwilk · 2019-12-15 07:05:01

DestinyCall wrote:

Wuatduhf wrote:
DestinyCall wrote:
I'd much rather automatically follow someone I have actually met and interacted with for three minutes of my life, instead of being required to follow someone I have never seen.
Boy, I'm sure the 3rd estate would've loved that!

Next update ... guillotines!

Ugh god my sad excuse of a social life would end wholesale if Jason ever adds guillotines... *drool*

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-12-15 08:59:02

Barons, counts, dukes, kings and emperors? The real question is, does Jason Rohrer play Crusader Kings?

MCzerotacos · 2019-12-15 20:45:10

jasonrohrer wrote:

ORDER, PLEASE REPORT TO TOWN CENTER
Would send a DING message to your immediate followers (if you were a King, it would go to your Dukes). They would see:
DING
AN ORDER FROM YOUR KING SAM THATCHER:
PLEASE REPORT TO TOWN CENTER

You could also communicate to the entire tree, like so:
ORDER ALL, WE'RE OUT OF WATER AND NEED TO MIGRATE

This would send a DING message to your entire follower tree.
DING
AN ORDER FROM YOUR KING SAM THATCHER:
WE'RE OUT OF WATER AND NEED TO MIGRATE

I tried using the order command and was confused on how it worked.

Is it typed out just like how it is written above and do you have to be a certain rank in the leadership to be able to use this command?

jcwilk · 2019-12-15 21:44:02

MCzerotacos wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
ORDER, PLEASE REPORT TO TOWN CENTER
Would send a DING message to your immediate followers (if you were a King, it would go to your Dukes). They would see:
DING
AN ORDER FROM YOUR KING SAM THATCHER:
PLEASE REPORT TO TOWN CENTER

You could also communicate to the entire tree, like so:
ORDER ALL, WE'RE OUT OF WATER AND NEED TO MIGRATE

This would send a DING message to your entire follower tree.
DING
AN ORDER FROM YOUR KING SAM THATCHER:
WE'RE OUT OF WATER AND NEED TO MIGRATE
I tried using the order command and was confused on how it worked.
Is it typed out just like how it is written above and do you have to be a certain rank in the leadership to be able to use this command?

I think it doesn't notify you at all when it works, which is annoying. The chat bubble should be colored like how cursing is colored, maybe I'll make a separate suggestion thread for this cause i think it's important and should apply to giving property permission and joining also (and any other chat commands I'm blanking on)

So yeah no rank required but if you have no one beneath you then no one will receive it. Typing just as it is in the post makes it work, yes, I'm not sure if the comma is required or not but I noticed it function correctly when it was included just as in the example.

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2019-12-14 22:10:23

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#52 2019-12-14 22:32:27

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#53 2019-12-14 22:46:30

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#54 2019-12-14 22:49:28

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#55 2019-12-14 22:56:26

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#56 2019-12-14 22:57:22

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#57 2019-12-14 23:03:28

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#58 2019-12-14 23:15:11

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#59 2019-12-14 23:35:42

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#60 2019-12-15 00:02:40

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#61 2019-12-15 00:03:50

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#62 2019-12-15 00:10:45

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#63 2019-12-15 00:33:26

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#64 2019-12-15 01:06:35

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#65 2019-12-15 02:27:59

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#66 2019-12-15 02:36:42

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#67 2019-12-15 02:46:56

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#68 2019-12-15 03:01:01

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#69 2019-12-15 03:06:47

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#70 2019-12-15 04:33:09

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#71 2019-12-15 06:59:57

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#72 2019-12-15 07:05:01

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#73 2019-12-15 08:59:02

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#74 2019-12-15 20:45:10

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

#75 2019-12-15 21:44:02

Re: Idea for a leadership ability: Orders

Board footer