a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
testo wrote:And I usually use /die when my mom is dumb enough to call me Bad names like: Aborted, Asshole, Adolfo XXIII, Steve XVI, Epic IV, Lazer XXX... maybe I´m forgetting some names. Just no, I don´t have to be your tool.
Even Hope IV is ok, I mean, at least you are trying.
Why is everyone hating on Steve?? *Sweatdrop*
Had a relative that started picking my kids and naming them Steve regardless of gender or anything at all. I hate it becuase someone think its funny to have everyone called same name. But I agree Steve is not that bad.
IDK. Maybe you can join the discord ohol server if you need more help. GL.
By default you are redirected to the main server active wich 99% time is Bigserver2. It is the only server with over 50 players active all day as far as i know (there used to be a lower bound of ~100 players at all times but last moth was controversial). For updates and resets BS2 gets shut down wich means everyone is redirected to server 1 for like two hours or something, then back to BS2.
Now, you can choose a custom server going to the main screen settings -> select custom server -> type custom servers name. The original game has 15 servers + BS2 but very few players do play on custom servers. Check http://onehouronelife.com/reflector/ser … ion=report to check server activity/users.
And I usually use /die when my mom is dumb enough to call me Bad names like: Aborted, Asshole, Adolfo XXIII, Steve XVI, Epic IV, Lazer XXX... maybe I´m forgetting some names. Just no, I don´t have to be your tool.
Even Hope IV is ok, I mean, at least you are trying.
Using over 30 /die commands in a day doesnt make any sense for under 6 families total.
why not make it so if a bucket holds 10 bowls of water, using a bucket on a cistern will remove 10 bowls and using a bowl on a cistern will use 1 bowl?
the question is: what does that mean for the newcomen engine, for instance, would jason have to create an object for "newcomen engine with 1 bowl in boiler, newcomen engine with 2 bowls in boiler" etc.
Yeah sure, nobody could possible grief voluntarily or not that system. See you in 15 years!
Tarr wrote:Requires engine work.
So what? If it's a problem worth fixing, then there's value in rewriting the engine.
You just don´t know, your 18 games are no good. Still need one more to type engine.
Thank you Snow for coming along with your traveler mom... It was a nice trip. /love
futurebird wrote:She trusted me now... but I could I tell her that I was in love???
Alright, this is a question, not a suggestion which almost surely would get relegated to the circular file or 'memory hole' pretty quickly if we were doing things as we should.
No, you don't have time to complete a radio for communication.
No, you don't have the ability to learn a foreign language in 40 years. OHOL people usually pick up languages slower than the children who get the worst grades in foreign language class I guess.
Roses might get taken as a sign of trying to induce and allergy in someone.
Make a stone road which says 'Love' if imagined that someone saw it from the sky? No... she might not have a zoom feature, so that's not likely enough to work.
Be bold enough to stand next to her and use the heart emote, and turn it off as soon as you go away from her? Then come back to her and put the heart emote back on? I think that might work.
Sure, your gesture of a heart emotion might get understood as something other than love, but I think that happens often enough in real life with shy people trying to express love.
Oh... and physical affection might lead to her or someone in the village accussing you of sexual harassment or sexual violence... at least I should have that warning in there, and OHOL people haven't even invented something like the Code of Hammurabi ("an eye for an eye", "a tooth for a tooth"). OHOL people are still before that code in terms of the development of their laws, killing anyone for any transgression. And good luck getiing a presumption of innocence or any sort of fair trial. So, better be careful with that love stuff, sir.
Pick knife make paper, make pencil, write her a poem. GG ez.
Whatever. Just give me my cards, I´ll play them to the best.
First I´d like to clear that I don´t intend to question Jason´s view of the game or his game design with this thread. In fact I somehow hate that I have to make this question personal, a better title to this thread should be "open question to the game developers" or "design team". I agree to most of his clarification in the last sticky thread about feedback and I refrained to post there about the parts I don´t agree, mostly becuase all the topic got completely derailed with a personal scrutiny about his work, and that is simply not my taste.
Second, I´d like to point directly my intent. I intend to understand how he views or he models war in the game, what elements should be present and generally speaking how he thinks and how is it going to work. Would there be a planning stage? What are the reasons to a war?, how does it develops? (IE a war IRL has a declaration process and a justification process, there are stages in the war and so on). What I am trying to get here is a picture from him like "this is how I envision war", "this is what I wanted in game and this was the result" basically "this is what I want you to do".
The origin for this question is clearly that I can not picture that process myself. Somewhere Jason asked why is there no war and no trade in the game. I understand his concern and I find it logical for a civilization building game to develop two of the most basic social elements ever present in human history. I can not picture or envision neither war nor trade myself. This is not a source of concern because I´m not a game designer. But I can not picture how he expects war to look either.
When he introduced property fences and gates I understood. Or at least I had a sketch of how he expected them to be properly used : everyone takes gradually a share of the map and gets ownership. Those with no land would have to take a piece a little farther from the town and goods or items would be placed under property and then traded. There will be conflict becuase of ownership and a proper code of conduct would arise, including punishment for theft and so on.
With war I can not understand. Warsword (wich I openly and completely dislike) has already its place in the game and It checks ok as an item that promotes conflict and facilitates killing ergo, helps "war".
This week I found inspiration on why I can not understand or give shape to his view of war in the game.
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6670 - This game was never meant to feature a full-fledged combat system. (When Talking about fixing the killing dance)
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6301 - ... what if there was a special weapon with no slow-down effect that you could only use on outsiders...This would allow for wars between towns, or raiding, or whatever. (When talking about introducing the warsword).
This is what genuinely puzzles and contradicts me. With no combat system there is no strategical elements for war in the most basic sense, and with no strategy involved I can´t see war arising. I can see killing and genocide, but I don´t see war in any shape or form. There can be raiding and stealing. I can envision organization for defence (make more swords, make wall around town...). I can see organization for attack (grab horses and swords, kill x player first...).But I can only picture killing, not battle. And with no battle, well, you can hardly call it war.
So that is the question, How is it supposed to look war in the game?, This question applies now but also extends into the future.
How do you see a model of war without a combat system? What decides the winner of the war and what is it to win a war? Do we have have a war where whoever gets more swords win? Do we get to steal their items or do we just kill everyone and wipe all the people there? Do we establish a new settlement and take the city or just abandon it? Will there be more weapons in the future that help the strategical process?
Again, I am trying to get the full picture from his perspective. I am not trying to prevent war (though I hate it). I am not trying to "catch the flaw" in the design (though I think I pointed at one). What I am trying to do is to understand the model and maybe help it develop, because I think we (the players) are somehow also shaping the game, and in this process we are not playing the war as it is modeled, mainly because we fail to understand said model.
I tried an outpost yesterday. Run 1k north west until I turned 14, I had a hat and a basket with a bowl only. I was very happy cause I had a pretty fast run, made a rope on the way. I managed to pass the point of scattered iron on some wasteland around tile 800 wich meant a pretty bright future to the settlement. Basically Everything to the north west was new land, and at least 100 tiles south east was too.
From 14 to 40 had 2 kids. Never in this game I´ve been so dissapointed in not having babies. Girl stayed and died of starvation bringing clay in 3 minutes (there was decent food around). Boy stayed yelling at mi cause I was a noob and should have stayed in town to stay safe and protect the line while demanding a hoe till soil... what a champ. My run ended in a flame war with someone that didn´t even understand how to use a skewer and less understood what I was trying to do.
In all seriousness you should read the last post about feedback. Just post the problem, when does it appear and how do you experience it. Just saying.
Da troll is into something here, four cities es few. I tried establishing a new camp 1k north west recently, but got only two children from 14 to 40. I never had so few.
Stand on straw to troll a bear. Straw decays. Killed by bear.
Fffffffff....
Hitting the tile of mosquitos because they are in the air (tile slightly below") fml.
I am happy that Eveing is now a rare and special event and not a choice. Eveing should have never been that simple, because the game won´t work if everyone decides to Eve.
I think Spoonwood is simply out of place while commenting about players control in the game, because Eveing is not a feature that you can choose without drastically changing the game flow for every other player. The problem is: we always took it for granted, and griefers showed us that this privilege could be abused ad nausem. This is not about choosing and controling your own game experience, this is about making a choice that affects everyone else in the game. Ergo, should not be a choice at all, imo.
Basically, if you could choose to Eve everytime, you would be choosing for say, the next 20 players in 2 hrs not to Eve. (I am just making numbers at this point).
Didn´t someone claim to be able to script a /die command anyways? Maybe that is the source of the problem, some lil kid thought it would be fancy to automate it, angry because he can´t Eve anymore.
While you may not care whether or not an update is good some of us would rather stuff be introduced in a useful state. When rails were originally released people were just as ecstatic about the new content but it was slow and janky until later buffed.
Regardless of how you think these things are less useful than what we have had previously which is just plain silly. We've had a single storage update since the game was released last year that was an actual upgrade to our storage system and that was by adding rubber wheels to carts.
You're welcome to make slot boxes, and you're welcome to think they're good, however that doesn't change the fact they're downgrades to stuff we already have in game. Pointing out their flaws is an attempt to get Jason to buff the things instead of adding more dead content.
I wonder if it´s really that much of a big deal to introduce an object that costs a little more than a previous one when it looks different and does similar.
Would you rather not introduce it at all? If the answer is yes, then only cost efficient items should be introduced, along side with items that set new mechanics.
However, I´m not really sold to that idea, for the simple reason than an always positive gradient in efficiiency would mean we should always upgrade to the new content, wich ends up being mechanic. I agree some things could get a buff becuase of underuse (has anyone ever used a wheelbarrow?) but calling something dead content because its not the best is not really accurate.
testo wrote:Tarr wrote:I don't really consider a box downgrade anything more than dead content. It's 1.5x the milkweed requirement, more iron tool usage with saws being one of the easiest tools to break, and is a strict downgrade.
There's nothing to vouche for the things in a game that could be classified as a tedium simulator. Swapping from two clicks to one click for less space (or more depending on if you right click through the whole thing vs just clicking what you want) is not useful at all.
These are without a doubt useless and if people,see slot boxes they should turn them to sledges and take the thread for a second box.
Without decaying baskets you should never have to worry about baskets and if you do either grow some wheat or take a cart to the local prairie to make,some.
See this is where I think the strict mentallity of 100% efficiency doesn´t work. It´s a game. If we wanted 100% efficiency we would probably only eat pies. If I wanted 100% efficiency I would be working at home not playing a game lol.
No, you wouldn't only eat pies. You would always yum, and always drink milk once buckets were up for milk (and that would happen fairly fast). Eggs from goose ponds would be even more of a staple and people wouldn't drain ponds. Turkeys would be even more of a staple, if that's possible. Berries from wild bushes close enough to town would always get brought back to camp. And probably a little less composting, and a little more of the fertile soil pits close to camp used (and they would probably get dug up). Maximum efficiency is the most efficient foods not considering yum in addition to everyone yumming as much as possible. It's more complex than just eating pies.
Lol whatever, my point was: I don´t really care about 100% efficiency, thus, I can accept a lower efficiency for slot boxes, as long as it is not *that bad. I wonder if 100% efficiency could be reached anyways. Is not part of the game stochastic?
And @Tarr: I couldn´t care less about more or less clicks. Slot boxes may not be most efficient, but I´ll build them anyways becuase I like them. They look cool to me and they are useful.
I don't really consider a box downgrade anything more than dead content. It's 1.5x the milkweed requirement, more iron tool usage with saws being one of the easiest tools to break, and is a strict downgrade.
There's nothing to vouche for the things in a game that could be classified as a tedium simulator. Swapping from two clicks to one click for less space (or more depending on if you right click through the whole thing vs just clicking what you want) is not useful at all.
These are without a doubt useless and if people,see slot boxes they should turn them to sledges and take the thread for a second box.
Without decaying baskets you should never have to worry about baskets and if you do either grow some wheat or take a cart to the local prairie to make,some.
See this is where I think the strict mentallity of 100% efficiency doesn´t work. It´s a game. If we wanted 100% efficiency we would probably only eat pies. If I wanted 100% efficiency I would be working at home not playing a game lol.
mrbah wrote:the wooden slot box seems to be a permanent storage, what seems to be the problem?
Holds ten small items. A box with four basket holds twelve items and the baskets don't decay which means the slot box is dead on arrival. It costs the same as 1.5 boxes rope wise, is harder on steel, and has to be redone if you want to move it.
Slot box basically arrived as dead content due to making baskets permanent. It's one niche is it is less clicks but in a game like ohol one less click so not worth more materials. The sort of thing you would want them for doesn't fit in them so overall they're a more expensive downgrade to storage.
Nah they are ok. Slot box looks cooler and it´s not like one or a few threads will kill a town. It is a little more expansive alternative true, but useful if you are not close to a big swamp. Dead content is pine walls, or dogs. Even track carts are worst, resource wise. Unless someday we have turning tracks.
Well yeah the root of the problem comes from free mutton pies being a byproduct of composting cycle which is 100% required for the long term health of a town. Wheat and mutton will always be somewhat problematic as long as they are basically *free*
I fear this thread could bring the biggest nerf to pies ever. Like, pies: only 2 uses.
RodneyC86 wrote:testo wrote:To be fair to Jason´s post, the solution to wheat is not to store it as several people proposed. The problem is: theres too much grain unused in the farms. Solution is not to store it.
The basic original problem is: wheat in town is grown for straw mostly with grain as a by-product and not the other way around (like in real life). There will be always a surplus of grain as long as you grow wheat for the compost and not for the grain. Stackable wheat and barrels will end up unused anyways under this analysis.
Easier solution? Make compost craftable from full wheat and straw only. That way you will get compost everytime and grain whenever you need it.
Am I doint it right?
Plausible, or they could let bread stack, or at least let unsliced bread storable. Then people can yoink out one to put on a plate for cutting later. I hate seeing 12 plates of plates of sliced bread sitting in the open.
Or maybe the problem is we are all too anal retentive? (Nah)
Issue is Jason picked the weirdest solution to the problem. If we're making too much wheat should we either lose it, store It, or produce less?
Producing less seems good on paper but is way too expensive to actually do with his solution thus this is obviously not the correct solution to our actual problem.
Letting players store overproduced wheat allows for players to clean up the giant fields of wheat. However, if players aren't using the wheat as is then what's the point of storing It? You'll just keep making barrels and never run out. So this is also not a good solution.
Allowing thrashed wheat to naturally despawn means players can produce whatever they actually need while having the game naturally remove the excess. This encourages players to bake more or they'll lose their potential food. This is by far the easiest and best solution while not taking much work to implement.
Can we agree that the base of the problem is wheat is grown becuase of the straw for compost and grain is just a by product unlike real life?
jasonrohrer wrote:I don't need to hear dozens of solutions. I need to understand the problem.
you made a thread to explain, that you need to understand the problem so you can come up with a solution.
you have the most experience and you can come up with the best solution.at the same time your solution to too much wheat is to make it possible to use string to create baskets.
instead of barrels to store wheat or make wheat stack able (like stone piles), which was suggested by people.
To be fair to Jason´s post, the solution to wheat is not to store it as several people proposed. The problem is: theres too much grain unused in the farms. Solution is not to store it.
The basic original problem is: wheat in town is grown for straw mostly with grain as a by-product and not the other way around (like in real life). There will be always a surplus of grain as long as you grow wheat for the compost and not for the grain. Stackable wheat and barrels will end up unused anyways under this analysis.
Easier solution? Make compost craftable from full wheat and straw only. That way you will get compost everytime and grain whenever you need it.
Am I doint it right?
Hmmm, so if there are 10 pies in it I can make a pie bomb by putting a shaft on it? It's fine, we'll just knife whoever does that repeatedly
I really appreciate what you have done here Jason.
What? It is free distribution to everyone.