a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
The problem with the Kerosene Pump is that it still has the 5% chance to exhaust, same as the regular Newcomen pump, so you're going to need a Diesel Pump sooner or later either way.
Great post, Thaulos. It's like you're reading my mind and putting my thoughts into words.
Random idea that just popped into my head: What if it rained during the Eve window, automatically watering any planted seeds every ten seconds? This, along with maybe spreading out soil deposits across the map, would make every well site a viable starting location. It would also make the Eve window visually distinct and it would feel like a big deal when you spawn into a world of rain. After the Eve window is over the rain is gone until the end of the arc, and if your family worked hard enough you should have a well and a farm up and running, ready to supply your family while you drain the surrounding environment of resources.
Change it back till we learn our lesson.
I had a massive farm and nearly made a cart when it was 500x500
1000x1000 and I don't see anyone my whole life, but my mother and a brother, both of which were panicking for no reason.
Lived to 60, made every iron tool, and didn't see any strangers to share them with my entire life.Change it back.
I think you played on the backup server while bigserver was down for the update, so you didn't see that many people. I logged in almost immediately after bigserver came back online and I only died now, ~20 minutes after your post. It was packed, over a dozen families only a short walk away.
My only hope is that Jason pushes out this update today so we don't have to wait until Monday for any potential tweaks and fixes. 500x500 is really small, and I don't think it's enough for a game with ~100 average players.
Love the new characters, but we need a lot more to be able to discern people in our towns more easily. I'd love to get one or two new characters every week, or an update that's dedicated to new characters once a month.
Does the new male models have an influence on birth rates, since there are now more males than females for those races? Or is it just complete coincidence? Because I remember seeing much more frequent ginger and black families before the new characters were added.
This is a big part of it IMO. Previously those races had a 66% chance of babies being girls compared to 50% of the other families, which meant their towns lived longer and were more populated. Now that there's two new male models they have only a 40% chance of babies being girls, which means they die out much more quickly on average.
That's a beautiful park!
All joking aside, having a really hard time trying to figure out how to maximize my score.
Lets say I have one child (or at least murder all the others while their still babies), just need to keep that child alive till I turn 60, and that would give me a perfect score?
The score goes from 0 to 60. The simplest explanation is that every time you die your score moves closer to your age of death. If your score is 40 and you die at age 20, the score will go down. If you die at age 60, your score will go up.
The same applies to your direct descendants (kids, grandkids, great grandkids) that were born while you were still alive. When they die your score is modified depending on your age - if they die at an age below your score your score goes down, and vice versa.
In case you are male it works similarly, except the fact that it looks at your nieces/nephews instead of your kids.
If you killed your babies your score would plummet very quickly since they would be dead at age 0.
If your baby uses the /die command it does not affect your score, but it affects their score.
The best way to maximize your score is to live to 60 and do your best to keep your kids/grandkids safe from harm.
Theoretically you could lock your kids in a room with pies, but it's very likely that they would starve themselves rather than live out their life in prison.
How does age of death affect score?
Granddaughters who died at age 5 of gave me +0.53 ,age 10 +0.39 and age 21 +0.61.
Isn't longer life = bigger score?
It's kinda similar to Elo, which means it depends on your current score. Your [New Score] = [Old Score] + ([Age] - [Old Score])/10.
Let's say you have a score of 14.10. If you or your offspring dies at age 60, your new score will be [14.10 + (60-14.10)/10], which means it's [14.10 + 4.59], which is 18.69.
What if the cap for everyone was 12, but new players earned life at a higher pace? When you have 0 hours played you get one new life every ten minutes, and for every hour of playtime it takes one more minute to earn a life, up to 60 minutes per life when you have 50 hours played.
Single furs decay after two hours. Furs in a stack shouldn't decay at all.
I get it now. Sorry was too thin-skinned. After the post on Steam about negativity, I've been a lot more on edge about posting anything and people's reaction. Kind of a chilling effect, I guess (except I'm just overly sensitive to how people might take what I'm saying). Thanks for clarifying though and sorry if I misunderstood your response.
The fault is on me I think, I was way too stern and I definitely wasn't clear enough. Sorry I made you feel bad, it wasn't my intention!
Funnily enough, I think like 4 other people responded to Jason's mock poll question by critiquing it as well, but only my response warranted a post from @Twisted pointing out Jason's example was a mock up, seemingly dismissing what I had to say. Why he didn't respond in kind to all the other people who pointed out some problems with the mock example, I'm not sure.
I responded to you as your post was the newest one in the thread. I thought about quoting multiple people but figured it was unnecessary and that it would come off as a bit hostile.
I did not dismiss your points though! I specifically only quoted the part of your post where you called the example poll bad, as that was the only part I was responding to in my reply.
The points you make are good but also potentially unnecessary - if the poll in the post were real, a good detailed reply such as yours would have been great and very helpful - but in response to a simple text test it seemed kind of... reductive? The edited part is great though, no matter the context.
Random observation, but the victim is blushing. Could it be that snowballing a perosn that's emoting has a chance to kill them for some reason? Tarr killed a baby that persumably wasn't emoting manually, but it did have the snow splat emote.
jasonrohrer wrote:Here's what the poll looks like in the game:
Strangely worded, biased, and imprecise choices for responses.
*SNIP*
That's not an actual real poll, it's just a test for the character limit and an example of how the poll looks ingame.
Theoretically, would a biome where every tile had a 100% chance to spawn an invisible unwalkable object be possible?
The biome background would be the actual water texture, and this would result in unwalkable 'lakes' that serve no purpose except to look cool. Seeing them break up the map would make the map generation a bit more interesting, and having villages by a lake would look nice.
Of course people would start asking for some actual uses for this biome with time which would mean a ton more work.
Only people who lived to old age at least once.
Only people who have spent their buffer lives.
Only people who played for at least X hours (in the last X days).
Only people who lived out at least X 10+ min lives (in the last X days).
Only people who (recently?) used the feature relevant to the question (i.e. if you're asking about crafting axes ask only if they crafted an axe).
Don't ask people right after they've been murdered (if they are murdered they might be angry and answer differently than usual)(again, could be relative to the posed question).
Implementing life token system = I think you will find its a null effect
It's not a null effect, it has made a massive difference and improved the quality of the game significantly IMO.
Can someone make a github issue for this here:
There's already an issue but it's in the data repo - https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLifeData7/issues/332
If OHOL was exclusively a Patreon-supported game I wouldn't have picked it up. I prefer to pay for something and then have it rather than having to pay a subscription.
Btw waiting to be born as twins (and not actually getting born) uses up a life too.
I just tested this and it seems to be just a visual glitch. The counter on the title screen will go down by one, but reloading the title screen by trying to spawn in again or going to the settings menu will correct it.
I think this won't change how most normal players play. I have never went through more than 10 lives in an entire game session of 3 hours.
Yeah, I feel like that's kind of the point. This won't really affect 95% of players at all, the only ones who it does affect are the ones that just endlessly spam /die. I think it's great although it's still a bit early to tell.
Login failed does not lose you a life, I just tested it out. You need to actually appear as a baby to spend the life.
Twisted wrote:HEEEY You read my note! Is my safehouse still there and kickin'?
That note was right there below Alix's grave, so I figured that by safehouse you meant the park. There were a few other buildings but I wouldn't call any of them a safehouse.
Hey, I saw your park, it was beautiful! Your grave was right in the middle. Unfortunately the town was dead, I stumbled into it while exploring.
Here's a pic:
