One Hour One Life Forums

Purpose of an argument is to sit down to listen to two sides, hopefully learn both stances and then continue to disagree peacefully or come to a conclusion and agreement. Truth is not the same to other people.

Many of my curse tokens go unused, sadly, due to me demanding to know more of the killings that go down. Overall if a player has been around for a long time and kills once or twice, I won't be suspecting or cursing them, especially if they talk about what went down.

Generally if one is planning to kill someone, it is good to talk about it to others. I will happily feed anyone who has justified their murder and kept the town going through their lives.
If no one talks about their intentions, I have nothing but my glimpses of the person to base my judgement on. This often makes me the sort of villager who looks at the scene, sees who survives or if none survive (meaning the starving 'killer' and the bleeding 'victim' die), and walks away, not to make more weapons but to continue their projects.

Once I did 'forget' to curse an old woman who stabbed my character, a 41 year old hard-working male. I suspect her reasoning was the crown which had just been given to me and some sort of roleplayer bitterness. Her name was Prince after all, but I had the darn crown. So yeah didn't even curse her, I was just more like "aaaallrighty then. Next life." than "omg someone avenge meeee". She just took down a 41 year old male, that's all. The old woman ran away to avoid the gathering people; usually quilty players are like that, running away instead of reasoning and staying put, vulnerable to everyone.

I like it a lot, dogs being like extra snares. As long as they don't require a lot of food to live. If they ate rabbit and goose bones that'd be great. I wouldn't mind if they ate human bones too, as bad as that sounds.

This would be such an easy way to grief. Griefers would steal mutton meant for pies and steal rabbits to make wolf hordes in badlands and then iron retrievers and scouts would die on their runs as the wolves would spread, possibly reaching towns, unless someone was always ready to kill them with a bow. It's just an easy way to grief behind people's backs.
Overall yes animals should respawn, trees too, or there could be ways to respawn each biome's wandering animal by leaving their favorite food around (excluding bears as those are not roaming ones). So as an example, if someone kills all nearby moufflons, someone could go to their biome and leave berries and carrot bowl there until a new moufflon spawns and consumes it. I'd like rabbits to move back in too if food is left near the abandoned burrows for long enough time.

Yes, I don't mind dying at 40-59 if I am in a camp that struggles with food as that's when you will be a drain, BUT! In good towns, with Yum bonus mastery, I think I should live as long as I can because I often teach others or tell all important locations like iron sources, bunnies and such to the next generations. At 55-60 I usually still save bushes and only sit in warmth and make sure to pass my knowledge on and I always make sure I work more than I eat (and I too feel like I have some rights over the food in the fields I have tended throughout my life).

And as an Eve in a good base, I totally want to live to 60 so I can keep spawning there and have people spawn in again too.

I am quite concerned about adding railways before making iron and trees infinite.

Will the shovel give back steel and planks when used on the rails?
I like that they can be used to move stones but they are really spread out so a track would need reconstructing all the time.

(Now that watering and farming was mentioned, watering systems could be amazing additions. Could help separating berry fields?)

Yes. I've been passive about the anti-grief systems as I've wanted to gather more experience and ideas before criticizing anything. I agree that the curse system is way too weak. And the black speech bubble is the beacon for attention some crave and want to have so they threaten and kill until they get it, as usually someone will raise them anyways. Having something special, even infamous, makes people desire it. Attention, uniqueness, reactions...

I like the "forced to Eve life" idea, or anything that renders griefers immobile or limits them. I have thought about a banishing system so enough curses and you are teleported to the wilderness (even if you are sitting inside a locked room). The demands for curses should be less for sure.

Oh my god, so brutal, and I still laughed out loud at that. But honestly I like the idea that you can kill cursed players with other tools, maybe even rocks, BUT, that may push the griefers to hide and trash stuff even more, most likely... Well it still sounds better than not having it.

TL;DR: curse system is truly too weak, I like "forced to Eve life" idea. I also like "attack with tools if cursed" idea. Anything that makes griefers weaker than others is good.

Yum chain: can it be made so that if the food is fed by someone, it doesn't affect a Yum bonus?
Griefer's force-feeding: can't really come up with much, the switch that was mentioned by AltyBagU was good I think. Something to use to refuse food incase a griefer strikes or if someone is building their Yum chain.

Personally I don't mind if my Yum bonus is intervened, only thing that bothers me in the feeding is just the chance to grief, but I haven't even personally experienced that yet so it must be really rare overall: it is a tiring way to grief, and not even flashy, so it's probably one of the last choices griefers take. I'd vote for the switch (which could be toggled on/off after baby years).

I thought long and hard for this and this is the conclusion I came to:
it depends.

I have way more female lives under my belt, maybe because females are raised more often than males.

When I'm playing as a female character, my train of thought and actions are constantly interrupted by children being born, and I have a tendency to demand a lot from my babies (baby testing) so they stop me for a while each time they are born. On the other hand, I consider myself a very capable player, so sometimes I end up being the only surviving fertile woman (knowing tricks of avoiding bears, being careful with snakes and boars, managing to get backup food before a famine strikes...). I know the value of me playing a female character and can carry my "responsibility" with ease and I know what jobs are ideal for the women and I enjoy most jobs anyways. I also enjoy observing my good kids and looking up how they ended up in the family tree, and any special fun chats with them are always great (doesn't apply to "just my kids" of course, but I do have to spend a lot of time with the kids I spawn).

When playing as a male character, there certainly is the freedom. No need for baby testing or stopping. I can teach, I can observe, I can go away from the city whenever to scout for stuff. My death is nothing major (unless I'm the only carrying force in a small base). I feel important as I can fetch stuff for people who can't. But then, I am helpless as I can just watch as a town runs out of women due to newbies or accidents. It's probably THE downside of the male characters.

TL;DR: as a woman I am constantly stopped by baby births, as a man I cannot spawn players when others fail. Error 404, preferred gender not found.

In games, there is this interesting balance of fantasy and real life. Some games are made for escapism. Some games are somewhere in-between escapism and realism. And some games deliver really raw and real stuff, I think "Papers, please" is around this side of the scale: some players enjoy it, some get sad and stressed out (too much is too much).

Sometimes a game can be ruined if it goes "too real" and introduces imbalanced negativity and issues of reality; it doesn't filter enough things to make room for the positivity of the escapism side and reminds the player too much of reality. Some games make remarks of real world issues, but often they are shrouded in fantasy or the issues distance themselves from the player far enough to not get them stressed as they play. Some games make sure to explore the realism throughoutly and worry little over the stress they may cause with the exploration of really serious issues and sad times.

The point I am making is that there is a peculiar imbalance in OHOL. The game would undeniably be great without the grief, murder, distrust, racism, hate - all reality issues - as the escapism side is "tarnished" by that. It's just not harmonious in a way; the issues of reality like racism, hate etc. are things brought from outside of the game: from players, real humans of the real world. The game doesn't express these things by itself, it merely has the tools to have the players express them. That's the thing of multiplayers. There is little to no ways of balancing out the things brought in by players. The reality issues keep on pushing onto the escapism side where many people would love to hang out without reminders of the negative reality but can't as the sides overlap constantly (meaning the escapism players keep encountering the negative reminders of reality in an environment they don't want them in).

I dislike the company of impatient, immature, negative, angry people: that's why I avoid them in real life. In games, I expect to be able to do that too, but multiplayers can't give you that power unless you, holding power from the outside, use that power you have and take your leave. Yes it is sad how that's the solution, but people are people.

Have I lost my faith in humanity? I'd say so (not because of a game), as I don't want to bring kids to this world. I think a merciless world creates merciless people. The world is depressing (no I am not depressed!), and while people make many things worthwhile, they also ruin many things. This is why I have only so much energy for ANY multiplayer game. People make them fun, AND ruin them.

I enjoy how different my lives are, I write down all of them. I still need to experience a life of a boar and wolf hunter. Currently my favorite has been a rabbit hunter life (wonders and dangers of wilderness paired with the calm and silence of the non-populated areas of the game world while being important and appreciated upon returns). I also get the dopamine rush when I know I have done well, saved a farm, city, someone else. I also like the idea of providing other people a game session; a life in an environment I have helped keeping up. Sort of like "I did so well, enjoy!". The heart warming kindness of other players is just the cherry on top, makes the cupcake sweeter but I don't need it every life.

Ticking a box of family-friendliness to have family-friendly sessions would require some sort of automatically executed server rules, some sort of moderating or some sort of managing. Censoring. Ways of keeping out people who would target these places especially as they include people who are tried to be kept safe. It's almost like a flag of "this place has all the people you want to bully for maximum reaction and damage" as that's the kind of people we are dealing with in the extreme side of the spectrum. Without rules that are forced onto players, it's just another territory for griefers and bullies to target.

I wish I could play on family-friendly servers. I'd love to play with people who just love to play and build too. It's people who get tired, bitter and annoyed who I want to steer clear of, no matter how pro they are. I want to experience teamwork, explore and learn without having to read speech bubbles of immature talks about sex slaves... I've witnessed sex roleplay too, ofc to me, an adult, it looked idiotic, but a kid really shouldn't have to witness that.

While it is great that there is the reality check of the world for children, as it can build strenght too, I'd probably not let my kids play this game as it is: they are playing with anonymous adults mostly, and well, I've been on the Internet long enough to know where that ends all the time, as sad as it is. But I am not a parent. I just don't trust people enough to let children play with them. Multiplayers be multiplayers... in good and bad... There are ages when children can be affected tremendously in negative ways so I'd probably feel like I'm risking a bit too much for it to be worth it. Kids will learn about the world through other means, we can teach them, no need to let them run to the mouth of the bear when you can bring them up without questionable game communities.

TL;DR: I'd leave kids out of the playgrounds of anonymous adults, just in case they experience something that affects them in a negative manner due to their age. If the game manages to develop ways to ensure it's safe enough, then it'd be more okay to me.

A chunk of those murders are probably the good people killing the murderers?
I wonder what the ratio is, "one murderer kills approximately x amount of people before dying" sort of deal.

So many old people starve after the hunger alarm stops ringing, we could have so many more Old Age deaths. Many starve while talking or explaining things.

Thank you for these observations, very interesting thread. If people want to compile some stuff here, I'll be lurking.

Apart from murderers/griefers...
...my daughter, who was 30 years old and the only fertile female in the town, said she had to go and disconnected, leaving only one son behind. Thanks...
It baffles me how people know that one session takes maximum of one hour of playing and still end up having to leave mid-life. Usually I am not too bummed if a town runs out of women but this just grinded my gears a bit as it was such an unnecessary end, like be a noob or have an accident but just leaving like that...