a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Clearly the horse is single if it's not being accompanied by a partner you fool.
Are you saying that anytime anyone (or anything) goes anywhere without their boyfriend or girlfriend they become "single" during that time. It's nice that you're trying to understand, but that's not how things work on our planet Legs.
rabbit shawl
man, dumb toddlers wasting the fur on it so annoying
That seems like a blanket statement. What's a better use of rabbit fur would you say?
We really need an overhaul, i have seen lots of towns slowing down on progress because they all lack rope. However having hemp as an upper tier of milkweed sounds way better
Both is best. Make some level of respawn for milkweed, but make hemp so that few would choose milkweed once hemp becomes an option. Hemp should take more work to produce, but that extra work should pay off with greater returns on the time invested. Milkweed could remain foolproof, while hemp could be ruined if not harvested at the right time, like most crops.
Milkweed should respawn in the wild... i mean.. it's a damn weed, why does it need to be cultivated in the first place?
I think most wild plants should occasionally respawn. Onion, carrots, indigo, bananas, all of them.
I think the best way should be that the game would check a large grid at a time on a schedule. If NONE of a thing is in that grid, then it won't come back, because it's been wiped out so to speak. But if at least one is there and it's less that a certain number, then a variable number (depending on what it is) would spawn in random places in that grid. It wouldn't be enough that a large town could depend on it entirely, but small settlements with only a few players might just be able to make do.
Honestly I don't think this would change the needs in a city hardly at all. You can be in a town with 20 players and walk less than 50 spaces out of town and every wild berry bush is untouched. Some wild carrots and cabbage spawning wouldn't make it any different in a town. A little milkweed might get picked out to about 100 spaces or so I think, but if it spawned only once a day or so, we are really only talking about reducing a town's water and soil usage by a small fraction at most. Well, a slight reduction in those usages I think is an OK thing, but I support this mostly because it just makes sense.
No city on Earth has ever picked a weed into extinction but this is a game. My suggestion would make it possible to a HUGE city to maybe wipe out all the milkweed in their area, but it would take a good deal of effort. Yes it would be something griefers could do if they set their mind to it, but Jason seems to like leaving that as a possibility. I'm fine with that because the constructive player isn't losing anything in the end. The worst the griefer could do is make one area at a time go back to what already is. Since hardly any town lasts more than a week anyway I say let them try to do this. And domestic versions should count when factored for extinction. If a griefer does wipe out all milkweed in an area, all I have to do is bring in one seed from anywhere and plant it and now milkweed can return again.
Well, the idea is that the stem is kinda woven in the band of the hat. But yeah, it wouldn't have been too hard to "chop" off the rose stem when making these.
It's a little late now, though, because there are 85 unique hats that would need to be manually fixed!
I don't think it looks "terrible" with the stem attached, but I do think without the stem might look better.....
Could it be made so the looks changes the next time all hats become = to zero (aka next time apocalypse is triggered?)
it can also be stolen with a single horse cart
How can you tell if the horse is single or not?
Giving idiots like you power only does more harm. The majority of all curses are misguided. This is just inviting a gang of morons to harm the hero. Especially since revenge killing is typically seen as just. It sets up good players to land in donkey town because they killed one griefer.
It's a terrible idea. You're not very bright are you?
Hold on, you specifically asked for the curses of someone with high genetic score to be more powerful, so actually you are asking to give individuals more power. I'm not asking for any more power for any one player over another so I frankly don't know what you're on about. It's always a special type of fun when someone who is a hypocrite calls someone stupid, and the reason why is what they themselves are actually saying. Basically you just called yourself an idiot.
I don't think most curses are misguided at all. If you just stab someone and all the rest of the town can't see why you did it, and you didn't take any time to explain why you were going to do it and get anyone on your side, then I'm sorry but you earned those curses. Taking the law into your own hands isn't a valid justification to just stab anyone you feel like. You aren't a hero I'm sorry to say.
I've seen some of your posts and it's clear from them that you grief. You don't like this suggestion because you know your ass would permanently be in Donkeytown. I'm bright enough to know that. If anything you only are proving that my system would work and be effective. You do things that make an entire town want to curse you but you think that your ONE curse should hold more power because you have higher genetic score, than an ENTIRE town's curses against you? As it is now one person in a town cursing you has the same effect as 10 people all in that town cursing you. I think you've complained about realism before. Well that isn't very realistic. In real life if just one person in a bar hates me, that doesn't mean much. If half the people in a bar all hate me, bad things will happen if I try to go in there.
This doesn't make any sense. The number of curses doesn't matter, only who's cursed you and whether they're near the fertile mother in question or not. There could be a thousand people who have cursed you almost all across the map but if there's still one asshole mother on a horse riding around 200m away from everyone else and hasn't cursed you then you'll be born to her every time.
It makes sense, I just suppose I wasn't clear enough. I still think there is enough info there to infer my meaning though.
When I said 10 curses would = 57, I wasn't suggesting you'd pick up 47 additional "bonus" curse from nobody. Clearly I wasn't saying that, because as the curse system works, that would mean nothing. Just like having 10 curses from 10 players who aren't online means nothing.
No, what I meant was that each additional curse would increase the power and effect of every curse you've received. If you had 10 curses against you, you would be excluded from being born in an area 57x larger than if you only had 1 curse against you. Only one person who had cursed you would have to be online. You would be prevented from being born in a huge radius around that player. If 1000 people had cursed you, there would be no place on the map you could appear. No fertile mother would be able to reach a place not covered. Far less that 100 against you would cover every bit of the explored map in it's entirety. In fact, 10 likely would be enough to make it more likely than not that you'd go to Donkeytown.
Every additional curse would increase the effective range and power of every curse against you. This would completely fix the curse system and make it actually work in the most simple and straight forward way possible. I suggested a multiplier effect of 1.5x, but if Jason felt that ramped up too quickly he could set to whatever multiplier he wanted so effectively X numbers of curses would virtually always send you to Donkeytown.
As I said in another current thread, anything regarding the cursing system that gives the individual more power to curse is apt for misuse and abuse. The solution to fix the system is to make the power of the community stronger, not the individual. 10 people all cursing 1 same player should have a multiplying effect. 1 curse should have the power of only 1, but each curse beyond that grows more powerful. By the time you have 10 curses, each one against you is over 50x stronger. The only way an individual's curse should get more powerful is if others also curse the same person you have cursed. That's how it should be.
Not running out of lives in itself isn't a problem to be solved. Griefers having less lives isn't really a fix for anything. I imagine a griefer doesn't have much need to use /DIE or suicide anyway. Very few go on murder sprees at young age, and even when they do and maybe are killed around age 20, they would still be regaining lives fast enough to not reach zero. I assume they aren't playing 24 hours a day that is.
Your final paragraph sounds like what you want is for the curse system to be turned into a griefers tool. No thanks.
I'm trying to easily deal with nuisance players not heavy griefers in my opinion i need to be able to block all the players who piss me off.
Sounds like the problem is you need to play a solo game, not a MMOG.
I second hemp as something I'd like to see in the game ahead of anything else I can think of. Hemp should not only make rope, but also should be able to be made into clothing.
Both terrible ideas. Making the curse of any one person stronger or giving single players more curses are recipes for abuse.
The solution is to make getting multiple curses against you from multiple players have a compounding effect.
example:
1 curse is = 1
2 curses = 2
3 curses = 3
4 curses = 5
5 curses = 7
6 curses = 11
7 curses = 17
8 curses = 25
9 curses = 38
10 curses = 57
This way, your average player that gets a few curses for random miscommunications or as as "payback" from a griefer will see little effect as currently in the game. A real serial griefer with 10 curses will face the real possibility of having no mother they can be born to and will actually end up in donkeytown.
I think cameras in OHOL should do the same thing they do in real life.
Capture the souls of primitive indigenous peoples.
Honestly I think the fun of this game is building towns and roads and communities and trying to survive. Having to micro manage your food like you're a health nut doing meal prep seems a tad tedious and boring. Tedious isn't "hard".
it's just fricking absurd that people cut a whole tree for a half shoe
I've suggested that two shoes should come from one log, and they should just stay together as a pair of shoes. At least let us stack two shoes together in one tile. Right? The fact that you can't put two shoes together unless they are in a basket, box or backpack is silly.
On a side note:
A few weeks ago I was dropping flint chips in a jungle biome to "herd" mosquitoes to one corner. I was holding an ax and accidentally hit the space-bar using hetuw mod which drops whatever you are holding. I was in an area surrounded with flint on the ground and no open spaces near. The ax just vanished. Did search to check if it just was moved further away. Nope, just gone.
i'm still having trouble getting over the fact that someone in this thread legitimately thinks no one plays vanilla minecraft.............. and that by not having griefers, this game would somehow become vanilla minecraft??? LMAOOO
OK, then direct me to the vanilla Minecraft server that has an active player base? Many Minecraft servers that have multiple different types of play, from economy to skyblock or PvP also run a vanilla server. When you pop in there it's empty. Occasionally someone jumps in to muck around a little, but nobody is doing anything substantial there. When someone is there it's because they want to be alone 99% of the time, just like people on OHOL that don't play on the main server.
The Vanilla server option on the most busy and most popular servers has usually 10 players max at peak times, and every server that has multiple play options, vanilla is always one of their dead servers. And that's how they manage to function in the face of the inherent anarchy. You kids didn't ever have to deal with this, but once long, long ago there were actually mostly only vanilla servers, and they would have dozens and dozens of players at anytime. Banning people was the only way the had to deal with griefers, but griefers didn't care because there were 100's of servers out there. If you got banned off one, you just went to the next one. Also, it was easy enough to get around blacklists. On such servers with high population things went down exactly as I described. If someone could find your "base" they wrecked it. If they found you they usually tried to kill you and loot your stuff. And as soon as modded servers because available and known, players flocked to those and vanilla servers have been dead ever since.
I honestly find it hard to believe you really play on a pure vanilla server anyway. It might be mostly vanilla with only minimal anti griefing mods, or a whitelist. That's still "semi-vanilla" and not the same thing as pure, no rules, anything is allowed vanilla. UNLESS you are there to loot and steal and kill other players and you like the chaos because you help create it. In that case you're probably doing the same thing here in OHOL and you're the reason vanilla Minecraft servers are unpopular.
Petaldancing, in regards to no griefers being like Minecraft. I said the opposite, that allowing unchecked griefing WOULD make the game MORE like vanilla Minecraft, not less like vanilla Minecraft. I skimmed the other posts and I didn't see anyone saying no griefers would = Minecraft. Where you talking about someone else's comment that I overlooked?
UPDATE: Oh, perhaps were you talking about Gomez's post before me? I assume when he said "OHOL becomes Minecraft without griefers" He is talking about modded servers, because that's what almost all servers are and where more than 99% of players actually play. He never said "vanilla minecraft".
Jason could change how being poisoned by a snake would work. You could be impaired for a much longer period of time. Slow movement and unable to use tool for up to 5 minutes before you die. Then seeking out help would make sense, and keeping some anti venom around would be useful.
But if you ask me, all ways to get die seem to not give enough time to get healed. Yellow fever is the only thing I survive more than it kills me. Wolf, bear, or snake bite? Forget it, you're dead 99% of the time (snake is statistically 100%). Knife or arrow? Away from town, 100% death. In town, you might ave a 5% chance. It would be nice if players could do any kind of first aid to buy you some more time, or even allow using a dirty pad to save you, but then you'd need treatment for infection that would still kill you, but at least you'd have more time to deal with that. And if you die of infection, well you likely would have died anyway so you really didn't lose anything.
How would you carry gold coins? Four coins per backpack seems like a pretty useless currency model.
I mentioned I already thought a lot about this, but abandoned it all because the more I thought about how to do it right, the more I realized Jason would not want to do it.
The most likely thing I believe is that we could make a coin purse out of rabbit skins, or maybe just place coin into a water skin, thus turning it into a coin purse. Once it's a coin purse we could attach it to our waist as an extra clothing item, like a belt. You could also stick this into a backpack to hide the fact that you have a coin bag on you. It would hold up to 50 coins, but 30 is a good number too. On the ground coins could be stacked in piles and you can click on a pile on the ground while holding a coin purse to pick up all coins at once, up to the max it can hold.
Coins would be made of gold and wouldn't be easy. First a coin press mint would need to be made. and of course you'd need to gather the gold. Maybe you'd need gold and iron to make an alloy first. Jason could find plenty of ways to make producing coins not easy. If it's too easy inflation would be too high, and the resources to make coins would be wasted too quickly. It would be advisable to allow coins to be melted down to get back the gold for other uses.
Such a setup would be used mostly for RP and many players will be encouraged to try to open shops and such, and find themselves highly disappointed when most players don't bother to carry coins, or aren't interested in buying things because it's so easy to just take what you want or need.
The idea I had that Jason won't ever go for (I'm pretty sure) is that towns can build a "bank" of some sort. Players can take their coins to this bank to "deposit" them (coins would still have to be made in game like I describe above). Deposited coins then they become tied to your account and esentially disappear from the game world. You can visit the bank to see how many coins you have in your account and withdraw them. Hopefully inflation is kept in check because as new coins are made, some players with bank accounts containing coins will stop playing, thus removing those coins from the world. Other players will die out in the wilderness carrying coins on their persons and society will advance west before anyone loots their grave.
With a system of "money" being tied to your account, that you can pass from life to life, then more of an economy can develop. With only 60 minutes of life, wasting time trying to build up a handful of coins seems pointless. By the time you have some coins to buy anything, you are old and what's the point in buying if you're looking death in the face!
Unfortunately I believe this alone won't be enough. Jason would also have to improve a players ability to make a private house/business that could be secure from one life to another and we would have to completely give up on the current style of gameplay. Anyone who just made things for the community would just see those things stolen by a "shopkeeper" so they could sell them back to the town. Or shopkeepers would constantly try to grief the competition to give themselves an advantage. You think towns die to easily now? It's only going to be 10x worse when things the town needs to survive are all in private hands, the the owners of those resources are dead, or offline, or being griefed to shut them down. Realistically I believe you'd need more players so all jobs have many "suppliers" and food would have to keep you fed much longer, or mass starvation will always be happening (or literally everyone would have to farm their own food to be safe).
This would be such a change from the existing game, Jason would have to set it up on a completely different server just to try it out, and let current OHOL run on all other servers. It would be so game changing that I'm sure it probably would more likely completely break the game rather than simulate an economy. You need more than 60-70 people to have an "economy" is what I think. Fun idea, I don't think it would work unless player base was at least 4x larger than current, and even then that might not be enough.
It is very optimistic to imagine that a cult dedicated to war or destruction would restrict itself to only attacking griefers or other death cults. Just because you founded the church to give griefers a "safe" outlet for violence would not stop them from changing the rules to suit their preferences. .
Sadly, I agree you are most likely right. A boy can dream though.
I will relate a story of something like this happening one time that I observed however:
It was a couple days after Jason introduced the hierarchy update. I was in the main and largest Bell Town, which had about 25 people there, when I followed a player. The group he was in (let's call them the yellow badges) had a leader that was plotting a mass murder of all the members of the other group in town (Let's call them the green badges). The yellow badge leader was ordering all his followers to gather all the weapons and get ready for the killing. I quit the yellow badge group and joined the green badges to warn them. They already knew because they could already see the orders the yellow leader was saying out loud. They also were grabbing weapons, and making what they could. I quit both groups.
About one minute later the war started. I don't know who drew first blood, but in the end only one group was left in town. I'm sure many of the losing side ran away, but both sides had losses. I estimate about 10-12 players got killed in the riot! The whole time I just stood around near the berry patch and watched. I had no badge and nobody tried to kill me. I don't think anyone who was neutral got killed. It was kind of neat to watch this all go down, and I felt like nobody got killed that didn't ask for it, because anyone could have left either group like I did if they wanted to. It was a completely RP war, and was actually good for the town because it was getting way too many people there to keep up with the food demands.
As I imagined my little warring church world, I remembered this fond moment of mass murder and wished it could be replicated in the same way. Sadly what I saw was likely a one time fluke. Rarely happening like that if ever before, and unlikely to happen again. Too bad.
It's better than most other videos out there. I wish you had audio and adjusted the zoom at some points, but overall not bad, and certainly helpful. Thank you for doing this.
roads suck they are hell boring to make
Good for you lil trooper! I suppose pointless people will say pointless things.
With longing I wish for a day when Jason makes one server ban those with curses stacked on their accounts.
Such joy knowing I'll rarely, if ever, be forced to encounter Legs. And I'll be happy for him knowing he's having fun being a useless ass-hat on a different server.
I've read many a griefer confessional that they admit they have to suppress their feeling bad about ruining others play, and I'm sure a few actually wish they had a little more challenge, even if that's a minority.
If two churches could arise with dedicated veteran players leading them who laid out a clear set of commandments and goals for their followers I could see this working. Any "church" that just attempted to lure in and kill people who didn't want to be part of this church would be short lived. Such organizations pop up all the time, and they get smashed just as quickly. You can't gain members if you become the enemy off all non-members.
Sure, amateur anti-social, occasional griefers will still exist, but they could become a target for the churches too. Either to recruit or to eliminate as heretics!
In the end, I believe most griefers do what they do because they are bored and feel like they have nothing to do. Giving them something to do could only help direct their negative actions away from the "innocent". Again, I believe any griefer church that actively goes after regular players would be doomed because they'd instantly find themselves vastly outnumbered and destroyed.
I'm suggesting a very specific thing. Two (or more) churches that were dedicated to fighting and griefing only each other. Any amount of time griefers can be convinced to just fight each other would reduce the amount of time they bother non-griefers.
I don't think there is any real "danger" of OHOL turning into Minecraft if the huge griefer problem is fixed.
I'm in the camp that some level of griefing is better than zero griefing, but we are nowhere near "some" greifing. I feel it's currently out of control, so I agree with you on this mostly.
I'm not sure why Jason doesn't just make at least one server have drastic penalties for being cursed. A curse lasts 7 days or whatever. If you have three/five/whatever amount of curses you can't join that server (or automatic Donkeytown). All other servers everyone can run amok as much as they want. The "play nice" server would still occasionally see bad actors, but once they get caught and banished, you wouldn't have to worry about them again for days, as opposed to over and over again every life non stop.
If this is such a social experiment, then let the players decide with where they choose to be. Maybe this "play nice" server would end up dead. Maybe most players in the end would rather take their chances on a server they knew they can't get booted off from. It would be a good way to test what the players actually want from OHOL.
I'm sure many people would opt for the no restrictions server but in the end I think we could have more people playing and having a good time. The game would retain more players because more people would have an experience they prefer. Hopefully instead of one server with 90-100 people at peak times, we end up with two having 60-70. That seems better for server load balance anyway. IDK, that stuff I'm not an expert about y'all know. But as it is now, there seem no reason to be on any server than the main unless you are looking for a solo play experience.