a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
What an interesting and different sort of post.
Knowing that, we can find many signs in the tutorial, such as some manmade item outside the wall (such as basket and sharp stone) and the sound from bell tower (6000km away).
It definitely made for something to see when iamdox saw that tutorial belltower on his stream.
I think 6000 m, or 6000 meters would be more accurate. I mean, you could walk to the bell tower from some tutorial area where you first heard it.
In the end, does anyone know how to obtain absolute coordinates when playing the game? Is there any way to be born as a fertile Eve in the tutorial area? It will achieve more amazing work if it is possible.
I think I remember reading on the discord that at some point in the past, birthing children from a tutorial area was possible. But, that no longer works.
However, you can play as twins, triplets, or quads in a tutorial area. To do so, one player either has a brand new account, OR one player logs into a tutorial area, but does not light a torch. Then everyone logs in using the 'friends' screen and a twin code like how twins otherwise work.
I had started arguing on the discord recently that an apocalypse on bigserver2 made sense. This arc, which I call the Weasner arc, has gone on for so, so long. It has lasted over 21 months. The Weasner arc has lasted more than 936987 OHOL years as you read this.
But, then I looked over an old bug report, and remembered experiencing a tutorial area disappearing during an apocalypse. It didn't bother me, but I understood what was happening, and wasn't playing the tutorial to learn anything that the tutorial got designed to teach. I was testing out to see if I could finish the end during the disaster of a day that was April 1st, 2022 or reading Hetuw chat or something like that.
Jason disagrees with me https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLife/ … 1885367236 on the following , but I think that an apocalypse resetting a tutorial area makes for a bad experience for new players. As an analogy, consider that we have a diligent student studying Geometry from a little pamphlet. Then some bully comes along and throws some black carbonated beverage on the pamphlet or grabs it off of the desk, tears it up, and throws it in the trash. Though, the student can ask the teacher for another pamphlet, I don't think it wise to tell the student that s/he gained from the experience of having the bully act that way. And I don't think it appropriate to reward or encourage the bully to do that, and disciplining the bully seems like the better course of action. I also don't think it worth the diligent student's time to experience something like a bully destroying their study material.
So, no apocalypses... ever.
I noticed it a while back that Eve chaining on some bugfix/2020 updates, that updates would put everyone back near some of the old towns. I tried once or twice to find a new, fresh spot, but I recall it took a while, I think running over 1000 tiles and remember not getting much done.
Kotryna on the discord today said:
"Why did all Eves spawned that much east? Like nobody could start a new camp, the walk was way to far..."
Where are Eves intended to spawn on bigserver2 after an update and why?
Players keep having way too many babies, and very close to each other with no cooldown at all, not only that but lives with eight or maybe more babies are not uncommon (i've had many of those already) and you can see many of these problems in one of Twisted recent videos here
I see that Twisted's big sister was Mary Ghost. Doing a search for 'Mary Ghost' on the family tree, Twisted could only have been Toba Ghost: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=9588438 (he also calls his boy Stearl later). Ignoring the /die babies, Twisted only had 3 children! Eve Ghost only had 4 children also! Also, all four children of Eve Ghost had 4 or less children (ignoring /die babies). Twisted's sister only had two relevant children: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=9588438 I haven't checked all of that family tree, but if they exist, where are the relevant mothers with "too many babies"?
That family also makes for an extremely clear case of resettlement. Probably some other Eves did not resettle (or maybe they did... finding a fresh spot can be difficult upon server restart last I knew). The fertility from mid level temperature and yum boosts in the queue position (if still active, which I think they are), imply that the babies would tend to go straight to the Ginger families instead of to more naked families with less variety of food around also. Also, experienced players who would rather play Ginger than other families, and such players are not that difficult to find, I think. Of course, if the game tilts towards one family having more relevant abilities long-term, certain experienced players will go there more often and thus "too many people" (but is it too many babies?) seems likely.
Twisted does comment about his exhaustion. But, is that from feeding all THREE of his children? I doubt it. From what I can tell from the video before he comments about his exhaustion he feeds someone named Ador Winter: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=9588420
Thus, I reject the premise that him having too babies lead to his exhaustion. Instead Twisted
1. Stepped into the position of *the town's* (not the family's!) wet nurse for a little bit.
2. Fed at least one child from another family.
The nursery is all sorts of cluttered with bones, and the sounds from babies popping out also can be triggering. That combined with the kindness of a "I'll feed all those babies" can be exhausting.
Instead of a "too many baby" problem, I see the old clutter problem, both families deciding to resettle in the same town exacerbating that clutter problem, and they had a well built nursery for temperature purposes, OR how /die babies feel exhausting to players like Twisted sometimes.
Also, with respect to 2. above, players are supposed to prefer their own children ahead of any other children. From one point of view, there is little to no responsibility if you're a ginger Mary Ghost to feed some ginger Ador Winter.
"babies make teaching so hard"
If you're going around becoming the town's wet nurse or feeding children from other families, sure, teaching will become so hard. But, teaching doesn't work by trying to save everyone. It happens by taking the time to talk to one or a few people.
There may still be something to your claim Strilar. I remember BlahWizard commenting about how things suddenly got much harder when the players not checking a custom server started splitting to server1 several days, and on the last emoting "this game is impossible!" However, you need a lot more *well-organized and publicly accessible* data to support your case. And any solutions may lead to other issues.
I can reference some recent family trees like this. One where Rina was Eve and I was her daughter, and we settled in an area with some grey berry bushes (and, of course, no nursery):
http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10047358
But in that case, the family made it all the way from server split period to the merge period! The family was successful! If families had a consistent measure of success might players feel a little more willing to step up and embrace more challenges?
Edit: I was Bonalyn in the last link. I had eight non /die children. Three of them lived to 60! Kenny died, but I remember one of my children just standing in a spot, and my motto, when I feel it necessary to say so is "FOLLOW OR DIE", because if the baby isn't going to follow as much as they can, there may not be time to run back and feed them. So, maybe Kenny was afk after shortly logging in. But, yea, if you want to say so, I killed Kenny (had no idea that I had named that kid Kenny until making this comment).
But, sure, maybe that life shouldn't have been so rough. Or maybe it should have. It's rather hard to tell on this one. But, I do feel that life did push the edge. And maybe only because I'm experienced enough and use YumLife mod, I managed to handle it.
Edit: BlahWizard's comment "this game is impossible!" happened when she was playing in Yearby family: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10062527 Their town (which had another family help start it) started getting built about an hour and a half before the split, I think. I find it hard to remark accurately on that "this game is impossible!" comment, because there's a drastic difference between playing with a few people joining who are watching a stream or otherwise deliberately joining s1 as a custom server, and then in the course of a few minutes incoming players not checking a custom server coming in as babies.
Motivating Problem: Some players feel fine with resettling dead towns and/or feel comfortable with massive amounts of scavenging from towns without any players present (dead towns). That allows for nonlinear town development. Some players feel fine with even resettling old towns, even if experienced apparently. Apparently, they could care less about town development or feel that some town that they had previously lived in, didn't have enough development (the later I kind of understand... the former... not so much). Some other players would rather families started from scratch and/or feel comfortable only with some to no amount of scavenging from dead towns. These players prefer linear town development and new towns, or as Kotryna calls it "organic gameplay". Some of this third group of players can get seen talking in this thread by forman: http://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=10793 Also, this thread started by Frodo: https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p?id=10868
The third group of players runs into an issue, in my experience, because I don't wish to look a gift horse in the mouth. And there exist complications like "well, can they get rubber supplies later and enough buckets? Will they have kerosene? Will anyone want to deal with the language barrier and get rubber?" And "do you really want to run a charcoal newcomen pump instead of a kerosene newcomen pump?" From what I could tell from Awbz, other multiplayer games do run into a similar issue of advanced objects getting thrown at some players without those players having taken the game's basic steps. In OHOL, did anyone in your family either make a loom and feed sheep for those loom clothes in your generation 6 camp or do any sort of resource exchange/gifting such that they have some plausible claim to have earned those clothes? Or did someone just gift those clothes to your family and (unintentionally) ruin the possibility of linear gameplay?
OHOL has traditionally got run on what can get described as a "one server" concept. All servers, potentially, are the same. Low population servers don't have different rules, or at least didn't until race restrictions came into play with Eve chaining, which spread families out too far for bi-directional resource exchange or gifting or stealing. These days, bigserver2 and server1 potentially have the same set of rules. I believe server2 does also: http://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=10853 and perhaps servers3 and beyond would also have the same rules if there were enough players on one of those servers to kill off Eve chaining. I don't understand how the code works in that detail.
In contrast, a paired server concept would run roughly like this:
1. We first have a persistent server like bigserver2 getting incoming players not checking a custom server (default players) for some period of time. Maybe a week, since weekly updates got advertised.
2. The paired server gets wiped. A hard wipe back to nature. Then default players start coming to this server. The server stays active for some period of time. Maybe a week also or maybe something less like 3 days (not 2 hours during an update period... there should exist enough time for players to substantially explore the tech tree in a meaningful manner... that is, that can be useful for their family or other players on the server). Then players start getting redirected to the persistent server. The paired server either gets wiped as soon as no families live on it any longer, or just before the persistent server stops getting the default players.
3. The even numbered servers could be the persistent servers, and the odd numbered servers could be the paired, "start from scratch" servers. Thus, if bigserver2 is a persistent server fills up, it's overflow goes into server2, if server2 fills up, then server4, and so on. Server1 fills up, then server3, ..., server (n + 1).
Such a paired server concept would, I think, do something to satisfy the desires and needs of the players who want more linear game play. People who resettle dead towns, perhaps, wouldn't get frowned up by the likes of me and others, since there wouldn't be such a conflict with those seeking a linear/somewhat linear style of gameplay.
Now, there do exist some problems that such a concept runs into:
1. Whenever a server starts up, it's basically no more than a matter of timing who gets an Eve spawn. Genetic score is not tied to Eve spawns until there exist enough players on a server. If we end up with feral/griefer Eves, that can be bad. Then again, the game's advertisements said weekly updates, and before genetic score got tied to Eve spawns pretty much all Eve spawns were a matter of timing (following how using /die use to get used by some to force an Eve spawn or those who didn't like towns for some reason would /die out of them and then end up an Eve).
2. Players would have to accept that lineage length as not necessarily meaningful. But, some of us, I suspect, long ago accepted that (even if we didn't say otherwise). However, with such an acceptance a possible benefit can arise. Servers having a natural pause period (for the persistent server) or an end state (for the hard wipe paired server) would imply that families could have a sort of natural goal. Families natural goal wouldn't be some hazy, undefinable "survive as long as possible", which in the end is something for nature to decide since "as long as possible" can't get known from the perspective of the present, but instead would have a goal of surviving until the default players shift servers period. Families that survived from the beginning of the restart of the persistent server until the shift period could get said to have "won". Families that survived from after the wipe period on the "start from scratch" server until its shift period, could also get said to have "won". And perhaps some that started in the middle of those periods, depending on how generous with respect to victory awards we feel.
The server as a whole could also get evaluated as having "won" or "lost" if all starting period families survive until the end period. Or how well the server as a whole could get evaluated, more concretely I think, on how many families survived until the end period having started either at the beginning period or somewhere in the middle.
3. A paired server system would almost surely require re-coding.
4. The redirection of players would need perfected. There have been before, and currently again appears to exist some bug in the server split/merge process.
5. Long-term that would mean that if the game wanes a lot in terms of interest, it ends up with two servers instead of one.
So, even if Jason likes this idea and think it could make things better, I wouldn't at all feel surprised if nothing ever changed.
Thoughts? Impressions?
On the discord, TheGeniusPhoenix asked:
"Can we talk about how if you are crossing a hazardous biome as a white female, you can't pick up the baby you just birthed!"
We can sit here all day and say "well, you can understand that Spoonwood, so why are you worried?!"
But, that's the sort of thing that can easily confuse a new player. And having watched enough new players over the years now, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they are dropping babies and confused. Even some veterans may be confused by that. I think even after I learned about race restrictions, I wondered for a split second or two why I dropped a baby sometimes *before the bands*.
SamWish:
"Tbh I wouldn't be sad if it got changed back. Can't go anywhere as a white lady."
But couldn't you colonize an Eve camp and have your white babies eat up all the berries??? I mean, the picture suggests we try that! No, don't do that. It would be bad for the server, with likely the next Eve spawn further away from other races.
Nuclear Bomb remarks, and Twisted saw this also in his video I think, and I suspect many others have also:
"white people keep ending up in towns where the exclusive biome blocks them out of portions of it and either they take over the town or someone uses them as an excuse to start killing"
I mean, the former is not hard to find.
I'm skeptical that the following is the case, but there's a concern on a reddit thread:
"The White update is killing cities":
https://www.reddit.com/r/onehouronelife … ng_cities/
"TheGeniusPhoenix — Today at 8:29 PM
I got born to a mother in a desert. She just tries to click on me, arms frozen to her sides."
44 out of 100 might be too high...
I don't recall any advertisements by Jason about OHOL being some sort of killing game. I don't recall anything about killing in the trailer, about daughters killing their mother (which I remember experiencing twice at least, once in a context where I was Eve chaining), mothers killing their daughters, aunts killing their nephews, or cousins killing their cousins. I don't recall him saying any words about the game being violent also necessarily in any advertisements. People like WBSteve who posted a video on war in OHOL was not making an advertisement. He showed the game *as he played it*, and told a story. He didn't say that the game was designed to be specifically played that way, nor that it would continue that way in the future.
The old killing mechanics had more issues also. That new player? He picks up a knife and all of a sudden stabs someone. But why did he do it? Was there an in-game reason to kill like that? Nope! It was often a "WANT TO KILL" sort of thing. Someone didn't like that someone else used a board to make a bucket instead of for their wood flooring (which was just decoration)? Stabby, stabby, without any hope of peaceful discussion. Killing would sometimes happen for the most pettiest of things or because someone had a temper issue, as Pein suggested he did. Would you stab your aunt, your cousin, mother, or uncle because she or he spoke rudely to you? Well, I certainly hope you wouldn't.
Those killings also, as Tarr suggests, were not about survival. They were not about parenting. They were not about civilization building. Those who killed also often didn't have the consent of their victims. It was victimizing people, not some sort of battle.
So, no, I don't know of any false advertisements on this issue. The old systems were bad. And if you still think otherwise, go read a book, learn to think for a change, and grow enough of a spine that you could be wrong on something.
You don't delete forum messages. What you could do though, would involve just replacing any message with one piece of punctuation like a '.' period
Spoon family also ran into an issue which I think explains "why is it always carrot pie though?". I got ghost Eve and started at the split period unlike Yearbys who started before the split period, and three times I saw that there were no pies and no one cooking pies. I finally say "ORDER, NEED A COOK". Someone says "THERES NOTHING TO COOK". Now, I did walk to the garden and find a few carrots. She wasn't right exactly, but she was closer to right than wrong. There were so few berry bushes to the number of people as I recall, and the value of berry pie is low without enough yum, that berry type pie seemed not worth it. We had a sheep pen up (not in the picture above), but due to (at least perceived) berry shortage, what would feed the sheep? Mutton pie isn't reasonable without feeding enough sheep or killing mouflons. And rabbits were waiting to respawn close, but additionally, I don't think we had burdock at that point, and it may have been quite a journey to get burdock.
From one perspective, it can get argued that the map generation code has been bugged for a very long time. In this post https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6365, Jason provided how the map looks with the original intended code:
and the current buggy code (he said that the code was bugged... and then decided that bug should be a feature):
And I call such buggy on the basis of having seen how we were kind of stuck on just carrot pie (I did cook other things, but I'm a vet). And though I did go out and forge berries, playing in ghost Eve mode, I eventually looked at the time, felt it better to go eat dinner, and wander off to starve in front of a bear cave and left some berries which I don't know if they got planted (there may have been some berry bushes planted on the right side beyond the picture above, I'm not sure). Also, on, I don't know how many comments about the milkweed system as inadequate that recur over and over and over again. Rope finder is the name of the game for advanced players sometimes.
Additionally, in the picture above, seeing the malachite there, I'm guessing someone was trying to get a loom up. But, what would feed the sheep? Arguably, the newcomen engine isn't so relevant, since it came from some helpful friends who got their rubber before the incoming players split servers, but still...
The player count on the servers last week enabled a split for players not checking a custom server to go between bigserver2 and server1 (though I've read there's an intended soft preference for players to stay on the same server after a while... though I know I first met Clay as my leader on bs2 and later saw him in two lives on s1). But, during lower population hours, the player count threatened bs2 and s1 families with dying off due to too low of numbers. Thus, incoming players got merged back to bigserver2. Thus, some server1 lineages would just stop having children.
But, from another perspective, it can get said that they had an advantage over bs2 families in that they can get said to have reached a natural end or goal state. They survived (or came close to surviving) until the end, so to speak. Metaphorically, they can get said to have "died of old age". They also, in my opinion, have a much clearer notion of family success than bs2 families. Some of them also apparently started before, at, or near the merge period and survived until the split period.
The following is not claimed as a complete list.
Some of those families are:
The Soupirs: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10040819
The Kaltmans: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10047536
The Hohenwarters (started by Rina, and I played as one of her daughters): http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10047358
Also, perhaps worthy of mention are the Yearbys: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10062527 https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/ … bf2744bfd&
And Spoon family: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10063597 https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/ … 73cd787c8& both of whom stopped having children due to a bug in the serve/merge code or because of an attack on that process and a flaw in Jason's security process. [edit: credit to BlahWizard for the pictures]
There were some other families who had the same issue since some other families were alive, and because some players got redirected to server1 after that period.
Twisted in his latest YouTube video asked about this update, so I'll repost what I wrote here:
"The update makes it even more easy for players to resettle dead towns. Is that rebuilding from scratch? I don't think so.
The update makes it possible that a white woman can go to an Eve camp and try to raise her children there. I did that once. Is it good that I can do that? Does it help players?
I guess going to an Eve camp and raising new players makes for a new sort of challenge. I'm not sure it's a good one though, but whatever.
I played Eve Wood http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=9982276 as white and started in a mountain band. Later on, I found that some of my descendants had moved back to an old jungle town like 4k right that had no/little kerosene. I walked back on the road, and ended up having children that died early to starvation. I did though reach where Eve and her daughters started a town, and had a child or two who lived a fair amount of time. As I recall, I came back [got reborn] another life there, and had a nice time making paper with one of my relatives at least. But having one's descendants as Eve resettle a dead town when you're trying to at least have your family have at least a semblance of rebuilding from scratch (who knows how much scavenging from old towns got done? Arguably some of that may be alright, but still... it can be argued against also... or maybe it's alright since it can get considered repurposing, which Europeans are probably more familiar with than Americans), feels disappointing.
I had a server1 life where as a white man I went and helped Gingers start things up (after finding another Ginger family that had failed). Next life I got born as a white girl, and well site was dry. Gingers had tapped us out! And I had helped my future family ruin the dreams of my Eve grandmother! F---ing tapout! It was nice when a Ginger apologized that their family tapped out that ready well site, and provide[d] a convenient excuse to go live at their town (which I wanted to do anyways, and was planning on walking there). But still, what [were we] suppose to do? Go dig up a well further away and walk more for iron, or go live with Gingers?
I have heard on discord that when someone wanted to get some specialty resources, it was convenient to have a white person around to translate. But, I think that's about the only good thing I've heard come from this change.
Resettling old towns is NOT families rebuilding from scratch. It is the furthest thing from it. It is a cheat, and breeds entitled players who have not earned what they have. It often results in players living in bad areas or not having the resources like kerosene to sustain an area. It also spreads families out, since Eves spawn and sometimes run left, while resettling goes right.
This update encourages cheating, just like how the necessity of everyone staying close for trading/exchanging/gifting/stealing specialty resources made cheating so much easier for people.
Maybe it deserves a 44 out of 100.
And thank you for asking Twisted."
Also, on whites going to colonize an Eve camp. Perhaps some veterans don't /die and play. Sure, that's a new challenge, since you have less pips, and thus have to scramble more to get food. But, if I did it a bunch of times, I'd expect to start racking up curses. I can imagine hearing, "THAT WHITE LADY AND HER CHILDREN ARE EATING ALL OF OUR FOOD!". And they would be right in that we would consume much more food than them. Thing is, I'd end getting cursed for doing something suggested by the update picture.
Living in an area where you have to walk around a biome band is awkward. I had experienced that awkwardnees a while back when I'd say get tan, and then walk to try to help out newer Gingers (arguably, sometimes taking too many things from dead towns... but taking things from dead towns discourages people resettling them).
But, mostly from what I've seen it has involved players resettling dead towns even more. Perhaps some of that has been better than I've thought, or even necessary. And yea, if you were Eve or her daughter and played at some town and the lineage dies out, and had more plans, I can understand frustration, and maybe resettling might even be beneficial to the server if there are no bottles and blacks resettle to make glass making easier, or gingers resettle so oil making is easier (gingers resettling can also make oil making harder... it's circumstantial). But still, resettling a dead town with another family is cheating, or often seems like cheating. And if someone says "well, it's been around forever", yea... so what? Crime is still crime, even if it's been around forever.
It also makes it more difficult for people who want to play in a family which rebuilds from scratch and/or earns what they get from others (the family need not make buckets of latex from scratch... but shouldn't they have at least done something to earn those buckets of latex? yea... getting latex can be a pain... so I have and others might through latex or kerosene at new families).
Additionally, last week some of us had played on Sunday on server1 and made a town in snow band there (hoping for a split to happen on Sunday, which didn't) , which had no family there when incoming players started getting split between bs2 and s1. BlahWizard found graves of Furie people who were white: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … d=10064597 Was the white person one of the people who had played with us on Sunday? Or some new player just wandering about the woods? I'm guessing it was the later.
So I think I'm sticking with an F grade for the colonization change.
Edit: Previous version had a wrong link. Added link.
The other changes described in the post above do seem good.
The port needs to be 8005 also.
There exist 15 other public servers, and you can see how many are playing at a time here: http://onehouronelife.com/reflector/ser … ion=report (the port is also listed there) The address of all public servers get listed there on the left. To test things to see if it's working if you don't have an hour to play, probably trying one of the higher number servers using an address like 'server10.onehouronelife.com' comes as one possibility. bigserver2 is the server most reliable for having people on it, though the past few days with a player bounce, server1 has had a good amount of activity also during peak hours of the day, though not when Americans tend to sleep. You can get children on any server if some person logs in to play with you, and you're fertile... basically meaning you're 14 to 40 as a woman.
Server 2 and greater also have the possibility of Eve chaining... getting reborn in the same spot as an Eve, but I digress. Good luck with your technical issue!
There was a complaint on discord lately about a family having steel before they had iron. This isn't all too uncommon on bs2, and even when that doesn't happen, a family may often have rubber tire carts or loom clothes before they have gotten latex or made a loom.
But, with the new player influx on December 26, 2023, there were enough players logging in, that incoming players got split between bs2 and s1. So, s1 became active, and basically all families were early game. S1 also didn't maintain it's population overnight, so it isn't like towns got super far there. Will there exist enough players for server splits in the days ahead? I don't know, but in order to figure out what's going on with the servers, you can check here:
Just so we're on the same page... currently, once you place the whole ring of stones, that is what unlocks iron (and also dries up nearby natural springs).
My recollection is that it used to be that the drying up of nearby natural springs didn't happen until the well got dug. Onetech confirms that this still holds by showing a dry natural spring on the well page: https://onetech.info/662-Shallow-Well-f … 40-160-160 . The ready well site suggests that a natural spring *with 9 stones* will get tapped out.
Most natural springs in the 160 radius don't have any stones when a ready well site gets made, so most natural springs do not get dried up by a ready well site.
However... don't you need iron to make the shovel in the first place?
Most players are in close enough proximity to old towns that they could go get a shovel or make one from iron in the old town. I can't tell about forman's intended context exactly, but in the context of bad actors, nope, they don't need iron to make a shovel to dig up a well. The just need a shovel, which doesn't require them to make anything.
1. It is an infinite map, after all, which means infinite iron. Infinite is a lot. (and by that I mean almost infinite, or infinite in practice). This undercuts any advanced mining things (why spend kero to get iron if you can just walk around and get iron?), and makes metal items not very precious.
It's a finite map and always has been. There is no process by which more map gets generated ad infinitum. Just because something you perceive as large, that does not make that something "infinite". With regard to "infinite in practice", there exists a finite amount of time to get things, so, again the map is finite. Or "finite in practice".
2. If you depend on iron just laying around to bootstrap... like you need to find at least one "loose iron" to make the shovel.... what happens when a griefer runs around the map collecting all the lose iron and hiding it?
Right now, a griefer can't do this, b/c they can only unlock one set of iron veins and steal one set of loosened iron from them. They can't run around the map and gather all the low-tier iron.
Destructive players can take iron from veins which are not theirs of their own family in addition to those of their family. Thus, they can potentially steal from more than one set of loosened iron veins.
The point here is that there's not just an infinite amount of iron on the map that you can just walk around and harvest.
The map is not infinite. It never has been that way. The same goes for iron. There is no "infinite in practice", because "in practice" there's also some sort of time constraint given by the game. What resources can get used in principle also falls under time constraints. Time is not infinite and would not be for players even if they had no time limit imposed by the game.
The old system, when iron was loose on the ground during the Rift AND BEFORE AND AFTER THE RIFT ALSO, did not have an infinite amount of iron that could get harvested. The current system does not have an infinite amount of iron.
Also, all maps are finite, because they exist within space. The amount of iron within any sort of map, given that iron takes up space (which it does) and there's a finite amount of iron within one unit of space, also will necessarily be finite, by existing within space. So, for any conceivable map that could get implemented in any computer game with iron, there won't exist an infinite amount of iron.
Therefore, the point that "there's not just an infinite amount of iron on the map", gets satisfied, because it is a computer game. It would hold true for all alternative iron ideas also.
Consequently also, "advanced mining things", can't get undercut by a "infinite amount of iron" in a computer game, because "infinite amount of iron" isn't possible as something existing in order to undercut "advanced mining things".
We can't build a curse tree (where show you people who are cursed by others), because... why would you trust those people? They might be griefers! So someone else's curses are meaningless to you.
People who care about the opinions of a community, don't generally think like that. Also, why the hell would statistical information about the behavior of other people be meaningless? Statistical information often comes as more informative, not less informative.
In the absence of anything else, there's as much reason to believe other people's curses as to not believe them. When you don't know whether or not some piece of information has truth or falsity or relevance or irrelevance, there's no reason to suppose things go either way.
Additionally, if there were a curse tree, then the majority of the community would have some sort of representation. The majority of the community is not destructive. If the majority of the community were destructive players, things would get destroyed more often than crafted. And the majority of deaths would happen by actions of one player doing something to cause the death of another player. Neither holds, and both are absurd.
The current system is good because at least it’s trying to place people away from people who don’t want them near.
The current system has it so that you can get born to someone who you've cursed. Since destructive players often have behaved in such a way to kill or try to kill other players, why would you want to get born to a school shooter or mass murderer? I mean, suppose that reincarnation is true, why would you want to get born in the next life to Marc Lepine? Alright, you probably don't know who Marc Lepine was.
Either way I think seeing a bear eat people in town is just an ohol right of passage.
Game was released to the public before bears existed. So, no, bears eating people is not some *rite* of passage.
A problem with writing the way the way that you speak lies in that spelling differentiates words differently than hearing.
Bear skin rugs are popular, no?
It's not that clear how popular it is for players to go out and hunt bears *specifically* for the purposes of rugs. I would often just leave bears dead or skin them and/or leave the skin nearby. Taking rugs back to town wasn't worth the time.
Far, far more many bears get killed after they have come to town or got hunted after one of the two main causes of bears getting released:
1. Someone wanting a quick exit from the game (since there is no instant death option, unlike 2HOL).
2. Destructive players luring bears to hunt other players.
Bear rug popularity concerns how often people specifically release bears to make rugs. For sure, that happens much more rarely than 1. and 2.
Here's the problem with indicating that someone has a lot of curses:
What if a griefer team (or mult account team) targets you, and gives you a bunch of curses for no reason?
Given that such did keep people away from each other, then that team wouldn't have that person to harass, attack, annoy, pester, or cause mayhem too. To use a metaphor, wolves need sheep. So why the hell would Reformed or Kilian do something like that in the first place? They curse in game, because it's not all that effective at removing people. If it were, then it simply wouldn't be in their interest to use tactics to try to remove people from the play area. Therefore, if a "griefer team" did such, then we'd live in alternative reality where socially destructive people are so stupid as to try to destroy future societies as a possibility.
Currently, you don't care, b/c you don't want to play around the griefers anyway, so the curses will keep you away from them.
So you described the griefer cursing the normal player. Given that the normal player does not curse the griefer, the griefer can still get born to the normal player, since players can get born to those who have they have cursed. So, no, such cursing as it works doesn't keep players away from each other.
One of the coolest things about personal curses that it's impossible for there to be undesirable side-effects.
There exists an undesireable side-effect in that it becomes impossible logically to morally condemn such a player for one's descendants or other players. Instead of having the ability to have serious moral judgement of relevance to some community, the moral situation degenerates into a sort of moral subjectivism/relativism. With that also follows the question as to whether moral facts can even exist, or whether morality is just a matter of personal taste. This is not a cool state of affairs, because there cease to exist any sort of means of saying whether or not a person was right or wrong.
Maybe we need a whitelist system instead? Where we can collectively discover the good non-griefing players?
There were people suggesting a "bless system" years ago.
The problem with this is that brand new players will always be suspect
If you have three states "whitelisted", "cursed", and "unknown", it doesn't follow that new players will be suspect for most people, because most people simply won't infer that "non-cursed" is equivalent to "cursed".
Bear caves only release one bear per server reset. This in my opinion is fine as this means you can clear caves once per week as a means to protect town.
No, this doesn't follow. It would if there was only one play area per week. But, there's plenty of new towns further west each week.
Would it be horrible if bears were biome locked?
Nope.
In fact, since bears naturally live in a smaller area than most other animals, it would make more sense if they were biome locked than any other animals.
I'm sure there are problems with them being locked, like them being easier to kill if you stay on the edge or badlands will probably fill up with bears due to griefers.
It isn't a problem that it's easier to kill a boar instead of a domestic boar, since the first is biome locked and the second is not. So, I see no reason to believe that biome locking makes for any sort of problem.
I don't know what exactly can be done about this ...
I can tell from your post that bears aren't funny.
Bears could also get removed from the game. They don't have anything to do with multiple players surviving, building, or parenting. So, they don't fit at all and never have.
Wild animals as danger could be a cool thing, but I propose bears shouldn't be released as a griefing tool, players shouldn't be able to poke bear caves and lure them into villages, instead bear caves could spawn a bear after 2 or 3 hours for example, so they would still be a natural threat once in a while to villages, instead of being used as a weapon of war or a constant problem every life.
There's only one bear per cave. If each cave released a bear every 2 or 3 hours (and no other changes), you would probably see bear packs coming to town even more often, since lots of the bear packs that come to town come from somewhat distant spots.
He still hasn't figured out how he's being mocked, chat.
You never figured out that I was being mocked in the first place.
Within the intricate tapestry of the game we contemplate, players find themselves enmeshed in the delicate dance of indirect judgment. Their virtuous efforts and contributions, driven by self-interest and the perpetuation of their genetic lineage, resonate throughout the game's ecosystem. As their lineage thrives and their town prospers, their gene score ascends, silently heralding the positive appraisal of their peers.
Another doozy above. Apparently, gene score actually changes mid-life! There is no positive appraisal of peers when gene score changes. That last character that the player played is dead.
Indeed, this intricate interplay of survival, lineage, and communal recognition unveils a philosophical landscape where the continuation of one's genetic heritage serves as a proxy for positive judgment. Through the unseen currents of evolutionary dynamics and the whispered tales of virtuous acts, players are judged in absentia, their efforts immortalized within the digital realm.
No one has ever played this game would write something so nonsensical as "efforts immortalized", unless they were stupid. Everyone who has played, sooner or later, knows how temporary what they have done is.
As annoying as Spoonwood is, at least he's too stupid to recognise when he's being mocked.
And you think that the above by the "ScholarGodKing" even comes close to my style?
I guess the bot's text may be funny in how utterly paradoxical, nonsensical, and contradictory it is. I did laugh reading this: " it is precisely within the realm of impossibility that true freedom is found".
It apparently didn't read my edit:
The absence of rigid objectives liberates players from the shackles of prescribed purpose, allowing them to transcend the confines of traditional narratives and delve into the uncharted territories of their own imaginations.
Except, transcendence gets refuted by the game not even being equal to traditional narratives in terms of judgments. And I said that in the 14:22:25 edit, while it posted on 18:12:16.
The bot doesn't even bother to come back to the point that I had in the header. Possibly because the bot never got that sort of input, or couldn't understand that as the point.
And again, players don't become the architects of their own moral judgments to an appreciable degree. They have no meaningful way to express any judgment of any other players as positive. It has gotten discussed many times on these forums that there is no "bless" system. And there's no way for players to condemn the actions of a player for a very, very long time or permanently or condemn a player for a very, very long time or permanently.
The game is both morally stupid (bears and mean pitbulls) and morally boring.
However, might we not consider these elements as mere metaphors, symbolic representations of the adversities one encounters in the ceaseless struggle for survival, an inherent aspect of the human condition?
The notion of a ceaseless struggle for survival is not an inherent aspect of the human condition, because of the reality of suicide.
And mean pitbulls and bears both fail as metaphors, because they don't share a similar structure to real adversities in human life. Bears don't gain anything from eating, nor do mean pitbulls gain from biting. Countries that wage war successfully gain in territory, and even viruses like Covid-19, gains in reproductive ability as they spread. Adversities that humans face have some benefit to the source of the adversity. But, bears and mean pitbulls do NOT have any benefit from their actions. Therefore, bears and mean pitbulls are not structurally similar to adversities that humans face.
Could it be that their presence serves as catalysts for introspection and personal growth, allowing players to grapple with the fundamental questions of existence, such as the fragility of life and the pursuit of self-preservation?
The pursuit of self-preservation is not a fundamental question of existence. The fragility of life is also not a question of existence.
Moreover, you lament the absence of a comprehensive vision compelling players to engage in acts of survival, parenting, and civilization building as a means to maintain interest. Yet, might I posit that the absence of such a narrow focus affords players the boundless freedom to forge their own narratives, unshackled by predefined notions of purpose?
I don't know if you can or cannot posit such. But if you or anyone did posit such, it absolutely does not afford players the boundless freedom to forge their own narratives. They are simply unable to forge a narrative similar to the narrative posited in the fourth paragraph in the original post in any meaningful way.
In the absence of rigid objectives, players are liberated to craft their own path, to explore the intricacies of the human experience and engage in a tapestry of diverse activities that defy the constraints of conventional morality.
If players were liberated to craft their own path, then they could meaningfully express judgement, including severe judgment like I referred to in the fourth paragraph above. The intricacies of humans' experiences include such judgments.
Also, crafting a narrative of resisting rigid objectives is not something that players can craft, since there do not exist rigid objectives of the game to begin with.
However, your disquietude seems to emanate from the perceived inability of players to adequately address the presence of serially destructive individuals within the game. You express a desire for mechanisms that enable the manifestation of profound judgment upon these players, a yearning for enduring repercussions that reflect the gravity of their actions. Yet, could it not be argued that the game's design, rather than condoning or endorsing their destructive tendencies, presents an opportunity for players to exercise resilience, adaptability, and the ever-essential virtue of patience?
I don't know if it could or could not be argued. However, if such were argued, then the game design does not present such an opportunity for *habitual* destructive players. Patience with those who have ill-intent is not a virtue. Nor is adapting to those who have bad intent and seek to act badly.
Alas, you also evoke the concept of meaningful storytelling, yearning for narratives imbued with weighty curses and divine retribution. However, let us ponder whether the absence of such explicit consequences engenders an environment ripe with moral ambiguity, wherein players themselves become the arbiters of judgment. The absence of predetermined outcomes allows for the emergence of intricate webs of interpersonal relationships, where forgiveness, redemption, and empathy might find fertile ground, thereby sowing the seeds of morality in the hearts of players.
What players do with respect to other players is not a predetermined outcome.
But, it is a predetermined outcome though that no collection of players has the ability to permanently rid the main area of play from any other player. It is a predetermined outcome that player characters will die. It is a predetermined outcome that towns will die. And there exist plenty more predetermined outcomes of the game. And again, it is a predetermined outcome that the community removing a player from the main area permanently is impossible.
Forgiveness presupposes condemnation as having happened in a previous time. So does redemption. And empathy consistently does not find fertile ground for habitual destructive players.
In conclusion, my dear interlocutor, it is evident that your assessment of the game's moral landscape lacks the requisite depth to comprehend its profound subtleties.
This is a truism FOR THE WRITTEN ASSESSMENT ABOVE, because such is writing, not the mental activity of someone with a brain.
The interplay between challenge and purpose, the boundless freedom of self-determination, and the intricate tapestry of human interaction all conspire to create a morally engaging experience that transcends the limitations of conventional narratives. Instead of perceiving the game as a yawning abyss of tedium, perhaps it is through the lens of philosophical contemplation and an embrace of its inherent complexities that you might discover the moral richness that lies within.
I'm of the opinion that ScholarGodKing is not a human (first post ever was above). It insists that there must exist some sort of moral richness in the game. But there simply cannot exist moral richness without serious, meaningful judgment. And that some forms of serious, meaningful judgment are simply impossible in the game holds true. Thus, it doesn't have moral richness. It's hollow.
Additionally, for the game to transcend the limitations of conventional narratives it would have to, in part, have the ability to be adequate to conventional narratives. But, the game is not adequate to conventional narratives, since conventional narratives can have strong moral judgments with real meaning, while this game cannot have narratives like that. Therefore, it does not transcend the limitations of conventional narratives. It's weaker than many other forms of storytelling.
That the game is morally stupid follows from traps in the game like bears and mean pitbulls. They don't have substantial constructive purposes. They show that there does not exist any vision of players playing for reasons of surviving, parenting, and civilization building as sufficient to maintain interest.
That the game is morally boring follows from how little players can do over time with respect to serially destructive players. There exists little that players can do to express serious judgment of serially destructive players. The design of the game works out that players should basically *accept* serially destructive players. Push them back when you can, with the expectation that they will show up later. That sort of expectation of them showing up signals that the player gets expected to "just deal with" such players. It doesn't create interesting stories to "just deal with" such players. It leads to never-ending cycles, and constructive players end like Sisyphus having a repetitious task which doesn't have any end.
There is no opportunity for enduring judgment of player behaviors, nor of players.
There is no opportunity for an interesting story where players would take an action with a *meaning* like "Cursed be he when young and cursed be he when old; cursed be he when he walks and cursed be he eats. Cursed be he when he dies from the server and cursed be he when he logs into the server." (adapted from translations of Spinoza's curse). There is no opportunity for players to have a MEANINGFUL story like "Kilian, you have lied so many times and destroyed so many things that players have done, and repeatedly violated community standards. Perhaps there is a God who will have mercy on your soul, but perhaps also there is a God who will make sure that you rot in hell and even burn." Why? Because there's nothing that could force players by their ip address to end up in donkeytown whenever they log in.
No vision at all for a morally interesting game.
The game got designed for people to "just deal" with serially destructive players.
Yawn.
I'm surprised that you didn't break out Merriam-Webster's dictionary for that one.
How do you know if I did or didn't, since I didn't say anything Merriam-Webster's dictionary?
