Servers as a karma ladder?

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 15:19:48

Thinking more about the problem of griefers.

Part of the problem is that, even if you kill them, they can keep coming back at you. They can bypass server assignment and keep coming back to your server, and they can baby suicide until they are born in your village again.

Killing them slows them down, but not by enough. Let's assume, though, that this will always happen to a griefer in the end. They will always be discovered and killed (assuming that I keep tweaking things to make that more and more likely, if it's not likely enough already).

One problem with any further punishment of "murder victims" is that it hurts the good guys along with the bad. A griefer may be running around killing people, and we don't want those people being punished any further.

However, I realized that if we compare the average griefer to the average non-griefer, assuming that non-griefers outnumber griefers, then the average griefer's life will be way more likely to end in murder than the average non-griefer. Essentially, the griefer's life will always end in murder, while the average non-griefer will be the unfortunate victim every once in a while.

So, some kind of further consequence for dying by murder might actually be okay. Someone really didn't like you... that should mean something. Even if it was a legit dispute between two benevolent monarchs, the one that was guillotined is special.

I already have 15 servers running. If I had mandatory server assignments, at least for the top half of the servers (so that there still are some free servers around for people who want to play solo or collab on voice or whatever), then those servers could be a kind of karmic ladder.

Going down one rung is pretty obvious: if your life on the previous rung ends in murder, down you go.

Climbing back up though? My initial thought is that you climb up if you live to old age on the previous rung. That would definitely slow griefers down. A full hour down there, at least, before they can get reborn in your village.

It also seems like it would be a harsh purgatory for the innocent victim of murder, but maybe it's okay and kinda fitting.

Another idea is that the ladder could be used for everything, not just murder. Living until old age lets you go up, dying young sends you back down. If you're on server1 and you have a baby, you know that baby is special. The advanced players are already making up their own filters to decide which babies to keep. The idea of having a "city of gold" at the top of the ladder where only the best players ascend is compelling.

However, it would also spread players out, trap new players in purgatory levels filled with griefers, etc. Maybe all new players start on server1 for their first game and fall down from there. You get a chance to play with the best and stay with the best, assuming that you can listen to advice, learn quickly, and contribute without dying.

TrustyWay · 2018-05-02 15:27:50

I'm talking if murder could put you down in the ladder : Griefers don't kill, they play backwards, I see more the griefers that will go into the good ladders instead of the average players.

When I grief I make sure to not kill anyone so It is easier. Mass murderers almost never kill everybody except if the villagers are retards. But good griefers always play better and live longer than average players. Good griefer would hide food and let people die first. I know people want a system against griefers but how do you detect somebody playing backward ? You can't...

When I kill people I'm almost always the good guy... So now we just have to let the griefersdo what they want and if we kill them we are down. This system doesn't really work.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-02 15:55:11)

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 15:32:50

jasonrohrer wrote:

Another idea is that the ladder could be used for everything, not just murder. Living until old age lets you go up, dying young sends you back down. If you're on server1 and you have a baby, you know that baby is special. The advanced players are already making up their own filters to decide which babies to keep. The idea of having a "city of gold" at the top of the ladder where only the best players ascend is compelling.
However, it would also spread players out, trap new players in purgatory levels filled with griefers, etc. Maybe all new players start on server1 for their first game and fall down from there. You get a chance to play with the best and stay with the best, assuming that you can listen to advice, learn quickly, and contribute without dying.

I really like this, not just because of griefers but also because it encourages people to play better.
Also it becomes an awsome challenge to run around at server 1 and try to kill everyone

TrustyWay wrote:

When I kill people I'm almost always the good guy... So now we just have to let the griefersdo what they want and if we kill them we are down. This system doesn't really work.

wait.. i understood this the opposite way, if you die you go down the ladder, only if you survive until old age you climb up (doesnt matter if you killed or not)

Last edited by Drakulon (2018-05-02 15:37:13)

Baker · 2018-05-02 15:36:31

What happens to abandoned babies, Do they also go down a level?

TrustyWay · 2018-05-02 15:42:59

At certain point your survival will depend of what your parents did, so if parents were shitty but they raised you anyway, you will have hard time and suffer during one hour to play with normal people in your next life

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-02 15:43:28)

sammoh · 2018-05-02 15:44:41

Karma must be given. Someone says "thanks sammoh" and I get one karma.

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 15:46:40

I would say it should only count after a certain age, maybe 1 year after you can eat.
Maybe there could be a bonus for raising childs. If your kids get to old age you get bonus points and are more likely to go up the ladder.

sammoh · 2018-05-02 15:54:10

Drakulon wrote:

I would say it should only count after a certain age, maybe 1 year after you can eat.
Maybe there could be a bonus for raising childs. If your kids get to old age you get bonus points and are more likely to go up the ladder.

This is abusable. You can "grief" by continually raising kids until a village starves, while racking up karma.

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 15:54:38

Baker wrote:

What happens to abandoned babies, Do they also go down a level?

Aha! We just discovered Limbo...

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 15:55:12

sammoh wrote:

Drakulon wrote:
I would say it should only count after a certain age, maybe 1 year after you can eat.
Maybe there could be a bonus for raising childs. If your kids get to old age you get bonus points and are more likely to go up the ladder.
This is abusable. You can "grief" by continually raising kids until a village starves, while racking up karma.

No you cant
You get the points only if your kids get to old age

EDIT: Ok maybe i wasnt clear, what i ment was you would only get bonus points if your kids die at old age.
So if you let them starve == no bonus points. If you reck your village it makes it unlikely that they will die at old age.
I edit this, because i dont want to waste more forum space about this misunderstanding

Last edited by Drakulon (2018-05-02 16:08:48)

pein · 2018-05-02 15:56:28

well you cant do much about it, there is no way, a program can tell a payers motives and intentions

i was kidnapping babies once because i left my kid near farm and they ate the carrot before her as i was busy taking care of my next son, was i right? maybe, maybe not. i didnt killed any, cause they starved, i was the reason they did, i also took all the pies, as they took all the clothes, playing favorites

all the killers should go on a "pvp" servers, they could take it as punishment or a reward, there you stay until you live a half live with no kill, 60 min would be harsh

there is also the question that did your mom pick you up?
with the current baby spawning system, you cannot seriously think that people gonna raise 15 kids every run, so you might die young, but there should be a difference, how many tiles did you move, tiles between your mom and you, lets say average 30+ tiles and distance traveled of max 50, you are abandoned kid

distance 50+, you were fed, died before age 2 you suicided, suicides can be an option
so hard to explain someone who already set up his camp on green biome, to move to a desert

if less kids would born, raising them to kid age could be a positive point, suiciding -2 , starving -1
its fair, if you died once, for any reason, you lack skill or luck
you need to raise a kid to restore balance, you could spend one hour to raise as many kdis as you can then you would be covered for that day for accidental deaths
but each kill would send you backward and make you lose all positive points
shouldnt be instant but each 3 points would send you back to lower servers

TrustyWay · 2018-05-02 16:02:20

Drakulon wrote:

sammoh wrote:
Drakulon wrote:
I would say it should only count after a certain age, maybe 1 year after you can eat.
Maybe there could be a bonus for raising childs. If your kids get to old age you get bonus points and are more likely to go up the ladder.
This is abusable. You can "grief" by continually raising kids until a village starves, while racking up karma.
No you cant
You get the points only if your kids get to old age

It is really easy do that, man

I did that for fun once and it is pretty easy, you raise them until they have hair and let them starve because only you know the place of the food, I killed like 7-8 grown kids by starvation. I have been killed at the end but still

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-02 16:03:50)

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 16:08:23

Trusted, the point is that a village needs to get good at detecting these intentionally backwards players and dealing with them. The only way to deal with them is to kill them. So killing them has to mean something.

If a village is ignoring the griefer operating right under their noses, there's nothing I can do for them. You're right that there's no way to auto-detect that.

All I can do is give them a poweful tool that they can use if they are paying attention.

Right now, the tool is just not powerful enough.

Someone has suggested a "dance on their grave" mechanic of some kind. Where a village, after killing a griefer, can curse the grave spot, which prevents the griefer from being born in that area for some period of time. The more people that participate in the curse, the stronger it becomes. Maybe it takes three people to ward the person away for 30 minutes, and each additional person who joins the dogpile will add an additional 30 minutes. A whole village could ward someone away for half a day or more.

That idea is becoming more appealing to me now, and I can't currently see any downsides to it. It will take some coding to implement, so I'm still thinking about it.

However, the karmic ladder adds an interesting metaphysical structure to the game beyond just dealing with griefers. It has a bunch of downsides, though (splitting up the player base, giving new players a worse experience, etc.)

zed · 2018-05-02 16:08:54

It's currently really quite easy to live on your own until old age: just go
out into the wilderness, stick round the edges of deserts, and forage. Once
you manage to make a basket, you're basically guaranteed to live unless you
mess up or are really unlucky. It's a grind, but not actually much of a
challenge.

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 16:13:00

jasonrohrer wrote:

Someone has suggested a "dance on their grave" mechanic of some kind. Where a village, after killing a griefer, can curse the grave spot, which prevents the griefer from being born in that area for some period of time. The more people that participate in the curse, the stronger it becomes. Maybe it takes three people to ward the person away for 30 minutes, and each additional person who joins the dogpile will add an additional 30 minutes. A whole village could ward someone away for half a day or more.
That idea is becoming more appealing to me now, and I can't currently see any downsides to it. It will take some coding to implement, so I'm still thinking about it.

No no no, you had an awsome idea there, we dont want to bring any black magic to this game.
Griefers would organize themselves and ban people from the game.

Right now the worst thing griefers can do is grief. If you add the option to ban players this would surley motivate griefers to group up, because now they can do much more damage than before.
Also who says a griefer griefs 24/7. Maybe the typical behaviour of a griefer is that he only plays the game once a day.

Last edited by Drakulon (2018-05-02 17:49:42)

Lum · 2018-05-02 16:13:18

Yes, let's separate the good from the bad and erase all randomness as to how your next life is going to go. I don't think this will upset people.

TrustyWay · 2018-05-02 16:17:51

Banning griefers from lineage is easier and smarter, sorting out players is bad. Bad players will stay bad and good players will have to always play at full potential,, which is kinda of annoying.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 16:24:29

zed wrote:

It's currently really quite easy to live on your own until old age: just go
out into the wilderness, stick round the edges of deserts, and forage. Once
you manage to make a basket, you're basically guaranteed to live unless you
mess up or are really unlucky. It's a grind, but not actually much of a
challenge.

I dont think it's necessarily meant to be a challenge. Yes it is easy to squat in a field for an hour and just stare at berry bushes. The fact of the matter is that it is a grind, an hour long one at that (unless you're an eve). So you are in a minimum hour long banishment from the server you were killed on, if we're looking at it only being used on those that have been killed. If we're looking at it from a perspective of it happening for every death, murder or not; then it will at least show that people have the ability to survive until 60, regardless of the method.

Last edited by FeignedSanity (2018-05-02 16:25:44)

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 16:26:40

Better to reward good play than punish bad play.

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 16:34:11

Karmic ladder is already "magic" in a way.

I agree that the idea of introducing black magic to the game is not appealing.

However, we have a problem here: death is not as meaningful in the game as it is in real life.

Obviously, this is a good thing most of the time, because most people want to play the game more than once, or several hours in a row. A very serious death outcome would subvert that and make the game unplayable in practice.

But in some cases, the fact that death doesn't mean much is a problem. In the case of law in the game, it's a huge problem. If death is meaningless, then law is meaningless.

I've always been tempted to make death more meaningful in general. This really isn't supposed to be a game where you come back to the same village over and over on purpose. People have figured out ways to do this, however, through custom server selection, coordinate mods, and baby suicide.

But I can't figure out how to thwart this, in general, without also spreading players out too much. For example, I could enforce server assignment and then force players to rotate servers each hour, but that would take the current 75 players on server1 and spread them out 5 players thick on all 15 servers... not good. The same is true for forcing players to spawn in different areas on the same server each hour, or whatever. Spreading players out.

Anyway, these things would of course make death more meaningful, because you'd really be saying goodbye to your village, at least for a while, when you died. And this would naturally deal with a repeat griefer in the village too. Both griefers AND good players would not be back for a while...

But spreading players out isn't going to fly.

Still, we need death to be more meaningful in the case of law enforcement. That one case we actually cannot do without.

Thus, instead of reworking death in general, I'm tempted to rework just this one case.

And a cursing mechanic, as backwards as it sounds on the surface, is the most straight-forward way to do this.

The concern with griefers ganging up to curse someone seems pretty unlikely. The assumption is that good players outnumber griefers. If not, then it is hopeless, right?

Maybe there needs to be a way to both bless and curse, so that blessing someone can undo a curse. Thus, if three griefers team up to exile you for 30 minutes, it's easy for the good villagers to counteract this with blessings.

Another idea is that maybe people can add to the curse (or blessings) in future generations to keep the person away longer. So if you tell your grandkids the story of Abe Milford, and tell them to always curse him before they go to bed to keep him away, that tradition can be passed down. Likewise, someone else could be trying to keep the "Bless Abe Milford" tradition alive.

I mean, the reality is that Abe Milford can really come back in this game. This is unlike real life. I probably need to embrace this.

In this game, you play as a soul.

kubassa · 2018-05-02 16:35:10

So forcing people to play out their lives with a newb eve or else punishment is a good idea?

The majority of the griefers I have seen are the people who have knives. Telling everyone what to do. There is usually 3-4 of them in the big cities.

Suicide babies ruin your karma or their own? Again is the game going to force people to play with newb eve's?

Easiest fix is kill 5 people you go to the killers server for an hour or two regardless of killing for fun or killing griefers. As someone else stated "dancing on the grave" is an interesting idea but can be used by griefers to keep the families out that started the village. So can the people on discord. They will be able to dictate the game the way they want. Not fair for someone new to the game allowing a bunch of no life neck beards to control the game.

jasonrohrer wrote:

However, I realized that if we compare the average griefer to the average non-griefer, assuming that non-griefers outnumber griefers, then the average griefer's life will be way more likely to end in murder than the average non-griefer. Essentially, the griefer's life will always end in murder, while the average non-griefer will be the unfortunate victim every once in a while.
So, some kind of further consequence for dying by murder might actually be okay. Someone really didn't like you... that should mean something. Even if it was a legit dispute between two benevolent monarchs, the one that was guillotined is special.

Jason I really think this would be the most fair for all parties. IMO

I would also like to see the possibility of spawning on your home marker. Especially if you didn't murder anyone and lived out you life to 60. Running from the big city to create your own settlement is part of the fun in game ATM and you should be able to get there.

Is there a reason for not allowing home spawns?

Last edited by kubassa (2018-05-02 16:40:01)

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 16:40:16

TrustyWay wrote:

Banning griefers from lineage is easier and smarter, sorting out players is bad. Bad players will stay bad and good players will have to always play at full potential,, which is kinda of annoying.

To be honest, I think everyone should be banned from lineage. I personally don't think that is how the game should be played and it would take care of most of the suicide baby problems. But that is just my opinion, and probably a very unpopular one.

With that out of the way, I will say that I see what you're saying about bad players staying bad. The easiest way to learn is to watch someone who knows and have them explain it. But you can't have the blind leading the blind. Possibly have a timer where you'll go back up a server after a few hours or a day, that way you get another chance to learn from the masters if you failed the first time (taking into account Jason's idea for new players to start on server one). The players that want to learn by grinding, will be able to do so; but the ones that stop for a bit cause they can't get it, and come back, have another chance at working with more competent people.

As far as good players always having to play at full potential and it being annoying, I find to be bull crap, personally. You don't really have to sweaty try hard all the time to be successful, (I will argue that you have to do this as an eve with no competent children). If you are in a server with almost everyone else knowing what they're doing, you shouldn't have to be breaking your back just to survive.

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 16:55:44

jasonrohrer wrote:

But in some cases, the fact that death doesn't mean much is a problem. In the case of law in the game, it's a huge problem. If death is meaningless, then law is meaningless.

My problem is not that death doesnt mean anything, my problem is that life doesnt mean anything
This idea of ranking up the ladder would give me a goal. I want to see this golden city everyone talks about at server 1.
I am not afraid to play with noobs to get there.
I see this as a challenge, a reason to play the game even tough i already played it alot.

I think its hard to imagine how it would be with a ladder like this. Could we maybe test this for 1 week or so?

Last edited by Drakulon (2018-05-02 17:00:40)

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 17:01:28

Drakulon wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
But in some cases, the fact that death doesn't mean much is a problem. In the case of law in the game, it's a huge problem. If death is meaningless, then law is meaningless.
My problem is not that death doesnt mean anything, my problem is that life doesnt mean anything
This idea of ranking up the ladder would give me a goal. I want to see this golden city everyone talks about at server 1.
I am not afraid to play with noobs to get there.
I see this as a challenge, a reason to play the game even tough i already played it alot.

I kind of second this notion, as far as having a goal. I know that the idea of a surviving settlement is in itself a goal, but that can be a bit ambiguous for some. It might also deal with some of the more experienced players that grief because they've become bored and have nothing to strive for. Maybe the more I think on it, I'm torn. Because if you've gotten to server 1 and have a thriving city, then the bored griefer is back to square one. But if you grief and get killed by the competent players that catch you, then you have something to work towards again.

I definitely think it's an interesting idea, but there is a real danger in splitting up an already small player base. Maybe only use the first 3 or 4 servers for the karma ladder?

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 17:10:13

Not sure that I've heard the notion of banning everyone from repeat lineage before....

That means that you'd pretty much only get a chance to play in a given city once, unless you migrated back to it with a different lineage later?

Yeah, that certainly aligns with the spirit of the game.

I'm trying to list all of the impacts this would have on the game, and there are tons of them, and many seem to be good:

1. Every life is truly different, meaningful, precious, fleeting, etc.

2. Being Eve means something. You are always founding a new city that has potential to grow into the next mega city.

3. Being born to an Eve means something (you are one of the new city founders).

4. Baby suicide won't get you back to the city, but will eventually just stick you as an Eve when you run out of villages to spawn into.

5. Every baby is precious, because there's a limited supply that will come through your village in the immediate future. If you let them all die, there will be no one left to be born to your village. That brand new, clueless player may be your only hope. Better train them up right.

6. Enforcement of law has enormous meaning. Easily deals with repeat, trans-life griefers in the same village.

Negatives:

1. Every city is always dying through lack of new blood. Once every active player has played in that city, the city will have no more babies. This concern might be imaginary, given the ebb and flow of the player pool, time zones, etc.

2. Seems to subvert the "two tribes" emergent competition. Villages are supposed to be competing for a greater share of incoming babies based on how good they are at producing food, warmth, etc. The youngest village automatically has an unnatural, insurmountable advantage. (Though currently, a young village has no chance if all babies are suiciding there, even if they are better at taking care of babies.)

3. The longer a player plays in a given day, the less and less interesting the game becomes. Perhaps they start in some of the biggest cities, but each life is in a less established city, until finally they are stuck being Eve over and over again.

Obviously, a lot of players like working on the same thing life after life. They want OHOL to be a different game than it's supposed to be, and they will be angry and vocal if I subvert this any further. I'm not so worried about this, because I do need to make the game I'm trying to make, and not remake minecraft creative mode with parenting or whatever.

I've always wanted dying in this game to be a HOLY FUCK emotionally-rattling moment. This life is over, I can't believe it, I'll never see any of you again, please remember me, goodbye, I love you all. I want you to physically weep every time.

I think the game is pretty close to this if you play occasionally. The first time you live to old age with your grandchildren running around you as you die.

But being born back to the same village in the very next life subverts this somewhat.

Being born back at some point in the future can amplify the meaning, though... like being born as the grandchild of your granddaughter.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2018-05-02 15:19:48

Servers as a karma ladder?

#2 2018-05-02 15:27:50

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#3 2018-05-02 15:32:50

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#4 2018-05-02 15:36:31

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#5 2018-05-02 15:42:59

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#6 2018-05-02 15:44:41

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#7 2018-05-02 15:46:40

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#8 2018-05-02 15:54:10

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#9 2018-05-02 15:54:38

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#10 2018-05-02 15:55:12

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#11 2018-05-02 15:56:28

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#12 2018-05-02 16:02:20

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#13 2018-05-02 16:08:23

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#14 2018-05-02 16:08:54

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#15 2018-05-02 16:13:00

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#16 2018-05-02 16:13:18

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#17 2018-05-02 16:17:51

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#18 2018-05-02 16:24:29

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#19 2018-05-02 16:26:40

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#20 2018-05-02 16:34:11

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#21 2018-05-02 16:35:10

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#22 2018-05-02 16:40:16

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#23 2018-05-02 16:55:44

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#24 2018-05-02 17:01:28

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#25 2018-05-02 17:10:13

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

Board footer