One Hour One Life Forums

There is a sort of grey area where all the disagreements over that happen. Antagonistic roleplay can venture into griefing. Does sounds like they were weird though. I wonder if they were cooperating through discord? Maybe they had some cultist narrative going on.

It could be they killed themselves on purpose so they could spawn back into the family and repeat the process. Did they die under thirty?

Since Jason decided to go through with it, I figure it's best to just try and observe what happens, trying to correct for personal bias if possible. He has to experiment somewhat after all to see what really happens and with weekly updates reverting isn't likely to be a huge issue if thing do "go south". There is at least one possible benefit to yum chain fertility, for instance. If it does make Eve runs harder, it might mean fewer Eve lines competing for babies. It might actually be a good thing at night, because the surviving towns will have the birthing advantage. Doesn't change the fact that the last two servers get a bad roll though.

i'm interested to hear the regulars' reports on how different the birthing mechanic feels after the update.

Since I'm fairly new still you all probably know the logistics behind functioning towns better than I do. But from my perspective based on what others have said these are the meta-issues with the suggestions in the OP.

1. Concentration of power. This causes logistical problems as well as perhaps an excess of nervousness in the town. Having all knives on one person locked behind an approval process inevitably leads to slowdown. In addition to this people become acutely aware that this one person is the only thing between them and death if a murderer does come around (and there's nothing if the person with the knives IS the griefer).

2. Self-election. You have essentially elected yourself as official distibutor of deadly power and essential tools. This CAN in theory work if you are a very skilled player (to handle the logistical issues) and a good communicator who reads people and situations well (in a way most would agree is fair). But this game has small populations. So let's say you actually happen to be a GOOD dictator of knives for your village. (An assumption anyone else has fair reason to be suspicious of until you prove yourself.) What are the chances someone else will be able to do the same job in a way that still leaves everyone happy?

Basically it suffers from a problem akin to dictatorship. In principle putting the most virtuous person in control of power can work very well (as long as the responsibilities don't stretch them too thin and make them ineffective), but even if you start with a benevolent and competent dictator, in the line of succession sooner or later something goes wrong. Either (a. Someone receives the power who is not benevolent; or (b. A successor proves to not be competent enough and a revolution occurs. And dishonest people put on their very best acts when they know they have an opportunity to receive near absolute control of power.

It's not obvious that this is better than distributing the knives evenly amongst the population, making some efforts to concentrate them in the hands of the more experienced and trustworthy.

That said, I'm always curious to see how things play out. Have you been doing this already on a regular basis, Crumpaloo? Has it worked? How did those lines die?

Overall, I agree, though it depends on the situation. And maybe I went overboard. In any game it's going to happen, and like I've said that's not all bad if managed well. I'm definitely not a stabhappy type, even if someone is suspected of griefing. I like to know who I'm stabbing if I must. And I don't mind roleplay or weirdness, even with a bit of a sharp edge if it is done in good spirit.

I think it partly depends on what type of game it is. In a shooter or RTS, it is automatically agreed going in that "we're going to play out the role of enemies". In this game, clearly there are number of players who have little or no interest in griefing of being griefed. But it's a multifaceted game, and seems to draw a diverse crowd. A side effect of this is that there's something to annoy each person based on their different goals. In a weird way that seems like a good thing, maybe. Comfort zones and all that.

I though it was quite fun when my mom was the "crazy pig lady" in a town recently. She was feeding all the pigs, but one or two others were killing them because they didn't want them taking up tiles in town. The end result was the surviving pigs became a wild bunch north of town which she continued to feed. I didn't know whether she was trying to grief the town, but it seemed like relatively harmless fun, as I didn't see her doing anything else suspicious. So I told my children their grandmother was the crazy pig lady. "It's our family legacy."

Anyway, no hard feelings. The only group that I firmly speak against are the ones who do nothing but grief and waste others' time. And thankfully they are pretty much always a minority and there are mechanics in place to counter them.

Because I would so judge you for faking X-mas.

Nice pic. And no bones to be seen!

Interesting discussion. Jason, have you considered posing this question in the Steam forums as well, since the different crowd might have a different flavor of response being more composed of newer players?

I respect the challenge presented by adjusting the mechanics of this game. It's very much an Edge-of-Chaos type scenario; if surviving is too easy, you have too much order, thus boredom except for one portion of players; if surviving is too hard, too much chaos and all but another type of player get bored. It's made harder by the fact that this adjustment is being made on multiple levels: Griefing potential vs excessive restriction, for example.

I think people's replies in this thread cautioning against changing the mechanic too drastically partly go to show that the game current sits well on the edge of chaos, with a slight bias toward towns dying out. That sounds like a good thing to me, that's where all the interesting stuff happens. It remind's me of Conway's game of life. You never know how long the pattern will live for, but it always dies out eventually. Yet fascinating unpredictable things can happen before it does. Maybe you already think about it like this, but if not I hope the metaphor might be useful. And thanks for making a game in which our social instincts are a primary gameplay mechanic, I think it's brilliant.

The fact that weekly wipes are not needed currently, yet large cities do happen sometimes, but not indefinitely, seems like an almost magical combination to me. Again, I respect the challenge of trying to keep that sort of balance while extending the tech tree.

I'm not sure yum bonus is the way to go either, though I'm not sure it would be wrong to add more factors. There is a myth I encountered on Youtube that having a full hunger bar gives you higher fertility. That seems less aggressively stacked against Eves while still having a skill component. It also provides a method of birth control besides killing babies for overwhelmed towns.

Cool, thanks for sharing!

Yeah, it's really weird. At first it felt restrictive, but there's a brilliance to the way the game keeps us blind to most of what happens outside our life. When details do emerge from other players, they are distilled down to the most significant things they witnessed. There's not the information overload and all of the irrelevant moments that can't be filtered out by a replay feature. Just stories woven from snippets of lives. SirCaio's Cardinals thread is a good example of that right now.

The way this thread has developed is really cool. It's neat when everyone's stories stitch together to make a sort of history.

Sounds like your monitor/video settings might need adjustment? The faces are easy to see for me.

Haha, I was playing a girl the other day, still sorta young, and this man in a hat says my name. So I say, "Yes?", and he says, "Don't go bald," and takes off his hat.

All next to a kiln with a big sign behind it reading TAR. Missing an R?

You can learn a little by looking at the server life logs: https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=2529
Direct link: http://onehouronelife.com/publicLifeLogData/

This is my first time looking at that so I messed around a bit. In any case, I put the name Mischa into the find-on-page field (ctrl-f) and started checking the most recent name logs on each server. I found mischa on server 3 for Dec 21st. Here are the two log files:
Names: http://onehouronelife.com/publicLifeLog … _names.txt
Births/Deaths: http://onehouronelife.com/publicLifeLog … Friday.txt

Basically, once you find the name you want in a names log, open the corresponding Birth/Death log in another tab and use the ID code next to the name to 'f'ind the entries. Here's what I was able to find. Jason's post about the data (linked above) tells you how to read it:

523333 LORISSA WEATHERFORD - mother
B 1545357422 523333 f34b110a06c412d10e4e2930f11a28bbfeb020f1 F (21163,-16240) parent=523217 pop=61 chain=18
D 1545360951 523333 f34b110a06c412d10e4e2930f11a28bbfeb020f1 age=58.80 F (21093,-16197) hunger pop=27

523467 SARON WEATHERFORD - 1st son
B 1545358410 523467 9767d2513e83948ae63dbb229f5ba9d4322adc63 M (21053,-16269) parent=523333 pop=75 chain=19
D 1545362010 523467 9767d2513e83948ae63dbb229f5ba9d4322adc63 age=60.00 M (21156,-16228) oldAge pop=9

SID baby
B 1545359752 523506 a7d8bb836b442fc99adda45f8e02ed8c07c57e37 M (21166,-16233) parent=523333 pop=52 chain=19


523473 MISCHA WEATHERFORD - twin 1
B 1545358712 523473 d8bc4c4a65e24e95780529d6c29d212d166867f7 M (21109,-16273) parent=523333 pop=64 chain=19
D 1545360381 523473 d8bc4c4a65e24e95780529d6c29d212d166867f7 age=27.81 M (21091,-16263) hunger pop=40

523474 CHANZE WEATHERFORD - twin 2
B 1545358712 523474 a712f5f5330915447ddd27ef8152e5ae0bbc5dc2 M (21109,-16273) parent=523333 pop=65 chain=19
D 1545361188 523474 a712f5f5330915447ddd27ef8152e5ae0bbc5dc2 age=41.25 M (21113,-15785) hunger pop=20

523307 POLO WEATHERFORD - Killed by Chanze
B 1545357109 523307 557c5d87830eace150cd41067a1c79212f0ac060 M (21092,-16285) parent=523259 pop=49 chain=17
D 1545359476 523307 557c5d87830eace150cd41067a1c79212f0ac060 age=39.45 M (21157,-16237) killer_523474 pop=51

523456 DEXTER WEATHERFORD - Killed by Polo
B 1545358274 523456 de35d81d25c9a047ea1b153a005eee84c80d3308 M (21170,-16228) parent=523319 pop=77 chain=19
D 1545359386 523456 de35d81d25c9a047ea1b153a005eee84c80d3308 age=18.53 M (21092,-16283) killer_523307 pop=52

So your son Chanze only killed one person, Polo, who had killed Dexter (the body on the ground I presume) just before - it is the very previous entry in the log. The were all members of your family somehow, but you can see from the "chain=" entries that Polo was two generations older.

Searching on the family trees page and following the murder link to chance reveals Polo as a "ninth cousin (twice removed)", whatever that means. I'm guessing it means his branch of the family was pretty removed from yours. http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=2473629

And here's Dexter, a first cousin to Chanze. Last words? "Polo is griefing." http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=2473617

It looks like maybe Polo was amassing weapons, possibly having lived in the south village in another life based on his comment about being back. Maybe the south village was an older settlement of your family, abandoned due to the griefers? Who knows, just speculating blindly.

I found your other son's last words interesting, too.  He says he was this lady: http://lineage.onehouronelife.com/serve … id=2472155

Anyway, thanks for sharing. I hope someone involved pops in to comment.