A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

futurebird · 2019-05-21 12:18:45

Each player would have 3 blocks EVER. If you block a 4th person the 1st person you block is unblocked. If you choose to block a player they have an effective birth area ban for your birth location. You also have an area ban for THEIR birth location. So if you choose to use all 3 blocks you would (at worst) be area banned from being born in up to 3 towns at any given time (but for that to happen all 3 people you blocked would need to be playing before you login)

Once you are born those 3 people cannot be born in your town. So you are less likely to encounter them.

The action of blocking is silent and babies can do it by typing the comment /Block FIRSTNAME LASTNAME.

Players who constantly annoy others might end up unable to be born to any mother when they try to log in. If this happens they go to donkey town until there is a town where no one has blocked them.

In fact 3 blocks might be too many. This system could also work with just 1 or two blocks.

There are a lot of players with zero or very few curses and a few with a great number. If the distribution of blocks is similar these players would be kept away from the people they annoy.

Since blocks are removed when new blocks are added over time a player who stopped being annoying and griefing could work their way off of block lists and have many more places to be born.

Basically, it'd be kind of like how you can block someone in a chat or other social network. But, with a limit on blocks to keep the number of places people can be born high.

Spiegel · 2019-05-21 13:49:02

It just needs a cooler name. Blocking sounds so. . .

So. . .

futurebird · 2019-05-21 13:58:54

Spiegel wrote:

It just needs a cooler name. Blocking sounds so. . .
So. . .

"Player mute"

"avoidance curse"

Really, I suspect that there are only maybe 20-30 players out of 1000s who consistently ruin my enjoyment of the game. I'm not talking about noobs, or drama queens, or even people who get in to fights that end with murder. I'm talking about *pure griefing* people who aren't invested in the game, who break the immersion AND block my ability to play because they think it's funny to make other people unhappy or angry.

The sword is no use against such people since they can be in your family and don't really care about being killed *at all* right now a lot of them seem to be playing as Eves since they now spawn close enough to drop in and annoy other people without being worried about curses.

Without the curse system we'd have a real mess. I think it's an effective system, but it's clumsy and LOUD.

Since this type of curse is silent it would also stop chain-cursing and "curse backs" as well.

But when someone keep spouting racial slurs, spamming yoo-hoo, undoing my projects, hiding tools, killing sheep, blocking objects with their body and trying to kill all the girls or break the town food supply or water I could know that would not have to play with that person again. I could avoid them. That would make me feel so much better.

Best of all: since the mute works both ways people have an inventive *not* to use it unless what they are dealing with is really irritating.

Last edited by futurebird (2019-05-21 14:01:06)

Spoonwood · 2019-05-21 17:28:59

I don't think this compatibile with Jason's notion of how every life should be unique. I think he would say that playing with the same people over and over would not be 'rich dynamics' or something. It wouldn't matter if I pointed out to him my experiences with playing with the same people on server12 or on server7 to convince him otherwise either.

Tarr · 2019-05-21 18:23:16

Most players you would want to block have multiple accounts anyways. You would mostly be looking at blocking 1 to 2 people max with a three block system.

pein · 2019-05-21 18:38:14

i mean, if the definition of "griefer" is someone that makes you angry then we got problems

cause people get angry for: abandoning them - sure it's not nice but still not your choice
telling them that you made that pck they wearing
picking up a pack from a corpse faster
literally anything, like asking them to work something

im an angry person, i go 1 to 100 quick, but i will forget you in 10 min, either i kill you if you keep annoying me or i quit, move out
if you are reasonable we can make peace or just ignore each other

but some rp nabs who walk and talk 40 min, curse anyone
and generally framing is worse than someone who was tricked into killing
i don mind gettign killed

so a 1 on 1 system surely would be better
i would give a higher range of not placing people together, but multiple blacklisting
just because you are alone doesn't mean you are wrong or because you can convince 2 kids doesn't mean you are right

this would segregate the playerbase somewhat, but hey, who cares about rp players who just leach on you anyways? i rather play with total newbees who need to learn how to eat

futurebird · 2019-05-21 19:09:20

Tarr wrote:

Most players you would want to block have multiple accounts anyways. You would mostly be looking at blocking 1 to 2 people max with a three block system.

It's very likely that there would be other people in any village would would want to block those same people and the preferences of the village taken together would cover multiple accounts.

Killing griefers does little to deter them.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-05-21 12:18:45

A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#2 2019-05-21 13:49:02

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#3 2019-05-21 13:58:54

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#4 2019-05-21 17:28:59

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#5 2019-05-21 18:23:16

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#6 2019-05-21 18:38:14

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

#7 2019-05-21 19:09:20

Re: A system to replace cursing "block" 3 players.

Board footer