Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

pein · 2019-10-25 12:08:04

jasonrohrer wrote:

op

Yeah constrains are bad considering that lot of us played this game a lot. It's an artificial limitation to players with more logic and memory.
It's like you stretching baby clothes to fit an adult, instead of giving a bigger clothing aka more content on top.

The most obvious ones after reading you:
-Not all activities are equally useful or needed and begging others to do it for you not gonna work as lot of times you are playig with potato brain people who can't put a stone on other stone. Also you would need to rebalance the whole thing to have equally useful aspects in each "profession".

-Genetic fitness is not a good measurement of skill or life archievements or experience, it's not something you can actively manipulate. For example i was an Eve right now, an arc before, and i seen people messing around, i born there, i just went back to my project and hours later people struggled to make a camp, so alone i made it into a camp with all basic needs, food was plenty, kept all kids, told them what to do and my score dipped below 20 after this life.

-Lot of games like LOL or other moba has rune system where you have minimal bonuses outside the game and you can choose and apply to the game, or others got character buy system where your archievements stack up slowly to be better, yet you don't feel it directly trough the game, it enhances certain play styles but nothing major. But at least stacks up slowly, where yo usuggest that such important core aspect of the game would depend on a totally random feature which doesn't reflect skill or care on it's own. Yeah is totally random.
You can't run around force feeding people and you are not responsible for people quitting a camp.So even if you gave your best you can end up with a low score and next life will suck. So a variable that would somewhat goes into positive would be much better than a totally random variable which depends on others mood and skills.

-Overlap: it will be overlap, cause people wont choose bad tools over good ones, like you can make compost all your life but you can't make your own clothing. And others will be like "oh im the clothing maker, sorry i can't do any useful job". So forcing people to do one job while unable to do any other is not exactly the best motivation to choose different things. And choosing lathe for yourself but never doing it, while blocking out others from doing it is not exactly the best choice either.
I guess we crack your system first day and we might need 2 people to run a city, nothing else really changes.
Also it wont solve the limitation, as other family can do it for you, so basically we back to square one where you don't care about fmaily, you care about intelligent people who can do stuff. And also, to have any meaning ful limitation family wide, which assuming is same as city, you would need city wide limitation, which is territory based, which the game doesn't recognize that this place is a city, cause then you could solve it simpler by buildings and building access, and tools that can't be moved outside, so the people with access would be the shop keepers.

-It doesn't stimulate trade until we dot have ownership. It just means that you might have resources that can be stolen, and it will be stolen.

-Proefficiency: i seen a system similar to this, mount and blade had 6 different weapon choices: one handed, two haded, pole, lance, bow, crossbow
You could have proefficiency to one and train up your levels, and would be increasingly hard to train up the rest or not too time efficient, which i guess is still a better system, like you would spend a lot of time doing one task until you did it x times. But for that we would need short life time tools which can be made easily again and again. So if you cook one pie, it takes 20 seconds first time, then the next one 19, then down to normal one click. That wouldn't work for everything, like we would need a better smithing option or training option for smiths. Than we would do schools, where kids clamp some useless resources into shapes, like adobe hammer to adobe tools, which are useless but good way to increase skill.
The problem with this would be the fire lasting only 20 sec so would be painful to see a person wasting a whole charcoal on a single real tool.

-The idea i had with small icons indicating player roles, the current state of the game you could merely indicate what people are good at, not really limit them to it, and some soft caps so it wont be a competition like cooking 5 pies, 15 pies and 30 pies for apprentice chef, medium chef, master chef or whatever. Limiting people to access doors based on their skills could be decent, for example making a Chef door would only let in the master chef or master door would only let in the "Masters".
I seen this in NHL hockey game, where hammer indicated strong defenders, good aim and good technique or passing was indicated with other icons. You could technically check skills on players but this was a good way to see talented players midgame, and they ended up being good transfers generally.

-To such a limitations, we would certainly need more resources, like upgrade fences to real wall or at least board walls, cause no point learning architecture when you got no resources to build from.

-Then again, i rather have team jobs, like one person has to hold the stakes for you to be able to place the wall. This certainly needs a minimal communication. And might help people working in teams. But just placing stakes and 2 years later someone making walls there is kinda bad, as it doesn't require communication, and maybe i rather place the stakes myself than letting others to tell where to put the building.

-Would just make people suicide more when they can't do something important they don't have the tools for.

-Doesn't mean people would trade, it's still can be stolen and hoarded back to a place then wait until you got a baby who can use it, rather than respecting the work behind it. For trade we need specific materials a way to convert them to currency (aka. Ai market to sell it) then convert to other material, own those items you pay for so limit others to interact with it. Basically to liquefy anything for mone and then buy things we can't make ourselves, which doesn't really mean skills to do so, means limitation on such items. For example sims has better beds, yo ualways want but with current job and expenses yo ucant afford. So you might work on your skills to get money, to get a bed, which then saves you time on jobs.
Which kinda brigns the uestion, why not have a stamina bar? that way you could actually spend something to make something, and others would be a valuable stamina source, "hey kid, chop this tree im tired". Would make beds and sleeping for 20 sec or such better, also some foods could have a stamina filling effect (cooked foods, coffee).

I was playing a browser game which basically had a skill system broke down into 4 traits and 5 ability each. So if you wanted the skill "building" you put on strength, which had building, vigor, health, determination and stamina.
So basically each level you put one attribute point in trengths and 3 ability point in building. This gave you 4 building points per level. And you got some extra skills which you didn't choose but came with strength.
Generally you would only put on one of them, strength or dexterity. As it was linked with weapon usage.
This made dexterity better aim and strength better resistance.
The other two was mobility and charisma. Mobility gave better resistance to weapons and dodging, while some specific jobs.
While charisma was kidna useless early levels but very good at high levels. Each job was predetirmined, had a set of skills needed which you could archieve different ways, with some clothing or putting skills. Aka, you became better at cutting wood, when you had a checkered shirt.
Also the better you were at it, the more money, xp and products it dropped. There were different jobs which had either more xp or luck (finding rare items) or money.
That game was in a persistent world so you didn't lose your character, so your grind was always paying off.
In a game with max 60 minutes you don't want complex and very grindy jobs, cause no point learning 40 minutes for a job to then die to some animal or other malicious player.

I mean i don't see how it would fit into the current game
You oculd add a layer on top which would be based on this rules and add some non essential jobs to it. And keep basic recipes avalaible to everyone. Sharp stone has like 40 recipes and flint has almost every usage as a knife has, but if you can do knife, you can do bread, turkey, rubber, killing people, while others can't. But then you can't make a knife so it's no use to it.

Engien making would be the most wasteful job in the world if you would need a random player to do all the work with lathe or hammer. They would ruin so much iron, waste so much charcoal and water that would kill the camp fast.

sigmen4020 · 2019-10-25 12:16:06

Dafuto wrote:

Could males have a slightly higher tool limit than females? It would make sense, as males should be doing more work than females, and it would encourage people to keep male kids as they can do more with tools than females can.

That would be a pretty neat way to give males an advantage compared to females. +1 to this idea.

Ilka · 2019-10-25 14:03:51

Well, I looked through my old posts and unfortunately since February (the infamous temperature correction) I'm just complaining about in the forum.
During these few months, Jason reduced water (twice), introduced fences (which nobody wanted).
Then, to force players to use fences, he added swords and let griefs be killed with impunity.
Do you remember those beautiful days when one man killed all your family?
Then there was a rift and a nonsense system of constantly starting from the beginning.
This time I see it this way - this amendment again limits something and there are so many ways that it will fail, that unfortunately it will be bad.
I can already see this chaos and confusion and weeks of corrections.

Jason, you're going in the wrong direction.

Instead of restricting and forcing players to do something, start giving them rewards!

Finally, start adding something!

Specialization system - here you are.
Let the person who deals with the berries have a random chance of growing a wonderful shrub that gives more fruit - suddenly the bush begins to glow and you get the message: "You have grown an improved bush. You are a qualified farmer."
The beginner's joy will be priceless.
A blacksmith can forge two tools from one piece of iron, a hunter make twice as many clothes from leather, etc.
Let it be add-ons, skill bonuses, and not a nonsens system in which someone can use a stone and another cannot (ha, ha, very realistic).
I also don't know how you imagine creating new technologies - now only a few players know how to make an engine, well making it even more difficult ... yeah it will be a beautiful disaster.
Well, but I know that Jason won't listen anyway.
This is a return to the idea from a few months ago.
You remember?
Only the descendants of Eve born in the swamps were to be able to do things from clay, the savannah people were the only ones who could hunt rabbits etc.
The idea was absurd and now a little changed returns.

Last edited by Ilka (2019-10-25 14:06:21)

The_Anabaptist · 2019-10-25 14:52:46

Jason,

I appreciate your proposed changes, and more importantly the thoughtful way that you laid them out to the community.

I will note that there have been plenty of forum threads previously that have also proposed similar versions of what you have laid out. It is nice to see you give credit to someone you respect, and I hope that you take a bit of time to glean additional ideas from the community as well now that you have chosen to pursue this.

The_Anabaptist

Gogo · 2019-10-25 16:24:30

Dafuto wrote:

Could males have a slightly higher tool limit than females?

Yes! Please!

Ilka wrote:

Let the person who deals with the berries have a random chance of growing a wonderful shrub that gives more fruit - suddenly the bush begins to glow and you get the message: "You have grown an improved bush. You are a qualified farmer."

Maybe something like that - when player reach age of 40 or 50 he/she became master in specialization that allows to do one extra, cool stuff?

Last edited by Gogo (2019-10-25 16:25:19)

Twisted · 2019-10-25 16:34:32

I don't think males should have a higher tool limit, that seems kind of sexist.

There already is a skill point benefit for being male - your gene score is more likely to go up since you won't have to worry about your babies, which means you'll have a higher number of tools that you can use next life.

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-10-25 17:45:16

Twisted wrote:

I don't think males should have a higher tool limit, that seems kind of sexist.

Lmao I was expecting a comment like yours, considering the disproportionately large amount of SJWs in this community, but then I thought surely people posting on the forums are at least a tad smarter, surely...???

Male characters should have more tool slots; men are stronger and have done the overwhelming majority of the labour-intensive work that goes in to building society and providing a living for their families. It's also an obvious no-brainer balance-wise as currently playing male in the game is next to pointless, and extremely boring for a lot of people, to the point that they almost always /die when born as male.

Dodge · 2019-10-25 17:45:25

FulmenTheFinn wrote:

...

Being physically stronger on average doesn't mean that you can learn better...

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-10-25 17:50:03

Dodge wrote:

Being physically stronger on average doesn't mean that you can learn better...

FulmenTheFinn wrote:

It's also an obvious no-brainer balance-wise as currently playing male in the game is next to pointless, and extremely boring for a lot of people, to the point that they almost always /die when born as male.

Dodge · 2019-10-25 17:51:20

FulmenTheFinn wrote:

Lmao I was expecting a comment like yours, considering the disproportionately large amount of SJWs in this community, but then I thought surely people posting on the forums are at least a tad smarter, surely...???
Male characters should have more tool slots; men are stronger and have done the overwhelming majority of the labour-intensive work that goes in to building society and providing a living for their families.

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-10-25 17:59:14

Dodge, you cherrypicked the first bit of what I said, totally ignoring the game balance aspect, and now when I repeated it in response to your reply, you're quoting my original reply in its entirety...? Is it past your nap time?

miskas · 2019-10-25 18:07:38

Biology is sexist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK6rqm2nCzM

https://rgambler.files.wordpress.com/20 … curve_.png
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/ … .21.50.png

Last edited by miskas (2019-10-25 18:08:09)

Dodge · 2019-10-25 18:08:38

FulmenTheFinn, that was the first point you made "Male characters should have more tool slots; men are stronger", so you logic is "men are stronger so they can learn better", if you didn't want it to be mentionned why say it at all? Just say that it could balance male/female better instead of going on some useless rant. But then you still have to justify why men can learn more tools.

That's when you talked about physical strength to logically explain why males could have more tool slots (which doesn't make sense)

Btw i saw the picture you posted earlier but edited out... Are you off your meds?

Dodge · 2019-10-25 18:16:11

miskas wrote:

Biology is sexist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK6rqm2nCzM
https://rgambler.files.wordpress.com/20 … curve_.png
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/ … .21.50.png

Do you really believe this?

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."

-Albert Einstein

wondible · 2019-10-25 18:23:48

I could maybe see "Women are forced to take the childbirth skill, taking up one slot" Given that some people say always be female, it's obviously considered a valuable trait, looking at it purely from a game mechanics perspective.

Whatever · 2019-10-25 18:26:23

wondible wrote:

I could maybe see "Women are forced to take the childbirth skill, taking up one slot" Given that some people say always be female, it's obviously considered a valuable trait, looking at it purely from a game mechanics perspective.

yes and if man pick up babies they hold them upsidedown to show that they dont have the skill learned

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-25 18:35:23

Dafuto, wow, that's a great suggestion about men naturally having more skill slots..... though I feel like adding something like that would really be me kicking a hornet's nest. Having gendered names was controversial enough!

Even my wife, who's pretty on board with men and women being fundamentally different cooperative partners in the human story might bristle at the idea of men being inherently more "skillful" than women. And actually, I think there are just different skill sets. Women are supposedly way better at "fine work" because they have smaller muscles and fingers.

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-25 18:39:27

Regarding knowing who knows what skill, I am concerned about that.

Conversation is supposed to be part of it, but I also realize that "boilerplate" conversation is going to get old really quick.

"SHOULD I LEARN HATCHET?"

"NO, I ALREADY KNOW HATCHET"

And also finding someone to help when you need something done.

I have thought about some kind of icon that shows up above people's heads when you're holding a tool that you don't know how to use, to show you who knows it already. That will help you find an expert when you need one, and also help you make decisions about which skills need learning. If the only person around who knows the skill is an old man, you should probably learn it yourself to cover for him when he dies, right?

Though I also don't want to undercut parental interaction. Your mother should help you figure it out. I really hate the 3 minutes of standing around when you're a baby. This would be a good time for her to help you figure out what you should do with your life.

So I think I'll leave it for now, and maybe add little "expert" icons later....

Maybe the icons only start showing up after your tool slots get full? To help you find a needed expert....

Dodge · 2019-10-25 18:40:56

Would make more sense if only men could do physical strength labor like carrying rocks, mining etc.

Should be an high advantage enough to be worth it.

Maybe some skills could only be learned by men like smithing or cutting down trees.

But if the genetic fitness score becomes really important then it doesn't matter if you are born a boy or girl since your mother will lose the same points if she lets you die will being a boy.

As for some situations where though decisions have to be made then it just becomes a reality of life if you had a choice to make between saving a man or a woman's life given that there is no emotionnal attachment and that they are both young, you would most likely save the woman.

Whatever wrote:

wondible wrote:
I could maybe see "Women are forced to take the childbirth skill, taking up one slot" Given that some people say always be female, it's obviously considered a valuable trait, looking at it purely from a game mechanics perspective.
yes and if man pick up babies they hold them upsidedown to show that they dont have the skill learned

lol

Saolin · 2019-10-25 18:41:30

This could either be horrible or fantastic. In the state of the game now it seems at first like it would be a huge pain. In most lives I'm running around doing a variety of odds and ends tasks as needed in order to advance/maintain the village and using a wide variety of tools a few times to do so. Eventually I would lack the tool slots to do what is needed, which would decrease my productivity and I'd have to count on someone else to do a necessary task. This has the potential to be quite frustrating as leaving tasks to be done by others ends up pretty hit or miss, and a miss can't always be afforded.

Its at this point that it's make or break for tool slots. Thinking about being in game now and not having tool slots to say, make a bucket, and having to ask someone else to do it, you're likely to run into a bunch of people who ignore you, or say they don't know how, or say sure and then run off never to be seen again (died?) And then you end up doing it yourself anyway. In the current game you realize it's generally faster and and more reliable just to do everything yourself. At least if you die no one was waiting for you to get back with something they needed. Someone else will notice your half finished project later and finish it.

Tool slots would likely force people away from this approach/playstyle, and instead to be required to rely on others to complete some important tasks. While I've probably sufficiently described how this can be challenging, I think it also has the potential to very beneficial on the longer term, at a smaller short term cost. We won't be able to give up on finding help so we'll have to find someone to do the task. Sometimes it will be another experienced player who will understand the situation and take care of it with no problem. Sometimes we will have to pick an "I don't know how" player with an available tool slot and walk them through the process step by step. This is where the long term benefit comes in because the game mechanics will be forcing us to teach newer players how to do some more Intermediate or even complex tasks, making them feel useful and valued, and they will learn skills that will make them more knowledgeable and capable in future lives, which to me, seems like it would make them more likely to continue to play because they will feel more competent and useful. While the time spent teaching them will slow your own progress at the time, in the long run teaching these players should in theory decrease the pressure on more experienced players to do everything themselves. It also encourages more meaningful interactions in game, either involving newer players in the game, or even if it's two experienced players dividing the workload.

This could be a really great change even though thinking about these restrictions right now seems more like a negative initially. The success of this update depends a lot on how things unfold when we run out of tool slots to complete necessary tasks.

I do have concerns with what counts as a tool. I think weapons as a tool is fine. I think stones shouldn't be tools as sharp stone is probably too essential for survival and used in too many tasks, and flint chip is basically a weaker knife. Also there's things like the draw plate that have very specific and limited applications. Some aspects of the tech tree could become completely neglected if certain tools are seen as not worthwhile.

Last edited by Saolin (2019-10-25 18:56:09)

Keyin · 2019-10-25 18:54:24

This update will help give direction.. often when told "You can do whatever you want" people go into "analysis-paralysis" and cannot choose, or they just sit around the berry patches.

But when you're constrained to a handful of 'needed' things, it becomes a much easier/engaging choice.

Something that would make the update better, I think, is if there was asymmetric cost between lives. Some things could cost less than other depending on difficulty to learn. And some people could be born with certain affinities. Even something as simple as:

'This life your character has a knack for shearing, shears cost one less point than normal. This life your character is inept at woodcutting, axe costs one more point than normal."

You don't have to learn shears, but if the only shearer is old, why not? If you really wanted to cut lumber, you still can, but you might be better off leaving it to someone else.

I am really looking forward to this change, thanks Jason!

miskas · 2019-10-25 18:56:32

In general, I avoid to believe in stuff, I prefer to study, discover how things work compare findings and then I just share my knowledge.
So no I don't believe that the average male IQ is higher than the average female IQ.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/04/06/fish-climb/

No offend to women btw, animals with sexual dimorphism have limited skill slots so men and women had to choose different skills to survive together.

Whatever wrote:

yes and if man pick up babies they hold them upsidedown to show that they don't have the skill learned

LMAO! xaxaxa

Dodge · 2019-10-25 18:59:22

jasonrohrer wrote:

So I think I'll leave it for now, and maybe add little "expert" icons later....

The whole point is to incentivize communication and cooperation, do you really want to add icons?

If someone knows how to use a tool then he should have it in his property right?

And if that property is inhabited then you can assume that nobody knows that skill then. Right?

Organization is something the players should have to do and not done by the game, otherwise what's the point of building an advanced civilisation?

What's the point of having a leader if there is nobody to lead? Or having structures if they dont structure anything?

You always wanted the game to have civilisations that needed a king, a leader, a president in other words a hierarchy Right? That's what the crown is for isn't it?

The players should have the tools, the means to create these organizations and structures.

The_Anabaptist · 2019-10-25 19:00:35

This is a game. Can we please leave the gender politics out of it? Whether something is "women's work" or "menfolk's work" is more of a cultural bias or mindset than "Is she physically strong enough to swing a pickaxe?" or "Are his ham fists dexterous enough to thread a needle?"

At least stick to the premise of "should we do this change or not?" Additional parameters like gender discrimination can be added after it is clearly a success or failure.

And remember, picking up a berry bowl with carrot counts as all your skill slots.

The_Anabaptist

jasonrohrer · 2019-10-25 19:15:38

Love the idea of a man holding the baby upside down, and needing to use a slot to feed a baby...

Though a naked man holding a baby upside down looks like what, exactly?

One Hour One Life Forums

#26 2019-10-25 12:08:04

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#27 2019-10-25 12:16:06

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#28 2019-10-25 14:03:51

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#29 2019-10-25 14:52:46

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#30 2019-10-25 16:24:30

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#31 2019-10-25 16:34:32

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#32 2019-10-25 17:45:16

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#33 2019-10-25 17:45:25

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#34 2019-10-25 17:50:03

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#35 2019-10-25 17:51:20

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#36 2019-10-25 17:59:14

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#37 2019-10-25 18:07:38

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#38 2019-10-25 18:08:38

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#39 2019-10-25 18:16:11

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#40 2019-10-25 18:23:48

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#41 2019-10-25 18:26:23

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#42 2019-10-25 18:35:23

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#43 2019-10-25 18:39:27

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#44 2019-10-25 18:40:56

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#45 2019-10-25 18:41:30

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#46 2019-10-25 18:54:24

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#47 2019-10-25 18:56:32

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#48 2019-10-25 18:59:22

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#49 2019-10-25 19:00:35

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

#50 2019-10-25 19:15:38

Re: Coming soon: Character skills (tools)

Board footer