a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Oh yeah. How to go from 48 to 33 in just 3 lives. The babies were pretty much flying out of their moms, and almost always promptly dying. The chaos was kinda funny. Looking at my gene score afterwards was pretty depressing though. Just red, red, red, red.
I did manage to teach a few of the newlings how to farm, eat, and some general basic concepts. I'm guessing that things will sort themselves out as the wave of new players crests and they either figure out how to play or get frustrated and leave. I hope some of the frustrated ones eventually come back.
Jason, I think mothers should not be able to have babies when they are in a bad biome. They can't pick up their baby at all. Alternatively, always allow babies to be picked up, regardless of biome.
I had this happen to me, and it's pretty annoying. I managed to survive by running out of the bad biome as soon as I could, but this shouldn't be a thing. It simple feels completely wrong.
Jason, what happens if one of my children has a score above 60. Does that mean I'm getting a lower score no matter what I do? Even if (s)he lives to 60, that will be below their 60+ score.
You were the first person I saw after my mother abandoned me in the wilds. I was George Fryman in that life. We were both old and somehow found each other in that abandoned village. We couldn't understand each other, but it gave me some solace that someone saw me before I died.
Mutton is already OP. In real life you get 1/10 of the calories back that you feed to livestock. In OHOL i don't know the math but you probably more than double your calories.
I'm pretty sure that, while the game tries to hew close to reality, sometimes realism has to take backseat to balance. Mutton is appropriately balanced right now. Effectively reducing how much food we get from sheep by 1/4 will throw that out of balance.
Slaughtering sheep should be hungry work.
I could see this being a thing. However, we would need to get another mutton out of sheep to keep things somewhat balanced. Basically make slaughtering sheep cost X pips but also give us another mutton for X pips. For the town, that makes the whole thing a wash (if a bit more annoying). For the griefer, it makes slaughtering sheep pretty much pointless.
I think you were my gma one life. You stabbed my ma because she was standing in the bakery and not listening to you.
Nope. I tend to be pretty pacifist. About the only time I get a little bit riled up is when someone is wasting meat with the sheep. Even then, I've never stabbed anyone over it.
As for the difference between baker and cook: I don't really draw a line here. Pies are definitely the backbone of the food management. Once those are sorted out, then yeah: making lots of yum alternatives makes sense. I do that all the time, but only when I feel like there are enough pies to hold everyone over if a griefer kills all the sheep.
Smiths/Engineers and just overall people that build the town's infrastructure (oil rig makers and even builders) help develope a town way more than a single baker can.
You are absolutely right. Of course they develop the town more! If my point was to try to rank the importance of some jobs to others, then this would be a different thread. My point is that the baker (or cook if you want) is going to be a good place to go to find out what the town needs. This makes the baker/cook a critical part of information sharing. This does not mean his job is more important than anyone else's. Let me quote myself:
everyone in town doing something productive is important. I'm not saying the baker is "better" or somehow "superior". It's just the nature of that particular task that makes the baker a central information hub.
One other point that I wanted to make before but forgot: the other advantage that the baker has is that (s)he's usually easy to find. The bakery is almost always near the center of town and most everyone knows where it is. The person doing the cooking is almost always there. If not, they will be back really soon. So next time you're grabbing a pie and also wondering what to do next: just ask the guy in the funny hat.
Hungry work for smashing stone walls
I like this idea as well.
Smith > farmer > baker
Each of these jobs feed into each other and if any one of them fails the others atrophy into not being able to be done. Without a smith you cant maintain a farm. Without a farmer you cant bake. Without a baker sheep and wheat cycling has no pressure.
If bakers focus on compost management as well as baking the whole situation gets a lot more stable..
I think we understand each other. Every job is important and all of them feed into each other.
I know when I am filling the baker role, I usually end up doing lots of odd jobs. Ideally, I would just be baking pies, because everything would be delivered to me as fast as I could make stuff and work the oven. It rarely works that way, though. Something is a bottleneck, and I'm either trying to figure out what happened to my mutton supply, or why the wheat isn't being grown. Each of those potentially leads to new questions about why carrots are missing or why there's no compost. So if I happen to be your baker, I can probably tell you immediately what the town needs the most.
And if by some miracle everything is going to plan, then I'll send you over to the smith to see what he needs.
When I'm doing any other job, I usually don't have a clear view of what the town needs. When I'm smithing, I can tell you if we need iron or possibly bowls and plates. If I'm scouting and gathering, I have no idea what is going on in town. If I'm farming, I might be able to tell you something about composting. Tending sheep will give me some insights into the carrots and berries. But somehow, no other task seems to force an overview quite as much as baking does.
I like the designs where there is only one entrance and exit. This makes it a bit easier to corner griefers or even kill them before they can get all the sheep.
You wouldn't need to have a direct link to a location to mark or clear outdated maps. The coordinates should be enough. When the game decides to reset an area, the game will also know which coordinates are affected. Just enumerate through all the maps and find the ones with coordinates inside that area. Mark or reset maps as Jason wills. This should not be a problem as long as it's somewhat efficient to find all the maps in the game.
Bakers are one of the key people in a town. There are others, of course, but the baker might be the most critical of them all. The baker will know what in town is straggling behind. Need more plates and bowls? The baker will know. Need more wheat? Yeah, the baker will know. Even carrots and berries will come to the baker's attention if they start straggling. Sheep problems are almost always immediately clear to the baker. The baker can probably tell you if it makes sense to go rabbit hunting. The baker will know if kindling and even firewood is running low. The baker will also know if water is getting to be a problem.
The smith is probably the other contender for most critical position in town. The only reason I think the baker is even better positioned as an information hub is that that baking is needed pretty much continuously while smithing is a bit more start and stop. The continuous nature keeps the baker in touch with the current state of the town.
If you are looking for something to do, go to the baker: (s)he can tell you what the town probably needs the most.
Also: when the old baker come in and says: we need a new baker; get on that right away. That huge stockpile of pies will disappear fast if nobody is making sure that there is a continuous stream of stuff getting made.
Just to be clear: everyone in town doing something productive is important. I'm not saying the baker is "better" or somehow "superior". It's just the nature of that particular task that makes the baker a central information hub. In this game where communication is deliberately difficult, knowing where to get fairly up-to-date info on what is needed can be the difference between a successful town and one that is always on the brink of destruction.
Yesterday I had a town where I got to play as baker. There must have been a particularly large influx of experienced players on, because for the first time, I could just mention what I needed and someone got on it right away. By the time I died, the town was flourishing in all areas and I was happy to leave behind 4 solidly stacked containers of pies, plus a bunch of yum alternatives. This only worked because:
1. People were really playing together (not just with the baking, but everywhere)
2. People did not clutter the baking area with useless crap
3. All the basics were being dealt with efficiently (berries, carrots, sheep, and wheat)
4. People were really using yum like they should (using pies as the mainstay)
5. Oh, and people actually ate from started plates. Nothing really annoys a baker like 20 half-eaten plates.
This has been a service announcement from the Baking Association of OHOL: Making Better Pies for a Better Tomorrow
I totally missed that pine trees don't cost hunger to cut down...
That is going to change up how I do firewood going forward.
Or just add a sound to it so people know what is going on.
Off screen notifications?
There was a sound. He was also helpfully shouting things while tearing stuff down. He was still much faster than we could react. There's no skill here. It's just rush in, destroy a half dozen walls and then run away. Repeat.
Could we please get a small delay when tearing things down? Griefers are tearing things down faster than we can even chase them. Entire walls are ripped down before anyone can even react. Also, could we get a small slowdown when walking with larger tools?
We actually had guards, for all the good it did us.
So you think cuz one bad thing happens it's okay if more bad things happen?
That's not what I said. I said that this does not introduce any new problems. If saying naughty things is what we want to avoid, then that ship has sailed.
“MY NICKNAME IS JASONSUCKSDICKS”
See how this could be abused?
No not really. I mean, I can see how people might do this, but it's not really different than people putting items in the shape of potentially offensive signs, writing on paper, or whatever. Plus, we could limit the size of the nickname. Perhaps the size is related to your genetic score.
And you know, even if people did use this to be immature idiots: this would actually be great. It would give us a heads up on likely griefers. Someone using their nickname for something like that is probably not anyone you want to let near your sheep.
Don't like your name? You can name yourself anything.
Well no, you can't. You can give yourself a nickname, but your name stays the same. There's only one possible reason to be against this and that is...
Destroy anonimity.
I considered this. However, nothing is stopping you from running around shouting your real name to everyone. The same goes for impersonation. Nothing stops you from going around claiming to be someone else. Sure, a quick look at the name clears it up, but with a nickname, the real name is literally right there.
So do we want a chance to be able to define roles for ourselves or not? I can live without it, but if we want to actually allow something like this, why overcomplicate it? Nicknames are a part of social reality and by reading Jason's comments, I would actually be surprised if he wouldn't be interested in the social tension created by comparing how we see ourselves compared to how other people see us.
I saw several ideas about how to communicate what we are doing or how we see ourselves. How about allowing us to set a nickname for ourselves?
"My nickname is Pie maker"
Then when we hover over them we see: Mark "Pie maker" Sky.
I recently had the situation that my mom was clearly new, and the camp was also clearly dying. I would have saved all of us, if I could. On my search for supplies, I realized I was really far and made the decision just not to go back. I felt bad about this, but I didn't see a chance to pull things out for the camp. I might have kept her going for another minute or two, but then we would all go out together.
I felt like I was doing mom a favor by actually making sure that at least I made it to 60, but I'm still not sure that this was the right choice.
When do you guys bail on a settlement?
IIRC the only benefit of feeding lambs over shorn sheep is that with lambs it takes a lot less time for them to produce sheep shit. With shorn sheep you should generally try and wait until they shit, before killing or shearing them again.
No.
I already did the math, but I will repeat the conclusion here.
If I shear the adult, then feed it, and shear it again (and so on), I will have 5 fleece to show for it.
If I only feed the baby, then shear and kill the adult, I will have 5 fleece and 20 mutton to show for it.
20 mutton is a huge difference in my opinion.
In Twisteds last video, there was a kid tilling rows, but he was temporarily invisible, so it looked like it was happening on it's own. I have had this happen once, a month or two back as well.
I just saw that one as well. His reaction was great. Even just watching the video made me feel a little freaked out.
Almost every single town I have been born into so far has been on the edge of starvation. I may be fairly new still, but I have yet to really feel the problem of too much food.
I will grant that if the town is absolutely stuffed to the brim with mutton and nobody knows what to do with it, then maybe the bottleneck is somewhere else. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about towns with a few half eaten pies or towns that have a quickly growing population. In that case, it would seem to me to be pretty important that the food production remain as close to optimal as possible.
I think that the yum factor is a reasonable reason to make some alternatives. That actually bolsters the importance of handling sheep efficiently. The more efficient your sheep, the more room you have to broaden the types of food available.
The other thing is that griefers can strike at any time. If the problem with meat is finding a place to store it, perhaps the better alternative is to add storage. When the griefers hit and someone has to find a rope, figure out where the arrows got to, sally out to find a mouflon only to discover that the griefers have killed them too, meaning that someone has to spend a better part of their life just trying to get another sheep and bring it to town (oh, and hopefully the town still has carrots). If the town has a solid backup of food and compost, this won't even be noticed by most of them. If not, the town might very well die quickly.
I'm not sure that I can get behind the clutter argument. If the pen is too small to be able to handle the dead babies, then the pen is too small. There is a fairly easy solution to a pen that is too small.
Trading some direct efficiency for yum is something that I can understand. Simply throwing away meat for no real gain is less understandable for me.
I do understand that this can change if carrots are limited (another absolute pet peeve of mine; how hard is it to realize that if the carrots dry up, the compost dries up too, stopping all the other crops as well?).
I will sometimes shear the last adult if its clear that carrots are years away just to stop the baby body bonanza. It depends how big the pen is. If the bodies are disappearing faster than mama sheep can make them, then I'll just leave it, otherwise you end up with little dead sheep blocking up everything when carrots do finally arrive again.
Also, what is the proper moral choice in dealing with the stubborn shearers? Is it more morally right to:
A) Leave the shears out, knowing full well that this is reducing the amount of food over the long run?
B) Hide the shears, knowing that this hamstrings folks just trying to make clothes?
C) Shank the stubborn who won't listen. This one is quickly gaining in attractiveness for me.
I can't quite decide.
I'm still pretty new, but I thought that I understood how the most efficient way to use sheep is.
Feed the baby, shear and kill the adult.
I see a bunch of people who claim that they know what they are doing just feeding adults. If I have understood this correctly, this is a pretty bad waste of food.
Let's say I have 5 bowls of sheep food (which is 25 berries and 5 carrots...a pretty hefty price in water). To keep things simple, I will assume we only have one adult, but the math is the same if we had more. More adults accelerates how fast we can get resources, but does not change the actual mechanic.
If I shear the adult, then feed it, and shear it again (and so on), I will have 5 fleece to show for it.
If I only feed the baby, the shear and kill the adult, I will have 5 fleece and 20 mutton to show for it.
Am I missing something? If not, why are so many people claiming to know what they are doing shearing all the adults? I'm pretty sure they are not griefing.