a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Sure, chimps. But how many Roman emperors were killed by Praetorians?
13. Half of all assasinations.
But, as you said, they lived in much bigger societies. You say violence is not applying to small group. Maybe this is true only for relation ruler-supporter?
More like tundra. Greenland would be a lot better comparison.
Definitely more like savannah, because it could support great herds of megafauna.
Also, lolwut savanna supporting more animals than forest? Forest has a much bigger plant biomass per area than savanna.
Animals cannot eat wood, but can eat grass. All this extra biomass is a waste for animals. Forest elephants and indian are smaller than african living in savannah. The same is for asian lion, smaller than african. The smaller modern people, Pygmy, live in rainforest. The same was for Flores. It is all because of lack of food.
Also, the whole concept of population having a super easy time getting food is kinda silly. If you got that going on it means a specie is severely under the carrying capacity and the population will quickly grow until it reaches this capacity. Just look at global human population since the green revolution.
From Lotka-Volterra equations comes a solution: if they work too much, they will have more food for reproduction. Which will end with eradication of area and population collapse. From thousands of years of cultural evolution, 2-hours work (just to be sure: 2 hours of hunting and gathering, cooking not involved) per day showed up to be the more stable and supporting the bigger number of people. This 2 hours is a thing observed amoung modern hunter gatherers in Australia and Africa.
YAHG wrote:The best part about the Karma idea is don't have to remember all the reasons why
it will be bad, cause someone will remind us all again soon enough when the next
karma thread comes around..
The player base is steadily declining. Any idea how to fix that, instead of criticising others?
By suggestions
For example: apply karma system ![]()
Customer: Waiter! There is TheRedBug in my stew!
TheReadBug: STEW!
I've just searched an Internet to find out, if my father told me fairytailes
Drunk Amish carried home
Drunk cowboys not always carried home. Only, if horses treated well. They could also abandon you
And one drunk cowboy did not carried home. Police interrupted horse attempts ![]()
As hilarious as it sounds, it seems true ![]()
Making having kids harder? No problem. Immobilize them for first 2 minutes after spawn >)
I warned, system punish for griefer, which is lineage ban, will force Jason to rewrite it all the times, as griefers will be adapting to it. Currently, the best adaptation is to buy a second account ![]()
The concept of souls/karma would release developer from this burden and give it to players. Yet, Jason, usually so prone to make players solve problems on their own, is hesitant here ![]()
Still kinda feel like unplanned babies is really important to the rhythm of the game. Also unplanned baby droughts.
When I gave a suggestion about hugging based reproduction, Kinrany tried to convince me, it won't change anything. That people would hug each other like crazy rabbits ![]()
I think, both would happen: abstinents and crazy rabbits. Both dangerous for village, complex and requiring players to solve the problem. Uncle's birth control is a little... soulless?
We still don't have domestic horses
1. Domestic horses tend to follow humans. They like us
2. More wild horse races are more likely to run away. Then, you must find the leader and bring it back home. Others will followe ( I know this from this blog . But still, they just like wide area and search for better grass, they do not avoid human.
3. Domesticated horses are known to go back to stable when are free to go. People used it to their advantage, as they could drunk sleep in the cart while horse carried them home. I know this from the father, who worked with horse plow a long time ago.
While we still not breed horses, their current behavior is OK. But domeaticated horses should be more menageble.
More likely the tyrant will be killed by a supporter hoping to take his place.
It happens very rarely. Usually in chimpanzee group old ruler is defeated when a new coalition emerges. Such change often ends with killings. But you don't kill your supporters. They also don't attack you, because being supporter is safer.
Being supporter can be fruitfull from the evolutionary point of view, like in the ruff example
Sometimes, when law does not work, such brutal intergroup actions takes place among civilised people. Like Mutiny on Bounty (on Pitcairn island one man killed all the others).
And sure, you can forage just two hours a day in the tropics, but I doubt food would be so easily available in ice age Europe.
Just gathering probably no. But hunting changes everything. Ice Age Europe was savannah with plenty of animals, much more than it is possible to live in forests. A little like Africa today.
No way could a tribe rely on a single area, they had to follow herds as they migrated.
Before Europeans brought horses to America, native Americans did not wandered on Great Plains and did not hunt bisons (I mean they hunted, but it was not their main source of everything). They all lived in settled communities, not followind any herd.
Clovis culture (solutrean in Europe) hunted down all big game in America. The rest applied more settled way of living.
And how many of those homicides are commited by members of the same group?
The numbers for Bushman and Ache are only about intragroup violence.
As for domestic tyranny, that's against women and children. Try doing that to a 20-30 year old guy for an extended period of time, and he'll almost certainly kill you given half a chance.
If you are lonely, yes. But tyrann usually has supporters. Even if you kill tyrann in sleep, it is still suicide, as his supporters will get you.
And a society that can't support a warrior class can't engage in total war. They're too busy feeding themselves.
Especially stone age society, preagriculture, can support warriors ![]()
You see, completly the opposite than philosophy of this game, hunter gatherers are putting much attention not in finding food. It's easy for them. They focus on not eating too much and not eradicate the area. Modern hunter gatherers work only 2 hours a day.
It would be the same in this game: if milkweed would regrow, so wild carrots, people would feel advancing technology is dangerous. We would apply sustainability rules, like it was when milkweed was regrowing only when fruiting, when there were no wells, like it is currently with rabbits.
It happened many times, a tribe was getting on advancement path during paleolit. But it all finished the same: advanced tribe eradicated area, famine started, tribe was killed during fights with wiser neighbors. Agriculture changed this pattern.
Show me an example of a modern day primitive society with extensive intratribal violence.
Modern savages live under law of civilized people. For example, we know Masai had puberty ritual of killing lion. Before English rule, they had to kill another person.
But, you asked about numbers of non warfare homicides. It is in book Violence and Warfare among Hunter-Gatherers
- 10% of adult deaths Ache in Paraguay, 40% kids
- 0,5% homicidal rate in Bushmen
Tyranny just doesn't work in groups under 30 people, you just can't separate your bodyguards from the oppressed population, and without bodyguards you're dead as soon as you fall asleep.
Really? What about domestic tyranny? In smaller group, in one family? It does not apply, victims usually do not look for revenge
You need social classes to make violence exclusive to the rulers (specifically you need warrior class), and there's no social classes without specialization of labor.
Bull fights? Wolf fights? Sea elephants? Do they have social classes? Because tyranny for sure!
Modern society has Verdun (...) The very concept of total war is a development of civilization.
The concept of total war and annihiliation is elder than humans. Jane Godall researched such cases among chimpanzees.
You say XX century genocides were worse? In plain numbers yes, but relatively no. Poland lost almost the most citizens during WW2 (second only to Belarus), 1/6 of populations. Relatively, because in plain numbers other countries lost more. Yet, the Great Northern War in the beginning of XVIII century took 1/4 of citizens. In relative numbers, the furthet in the past, the more warfare victims.
Potjeh, you're point of view on violence in stone age is basically wrong. Societies before civilization were much more brutal. There were a few crimes where an criminal can hide. Violence was tradicional and commited by rulers.
Glassius wrote:Neo wrote:Healing seem a bit far fetched for the current time period
Iron age started about 1200 BC. Bandaging was described 2200 BC. The oldest evidence for treppaning is about 6500 BC. Tooth drilling 7000 BC. Neanderthal are known for nursing injuried and sick. It is definitely not to early in game for medicine.
Ya ok idiot......................
This has to be one of the stupidest things i have read. EVER.
Why?
Just run around hugging everyone whenever you think the village needs more children
See the first picture. Hugging must require acceptation of second player. You cannot just hug everyone.
I am sure there will be people hugging all the time. Which will create baby boom and mass starvation or famine. There will be couples starting reproduction lately after basic camp established, ending with 2 boys and argueing they did not start earlier. There young will be young females left alone as all their family is gone. There will be Lot and his daughters. There will be drama ![]()
Also, spawning as Adam and Eve will require basic cooperation. At least to not loose your partner!
The effect would be mostly equal to introducing birth control.
Much. Birth control is one side, female action. Sex needs 2 to accept it. Add genetics and you got marriages, cheating and biological fathers
Healing seem a bit far fetched for the current time period
Iron age started about 1200 BC. Bandaging was described 2200 BC. The oldest evidence for treppaning is about 6500 BC. Tooth drilling 7000 BC. Neanderthal are known for nursing injuried and sick. It is definitely not to early in game for medicine.
Introducing new buttons would be much more confusing
And think: every player after live as a kid would know, picking up baby is different from breastfeed. They would find a solution quickly, as all actions are possible only by mouse buttons.
The idea is, without hugging (and maybe kissing next), there will be no more kids spawn to Eve. So you need two players of different sex to accept new player spawn.
How often does it happen to you, a killer puts his weapon right next to you, especially if you hold an arrow. Maybe he had reason for killing and now he wants to talk to you?
If you are afraid of griefer, everything is griefing for you ![]()
The original point of this thread is, there is a giant town just south, and the mother just happened to be out of town.
With spawn option "next to a city", they will not suicide. They will search for it.
This is just a simple paint work. I'm sure, Jason would polish the look ![]()
Hugging is awesome, hugging is beautiful, hugging is love, hugging is precondition for sex and breastfeeding. Please, Jason, add this to the game, by simply clicking on another player. If it accepts with another click, hug starts (hugging kids may be involuntary for them though).
1. Younglings
Huggin each other can provide warming. Imagine hugging twins waiting over coal ashes for father return, as mother just died next to them.
2. Breastfeeding
First pick up baby, this is hugging. Next click on it rewards you with breastfeeding
Elder woman will know, they can't breastfeed anymore. Fertile woman would not be afraid to put kid down for a moment, do something, and pick it up right after. She controls, when she wants to breastfeed (for 1 hunger bar lost make kid satiated as long, as breastfeed is in process). And running cancels breastfeeding. Give this action attention it deserves
3. Sexual reproduction
After hugging, next click would be an encourage for kissing (like 2-click breastfeeding). This obviously will be intercourse representation. After accepting (and animation, sound...), female player would start a counter during which a new player can be spawn as their kid. You don't have to affect family line, as male cannot be sure he is biological parent. This will introduce marriages, divorces, cheating without any roleplay. It will make kids precious, as you will have to take care first of your partner. And maybe convince him/her, you are ready for kids? Males would be more useful. They will care more about kids, if they suspect it is their heir. Baby will be born more often to suitable places, which means there will be less baby suicidal.
4. Homosexuality
Allow same sex players to kiss each other. Some people may not like it, but it is possible IRL. ANd add more drama, as mother can abandon her kids and husband for Aurora ![]()
4. Spawn options
First Adam, then next player would be it's Eve. Spawn options may include lobby to play as the couple or as twins. It is more fun to play with friend or relative ![]()
EDIT 2018-09-27
Make kid of parents related too much have ugly face. This will make people track relations and make communications between cities an urge
The problem is easy to solve, or at least to minimize. Add sexual reproduction to the game.
1. First spawn Adam, them the next player on the server would be its Eve
2. Add hugging. If male and female hug each other, Eve starts a counter during which she is ready to gain a new player.
Simple. Children are now precious, because there are two steps to gain one. No gatling-child for new Eves in the wilderness, which ends with fertility ban when basic camp is established. And, because people need to hug each other, they need to build relations and communicate. Imagine consequences and complexity of behaviors possible with this one change. Real marriages, divorces, cheating, no roleplaying. It would also increase a value of a man, as they are also needed for procreation. And it ads very important thing: fathership.
This simple change would be a step to further tweakings:
1. Add hugs as the precondition for breastfeeding. So everybody can carry kids (and fertile woman can put baby away for a while and pick it right after without hunger fear), but only fertile woman will be rewarded with breastfeeding sound and animation, if they decide to click on carried kid again. No breastfeeding during running!
2. Add hugging for babies. Imagine two youngling giving each other warm over ashes, waiting for father to return, because mother just died!
2. Spawn options: as a couple or as twins.
Because they log in to try out a new thing. Some people are just bored of eveing. Why should they stay? To care more about your entertainment than theirs? Please
Solution would be spawn options. But it's not gonna happen quickly
Therefore, they and you must waste a time, until a proper spawn occurs.
Plow, very fine. But without domesticated horses?![]()
If you could only put guarding dog on all the furs you collected...