a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Not so much a bug, but probably an oversight. An ancient stone wall can't be knocked down, but a normal stone wall can be knocked down with a pickaxe. There is no reason why they should be any different.
Sounds like a bug(or rather oversight), the ancient stone walls should be able to be knocked down like the normal ones.
Yeah, he should of just made it open sourced with generous licence rules rather than open sourced and public domain. Though there are two things that may be salvageable here for going forward in the future. The first is that Jason can choose to change the rules on future updates. The public domain stuff only applies to the game as is now. Updates to the game can be copyrighted and protected.
Since it is to other people's benefit to have access to newer releases, you can use that to your benefit. Basically people can do anything they want with the game as it is now, and make their own changes, but if they want to use your future updates then you want credit or whatever. If the game is updated for several more years, then by the time the game is finished the protected part of the game will be very sizable. So it would be wise for them to follow the agreement to get the full game with all updates, rather than use the public domain version.
The second thing that may help, is that Jason is the owner of the website. The game and the website are two different things, so it may be possible to argue that while the game is public domain the website isn't. So someone using the name to sell copies of the game infringes on your website which sells copies of the game under the same name and was created first. You might need a lawyer to work out the details but I think it is a valid argument.
I don't think giving clothing to newbie players so they don't die is a bad thing. Even though they will probably make the least use of it as far as helping the community, it has the largest impact on helping them survive. For a newbie having a backpack might be a matter of survival or death, for a pro player it is merely a convenience.
I do agree with you overall, it isn't the ideal situation but it isn't something I would kill a person over.
It gets really complicated when talking internationally, since countries have different laws. It is difficult enough when just dealing within one country, but you definitely need a lawyer if dealing with multiple countries.
I don't consider a warning valid unless you also try to explain why. Because if you just tell someone to do something they have no obligation to follow you. You are not the king and they have no idea if you are just messing with them or not. You say don't shear the sheep and they say, "Yeah but I need wool to make clothing." They are not wrong in their reasoning.
So I say you need to try to explain it. If you tell them don't do X, because it is going to hurt us because of Y, then they know. Then if they do if they do it anyway, they either have a really good reason, or you know they are just griefing. Also your reasons have to be valid. If you say don't make pies because berries are better and they disagree with you and make a pie, I don't consider that a reason to kill someone.
Also I say try to explain to people, because if they run around and don't listen at all, then it can't really be helped.
I made a post in the other thread, saying that it is possible he probably hasn't given up all his rights, and probably should retain protection for the name itself. Also that just because something is open source and free to use doesn't mean it is public domain.
However, with that said, if he tells someone the game and the name and everything is free and do whatever the heck you want with it, then it is kind of his own fault. They don't need to call it the unofficial anything, because there is no official anything. It is all out there for anyone to do whatever with. Which is why in the future, Jason most definitely needs to protect the name at the very least.
Probably best to contact a lawyer about this sort of stuff but I have a question. Is One Hour One Life actually public domain? Just because it is open sourced and you let anyone use the code, doesn't mean that it is public domain. Have you ever actually stated that it was specifically public domain? If the game is open sourced but it isn't public domain, then you would likely still have rights. For example, I think the name One Hour One Life would still be protected.
I saw on the website that it does say it is opened source but I see nothing saying it is public domain. Legally you probably have to make some attempt to actually classify it as public domain and if you do not, it is likely still protected even if you may have casually mentioned it in a conversation or something.
Depending on the specific, you probably do have some rights. I am fairly certain your intention was just to make the code free for everyone to use and not to abandon the game and throw everything into the wind. After all you are still working on the game, still selling it and still using the name. Also things like names are different from code. So even if you released the game as open sourced and public domain, that doesn't mean the name One Hour One Life is necessarily public domain as well. Obviously, outside the game you still run this website as well don't you?
There is the argument to be made that someone selling the game under the same name would be going against your copyright on the website, even if the game didn't matter at all.
I would say it is mixed. Before when everyone just farmed a billion carrots, things could go really bad if someone neglected the carrot farm. In fact, things could go very badly surprisingly quickly. All the things you listed makes the game harder, and there is also more complicated stuff with a lot of steps that also makes things harder. That said, there is a lot more options and more safety nets to help out. There really isn't a situation like before, where you run out of carrot seeds and boom, the city is done for. You have to mess up a lot more to entirely wipe a city out. Well you can run out of resources now, but it is much slower process.
So there is some harder stuff and some easier stuff.
I always saw graves as something you do for important people you care about, and everyone else just goes into the bone fields at the edge of town.
Except you cannot gauge intention through a computer screen.
You have no idea if the guy is doing something to make you mad or someone else mad.
Maybe he hates the town itself. People getting mad is just a side effect of his hate for the city.
I have no idea what will make you mad. I could do something with good intentions but it was perceived by someone as ill intentions.
That is true, though you were making it sound like griefing doesn't really exist, because everyone is free to do what they want. Which isn't true, everyone can do what they want but there is definitely people who are griefing. Whether or not you can tell if any specific person is a griefer, doesn't change the fact that there is most definitely griefers in the game and those people know what they are doing.
Though I would go further and say that a lot of times it is fairly easy to tell it any way. If someone randomly starts to dig up bushes to kill them, or takes a bunch of stuff and hides it, or throws several important items into a trash pit or goes, "Ahh die!" and starts trying to stab everyone they see, well it isn't hard to guess they are probably a griefer. Sure some people might guess wrong, but to say you have no idea isn't really true, people have a lot of ideas, there are clues and hints.
All that said, I do think people should try talking to others before jumping to conclusions. Some people just start stabbing people they think are griefers and a lot of time stab innocent people and I think that is kind of dumb. So speaking to people is important too.
To answer the original question, yes you do them all. You say it is a waste to raise children who just die early, but that is why you need a bunch, since so many die early. You can figure 3 out of 4 children are not going to make it to adulthood, so having eight is likely to result in just 2 adults, maybe 3 if you are lucky.
The one thing you need to remember is that children are extremely cheap to raise from a food perspective, and they are not a drain on resources until they start eating on their own. Next to a fire you can raise a child from birth until they can no long breast feed off a single berry. That is nothing. What you are really wasting is time, since you are standing there with your baby and not doing anything else productive. However, it doesn't really matter if you are raising one baby or five, since you are already standing around any way. So if you are going to raise one baby, it doesn't really hurt to raise a ton at once.
If you can get a child to go and add soil and water a bush before they die, they already pay for them self. If you get a child to make a pie before they die, they basically pay for themselves and all their siblings. That is why teaching is really important while raising children. If you just teach them to do something, anything useful, they will easily pay their way.
The big problem is any definition of griefing is a construct of someones opinion because there are no hard rules in game.
You can say I THINK the following behaviors are griefing but you cannot say they ARE because there is no law.
I disagree, since griefing is basically defined as trying to piss people off on purpose. So it is pretty clear what is griefing or not, based on their intention. You know killing people will piss them off, so if you kill someone for no real reason, then you are griefing. If you go around destroying tools for the sake of destroying them so others can't use them then that is clearly griefing.
There is some grey area, when you do something that is likely to piss people off but you feel there is a good reason for it. However, most cases of griefing are pretty clear cut.
I kind of like the idea where your temperature slowly drops over time, until you reach the area's temperature, and having the food use for it being far more extreme. So for example, if you are in the cold area and at a fire, you are at ideal temperature. If you are naked and walk away it takes like 5 minutes to reach the cold temperature but it is basically freezing to death where you have to eat food every minute just to survive. If you have full clothing maybe it takes like 15 minutes until you are freezing.
For a naked Eve, going into the ice area might almost be death, but since fire is fairly low in the tech it isn't completely hopeless and the other areas don't need to be so extreme.
If you want people to take clothing off and put it on while changing terrains, then you need to put in coat racks, hat racks, places to put our shoes and all that. Because throwing clothing all over the floor is silly. Also, you should put in underwear and underclothing. That way rather than strip naked, you just take off the top layer of clothing. I know we don't really have layers of clothing but we should.
No matter how hot it is outside, people don't strip down totally naked. If you had light weight clothing that was good for hot areas, then you could put a fur coat on when going into the snow zone, and take it off when you come back.
Currently you wear full clothes, then strip down naked, and leave your stuff on the floor then someone comes by and steals it all and it is just silly.
It is kind of silly that he put looms in just to make wings, though I suspect it will have other uses eventually. The planes are kind of cool. It is nice knowing you can at least attempt to make two villages next to each and fly between them, even if you might end up dying from it.
I just had a nice idea. It would be nice if you could have something like a home marker, but could send the coordinates by radio. So that if you ran out into the wilderness, really far away and made a radio you could call back to the city you came from and people there could get the new home marker and then come join you. That way one person or a couple could go off and set things up, then everyone could follow you later.
I was actually wondering about glassblowing as well. I don't think it will come out that soon, but it seems like a natural thing with the start of glassblowing for the radio put in.
This has always been true. There is stuff every where, all the time.
Rather than saying you are doing nothing, I would teach the children and help organize what people are doing. Which you can basically do at the same time as sitting around. If you do that, then it is a very useful thing to be doing. Also if you are just sitting there trying to have lots of children, might as well help raise other children as well.
Just wait until we have walkie talkies or phones, then we can carry the radio around with us. That would be pretty cool.
That is more or less true of recently if you are looking at the last month or two, but if you go further back it is a more of a mix hoping back and forth. It just seems recently he has been interested in these more advanced stuff. He has always been a bit unpredictable, so who knows what he might do next. I am fairly certain there will be more early stuff added later though.
The thing is, he isn't really putting stuff in, in order. So I absolutely agree that it seems like we are getting stuff far too advanced compared to the current level of tech in the game, but he is probably going to add in more older tech too. I think the end result will be a more smooth and gradual increase in complexity as tech advances. Over the sort term, this is what you get though.
Lily wrote:To answer the original question, new players are not bad for a village. If anything I would say they are more neutral. Some times they fail, but it doesn't take that much effort to turn them into a positive.
This was probably the most progressive response ive gotten in this entire thread
People get all worried about other people wasting food and stuff, but how much food does it really take? It takes one box of food to pick up a child and feed it, and a berry feeds you like 5 boxes. So a single bush allows you to pick up a child 30 times, with 30 times you can easily raise 4-5 children off a single bush. You can raise all your children you have in your life time off a single pie.
So in my eyes, raising children is basically a freebie. The obvious issue is what they do as an adult. If they die before adulthood because they are a newbie, then there is no real harm so we can rule out all those situations as neither good nor bad, just a slight distraction. If they can survive into adulthood then they can probably learn to do something useful. Most players don't want to starve to death and die, so they are willing to learn to feed themselves.
The other thing is that a pro can probably feed 5 other people and carry them on their back. At least if they got them self in a good position. A decent player can probably take care of another person or two. If you are good enough to take care of one other person though, then you can take care of two newbies who are each only half capable of taking care of them self.
So taking care of a newbie who can't survive on their own is fairly easily. It is rough if you are an Eve and don't have a farm, or ran out of resources or something, but in most situations you should probably be fine. So yeah newbies waste resources, but not a lot. If you can get them to do a minimal amount of work you are good.
To answer the original question, new players are not bad for a village. If anything I would say they are more neutral. Some times they fail, but it doesn't take that much effort to turn them into a positive.