a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
I really like this suggestion and it would make public cursing and donkey town not needed. But I don't think it would be easy to guarantee that, in a village of 20 none of them are negatively.
So, I think a more simple idea can work:
-when you curse a player you have a what is an effective area ban from being born near that player. If you curse too many people you'll end up isolated from all the good towns, but if you use it sparingly, on the most negative actors you could avoid people who are extremely destructive (or not destructive enough if that's your thing.)
-Perhaps you only get to avoid three people at any given time. There are always 3+ towns to spawn in so you would not be block out of being born.
-To keep it simple if you curse a 4th person the first person you cursed falls off of your "avoid" list.
-players who have a large number of this type of curses and who can't be born to any woman would be born in donkey town
-Players with more than 5 curses would never be born to a new player who has not learned the system yet.
-babies can put in a curse and no one would know who you cursed or that you said the command. You would just have a buffer to keep you away from those 3 people.
Frankly letting people have only 3 "outstanding" curses would solve the problem of curse scores piling up too high.
Yes, /die babies can delete clothing you put on them and when that happens they leave no bones. It's very strange.
OK it's joke time.
Why does the smith need a deck of cards?
Because.....
Whoever smelt it dealt it.
How do we know outsiders in multi-family towns beyond unfamiliar last names? Well, language. I think something similar with clothing might be possible too. What if rabbits had different fur colors? So over vast regions (think 4-6 biomes) the rabbits might be black or brown or white or spotted. This would also tie people in an area together in a visual way.
It could also be the case the the dyes used for clothing turned out darker or brighter depending on region. So in one vast area red is *dark* red and green is hunter green... but in another zone the colors just come out more tropical.
Perhaps there could be bunnies of the stone, bunnies of the snow, etc. but they are very rare. So, here is a way to unevenly distribute a "resource" without hampering anyone's growth. At first it would make people visually distinct, later things like spotted or black furs would become valued items of trade.
I got up the nerve to play a game at last and it was really very nice. I was in a big town with 4+ families who all knew the same language. Very diverse and no violence at all. My daughter wanted to build a wall for the town so though we both agreed that it might not do much good we worked on that project. One of my other kids worked with some kids from another family fixing the terrible tiny sheep pen (how did our ancestors build a diesel engine and never get around to doing anything about at 3x4 sheep pen... my word.)
And the town, though "mature" wasn't suffering from the malaise of "nothing to dooooo" that some old towns have. I was making a pretty aggressive effort to point out projects that needed doing to everyone and even got on board with build the wall just because I think that shutting down people's ideas is bad and can kill towns. If the wall isn't what we need we can revise in the future.
The town also had a clothing and basket shortage which I made a tiny dent in during my life. It was not a super remarkable life but it prove that big towns don't have to be hell-holes.
As I got older I noticed that there was only one and a half tanks of kerosine left... hopefully someone will see that looming issue and get on it.
Mostly just being in a town where everyone didn't look the same cheered me up a lot (I'm not just talking about everyone being the same race, but everyone *literally* looking the same) the language update was really interesting but language learning is the bomb. It lets cities form their own little bit of culture at the break-neck pace needed for the game.
How would we know outsiders beyond unfamiliar last names? Well, language. I think something similar with clothing might be possible too. What if rabbits had different fur colors? So over vast regions (think 4-6 biomes) the rabbits might be black or brown or white or spotted. This would also tie people in an area together in a visual way. It could also be the case the the dyes used for clothing turned out darker or brighter depending on region. So in one vast are red is dark red and green is hunter green... but in another zone the colors just come out more tropical.
Just a thought inspired by a good experience after being driven away by a few bad ones. I really loved that town, even though it had everything "against" it in the current "meta" (multiple families, old town, etc.) --I do think we were lucky. There was a sword in town and I wasn't calm until it was in the backpack of one of the families I trusted. I was so scared that some kid would be born with a host of easy targets in all the unrelated families. Or... worse in some ways, that one of my kids, after I had shown them the town and it's needs and what I loved about it would betray me and kill another family there-- but that didn't happen.
How long will it last?
For once I don't want to go back because in my imagination it can last forever.
I generally agree although, there are some flaws in the Maslow's Hierarchy theory. Mostly that people tend to think it means that you *can't possibly* focus on needs higher up in the pyramid until the lower needs are met. Having worked with students who have been homeless, refugees, from situations that were violent and unsafe I can say that that just isn't how people operate. The lower needs can and *will* be set aside to get some taste of the higher needs. I think about my student who took time out from an assigned work-study program every week that he needed to have enough food to eat to spend time working on his drawings on the building roof top. So, my point is that real people need a slice of all of the layers in the pyramid and will make all kinds of sacrifices to make that happen.
But, in terms of this game and your application of the theory here I think it makes total sense. People worried about food don't have much attention to put in to government. People without a sense of a family unit and love aren't going to have as much time for making their homes look lovely.
OHOL has always been more violent than NYC was in the early 80s based on these graphs. It's a level of violence that is probably only found during wars. Only there aren't any coherent conflicts going on... It's a game so it *should* be a bit more wild than normal life. But, if we want to be invested in these lives emotionally rather than just treating them like plopping in another quarter to "continue" I don't think the murder rate can be very high. Frankly, it makes murders less shocking and important.
I think an ideal level would be that in about 1/4 lives you might witness a murder in your town. In 1/200 lives you might be the victim or killer. That lower rate make it a much bigger deal when it happens and something that you don't forget.
The murder rate won't go back down to previous levels, because foreigners can't get cursed to donkey town. Jason removing controls from discouraging griefing may make for the most worrisome change that he has made. A griefer getting murdered isn't enough to get such a person to think twice, at least not usually, while Donkey Town is, as shown by Da False's repeated requests for his curse score to get reset.
Generally, I agree. The total kills may fall, but the kills per life may keep rising since killing the outsider is the new "meta" and there isn't any reason for people who want to kill off towns to stop.
I think it makes sense that old backpacks hold fewer items, and they are dangerous to use. I do think maybe knife should have priority for staying in during a decay event. You'd put the knife in the most secure part of the bag... so it should fall out unless you have 4 knives.
I agree that organizing with baskets feels pointless because they decay. Organizing with boxes is better, but too expensive and not item dense enough. I have a basket that is 100s of years old in my family it's still being USED (not a museum piece!) as a sewing basket. So, the whole "basket got old!" thing never sat right with me.
The idea that stacking them, or putting dirt in a backpack "resets" them seems to be a myth.
But I would cheerfully invest time and energy to make storage that lasted for the ages.
We also need books to store precious papers (and let the papers not in books decay please.)
I guess what I'm trying to say is:
S T O R A G E U P D A T E
futurebird wrote:Total lives isn’t the same as server population?
This is grouped by day, so it is total lives in that day. There is probably a little wiggle where a person could be a allocated to one day but a murder actually happened on the next when it falls over a day boundry.
Well, I'd define server population as either the highest and lowest value from each day or the average number of people on the server at any given time over the course of a day. (think box and whisker plot...) This is going to correlated positively with the number of lives from that day... but a group of experienced peaceful players could have a rather high server population and a low number of lives, while less experienced players who kept rolling for a new life could inflate the number of lives. An experienced player might live one life per hour maybe a little less and play for like 3 hours. A new player could rack up 20 lives in that time.
I really just wanted people to stope being mean to each other and to Jason. ![]()
This didn't work. AY.
Yes please!
Total lives isn’t the same as server population?
yeah I think you are right, Though I’d like to see these numbers vs server population rather than total lives.
Do those spikes go down because people stop killing or because people who get killed stop playing? Increases in server population seem to go with increasing not just in the amount of killings but also the rate. So, are newer players being slaughtered and they don’t come back?
Well this makes me feel a bit less like a wilting daisy for taking a break from the game waiting for this to calm down. There really are a lot more murders. And let’s be clear more murders are not by itself a bad sign. But, if those murders are mostly greifing and people trying to pre-empt griefing by killing anyone who looks different or who talks different— that isn’t really something I want to be in the middle of when I play a game (get that feeling enough IRL, thanks. )
Anyway can we *prove* that whole spike isn’t just Tarr’s fault?? (I’m kidding.) ![]()
Yeah, I don't think not being able to curse people in other lines mattered much when people were more spread out. But now? If your idea of a good time is killing a bunch of people who are just working there isn't any consequence.
People doing raids because they have been forced in to it by shortages can curse back and would be in groups meaning they would not get hit with many curses. Lone wolfs just killing because they can could get cursed by a whole town-- so I think it's fair.
I'd go for that, make the fancy clothes decay (but still last longer than fur) AND give us more wool to make them.
I’ve been feeling more and more detached the more violent this game gets.
It’s sort of like a defense mechanism, I guess.
It sucks to experience the slaughter/killing the first few times, but at a certain point you kinda realize that you don’t really need to care anymore. These days I see it almost every game, so why bother get immersed to begin with?
Same it’d be like IDK crying because your friend got blown up by a creeper in minecraft
I think a finite map could be interesting, right now we’d run out of iron but if there were another tier of iron mine it could make sense. Just let it run for a long time and things I’ve dreamed of, like wild onions becoming valuable, (they are finite) might even happen. I agree with Jason that you don’t need uneven distribution of resources to have trade. Specialization and surplus is more important. Both of these are possible now if we could just keep towns from dieing our to population crashes. As much as the murders upset me they aren’t what’s killing the towns. So let’s go with:
- finite map
- new tier of iron mining (or tool repair)
- fixed number of Eves (based on server population)
- area ban relaxed to make fixed Eves work.
With Eves spawning close having as many Eves as players demand is bad. It’s created an incentive to become and Eve just to grief. And the bad reputation of griefer Eves is making peaceful Eves unwelcome. And it’s making the game depressing.
Genocide yes peoples have been wiped out land, wealth, and resources looted many times. But that’s at a nation level. Just killing the family that lives near you isn’t productive or normal, who will your kids marry? Who will farm the land and generate wealth? And since this killing is still going on in Tutorial town too it’s obviously isn’t about survival. It’s about killing for fun.
IRL killing for amusement is deeply destructive to any civilization. In this game it’s at least counter to the goal of building civilizations.
Humans have always been violent. Hunting and gathering tribes suffer from as much violence as people with towns. In some ways the purpose of civilization is to create conditions of peace and trust since both are essential for trade. But if 10% of the people born in your nation are sociopaths who think killing is fun you just won’t ever get there. IRL such people are really really rare -in games much less so- which is why games need to be designed with mechanics to curb those tendencies to more normal levels if you want cooperation. What we have instead are mechanisms that encourage nasty behavior by making it free of consequences and anonymous. All that to shoehorn the “Meta” of people not trusting outsiders. It just feels contrived.
Yeah I had a long streak of games without (random out of nowhere) murder and I kind of forgot just how much it bums me out
I don't think that most players are that in to that whole "mini game" far more players want me to teach them about water and pumps than want to just kill me for no reason, but I worry about that broad group of players who aren't aggressive unless provoked getting discouraged and playing less as the murders spread through towns.
I'm a pretty sensitive person so I'm probably taking this all too hard. Like I can recognize that but at the same time still feel really terrible and sad.
I've stopped using /die except if I haven't been Eve or in an Eve camp for two days or more then I spam it to get there. I haven't been en Eve in a long long time. I love Eve camps too! But when I was a brand new player I found towns were a bit easier to not starve in, and I was excited to see all of the tech. Personally my favorite part of the game is when a town runs out of water and you need to rush to build the first pump or engine. I love how people take on different jobs to support the larger project:
-getting kindling
-keeping the main fire going and stacking wood there
-getting iron
-smelting wrought iron and steel
-Making food (pies, soup, berries, burritos)
-making rubber
-making the hammer, lathe etc.
-drilling for oil
-building roads to oil and nearby springs
-making kerosine
-making the engine parts and the engine
-Cleaning up bones and clutter
-making clothing (wool or rabbits)
There's just so much to do!
Once the engine is there I feel like people are less excited. But I don't understand why??? Now you have all the water you want and with compost all the soil too! Now you can make MASSIVE farms and tons of milkweed and make enough for your town and your neighbors too. But often it gets side tracked by murders at this point and I just find that frustrating and pretty boring.
Just embrace the narrative
Not bad advice, but this story about how all the people who look and talk different are evil and need to be killed is depressing.
But I do maintain that griefing is a bug, not a feature.
Same. I can see the appeal to trying to leverage Greifers in to a natural part of the threats in the game. You have wild pigs and snakes ... and griefers I think that Jason seems to be looking for ways to structure the game so that destructive people are just another challenge, as they are IRL. It's not a terrible idea.
There are some stumbling blocks however:
-being killed by another player randomly without cases its emotionally different than being killed by a pig. Even when you *know* you did nothing to deserve it you ask "what did I do to them to make them so angry?" Your death is the result of someone with agency, not a blind killing machine like a NPC snake. It makes you wonder if you are welcome, if you are a good person. If you are being told "go away you are not wanted here" because there is a person behind those actions.
-griefers, like most players, exploit any game mechanic that they can. Closer spawning? No curses? Excellent! Butter knives (it used to be that a knife with butter works as the sword did at first)-- does it "make sense" in the world of the game? irrelevant. Now I rather like the way that players find loopholes and exploits in games (Tutorial town) -- but when those loopholes are used to make everyone miserable it not only break immersion, it breaks ones ability to make progress.