Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

Arcurus · 2020-09-25 11:34:33

This topic is about collecting and discussion more detailed ideas how we could handle grieving in a better way:

The main question i have is, do we need two different logic / curses and exile, or could they be combined to one?

People who are exiled (more enemies then allies) could be slowed down X0.8 and reduced to tool / item use of age 3

This would reduce their ability to do damage drastically and they have time to beg for redemption.

The ally exile system would be perfect to do this. Using a curse could by default also exile the other person.

I would see it this way, we have three different ways of saying i dont like what you do in this order:

Exile, Curse, Kill

An exile ist the most soft version an kill attempt the hardest one.

If you curse and try to kill, by default you should auto exile. If you forgive also the exile should be forgiven

If you try to kill some one by default it could auto curse and auto exile the one.

Further ideas would be to mark a person also as newborn as exiled / cursed if he happend to be exiled / cursed a lot (especially if he is born in the family which exiled / cursed him a lot).

Further we could use something like cursed graves, which would be a bone pile with 5 sharp stones which does not decay.

As long as this cursed grave is close, the griefer is seen as cursed, gets above speed mali and item use to age 3.

Additional this grave could increase the general curse count by 2 of this person as long as the grave is there.

I think a cursed grave could bring some stories to a village and report to the next generation what the cursed person did.

UPDATE:
If you exiled one and are very close to him, you could be general hindering him to pick up stuff.

If one tries to attack you or cursed or exiled you, you could be allowed to attack him.

Last edited by Arcurus (2020-09-25 13:06:28)

gamatron332 · 2020-09-25 11:58:51

I like this a lot actually. I have nothing to add though. Srry. Hmm dum dee. Need more space. I like grapes. Aight byeeeee

Arcurus · 2020-09-25 12:15:39

gamatron332 wrote:

I like this a lot actually. I have nothing to add though. Srry. Hmm dum dee. Need more space. I like grapes. Aight byeeeee

lol yea, a simple i like it or i like this part of it not because of XYZ helps also a lot, so we get a better feeling where we stand at as community

Arcurus · 2020-09-25 12:26:43

By the way, yea curses could be counted relative to your play time not simple decay after 30 days.

But this would encourage to just stay AFK at the fire and wait.

Maybe better would be to compare the curses to how you have been treated after death:

More to this idea you can find here:

https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p?id=10129

DestinyCall · 2020-09-25 13:59:59

I see no reason to combine exile and curses. It gives Jason more levers to tweak and it gives players more ways to address problem players. Not everyone who starts trouble is actually griefing, so only having one way to "fix" the problem is too limited. When all you have is a hammer, all your problems start to look like nails.

In fact, I'd like to get even more ways to handle problematic players. For example, can we have some non-lethal weapons, like snowballs, before they were nerfed? It would be nice to be able to disarm suspicious individuals so we have time to talk with them about why they are running around the town targeting people with a bow. Maybe they are a new player and just need to be told where to find something to shoot. Or maybe they are trying to kill their sister who is a baby-kidnapper. But unless we have a way to neutralize potential threats non-violently, we will tend to resort to killing or cursing or whatever is easiest/fastest.

The question of whether or not we should auto-curse people who are killed has come up in the past. The problem with automatic curses is that there are many different reasons for killing. Innocent people get killed and they don't deserve to be cursed because of it. If you are killing someone for a good reason, you can choose to curse them also. But I do not think it is necessary to automate it.

One thing that I was thinking might make sense as an automated process - if a leader targets someone as a kill target, perhaps that should also exile them automatically. This would make it easier to exile problem players by allowing the leader's decision to stab them in the heart also communicate their desire to exile them from the group. So instead of announcing "I want you gone!", you could just go over and murder-stab them as a clear sign that you don't like them to a high degree. If you fail to kill them, then they have at least been banished. If you succeed in killing them, the exile is meaningless but not harmful since you obviously wanted them gone.

The biggest danger with this system is that a mad leader could more easily kill random people, but that is already a potential danger with anyone who is in a position of leadership. This doesn't give them a new power, it just makes immediate removal of bad followers more idiot-proof. I would NOT advocate auto-cursing in this situation, because curses are a more serious and long-lasting punishment that extends beyond a single life. They should be reserved for special cases when you decide it is justified. I don't want the game to link killing and cursing together or they become the same choice.

For example, as a leader, I might make the decision to kill a follower based on a report given to me by another villager who witnessed them committing a serious crime. I might be willing to exile or kill someone based on hearsay, but I would not want to curse them. I would also want curse forgiveness to remain separate from exile. These two things should be distinct actions. One is targeting the player, while the other is more about their in-game character's relationship to the village. I might decide to allow someone back into the village after being exiled, but not trust them enough to forgive the curse I placed on them earlier. The black curse label allows me to keep an eye on them more easily and if I decide that they are genuinely not griefing the village, I might decide to remove the curse before I die.

Arcurus · 2020-09-25 15:31:59

DestinyCall wrote:

I see no reason to combine exile and curses. It gives Jason more levers to tweak and it gives players more ways to address problem players. Not everyone who starts trouble is actually griefing, so only having one way to "fix" the problem is too limited. When all you have is a hammer, all your problems start to look like nails.
In fact, I'd like to get even more ways to handle problematic players. For example, can we have some non-lethal weapons, like snowballs, before they were nerfed? It would be nice to be able to disarm suspicious individuals so we have time to talk with them about why they are running around the town targeting people with a bow. Maybe they are a new player and just need to be told where to find something to shoot. Or maybe they are trying to kill their sister who is a baby-kidnapper. But unless we have a way to neutralize potential threats non-violently, we will tend to resort to killing or cursing or whatever is easiest/fastest.
The question of whether or not we should auto-curse people who are killed has come up in the past. The problem with automatic curses is that there are many different reasons for killing. Innocent people get killed and they don't deserve to be cursed because of it. If you are killing someone for a good reason, you can choose to curse them also. But I do not think it is necessary to automate it.
One thing that I was thinking might make sense as an automated process - if a leader targets someone as a kill target, perhaps that should also exile them automatically. This would make it easier to exile problem players by allowing the leader's decision to stab them in the heart also communicate their desire to exile them from the group. So instead of announcing "I want you gone!", you could just go over and murder-stab them as a clear sign that you don't like them to a high degree. If you fail to kill them, then they have at least been banished. If you succeed in killing them, the exile is meaningless but not harmful since you obviously wanted them gone.
The biggest danger with this system is that a mad leader could more easily kill random people, but that is already a potential danger with anyone who is in a position of leadership. This doesn't give them a new power, it just makes immediate removal of bad followers more idiot-proof. I would NOT advocate auto-cursing in this situation, because curses are a more serious and long-lasting punishment that extends beyond a single life. They should be reserved for special cases when you decide it is justified. I don't want the game to link killing and cursing together or they become the same choice.
For example, as a leader, I might make the decision to kill a follower based on a report given to me by another villager who witnessed them committing a serious crime. I might be willing to exile or kill someone based on hearsay, but I would not want to curse them. I would also want curse forgiveness to remain separate from exile. These two things should be distinct actions. One is targeting the player, while the other is more about their in-game character's relationship to the village. I might decide to allow someone back into the village after being exiled, but not trust them enough to forgive the curse I placed on them earlier. The black curse label allows me to keep an eye on them more easily and if I decide that they are genuinely not griefing the village, I might decide to remove the curse before I die.

I see the points. thank you for outlining them in that detail.

Yes, attacking one should for sure exile him, he has still the pre attack warning to run away.

And with "Life by the sword die by the sword" in place an evil leader cannot go that easily anymore on a mass murder.

What im worried about is not so much the vets, but the normal and noob population.

I mean when some one killed you and you have still a curse token, why should you not by default curse the person?

In your above example i understand that you dont want to curse him, since you dont know if he is real evil, but would not in this case a warning combined with an exile enough, why kill him? He could be further restricted to pick up only stuff up to age 3, so he would have an incentive to leave or work good for redemption.

Isn't it that killing says already i dont want to play with this player? Why not curse him then by default if you still have a curse token? For sure still you can forgive him.

And i dont think that victims wont get much punished through curses, if the murderer curses you, you have even a bigger chance not to play with them. And since they only have one curse token per time, they cannot curse much and will receive plenty curses if they kill plenty people.

Making the curse token more valuable itself could also help to think twice about using it or killing some one. For example your speed could be reduced X0.9 until you have it back. If you forgive very close after your curse the curse token could come back. So still you could forgive one that you murdered.

Arcurus · 2020-09-25 15:36:52

Oh i forgot about the non lethal weapons. yea would be interesting to try them out. I guess they can be very annoying too, so this would need some further considerations.

And maybe a way to chain some one for one minute on a rope and then bring him somewhere.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2020-09-25 11:34:33

Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#2 2020-09-25 11:58:51

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#3 2020-09-25 12:15:39

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#4 2020-09-25 12:26:43

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#5 2020-09-25 13:59:59

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#6 2020-09-25 15:31:59

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

#7 2020-09-25 15:36:52

Re: Collecting Ideas about Griefer "handling"

Board footer