Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

Arcurus · 2020-05-17 17:53:30

UPDATE:
the first problem i see with it, the more relatives you have the more difficult it is to take care of them the higher the chance is that they pull you down.
Just imagine you have only yourself to take care of thats lot easier then to take care of 5 relatives.

On top of that you wont get any warning before a relative starves to death, so normally you wont have a chance to help them, except to always make sure that there is tons of yam food. But still many new players starve to death even if there is food, so some information would be helpful, so that you can actually help them.

Also it does not consider the linage of the genes / what happened after you.

So here some ideas to that:
- all relatives after the direct kids (kids of your sisters) count only positive to the genes, never negative. This would benefit those who make sure that they have many offspring's and not punishing them for that.
- Further at least one more generation can be considered to get positive genes the more offspring the better
- if the family linage dies out in the next hour after your death, you get -10 gene score (sorry you failed)

UPDATE: of course sever shutdown and no fertile female can be considered not to count)

The leader calculation is changed the following way:

CurrentGeneScore * (SUM(lengthOFyourLifingLinages) plus 10 forEachAliveEveLinageYouStarted plus TheLongestLinageYouEverHad)
the current linage can be counted double.

With that we can require Bobo to be close to a saint if he wants to be a leader

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-05-18 20:28:24)

miskas · 2020-05-17 18:09:31

if you have to change something is this :
you wont get any warning before a relative starves to death
Any visual warning that someone is starvig would be nice, A hungry Emote.

<<all relatives after the direct kids (kids of your sisters) count only positive to the genes, never negative. This would benefit those who make sure that they have many offspring's and not punishing them for that.>>
How? if you want to make grandkids less important then factor their weight on gene score by 50%

<<Further at least one more generation can be considered to get positive genes the more offspring the better>>
you mean that you get a flat bonus for every grandkid spawning in your family?

Arcurus · 2020-05-17 18:41:12

miskas wrote:

<<all relatives after the direct kids (kids of your sisters) count only positive to the genes, never negative. This would benefit those who make sure that they have many offspring's and not punishing them for that.>>
How? if you want to make grandkids less important then factor their weight on gene score by 50%
<<Further at least one more generation can be considered to get positive genes the more offspring the better>>
you mean that you get a flat bonus for every grandkid spawning in your family?

I dont want them to be less important i want them to be more important, especially since mass-murderers wont have many of them.
how? simple, they never ever count negative.

As said the problem currently is, if you have a high gene score, you get in average mali for having more relatives, since they can bring you in average down.
by never letting these grandkids getting you negative score they can only put you score up, so they would be always good to have for you.

I mean with each grand kid you have a chance that it lives longer then your gene score, since it does not pull you down it can only pull you up, so they are always beneficial for you to have. As balance you get massively punsihed if your linage dies out in the next hour, minus 10 years, so simply incarnating to have more grandkids alone wont work, since every incarnation is a chance that you get punished for your linage then dying out.

was also thinking if for the leader calculation some kind of linage score similar to the gene score could be used additionally.

If one Linage dies or lately after 60 generations after your incarnation:
Your LinageScore += (LinageLengthAfterYou - LinageScore) / 10;

This would have the effect the more you incarnate in one linage the more you gain or loose if this linage dies...
But im sure if the effect would be big enough to stop mass murderers. Since we have the data we could just calculate and see the result.

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-05-17 18:44:29)

Spoonwood · 2020-05-17 19:26:37

Lineages die out due to updates. Also, they have died out, because of mothers not having girls. So, the part about losing gene score due to lineages dying out isn't a fair system.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2020-05-18 10:39:59)

Laskara · 2020-05-17 20:22:50

Spoonwood wrote:

Lineages die out to due to updates. Also, they have died out, because of mothers not having girls. So, the part about losing gene score due to lineages dying out isn't a fair system.

I have to back that one up, I just went through a whole life improving the town as mum's only son and don't get shit out of it because one of my sisters disconnected and the other ran off and died to a wolf somewhere, mom and I had fuckall to do with their bad luck

Arcurus · 2020-05-17 20:42:22

Spoonwood wrote:

Lineages die out to due to updates. Also, they have died out, because of mothers not having girls. So, the part about losing gene score due to lineages dying out isn't a fair system.

both could be considered, since both is visible in the data, so this should not count negative, but thx for mentioning it.

I think the current genetic system is fully broken. the more kids you have the less score. got so my kids and grand-kids i could not even count anymore, even if some die, still you should be rewarded since lot of grandkids, but no you will be destroyed....

Guess i have to wait untill the family tree is updated to count them all:
http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=6230595

maybe a system, which just counts the boddies would be better something like:

If you get 3 years old you loose 100 score since you got a body where you can take care now of your own, this investment you need to pay back....
if your child gets 3 you get 10 gene score and four generations before you get also 10 gene score so in total 50. Additionally the closest male in right age also gets 10 gene score and the four generations before him.

People with more offspring's would have positive balance, all other negative...

Downt know yet how to let also siblings benefit anybody any idea? Maybe just instead choosing a male, choose any sibling. and only consider male if male got in average less genes then female and female if they got less then male....

the bad thing with this would be that its not totally in your control how many childs you get, depending on the time you play, there may join more or less players, so players in a bad time zone would be discriminated.... this could be balanced by the algorithm if it is a repeating pattern...

anybody any better idea?

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-05-17 20:52:16)

Lava · 2020-05-17 21:29:05

I wish we had more branch differentiation. More often than not a family is composed of pretty much immediate family only and the far off branches second third usually die out

Catfive · 2020-05-18 00:47:22

Arcurus wrote:

With that we can require Bobo to be close to a saint if he wants to be a leader

Nope he will still be handed it by the less bright amongst the playrbase. Logic i have seen used is ' you gave me bp so..' and 'you were my only child' rp by a male. He will still be given leadership on a regular basis i guarantee it. and that ignores his gene score completely

Arcurus · 2020-05-18 07:38:49

Catfive wrote:

Arcurus wrote:
With that we can require Bobo to be close to a saint if he wants to be a leader
Nope he will still be handed it by the less bright amongst the playrbase. Logic i have seen used is ' you gave me bp so..' and 'you were my only child' rp by a male. He will still be given leadership on a regular basis i guarantee it. and that ignores his gene score completely

that could be changed, that your default followers will only follow the new one if he has better score.

in general i think the problem is that the current exile system is too powerful, you cant do much about it like it is now.

Catfive · 2020-05-18 08:26:17

Arcurus wrote:

Catfive wrote:
With that we can require Bobo to be close to a saint if he wants to be a leader
Nope he will still be handed it by the less bright amongst the playrbase. Logic i have seen used is ' you gave me bp so..' and 'you were my only child' rp by a male. He will still be given leadership on a regular basis i guarantee it. and that ignores his gene score completely

someone smart wrote:

that could be changed, that your default followers will only follow the new one if he has better score.

which would be awesome if it were yes but i can't help thinking it may have been deliberately put in as is, just as some of these 'leaders' deliberately pass leadership to players they know are bad for their tribes. not bobo worshippers as such but fan boy drama rpers

Catfive · 2020-05-18 08:27:44

Arcurus wrote:

With that we can require Bobo to be close to a saint if he wants to be a leader

Catfive wrote:

Nope he will still be handed it by the less bright amongst the playrbase. Logic i have seen used is ' you gave me bp so..' and 'you were my only child' rp by a male. He will still be given leadership on a regular basis i guarantee it. and that ignores his gene score completely

someone smart wrote:

that could be changed, that your default followers will only follow the new one if he has better score.

which would be awesome if it were yes but i can't help thinking it may have been deliberately put in as is, just as some of these 'leaders' deliberately pass leadership to players they know are bad for their tribes. not bobo worshipers as such but fan boy drama rpers

Alontae Balasa · 2020-05-18 17:12:47

Do lives from server1 - server15 count towards your genetic fitness score?

wondible · 2020-05-18 18:00:45

Alontae Balasa wrote:

Do lives from server1 - server15 count towards your genetic fitness score?

No, people were farming score there. Currently minActivePlayersForFitness is 15, similar to a lot of other controversial features.

jasonrohrer · 2020-05-18 19:48:01

It's not true that the higher you go, the more other people pull you down.

You gain score if they live longer than THEIR current average.

You lose score if they live shorter than their current average.

So, you having a high score doesn't matter. If you help them do better than their normal, your score goes up. If you hurt them to do worse than normal for them, your score goes down.

Now, that said, when you have a high score, it is easier to go down than to keep going up. You can't go up that much more (because of the cap), so your improvements become tinier and tinier over time as you keep going up. Meanwhile, you have much further to fall, because you're so far above the floor.

So, let's say you have a score of 50, and you live two lives. In one life, you live to 60 (so your score goes up a tiny bit). In the next life, you die at age 5, so your score goes down a lot. The net impact of those two lives is a drop in score. That might not seem fair, but if your current score is 50, a life of 60 isn't that surprising. A life of 5 is very surprising, though.

The amount a score changes depends on how surprising the life is.

Likewise, if you have a low score and live a long life, that's very surprising, so your score will go up quite a bit.

This might seem unfair to the people at the top---their position is so precarious!

But I don't think there's a more fair way for it to work.

For example, if we had the score move equally slow up/down as you got closer and closer to the top, the people at the top would be kinda protected from big drops. But then you could get into a situation where someone gets to the top, starts sluffing off, and lets 50% of their relatives die young. As long as 50% lived to old age, it would balance out, and their score wouldn't change. But that's not right! They shouldn't stay at a score of 55. Their true score is more like 30. So they should slide down to 30 again. The current score system does allow that to happen.

I know the big drops from the top can be dispiriting, but I don't think there's a way around it.

Arcurus · 2020-05-18 20:22:56

jasonrohrer wrote:

It's not true that the higher you go, the more other people pull you down.
You gain score if they live longer than THEIR current average.
You lose score if they live shorter than their current average.
...
I know the big drops from the top can be dispiriting, but I don't think there's a way around it.

Thx Jason for clarifying it, yea just looked at the code need to change my post if i said it wrong... But still the problem is the same, taking care of more is lot more difficult then taking care of only yourself. Genetically it should be exactly the other way round, since you reaching 60 alone has done nothing while having 3 kids even if one dies early did at lot.

To the current score, there are some problems:
Normally you get no clue that another of your relatives is starving to death, so you can help him only indirectly through making food available, but especially for new players this might not be enough, since they might not know how to eat it, or are simply overhemeld to find it in the right time. so an better information about starving close relatives and some kind of starvation change like outlines in the github issue could help, that you can help them before they starve to death.

Another issue is with grandkids and grandgrandkis often you cant do much about their life a fair thing would be if they would be rated more positive then negative, since having grand kids is already a success.

Also as outlined, currently having lot of kids pulls you in average lot down, since you are simply overwhelmed to take care of 6 kids in a new village. From the genes logically it should be a success, since even if some kids dies early more a lot of them survived so your genes spread.

Imagine you would only have yourself to take care, thats lot more easy to take care then of 4 additional relatives, but gene wise all count equal, but taking care of 4 is much more hard, so having more kids pulls you in average down.

To balance this therefore i suggested to count grandkids only positive. having more kids should pull you in average up not down.

Maybe counting yourself only negative, your first generation normal and all after that only positive could help to balance that and would encourage to have more kids not less.

By the way, we should think also about counting the auto followers to the gene score of the leader, had 10 plus followers but only 2 of them relatives...

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-05-18 20:37:44)

The_Anabaptist · 2020-05-18 20:36:22

I think the two biggest challenges are that 1) a mother gets zero warning that they are about to have a kid. and 2) SIDS babies.

1) Zero warning. How do you family plan? If you dare go out of town, then you can pretty much count on returning to town with a baby and not what you went to fetch.
2) SIDS babies. I can be in a beautiful town, but the kid refuses to stick around, sometimes not even taking enough time to even evaluate the situation. They are essentially a miscarriage. Nothing you can do about that.

Honestly, I would prefer a system where a blessing or a curse just counted as a + or a - to your overall score. Let a player who reaches elder age bestow a bless / curse to each family member once. It would probably encourage "respecting your elders".

The_Anabaptist

Arcurus · 2020-05-18 20:47:45

The_Anabaptist wrote:

I think the two biggest challenges are that 1) a mother gets zero warning that they are about to have a kid. and 2) SIDS babies.
1) Zero warning. How do you family plan? If you dare go out of town, then you can pretty much count on returning to town with a baby and not what you went to fetch.
2) SIDS babies. I can be in a beautiful town, but the kid refuses to stick around, sometimes not even taking enough time to even evaluate the situation. They are essentially a miscarriage. Nothing you can do about that.
Honestly, I would prefer a system where a blessing or a curse just counted as a + or a - to your overall score. Let a player who reaches elder age bestow a bless / curse to each family member once. It would probably encourage "respecting your elders".
The_Anabaptist

yea the curse system looks quite broken to me. fights happen now through who can curse the other more, most cursing is done for nonsense or to defend against an EXTERNAL attack. You should be never allowed to curse externals, since for that you have weapons to fight them of. Taking care of griefers you get normally cursed for, since most are simply ignoring the griefers, so you get their curses when you take care of them. Just look at the last video from twisted, all except him ignored the griefer.... lucky the griefer was a super noob, otherwise he would just use the horse to steal the engine with no chance to catch....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy3S-mMXrEw

Even worse often curses you get by just simply walking on the wrong time on the wrong place when someone wanted to curse another one then me.

I was thinking about if we could connect the curses / score to the graves, if you let rot one he losses score if you build a grave he gets some score.

I feal really sad when i see all this unburied bodies.... all civilizations took care of their dead realatives, but since there is no gamplay use other then faster decay and some memory, you even can be considered as griefer if you bury them...

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-05-18 20:51:41)

Spoonwood · 2020-05-18 20:50:55

The_Anabaptist wrote:

2) SIDS babies. I can be in a beautiful town, but the kid refuses to stick around, sometimes not even taking enough time to even evaluate the situation. They are essentially a miscarriage. Nothing you can do about that.

No, he could have /die children not count at all towards genetic score. It's a stupid system, because it penalizes the mother for something she had absolutely no control over. Baby bones work the same way to some extent. Really, both show how much the game designer resents players and seem to have such clear solutions, since they can't even choose to play a fair game, while in at least some other games that I know of, players can bias the game in their favor even.

Also, that it doesn't matter the generation of the players shows how bad of a system it is. Lower life expectancy of players in true Eve camps (at least given that's still a thing), implies that the generation of the player should matter in the number needed to exceed to increase or decrease genetic score.

Arcurus · 2020-05-18 20:55:40

Spoonwood wrote:

No, he could have /die children not count at all towards genetic score. It's a stupid system, because it penalizes the mother for something she had absolutely no control over. Baby bones work the same way to some extent.
...
Also, that it doesn't matter the generation of the players shows how bad of a system it is. Lower life expectancy of players in true Eve camps (at least given that's still a thing), implies that the generation of the player should matter in the number needed to exceed to increase or decrease genetic score.

I thought /die count only for the children not the mother? if they count for the mother that would be quite unfair...

With the generation, yea thats quite of unfair, early towns are lot more difficult, maybe the algorithm could balance on the actual statistics.

pein · 2020-05-18 21:31:09

it's not really something that you control so it shouldn't be something to control you

I'm having a hard time getting any score and enforces a dumb playstyle I don't like, force-feeding people and doing nothing but watching others do stupid shit
also, a good way to get cursed by interacting with dumb people and mentioning their mistakes

sad that it hit veterans who like crafting a lot while having zero benefits on teamwork, slots have failed and they are annoying, anyone who denies it, doesn't even play the way that he would be useful on tech and long term sustainability, enforcing your views again on short term stupidity

how is that those veterans who are 10 times faster are worse players than these noobs who live their life within 30 tiles? how that is civilization building? that's mere survival
but the benefits go for people who don't care for slots and others are screwed with the tool slots
th cap was also bad, at least playing more games pushed your score up a bit
I don't even think that farming score is an exploit, it was a good feature, slot limits make life boring and you can't help others without showing them first, so quite dumb to limit slots, it enforces stupid tools you wouldn't use otherwise, all the farming and food making tools seem to be more important but committing to those makes you iss out on building and tech. artificial slowdowns are dumb and boring. not like you would need to make 50 fires or 200 wheels in a life so tools are not equal and enforcing to choose is a dumb limitation.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2020-05-17 17:53:30

Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#2 2020-05-17 18:09:31

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#3 2020-05-17 18:41:12

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#4 2020-05-17 19:26:37

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#5 2020-05-17 20:22:50

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#6 2020-05-17 20:42:22

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#7 2020-05-17 21:29:05

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#8 2020-05-18 00:47:22

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#9 2020-05-18 07:38:49

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#10 2020-05-18 08:26:17

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#11 2020-05-18 08:27:44

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#12 2020-05-18 17:12:47

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#13 2020-05-18 18:00:45

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#14 2020-05-18 19:48:01

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#15 2020-05-18 20:22:56

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#16 2020-05-18 20:36:22

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#17 2020-05-18 20:47:45

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#18 2020-05-18 20:50:55

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#19 2020-05-18 20:55:40

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

#20 2020-05-18 21:31:09

Re: Since gene score is now so important some thoughts to it

Board footer