Will we get content soon?

JonySky · 2019-07-04 19:57:35

MultiLife wrote:

Aghh, I just don't like the approach of "your character does a thing bad until you grind it enough to be good", and have that repeat every life. I personally like that good players can do things efficiently (fast, minimum use of resources) and bad players are the ones who waste things due to not being able to do it as well or not valuing the more efficient approach.
People would be annoyed to see someone start smithing and making low quality items (essentially wasting iron) when there is already some older smith doing the thing better. People would be stuck in the roles to ensure the town stays at maximum efficiency. It's a game after all, limiting a player "because it'd be realistic to not be good at everything" feels bad for the player. It's a nerf to your products, enforced by the game, even if you know you did it right.
There are so many theories how trade could happen in the game, but I hope we don't end up with a solution of "nerf until you have to do it". I'd rather approach it with the idea of excess. You want to trade away things you don't need or value, but right now everything is valuable. All towns are the same (or else they die), and any rope or pie is needed. Populations boom, bakers die, items are lost, ropes are low, populations shrink... What a town needs is everything, at every time. Every excess is beneficial and time goes by so quick that soon it's not excess anymore.
If we could communicate better, travel better, have actual excess in resources and clearly different towns with different strenghts, I think we'd get our first natural trades. But with war swords and language barriers, and same needs per town, we rather make momentary excess and keep it to ourselves, and get our own iron and soil. It's just easier to get your stuff by yourself, as no one is ever bringing it to you on their own anyways.
If I had excess items to get rid of, I'd love to switch them with someone who has something I'd rather have. But we never meet, and they're never there when I need them. Too much moving required, with language (communication) issues, griefing, killing, and towns always needing everything anyways. Same things as the next town, all the time.
So. My conclusion is... More ways of making things, more helpful resources, more useful things to make, more ways to move around excess items, more ways to communicate and excecute a fair trade (ensure the trader will most likely get what they want if they go to make a trade, so it's almost guaranteed and worth the try), more ways of specializing towns regarding its resource/s, and making it so that it's something it doesn't actually need to live, and can forward it to other places to get something they'd rather have.
I'd love it if some traveler came over with super cool and special character customization stuff, like hair gel or makeup or jewellery, and people would offer them things they can take to their town to help it live. I could finally look like a character of my own and do a trade that they benefit from. To me it could be fun vanity, to them it could be a lifeline for their town. Or maybe they just have a truckload of rope to throw away and we have a diesel engine for it, as we have extra. Although; who wants to be doing labor for a milkweed farm or an engine if it's sold by some random behind your back, with you not getting stuff for yourself? This is the issue of property we still face, and fences have done little to it. If machines did the engine for us, or farmed the milkweed... Hmmm...

That idea if I would like it! +1

AdelaSkarupa · 2019-07-04 20:36:41

JonySky wrote:

what do we do with the EVES ... do they know everything? Do you know all the professions?
...
what happens with the secondary tasks (french fries, burritos, snowmen, tree planting, etc ...) must also learn these jobs

I think your idea of a skill-based system is way to complicated. You're thinking of building skills associated with individual craftable items. What I imagine is that the more you cook (no matter what you cook), the more complicated things you can cook. And the more you smith (again, no matter what you smith at your current level), you will be able to craft higher level items. I don't imagine that this curve would be very steep or difficult to achieve, but would create a more realistic progression of crafting skill.

The questions about Eves is moot, since Eves are going to start out at the most basic level, regardless of what the player knows about the game. That natural progression should build their skills as the go without them noticing much difference, except when reaching higher tech tiers.

Edit: I also think this would be a good system to prevent all Eves from just rushing to the nearest abandoned city. They would have access to the items, but they would not immediately be able to take advantage of everything right away because they hadn't followed the natural skill-building progression.

Last edited by AdelaSkarupa (2019-07-04 20:38:27)

Dodge · 2019-07-04 20:47:19

@JonySky

You make it way more complicated than it really is.

Professions would be quite easy.

You smith = you gain skill points in smithing = you learn more advanced recipes in smithing and become more efficient

As for planting trees it would be farming and french fries would be cooking

Some crafting wouldn't require profession like making snowmen or other basic stuff like making ropes and bow drill etc.

Also keep in mind that with a smaller map there would be roads between cities and over generations people would learn the language of other families.

AdelaSkarupa · 2019-07-04 20:50:22

I think for the most part, Dodge and I are on the same page. However, I feel like if the map is smaller, resources will be closer together. If natural resources are in the territory of two families, I think they will more quickly fight for it than trade for it.

JonySky · 2019-07-04 21:20:25

Dodge wrote:

@JonySky
You make it way more complicated than it really is.
Professions would be quite easy.
You smith = you gain skill points in smithing = you learn more advanced recipes in smithing and become more efficient
As for planting trees it would be farming and french fries would be cooking
Some crafting wouldn't require profession like making snowmen or other basic stuff like making ropes and bow drill etc.
Also keep in mind that with a smaller map there would be roads between cities and over generations people would learn the language of other families.

if the professions are easy ... this system will not work

in this community there are players who within a few hours of leaving the update of the planes were already flying ...

... to the 10 generations we will have complete cities

If everyone can do everything (even if it is of poor quality) we will continue

imagine the pain that would be to find the blacksmith to ask for something and have to pay for a tool that would use a whole town

only RPG players will use this (and hopefully)

people will continue to do the tool themselves when they need it even if it is of lower quality
they will waste resources and the lineage will be extinguished ... just like now ...
Nothing changes

and about the trade ...
Do you really think that players will barter to get a better quality tool by paying a price on cakes? when can they do it themselves?

The disorder of the cities is very big and I think that is one of the main reasons for the laziness of the people

and if the learning system is very difficult, then we will have situations like the ones I mentioned before

I still see many problems Dodge

AdelaSkarupa · 2019-07-04 21:27:38

Why does what is produced have to be poor quality? I feel like it just needs to be a "walk before you run" kind of thing. Do simpler crafts, build to more complex ones. Then you couldn't just make a plane right out the gate. You'd have to craft simpler items that the town needs first. Crafts above your skill level are just undoable (albeit for a short period of time).

JonySky · 2019-07-04 21:32:35

AdelaSkarupa wrote:

Why does what is produced have to be poor quality? I feel like it just needs to be a "walk before you run" kind of thing. Do simpler crafts, build to more complex ones. Then you couldn't just make a plane right out the gate. You'd have to craft simpler items that the town needs first. Crafts above your skill level are just undoable (albeit for a short period of time).

but what you describe is just what we have now ... nobody makes a plane in an early camp ...
Maybe the cause is different, but the result is the same
in an early camp we do not have a bomb, car, plane, etc ... because we do not have the material to build it

It is definitely the same

AdelaSkarupa · 2019-07-04 21:46:44

It's not the same, because I'm talking about little kids popping in and engineering. It would take time for an individual to develop skill in a particular area, which would keep them focused on one or two tasks rather than running around town doing everything themselves. Sure, someone in town may have the skill, but you may not. People would have to cooperate.

And rather than rushing to the end of a civilization or the boredom of having nothing left to accomplish, there would some minor slowdowns along the way as the youth build up their skill and take the previous generation's place, unless they were wise enough to take on a sort of apprenticeship.

Last edited by AdelaSkarupa (2019-07-04 21:49:17)

RodneyC86 · 2019-07-05 03:28:50

Looks like sterile pads in medic apron will be a thing soon

But why do we get domesticated rubber tree but not palm? Rubber really isn't the issue since same tree can be tapped repeatedly. Palm kernels on the other hand...

Grim_Arbiter · 2019-07-05 05:10:30

RodneyC86 wrote:

Looks like sterile pads in medic apron will be a thing soon
But why do we get domesticated rubber tree but not palm? Rubber really isn't the issue since same tree can be tapped repeatedly. Palm kernels on the other hand...

I dont think it would be too late to add it to the github as well.

Dodge · 2019-07-05 08:23:50

@JonySky

The concept would be easy but levelling up could take multiple generations depending on what it is.

Then you pass down the skill to future generations.

At some point kids from future generations will be born with the skill their parents had and will naturally tend to go in one direction if they want to.

Yes you could do everything but being rookie you will waste more ressources which will be a problem late game with limited ressources.

You can imagine a lot of problems that could be solved but right now there is no trade, so what do you suggest to make trade a reality if everyone can do everything?

RodneyC86 · 2019-07-05 08:37:32

Dodge wrote:

@JonySky
The concept would be easy but levelling up could take multiple generations depending on what it is.
Then you pass down the skill to future generations.
At some point kids from future generations will be born with the skill their parents had and will naturally tend to go in one direction if they want to.
Yes you could do everything but being rookie you will waste more ressources which will be a problem late game with limited ressources.
You can imagine a lot of problems that could be solved but right now there is no trade, so what do you suggest to make trade a reality if everyone can do everything?

So basically later generation peeps tend to start off with higher baseline skill or can gain skill faster compared to earlier gens. I kind of like it. Look at how seven year olds today learn to use an iPad compared to my granddad who can only manage to use a smartphone to make phone calls Only

Bob 101 · 2019-07-06 02:22:45

Okay well I ended up having a peak just with discord.

Carrot-Seedling · 2019-07-06 02:55:58

@OP

No. Jason does this loop where he gives us content, then plays with the core game, then bugfixes, then adds something nobody could/would/should make (like orginal railroads, property fences, planes, crowns, etc etc etc). We still have some time to wait.

ollj · 2019-07-06 11:59:35

Léonard wrote:

AdelaSkarupa wrote:
Spoonwood wrote:
causalities of war will hurt your genetic score).
It is consistent. That gives you the genetic incentive to win the war.
That's fine and all until you realize that, oh gee I don't know, maybe you don't start a war in the first place and avoid any casualty at all?

this is not how the tragedy-of-the-commons and tits-for-tats work.

you either have an item for foreign-only warfare, or its substitution; sabotage gallore.
and the sabotage alternative comes with a fuckton of paranoya, and wastes much more time.

ollj · 2019-07-06 12:07:46

Léonard wrote:

RodneyC86 wrote:
resource wars is a thing too
But since it's your family that matters, could it be possible that the war casualties pay off better than the deaths caused by an eventual resource crisis due to the stress caused by multiple families living together?
Do lineages survive long enough for such a thing to realistically happen?

- yes- yes ice seen if a few times.
warfare creates a surplus of food and clothing (due to dead people with cloth eating a lot less), which easily causes baby booms.
deaths from war are very temporary drawbacks. matter of fact, if you die in a war, you likely near instantly get reborn very close to that area, if not right next to someone you murdered.
if a town runs out of food or has any technology (water) crysis, a war campaign is a good way to resolve asuch a crisis.
it may likely end up into settling into a rich outpost with no water/food crysis.

Léonard wrote:

Does the genetic scoring system even allow for it? Does it care about lineage depth at all?
And to be honest, even if so, even if that did create a legitimate non-roleplaying reason for war, I still don't really like it.
I mean, it's better off for people to start wars because they can have extra pips of foods while old? Why not just yum instead...
And besides, why yet another emphasis on war?.. Shouldn't trade be the better option? I mean look at the modern world..

genetic score does not go that many generations into your future significantly to matter for most people durung foreigner warfare.
but it sure is an incentive for fertile females to be porotected against warfare, which then is an incentive to scout for potential danger nearby.

non-rp-awarfare reasons are plenty:
a won far campaign can increase a city population top +50% to +150%, at the cost of making +3 to +5 war swords, and some minor cooperation/planning, and a time investment of 10 to 40 minutes by 1 to 5 people (and up to 6 more being born along the way)

non-rp-warfare reasons are often just BEARS (lured by me, because you made non-pen-property fenches and way too many knifes, instead of getting milkweed by farming or by horses).
two times now I saw this happen; (me causing a war campaign by luring bears into a base);
I lure the small amount of 5-8 bears (you know, the number of bears that i usually hunt and kill within 40 minutes on my own) into a shitty base full of greed, i whitness half of them die, and the remaining half decides "fuck this bear infested zoo town, lets just go to war against whoever lives along out path towards the nearesd bell-town"

this then was actually the smarter choice, not the smartest, but slightly smarter than most alternatives that are now passed.
https://mega.nz/#!U5FmwKwS!Y9_3eQGXtlnI … 1r2okPRFBs

Last edited by ollj (2019-07-06 13:56:31)

RodneyC86 · 2019-07-06 13:34:08

hey ollj, if you are going to edit quotes please do it right. Those were Spoons words not mine

Edit: oh it's Leonard lol

Last edited by RodneyC86 (2019-07-06 14:33:47)

Spoonwood · 2019-07-06 17:24:09

ollj wrote:

Léonard wrote:
AdelaSkarupa wrote:
It is consistent. That gives you the genetic incentive to win the war.
That's fine and all until you realize that, oh gee I don't know, maybe you don't start a war in the first place and avoid any casualty at all?
this is not how the tragedy-of-the-commons and tits-for-tats work.
you either have an item for foreign-only warfare, or its substitution; sabotage gallore.
and the sabotage alternative comes with a fuckton of paranoya, and wastes much more time.

No. I'm not arguing against defense. I am arguing against starting wars. Anytime you start a war, you can anticipate casualties. And one single casualty hurts your genetic score more than none, so starting wars has NO logic in the game. Simply put, if you're starting wars, you're trying to make things more difficult on other players, INCLUDING those of your families. So, if you're starting a war, then you're a griefer.

RodneyC86 · 2019-07-06 19:46:04

Spoonwood wrote:

ollj wrote:
Léonard wrote:
That's fine and all until you realize that, oh gee I don't know, maybe you don't start a war in the first place and avoid any casualty at all?
this is not how the tragedy-of-the-commons and tits-for-tats work.
you either have an item for foreign-only warfare, or its substitution; sabotage gallore.
and the sabotage alternative comes with a fuckton of paranoya, and wastes much more time.
No. I'm not arguing against defense. I am arguing against starting wars. Anytime you start a war, you can anticipate casualties. And one single casualty hurts your genetic score more than none, so starting wars has NO logic in the game. Simply put, if you're starting wars, you're trying to make things more difficult on other players, INCLUDING those of your families. So, if you're starting a war, then you're a griefer.

Morons will be morons. *Shrugs*

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2019-07-04 19:57:35

Re: Will we get content soon?

#52 2019-07-04 20:36:41

Re: Will we get content soon?

#53 2019-07-04 20:47:19

Re: Will we get content soon?

#54 2019-07-04 20:50:22

Re: Will we get content soon?

#55 2019-07-04 21:20:25

Re: Will we get content soon?

#56 2019-07-04 21:27:38

Re: Will we get content soon?

#57 2019-07-04 21:32:35

Re: Will we get content soon?

#58 2019-07-04 21:46:44

Re: Will we get content soon?

#59 2019-07-05 03:28:50

Re: Will we get content soon?

#60 2019-07-05 05:10:30

Re: Will we get content soon?

#61 2019-07-05 08:23:50

Re: Will we get content soon?

#62 2019-07-05 08:37:32

Re: Will we get content soon?

#63 2019-07-06 02:22:45

Re: Will we get content soon?

#64 2019-07-06 02:55:58

Re: Will we get content soon?

#65 2019-07-06 11:59:35

Re: Will we get content soon?

#66 2019-07-06 12:07:46

Re: Will we get content soon?

#67 2019-07-06 13:34:08

Re: Will we get content soon?

#68 2019-07-06 17:24:09

Re: Will we get content soon?

#69 2019-07-06 19:46:04

Re: Will we get content soon?

Board footer