Overpopulation

Gogo · 2019-12-17 14:41:50

An idea came to me. Do you keep all the babies in village or do you send them off? I just want one girl to replace me, max 2-3 females to run the village/town. The rest can go elsewhere. Due to the water crises, overpopulation chaos, we need to slow down progress of developing town and advancing technology. Would it work? After some time we would gave birth to boys only, so the girls that would leave also shouldn't keep too many babies (if… any!).

Of course mod to tracking number of girls in family will be very helpful.

Last edited by Gogo (2019-12-17 14:43:55)

pein · 2019-12-17 19:13:36

that what I suggested, the 3 female boost, which worked
now is 4 minimum possible girls

what I was also suggesting, that after this happens , should be only boys to re-balance things

also there is no balancing for outposts, so it's divided weirdly, I saw 16 girls in the other family, blacks, was a mess

jcwilk · 2019-12-17 20:35:59

Just knife the extras. Sorted.

Spoonwood · 2019-12-17 20:44:44

It sounds like there's a problem with towns not having enough water resources. I wonder if the game went back to a system where ponds could get dug into wells instead of the boring and uninteresting spring system, there would exist more incentive to keep more children and thus more parenting. It's not a very good game of parenting if you have to sacrifice children for the sake of other children, because of an artificially produced water crisis when older systems had less of a water crisis going on.

w0wma · 2019-12-17 20:58:43

maybe this is where griefers come into play... survival of the fittest perhaps? :thinking:

DestinyCall · 2019-12-17 21:14:47

Population control doesn't work. Villages that intentionally kill their own babies eventually get destroyed by the ghosts of dead babies.

Legs · 2019-12-17 21:53:22

"Dry newcomen pump with torn seal"

OHOL in six words.
The game in general is badly broken right now.

DestinyCall · 2019-12-17 22:20:32

I think the real answer to this problem is that people should forget about oil tech. Instead, focus on building (and USING) roads.

Build a long road heading due east from your home village's well. Your goal is to get at least as far as the next useable spring. When the deep well dries up, move east to the next valid well site. Keep building roads. If you find dirt deposits, make a cistern and construct farms. Haul water from nearby ponds. When new well dries up, move further east. Make use of any resources along the road. Make new sheep pens in each village. Move the important stuff and leave the rest. It shouldn't take too long to construct a new town center at the new site with all tools available from the start. If possible, begin preparing the new site early so the move is easier and uncomplicated by idiots or griefers.

Keep going. Never stop. Stagnation is death. There is no end game, only constant depletion.

Most importantly, this method does not rely on maintaing contact with other families. Your biggest issue will be specialty biomes getting in the way of eastward progression.

Last edited by DestinyCall (2019-12-17 23:03:31)

Gogo · 2019-12-17 23:12:58

It's a pity that places can't belong longer to families, everything is in constant change.

DestinyCall wrote:

I think the real answer to this problem is that people should forget about oil tech. Instead, focus on building (and USING) roads.

That's a solution, but it would make us immigrants, which sucks. We want to upgrade our homes.

pein wrote:

also there is no balancing for outposts, so it's divided weirdly, I saw 16 girls in the other family, blacks, was a mess

So it will be nice if a group could split from family and after reaching minimum distance get their own 'bonus' to born girls.

Spoonwood wrote:

It sounds like there's a problem with towns not having enough water resources. I wonder if the game went back to a system where ponds could get dug into wells

I don't think so, springs serves also as orientation in the area.

DestinyCall wrote:

Population control doesn't work. Villages that intentionally kill their own babies eventually get destroyed by the ghosts of dead babies.

Don't kill them. Send them off.

That's when it comes delevopment of my idea. OK I suppose most people prefer to stay in village. But some of them likes to do stabby stabbs. So send them to war. Divide peaceful workers from warriors.

There could be villages near to bigger towns, a family would own them, there would be just few people, a well, basic stuff. The towns would be 'warzones'.

Girls are loved because they bring life to the village, right? There are no fathers, so boys would be loved only for taking lives of others. They could come back with trophies (something similar to capture the flag ).

Anyway, that's the direction my ideas flows.

Last edited by Gogo (2019-12-17 23:21:04)

DestinyCall · 2019-12-17 23:28:37

Gogo wrote:

There are no fathers, so boys would be loved only for taking lives of others. They could come back with trophies (something similar to capture the flag ).

"Hail my brethren! I return with the fresh hearts of my enemies. We will surely feast well tonight! Huzzah!"

I'm having a hard time imaging how sending our children off to fight, Hunger Games-style, would resolve itself into a stable population control system. But the idea amuses me none the less.

Out of curiosity, wouldn't the constant, gratuitous in-fighting eventually just wipe out all the villages? There is no reason it would be confined to the central town area.

Spoonwood · 2019-12-18 04:25:31

DestinyCall wrote:

I think the real answer to this problem is that people should forget about oil tech. Instead, focus on building (and USING) roads.

So, a deep well or a stanchion kit is a suitable replacement for 'iphones' when newcomen pumps, radios, cameras, looms, oil rigs, and diesel engines exist in the game?

DestinyCall wrote:

Most importantly, this method does not rely on maintaing contact with other families. Your biggest issue will be specialty biomes getting in the way of eastward progression.

I guess you could eastward hoping to loot some dead town along the way. But also, from what I can tell from people still live between -1000 and 1000 on the north-south axis. So, going north or south would also make for another option.

DestinyCall · 2019-12-18 04:36:18

I am thinking you should head east, because last I heard, the new Eves spawn in that direction, so you will either find more people eventually or new untouched lands. Either one can be helpful for survival, in theory. Finding villages that are north or south of your own village might be possible, but seems less likely than finding signs of human activity along the east-west axis. If the village continues to trend in a single direction over time, it will eventually end up far away from the starting point. I'd rather point future generations toward new towns, rather than lead them so far away they become completely isolated.

Gogo · 2019-12-18 18:34:03

DestinyCall wrote:

Out of curiosity, wouldn't the constant, gratuitous in-fighting eventually just wipe out all the villages? There is no reason it would be confined to the central town area.

In war-zones you will have slower hunger, but can't build everything there. Towns with bells will have town borders. Basically families would live on the outskirts. If 2 or 3 elders from families agrees to war, they can turn town into battlefield. It will be like a game in-game. Trophies taking back to villages will add some bonus to families. ALSO I like the idea of art in game. So after entering war-zone screen will become a little different (more grayish and after killing there will be more blood). Also more music - idyllic for villages, piano for wilderness and some tense for war-zone.

Leadership could be use to form war ranks, orders used for info about enemies and next steps.

Man, I wanna play this!

ALSO griefers that receive enough curses will be send to be born to a females in war-zones.

Last edited by Gogo (2019-12-18 18:37:06)

Spoonwood · 2019-12-18 23:35:13

Gogo wrote:

That's when it comes delevopment of my idea. OK I suppose most people prefer to stay in village. But some of them likes to do stabby stabbs. So send them to war.

But what would such battles be about? How would they fit into the context of the game? How would they concern civilization building or parenting in OHOL?

I'm not saying it's completely impossible that such battles couldn't fit into the game. But from what I've seen and heard such fighting just gets done for the sake of someone getting their kick from seeing someone else suffer. And that's just griefing.

Gogo · 2019-12-19 19:05:59

Spoonwood wrote:

But what would such battles be about?

For such battles fighting system should be changed. Right now you can't defend yourself, only run away.

Last edited by Gogo (2019-12-19 19:08:44)

Spoonwood · 2019-12-19 19:25:55

Gogo wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
But what would such battles be about?
For such battles fighting system should be changed. Right now you can't defend yourself, only run away.

O. K. I think I agree that the combat system... well.. the game would actually need a combat system. But, that still doesn't answer what I was getting at. How would such battles fit in the context of the game? How would they concern parenting or civilization building?

Gogo · 2019-12-20 02:09:45

It will give a goal to offspring. Parenting for parenting (for survival) isn't goal, it's a need.

Last edited by Gogo (2019-12-20 02:10:24)

Spoonwood · 2019-12-22 02:07:30

Gogo wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
It sounds like there's a problem with towns not having enough water resources. I wonder if the game went back to a system where ponds could get dug into wells
I don't think so, springs serves also as orientation in the area.

You have a good point about springs serving as orientation. But, I don't think that advantage is better than the well griefing that I've seen in pictures and on stream that I've seen over the past few days. That doesn't imply though that eliminating springs would be good. More like having both the current spring system and ponds being able to get dug up into wells would work better.

ollj · 2019-12-22 07:45:57

you easily achieve lower populationm densities by building one long road, that zigzags between cities/ruins.
more people moving along the road depletes a city a lot slower (mostly with wild berries alongside the road)
And these people still mix and match all the time, by passing by each other on the road.

occasionally you give birth on the road wile building the road, and occasionally this revives a city along the road, and ive seen them boom to populations of 20 within 3 hours once, to then just chose to explore and equalize that population boom.
theres always bells along such a road, and the road itself, that lure explorers and gatherers away.

males become road builders or they bring stuff from north and south to the road. (mosaly gathering flat rocks AND iron ore, and milkweed)
females become gatherers, that just gather all the things on the road to more populated areas, especially babies and firewood and bowls full of wild berries.

this works, because wild milkweed (and anything else, flat stone/ores) respawn faster than roads decay.

Last edited by ollj (2019-12-22 07:47:47)

FulmenTheFinn · 2019-12-22 08:33:59

I always keep everyone except obvious griefers. If I'm not too busy saving the town from noobapocalypse, I try to teach the "useless eaters" of the town, to put them to work doing something useful. Food is practically never an excuse to let babies die, since even in Eve camps it's usually plentiful. The only time I have even had to consider letting e.g. baby boys die due to lack of food, was during those quad Eve runs when the four of us combined were popping out babies like crazy, well before we even got a farm up, but even then it was manageable as long as people kept foraging food into the camp before we grew our own.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-12-17 14:41:50

Overpopulation

#2 2019-12-17 19:13:36

Re: Overpopulation

#3 2019-12-17 20:35:59

Re: Overpopulation

#4 2019-12-17 20:44:44

Re: Overpopulation

#5 2019-12-17 20:58:43

Re: Overpopulation

#6 2019-12-17 21:14:47

Re: Overpopulation

#7 2019-12-17 21:53:22

Re: Overpopulation

#8 2019-12-17 22:20:32

Re: Overpopulation

#9 2019-12-17 23:12:58

Re: Overpopulation

#10 2019-12-17 23:28:37

Re: Overpopulation

#11 2019-12-18 04:25:31

Re: Overpopulation

#12 2019-12-18 04:36:18

Re: Overpopulation

#13 2019-12-18 18:34:03

Re: Overpopulation

#14 2019-12-18 23:35:13

Re: Overpopulation

#15 2019-12-19 19:05:59

Re: Overpopulation

#16 2019-12-19 19:25:55

Re: Overpopulation

#17 2019-12-20 02:09:45

Re: Overpopulation

#18 2019-12-22 02:07:30

Re: Overpopulation

#19 2019-12-22 07:45:57

Re: Overpopulation

#20 2019-12-22 08:33:59

Re: Overpopulation

Board footer