One Hour One Life Forums

How many times did the other listed people attempt a life? Particularly the person with 40, 31, 18 and 10 curses.

Lol.

+1 to dogs not being a waste of coding.

I think a combination of suggested ideas would be cool. Something like:

- Outsiders with weapons on them [whether in bp/pocket or in hand] get bit
- Outsiders that try to interact with the dog [whether they have a weapon or not] get bit [so outsiders can't just relocate/release a guard dog].
- Outsiders without a weapon that get too close just get barked at.
- Family members are ignored. Maybe a system similar to fence gates where you can "add" outsiders to make the dog friendly towards ig, with a shortcut to add entire lineages [to make them less inconvenient for multi-lineage towns.]

Lol. Not touching this game with a 10 foot pole then. Thanks for the heads up.

bUt ThEn I wOUlDn'T kNoW hOw LoNG u cAn LaSt!!1!

Tarr actually made a github report about this about a week ago.
Jason closed it and said he might revisit it someday. Long story short, that's a no from him dawg.

https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLifeData7/issues/426

I made a new complaint about it claiming it's inconsistent. Go support it if you can. Maybe he'll 'revisit' it sooner.
https://github.com/jasonrohrer/OneLifeData7/issues/431

I think I may be the only person frequenting the forums who actually does live in the Seattle area, though not everyone puts a location tag and I may easily be wrong.

Unfortunately I wouldn't have a use for this, or really enjoy having it in my living space, since I no longer really play the game. Also I have work tomorrow, and doubt I could find a ride into the city this short of notice anyways.

Hope you're enjoying Seattle though. Aside from the awkwardly narrow and steep roads, the disturbing number of homeless, and the traffic, it's pretty fun up in the city. Maybe I'll get tickets to Pax next year.

I have few doubts about wanting to return to this game lmao. I'm glad he's fixing things that've been issues for literally months now, but with the rift as small as it is and griefers running rampant, I have little interest in returning. Nothing screams "stay away" like griefers literally having 0 consequences whatsoever, outside of being pushed onto other players for 2 days..

Hopefully he'll figure out a better system and things will stabilize eventually. I look forward to it, but in the meantime, not a huge loss on my end- there's plenty of other things taking up my time these days anyways.

Just gonna point out right here that it's been common knowledge to the longer-term playerbase for quite some time that the #1 cause of a family's downfall isn't food, wild animals, or even griefers- it's lack of females/players. This isn't a new discovery in the slightest. You're really late to the party on that aspect.

As someone who thoroughly loved playing as an eve or eve's child, such runs were often almost impossible to get off the ground solely due to the lack of children born, and of those, how few stayed. A single female competing with established towns with multiple fertiles for children rarely worked out, even in the best of circumstances.

Of course, that's no longer really a thing now, since the rift and eve window has been introduced. It's still there though to a degree, I'm sure, for families that had it rough from the start or suffered griefing problems / other incidents. Would love to see something done that gives smaller families a better chance, but I don't really have any ideas for you that haven't already been thrown out there. Something that's able to balance female ratios in both small and large families would be nice though.

My point was simply that, he is the sole person responsible for the game and the state it's in. Praise, reproach, criticism- it all falls on him, obviously, since again... He is the sole person responsible for the game and its current state.

If you paid attention, I actually didn't say a damn thing about my opinion of him or this game anywhere in my post. Quite literally all I stated is that he deserves both praise and reproach, which he does for being the producer of a product.

As the ONLY person working on the game, period, he deserves the criticism the consumers of his product give him, whether it's in a positive or negative light. Because at the end of the day, we pay money for the product he gives us, and we have a right to judge said product in whatever light we view it in. And as the sole person responsible for the product we receive, that falls on him, nobody else.

So kindly stop reeing about how "meanspirited" it is to state such, and stop dragging your own opinions of the game in its current state into the conversation. This isn't about that.

-

Added note, you might be right in terms of managing, but I still feel you could do things more efficiently if you had help in terms of coding weekly updates. Fresh perspectives and assistance with the grunt work isn't a bad thing for any game.

Also, I am not a coder. I've reported plenty of bugs in my time, but that's the extent of both my and a vast majority of his playerbase's limits.

Except, by your logic, the other twin would simply suicide in that case, since "they want to play together, that's the point, right?"

If the point is playing together, the newbie would obviously suicide so they can play with their friend again, right? And that's actually true in a vast majority of non-griefing twins- another reason some players often abandon them from the start, because what's the point of raising them when if one dies, the other just suicides? That's simply a waste of resources. But that's not the issue at hand, nor is it something solvable by your intervention.

I think it would be in very few cases where the other twin doesn't purposely suicide after their partner dies, excepting griefers, though.

However, one possibility for this would simply making Broken Heart Syndrome only activate when one of the twins is actively killed by another player- that is, stabbed with a knife/sword or shot with an arrow. They get the same death slowdown and inability to hold items as their injured twin, are saved if the twin is saved, and die if the twin dies.

That way, they're rendered no harder to take down than a singleplayer griefer. They no longer have the advantage of having the other person/people there to retaliate, but dying by accident (starvation, wild animal, etc.) would give them the option to stay in the occasional event that they'd want to.. It would return control to the players, as killing is currently the only option we have at our disposal for ridding our town of griefers.

It wouldn't be foolproof, I suppose. Players could still starve before succumbing to their injury, or if they're close to a wild animal, overwrite their wound with a bite wound and die to that. But it'd be a fairer playing field than what we currently have, which is p much nothing.

A functional "Peace" and "War" system.

Opposing families start out neutral with each other, the other family being marked as simply "No Relation." Swords are unable to be used.

Over time, if one elder [changed to 40+ instead of 55+] from each family declares Peace in each others' or their shared language, swords are disabled permanently. The other family is now tagged with "Ally" instead of "No Relation." Could have this effect the language barrier too.. maybe now they can all understand each other flawlessly.

On the flip side, if two [or maybe three] family members from a single family declares War, swords become active and they get a special emote/sound, something similar to murder mouth but distinct enough to not be mistaken for such.. A war cry, perhaps? Maybe red/bloodshot eyes or something? And perhaps a declaration goes out that x family is at war with y family. Could also maybe effect the language barrier.

To end the war, I think either those who instigated must declare peace/neutrality again, or one of each side has to do so like the initial peace process.

I just want wars to actually be wars, not a singular asshole running around with several swords slaughtering anyone they come across. There should be some sort of collective agreement among the family to declare war against another. Show an actual difference between war and serial killers, because right now there often isn't.