One Hour One Life Forums

I don't think this is it.

By making harsher penalties on griefers, fewer people will want to play in the long run. Imagine a noob player who made a silly mistake, like taking the pies to his workplace. People think he's griefing but he's clearly just moving a basket of pies, in this case, he would be cursed (most of the time) just for doing something that is not considered griefing from his perspective. This player accumulates more and more curses for either very strict reasons, or for stupid beginner mistakes.

Eventually, he gets sent to donkey town, which is not even that hard to be sent to if he makes only one mistake, the whole town can curse him off. With all these penalties, or even just a few of them, he losses motivation and stops playing the game. It's not even funny how demotivating donkey town can be if you are sent there. Even if he burns off the time, he will now think that everyone is out to get him, what kind of community are we if we just punish people for silly mistakes in such a manner?

Even if he IS a troll/griefer, these people are essential to the game. What's the point of a knife/arrows in your bag if everyone won't ever be "disrespectful" or start griefing? No combat or drama at all makes the game stale. Some people would rather to have the game like this, but trust me, in the long run, it is never good to have too much of anything, too much "fair and kind" gameplay will make the game get boring even faster than having griefers on. This is just my opinion, however, but I've seen the results of grieferless societies and it really ain't nothing special.

Besides the definition of griefer has changed recently. Nowadays a griefer is just anyone who pisses you off if they say something bad to you? GRIEFER! If they use something in town that you wanted to use? GRIEFER! If they made a house where you wanted to make a farm? GRIEFER! It really makes the term redundant, it has no more meaning, I hate when people use "good" and "bad" guys. As if you can decide that yourself, some people play differently and think some a certain person is a griefer or not a griefer when in reality the opposite can be true. It's all about how YOU think, there is no objective definition of a griefer in this game, yeah you can say the definition in response to me.... But that is not any meaning you can use in-game, where anyone and everyone is griefers.

Thats irrelevant dont fit me into your narrative this isnt at all about defending griefers, you've made posts before about things that arent important and now youre saying that I'm only doing this because i grief now and then?

Ridiculous.

Lol trust me your post didn't encourage griefing. Most of the time the players dont uave discord/forums and don't even bother to read posts if they do have it.

These are isolated events of noobish griefing that i definitely wouldn't do, not to a small camp anyways.

Anyways why is this a big deal? This post doesnt bring up discussions not two sided, just hate towards griefers.

I somewhat agree with what you're saying, even though I think you're fertile from 14-39, still 25 minutes, but I think that the feature is necessary.

By that I mean, why remove something if it's not broken? Can you imagine if Jason removed all non-essential things from the game?? It would be literally just, farm, iron, smith, compost, sheep, wells/pumps. There wouldn't be anything extra, small features like this are needed to give the game some colour. If we remove all "meh" features we get a boring and simplistic game that is not to the standards it is now.

Hm... that won't work, here's why:

As annoying as having many kids for a big civ is, this is simply the job of a caretaker, if all the kids in the town were concentrated in one place, it means that other players and women, for example, can live a relatively sound life away from all the crying and feeding. It is simply necessary to have a caretaker or a nurse for many children in a big civ, because more players are concentrated there, more kids pop out, and that's just how it is.

The number of children you "should" have is, as before mentioned, not up to you and is frankly the game's decision for now, but I get your point. Even though the whole "playerbase that has a clue" is confusing because how do you expect to judge a player on how good they are based on how long they live??? YES, people who live long are usually good players...?? except that's not always true. At this point we need to acknowledge sponges exist, and that many new players will ride on other player's achievements all the way to 60. What if they were born in many advanced civs and just ate food all day? Or what if a pro player has to go and leave the game, or is accidentally bit by a hidden snake/boar or is bitten by some mosquitos, or what if the advanced player decides to die early not to waste food in their old age? (Seen it happen loads of times)

You simply can't just judge a player on how good they are based on the age they reach, also, what if they're murdered/murdered a griefer and got stabbed or starved. Lots of factors make pro players not live to 60 and make noobs live to 60.

While it is annoying to have lots of kids that aren't successful, the best you can do in that life is to raise them, help them if they ask questions, and GIVE THEM A JOB! That's so very important for ALL players. Usually, they don't receive any kind of job or task and end up "doing their own thing" or just goofing off. Being a good parent makes sure that your kids can be useful!

Switch on and off from being a caretaker to provide for your noob children, teach them something, make them do something, create usefulness in a field of sponges. That's how we thrive!

I get everyone's points about fairness, at some point it becomes ALL about luck and you're stuck with no girls.

The reason I kept trying to refute that is that in theory, Jason's system works well, 50% chance of male/female and a possibility to have a female from every fertile woman. The problem is how it's executed, did you know that two of the characters aka skins in the game do NOT follow genetics? The pale ginger woman and very dark male are both skins that since their other skin colours for the opposite gender of their class were not added yet, they don't have normal spawn mechanics like a dark/light person would. Another problem is the lack of skins that are female, many people spawn in looking the same with limited flexibility in that aspect, not that having no skins significantly affects the problem, but it is there. The result is that Jason will add more in time.

But the main problem with the system that has existed for months! Is the lack of players. Babies and spawn mechanics, only apply when a player joins a specific server. We're looking at 40-60 people on a top server at average, but no people at all or barely any at the lowest rated servers! This problem existed way before steam release, and at midnight in my area, at MAX we would have up to 30 people... in all of the servers!

Lack of girls is what made the last few months before release hell. Players were leaving left and right to such an extent that I could feel the community dying, luckily the steam release was soon enough so that new players learned and some old ones rejoined to help. At first the new players were screwing civs by themselves from "too many girls/boys" and yes I'd say majority civ failures were from that. As more players leave and more players learn the result is that the same process that existed beforehand will affect the game again, this time it will be slower, but you can feel that many steam players are putting the game down already...

SO what's the solution? Well, we can't magically "make" the players join the server we need the most help in, if they're using custom, and I already think the game does a fair job in distributing the players evenly on each of the servers. What do we do?

I got an idea, well not my idea, but... let's picture this first. When I joined the community in late March, the game was very different, yes by mechanics and yes by the items in game, biomes, players attitudes, skill, but one of the things that MOST changed were the spawn mechanics. You see, back then we didn't have lineage trees or names for people, or "your mother" or "your first cousin" we didn't have titles. What we had were advanced civs (at the time) and many eves spawning left and right, all people in one jumbled area, I would say that people spawned on old civs all the time, so much so and so closely that I would say within 1K you could find every person in that server all jumbled up.

Jason eventually changed this with the addition of lineage, he made eves so far away that no one could stumble into another civ... He eventually adjusted it and more recently, he HAS paid attention to your cries, because he changed the eve proximity spawn range from 500 ~> 250 tiles. This is huge! And I notice more eves spawning closer in an advanced civ. Really, Jason is reverting the game kinda to what it was before.

Overall, I don't know of an immediate solution but I can give facts

I find it funny how me being honest makes people not wanna read my whole point as if thats a good excuse. The reason I said what i said is because maybe people need to have a different mindset. Thinking that there is a fundemental issue with the game and not an issue with your play style is very common nowadays. You'd first blame game than blame how you play.

Also, those two examples of you failing as eve cause your kids werent adult females is kinda how the game is supposed to function. There never is a perfect eve spawn; you cant expect to spawn in and have a long lineage. The point of the game is to try to fight against luck and chance to have a near perfect civ. Suggesting a way to make the game easier because you cant have a long lineage while you eve is frankly ridiculous.

For example, Tarr, a long time player, makes sure to eve as often as he can, and since hes so knowledgeable with the game, i can always see at least one tar family active during nearly every time i play. I dont see him complaining about birth mecahnics because he doesnt worry to much about thise things, he can have a successful lineage against all odds because hes played the game enough to know that things like birth and girls are random, the best you can do is try to have many fertile women at good temp in your civ.

The point is that when you suggest a new idea to replace or improve and old one, its usually because the old idea has severe problems with it. Yet i dont understand why jason should fix something that isnt broken?? The system has flaws sure, no one is guranteed a girl  that stays, but are we really considering changing it because it makes eveing too difficult?

The few times i eve, my civ always gets far, could be my luck, but i really think the quick decisons of an eve is more important than any birth mechanic.

That sure was fun

Hm this list is very subjective and situational.

For example, tilled rows, what if someone wants to get points so they take all the hoes and use them to make tilled rows, as well as using the soil. This creates turmoil and the town has no resources to maintain a farm which results in no crops which results in no food and starvation occurs. You get it?

And Feeding a lamb, let's say you want to accumulate points so you mass feed the lamb, you crowd the pen and make it impossible to do anything in that space so the sheep are momentarily useless. Then let's say you find a way to clear the pen, was it worth it? You may say you got mutton for pies! But think about it... all those berries and carrots were stripped from their places to be made into feed for lambs, and what happens from that? No compost, no berry/carrot pies, therefore no wheat and no dough, which means no pies for you! Catching on yet?

The system can also be damaging towards a society. Let's say we got a top tier city with all the most advanced things, and babies spawning left and right, plenty of food, everyone's need taken care of, paradise!....But then think what would happen when the bored players decide their lives aren't fulfilling enough and want to gain the most points possible in their lineage. The players start rapidly, planting as many seeds and feeding as many sheep as they can, doing all the things that could potentially add many points to their overall score. But wait. Someone just used all the carrots to feed the lambs, and you can't spam compost anymore? What do you decide to do? You fight! Creating havoc and resulting in death and cursing vigorously from both sides. This effect will butterfly and soon that advanced top tier civ, turns into a post-apocalyptic wasteland (ironic right?).

Even if Jason can make this system avoid all these problems, what's the worth in a system like this anyways? Now we are judging every player on how good they are based on which things they can click on and do the most? Not even a very intelligent system either, because someone plants 100 berry bushes all together and I only plant 4 by 4 bushes in certain areas, I'm the worse player?  What if someone makes 50 batches of compost but I create 1 deep well that can sustain the society for much longer, is he the better player because he made lots of compost that can be used up quick? Even if my well can sustain generations? These things are trivial and do NOT create an effective system that you might've had in mind, it's frankly ridiculous and I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt something like this would even work.

Keep trying Floofy, maybe one post will be decent

Minesweeper? Bro they'll suicide if they want and if you dont feed them your ass is on the line not ours.

So have fun getting stabbed for not feeding you last 2 fertile females.

Did you completely miss out in my prior post? This griefing guide feels more like a "correct my mistakes" guide because i see more people criticizing and correcting it than i do appreciating and utilizing it.

This is not a mindful post at all, and it is NOT a guide. Please learn how to properly play the game before you make such a ridiculous forum post that only props up the discussion that you have a poor grasp on ohol griefing and a poor understanding of effectiveness.

Just remember that forum posts are supposed to be important and useful towards the community. This is just another misleading post that doesnt get very far at all.

Ok from a certified griefing person.

I can say this guide is trash, except for the wild animals, the rest of it is too subtle and not effective in comparison to a whole town against you.

The best way to grief is to make the town grief themsleves, social engineering and manipulation will confuse and divide a town to the point where you can easily break up a town and concentrate your attacks.

Dont fill bowls with sulfur, its obvious and obnoxious. Much more noobish than griefing there.

Writing it down lol no don't do that, just accept the fact that Jason won't give us more than that small tab bar. other than speaking to ppl, watching them, and the tab, thats all the ingame help you got.

It's not a possibility to be able to include such a link, not possible as in Jason simply won't add it anytime soon.

So take a day off or an hour, and memorize the wiki or onetech, get familiar because that's all we got.