One Hour One Life Forums

I feel that this is horrible advice, breezeknight. I get what you mean with it (that the new player should learn everything on his/her own without having to care about anyone else), but it's counter to what the game is about (cooperation, taking care of other's needs, aiming for slow but steady progress). The real skill to learn is how to take care of kids and inexperienced players and still survive. Doesn't matter if it takes longer, because it's more fun for everyone and it's a unique experience in gaming, which is getting lost if people play like you suggest here. Yes, I see that you mean it as a learning phase, but what you would learn from that phase (and what people trying to play as your baby would learn) are not the right things.

You are putting words on what has been nagging me. It's a sad reality that many of the players who are actually loving (or love/hating) OHOL the most, are also inadvertently taking an active role in stifling the growth of the user base. Not all the time, but often enough. I would very much like to see the user base grow. Kill babies, code words for experienced players, kill inefficient players, ignore teaching... all of these methods are sucking the lifeblood out of the game and user base.
As Master Yoda says: The Dark Side is not stronger, only quicker, easier, more seductive. Power gamers: join the Light Side.

Please don't be offended. You have the right to play how you wish. If you're active on the forum you probably have a vested interest in seeing the game grow though. It's through the new players that can happen, and through your positive attitude towards them. This attitude cannot only show in the forum and Discord, it needs to show in the game itself.

My 2 cents.

We’re porting the game client to iOS and Android. Soon the world will be full of people playing the game on touchscreens and all of you will be regarded as secondary players, probably made fun of and being called “mouse people”.

Sorry about that (but not very...)

Also, I once kept eight kids in a game. Not sorry about that at all. Kids for the win!

Lol

I would suggest to give males a possibility to help the family line along.

First some math:
In real life, a family tree grows through childbirth and marriages, and through both men and women. In OHOL we have the situation that only childbirth and only women grow the tree. If we simplify significantly, we can estimate that it is _at_least_ twice as hard for a OHOL family line to survive to a new generation, than a real-life family. This means that for a OHOL line to survive for another 10 generations is 1000 times more difficult than in real life, and 100 generations is 10^30 more difficult to achieve (which means that it will never happen naturally).

Special male-only feature: adopt a stranger into the family line.
This would not change normal game-play but it would impact the long view, for players who are interested in that.
The mechanism could be something like this: 1. A male takes a certain object in hand and says "You are (name_of_family)", and drops the item. 2. The player who wants to join the family picks up the item and says "I am (name_of_family)". The item could be a leaf or a bone needle (alludes to mixing of blood) or something.

What do you think?

Looks like he chose the one I was writing about, so you can have another look at that. It’s not a bad solution at all. The way I read Jason’s explanation, he is saying that both fully random and fully determined are worse solutions than what a combination of them is. I for one agree with that. For one thing, it’s more realistic. Let’s try it out and see if it feels good. Otherwise I’m sure there will be new updates.

tldr: using 2 or 3 stages for an item to break or decay gives an element of chance combined with a nice probability curve

This concept was described in more detail in https://www.reddit.com/r/OneLifeSuggest … _easy_way/ as a way to model decay. It's also good for modelling tools breaking from actions, because it has the non-apparent mathematical property of bunching together probabilities in the middle and shortening the tail.

Let me explain by example:

1. An axe is given 1/40 chance to break at each use.
Probability for an axe to be used exactly n times before breaking:
1:2.5%, 2:2.4%, 3:2.4%, 10:2%, 20:1.5%, 30:1.2% 40:0.93%, 50:0.72%, 60:0.56%, 80:0.34%, 100:0.20%, 200:0.02%
(an axe is likelier to break on the first use than on use number n, for any n != 1)

2. An axe is given 1/20 chance to turn into battered axe, while a battered axe is given 1/20 to break
Probability for an axe to be used exactly n times before breaking:
1:0%, 2:0.25%, 3:0.48%, 10:1.5%, 20:1.9%, 30:1.7%, 40:1.4%, 50:1.0%, 60:0.75%, 80:0.36%, 100:0.16%, 200:0.002%
(an axe is likelier to break on use number 20 than on use number n, for any n != 20, n != 21)

(a graph would have been nicer, I confess )

Adding a third stage would increases the probability effect further. If you want a probability for tools to break from age as well as from use, you could add a 1/20 chance for transition every 60 minutes as well...

Spot on!

This made me laugh.

With respect, here is an online definition of griefing (there are other, similar ones):

1. Purposefully shooting or otherwise sabotaging your teammates in an online game.

2. In online gaming where one repeatedly killing the same individual or individuals over and over again, or camping their corpse to prevent them from retrieving it, or otherwise performing actions in a game to prevent the player from enjoying the game.

3. In online gaming, someone who takes pleasure in creating grief for an opponent via various "cheap" tactics.

Unintended griefing does not exist, per definition. If it is not done on purpose, it is not griefing.
You are entitled to your opinions, but please stick to the same definition. If it makes it easier for you, then substitute "griefing" with "intentional griefing" (to the rest of us these are the same, and that's how you need to view and respond to other posts discussing griefing).

Note that doing something bad against other players in game, with the result that you win a benefit for yourself in-game, is not griefing. So stealing food to extend your life is not griefing, while planting wheat with the sole intention to disrupt farming is.

Thanks, and I wish you happy gaming!

I agree with this. I think that a serial murderer should receive the Mark of Cain and spawn as a Cain in the next life, i.e. a grown male in the wilderness. To remove the mark of Cain, you have to live a whole life until 60 (which is a bit of a challenge in the wilderness, and requires that you sustain yourself buy actually playing the game as intended). If living to 60 proves too difficult, then 120 minutes of gameplay as Cain could also wipe the mark.

You would get the mark of Cain if you kill more than one person within 60 minutes of gameplay. If you kill many, you could receive more than one mark that you would have to wash away by spending several lives as Cain.