Servers as a karma ladder?

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-03 16:26:14

What do you mean, Kinrany?

Oh... that you can only respawn in a place if one of the available mothers is your grandchild or great grandchild, etc? And that you cannot spawn if the available mothers are your cousins only?

I.e., you have to have some babies survive in order to come back?

So for the griefer.... they'd be trying to have babies along with griefing.... and people would have to keep track of who's baby was whos to nip the griefer's family line in the bud....

Okay, this is an interesting idea....

But men can never return to the same village....

Unless men are the exceptions to this rule, and then people are trying to kill the male griefer's nieces....

Drakulon · 2018-05-03 16:26:47

If this lineage ban idea doesnt work, maybe it could be mixed with the curse on your grave idea.
So you can ban people from your village if you dance on their grave, but they wouldnt recieve a ban from the game itself only from the village

Baker · 2018-05-03 16:28:06

jasonrohrer wrote:

Also, for those who say that griefing is not a problem anymore, or is not a serious or overwhelming problem, or that only a few vocal players are worried about it, or that it can be dealt with through a culture of shaming griefers, or whatever.....
....one of my friends said, "Can't you just ask them to stop?"

If the game allows this, it's part of the game, and people are going to do it. It IS part of the game, but having ways to deal with it is also supposed to be part of the game. Every civilization needs to figure out how to deal with this, both inside and outside the game.
Currently, in the game as it stands, I know that I could destroy every village, and I know there would be no way for them to stop me in the long run, even if they were paying attention and killing me whenever they caught me. I'd just keep coming back.

This is a problem. It doesn't matter what happens in practice, or what people will actually do. It matters that it is possible.

If it's not a huge problem now, there is potential for it to be a huge problem in the future. I'm not going to wait until it's a huge problem before I fix it.

You sound like Joriom.

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-03 16:29:53

Joriom 17 The Jason

Drakulon · 2018-05-03 16:32:45

jasonrohrer wrote:

But men can never return to the same village.....

Drakulon wrote:

And males would need to be able to have kids. (which they should anyways in my opinion)
Implementing a very simple sex mechanism would solve many problems and would create a good foundation for future game mechanics.
Males become useful and you finally have birth control. (we would also need Adams spawn next to Eves in order for this to work

a good foundation for future game mechanics.

Kinrany · 2018-05-03 16:41:12

More specifically:

You can be born in any of the bloodlines aka descendant trees that started with an Eve or you.
If you're born as a woman, the rest of the bloodline you've been born into is now inaccessible. Can't spawn as your own cousin.
(Since men are currently defective, cutting the unlucky players out of their available trees would be unfair.)

This way each village has three sources: immigrants, players that haven't spawned in that village before, and players that have successfully raised children.

On another note, I think it's inelegant for server selection to depend on game rules. Eves could just spawn 100000 tiles away, to have several completely disconnected places on the same server.

Kinrany · 2018-05-03 16:47:32

jasonrohrer wrote:

What do you mean, Kinrany?
Oh... that you can only respawn in a place if one of the available mothers is your grandchild or great grandchild, etc? And that you cannot spawn if the available mothers are your cousins only?
I.e., you have to have some babies survive in order to come back?
So for the griefer.... they'd be trying to have babies along with griefing.... and people would have to keep track of who's baby was whos to nip the griefer's family line in the bud....
Okay, this is an interesting idea....
But men can never return to the same village....
Unless men are the exceptions to this rule, and then people are trying to kill the male griefer's nieces....

Yes!

I suggested disconnecting the babies from their bloodline trees on birth, but a more elegant solution would be to use relation degree as a weight. Say, 1/tree distance.

So you can potentially spawn as anyone's child, but are really likely to spawn as someone close to your previous character. This way you don't even need a special case for males.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-03 18:56:05

jasonrohrer wrote:

I think I'm going to use the "boiling a frog" approach here, and start by testing out a small lineage cool-down. Even a few hours would work wonders to stop repeat griefing of the same village and make baby suicide spam less effective.

Might I make a small suggestion to maybe have it based on a generation limit rather than an actual time limit? I think it's more interesting if you don't know exactly how long the limit is.

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-03 19:37:32

Good point.

TrustyWay · 2018-05-03 19:57:33

I mean, the time joriom start griefing everyone, I complained and was a cry baby , like you girls, and jason told me : "it is part of the game".

I learned how to man up and I have no more problem with griefers right now. This is only a problem if you are bad. But don't ask for karma or ladder because you will stay with the griefers more than people who knows how to defend. People that defend will go up in the ladder or down because they kill but they wont be with you.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-03 20:01:03)

Joriom · 2018-05-03 20:35:42

Jason 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.

+

Jason wrote:

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.

It like the idea as it aligns nicely with my previous thoughts on the topic. Let me quote my post from few weeks ago

Joriom wrote:

The karma system would be actually a good idea but would need a hard work and a lot of cosideration. It should be both positive and negative. Like "player rating" that can be seen next to name without perfect precision and is only graphically shown on player model if its to low. Some in-game "mini-achievements" like crafting clothes, tools, and other stuff that helps others - could bring it up. Others players (possibly only family members? close relatives? town "wars" concern) should be able to bring it down though. I like the idea of "marking" players (reducing their karma A LOT) with combined effort of entire village. Lets say first one or two marks hardly change your carma but the growth is exponential during lifetime - the more people who "mark" you before you die - the faster your karma drops.
It would also solve problems of "accepting people" to communities. Why was 111 gen possible? Because we discarded people who we were not sure we can trust. Because we had Voice Chat and vouched for each other. Karma would be a little bit like that. That counters the whole "grieffer being reborn over and over again" a lot while still having the uncertainty for most "casual" players with karma in the "middle". I could not continure the "Rose Town" legend anymore with this in place. I would have to wait some time untill karma "decays" back to neutral over time or I would be forced to play alone or with other outcasts to build a "savage community" and progess it crafting usefull stuff untill we get clear. Thats also another point - karma decay over time. It should try to get back to the rest position ("neutral") over extended peroids of time (hours? days?). Decay from negative should be slower than from positive.
With karma system we would still have some "bored" people who made some good deeds and now proceed to "reset" their karma to resting point by griefing but it would reduce their possibility of respawning to finish the job.

I think this explains my point of view enough. Combinint that with "grave dancing" seems legit. Also - talking about eponential growth I thought of something like (x^2)/2 where x is ammount of people "grave dancing".

Drakulon wrote:

Griefers would organize themselves and ban people from the game.

Its way easier to organize village of random people than group of 3 griefers in single town. Also - griefers mostly work solo.

Jason wrote:

If a village has 20 people in it which need to be replaced every hour, then it needs at least 20 fresh players born to it every hour to keep going. If there are 900 players to go through, the village can survive 45 hours before running out of people. Given that this is close to the all time record for a family line to survive, this seems pretty good. Add to that the churn of 300+ new players each day, and at the end of 45 hours, they should be have about 600 new people available, letting them go another 30 hours, at which point there will be 300 new people available, taking them another 15 hours, for a grand total of 90 hours. These are all back-of-the-napkin calculations.

I don't think your calculations took into account new players, and even casual ones, dying 20 times in 10 minutes or never living past 25yo. They'll end up in repeated cycle or spawning as Eves or Eve kids - showing new players false idea of there being no progress in game whatsoever.

kubassa wrote:

When there is only two people in 'high numbered' servers, say me and my daughter, you are right we can play together but when we can't have any children because it's just the two of us the 'high numbered' server just is not a fun option. Same goes with the 'custom' servers.
It is your game and if you want to alienate people from your servers you can.

Thats a very good point and I believe any system of "respawn prevention" should only kick in if there are at least X players online on a server. Like 10 for example?

TrustyWay wrote:

I mean, the time joriom start griefing everyone, I complained and was a cry baby , like you girls, and jason told me : "it is part of the game".
I learned how to man up and I have no more problem with griefers right now. This is only a problem if you are bad. But don't ask for karma or ladder because you will stay with the griefers more than people who knows how to defend. People that defend will go up in the ladder or down because they kill but they wont be with you.

See? It wasn't so bad and it served a point. Look where we are now thanks to that, with Jason saying almost wort to word what I was posting after the "big grieffing". Also - people started taking it more serious and organizing to prevent grieding as much as they could. Some even grew balls like you did!

Final notes

I like both "grave dance" and lineage bans. Although - I believe lineage ban should be only temporar, not permanent.
Rebirth into your own descendants makes a good work of that too. It would for sure push people into trying to raise as many of their own kids as possible. This might have negative side offect of neglecting other kids even if they're still part of the family.
I'm against temporar bans and karma ladder using servers for that. That would be hell.

P.S. Please remember:
Limiting lineages to much (like with perm ban to respawn into) will give to much power into hands of experienced players as they'll be able to spoof coordinates to "repopulate" dying lineages with fresh blood to keep place running without bell tower and stuff. Temp blocking does not incentivize such behaviours as much.

Angel Carrillo · 2018-05-03 20:36:21

Don't you "play" as a soul in real life too though?
Oh yeah, also, I did grow balls when greifers in servers in even other games became common. That was back before I hit double digits though.

Last edited by Angel Carrillo (2018-05-03 20:38:16)

TrustyWay · 2018-05-03 21:11:22

Grave dance or ban from lineage are the good suggestions. Others scale players on an immaginary scale where good or bad players are designated by things at don't even represent your work, or reality that

We cant detect players playing backwards or forwards too fast AKA griefers.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-03 21:36:43)

Kinrany · 2018-05-03 22:59:53

Joriom wrote:

This might have negative side offect of neglecting other kids even if they're still part of the family.

I think that's a positive side effect!

I don't like grave dancing because it seems inelegant. It doesn't scale, it's effectiveness depends on the absolute number of players on each side, not relative.

I think there must be other solutions that help the side that eventually wins.

That said, I welcome mechanics that encourage proper burials.

Bornhald · 2018-05-04 00:56:55

I've been think about griefers and have an idea but I am not sure how feasible it is implenting it.
What who ever started a town or where the most senior elders of that town ever given the ability
for others in the town to do certain actions. They could decide if someone was allow to harvest
resources in town, deconstruct structures, build new ones, or even interact with items on the
ground. This could be based on everything within so many tiles of a home marker or something
similar as to how wide its effect would be. If a child started eating all the carrots for example and
you had been in the town caring for it a long time you could uncheck their ability to pick or eat carrots
in town. This would limit, but not eliminate their damage as not everything can be monitored 24/7.
If they wanted they could still leave town and try to live in the wilderness or start their own town.
Those who have the most time vested in a town are least likely to destroy it. When the eldest generation
or group passed away the next oldest would inherit this ability. If you wanted your town restricted you
could do so, and if not you could just ignore this feature. Also for the affected area you could uncheck
murder as an option, unless you wanted that.

Kinrany · 2018-05-04 01:05:27

I wonder if OHOL would be easier to design if there was only one town per shard, like in Die2Nite.

YAHG · 2018-05-04 02:11:00

Bornhald wrote:

I've been think about griefers and have an idea but I am not sure how feasible it is implenting it.
What who ever started a town or where the most senior elders of that town ever given the ability
for others in the town to do certain actions. They could decide if someone was allow to harvest
resources in town, deconstruct structures, build new ones, or even interact with items on the
ground. This could be based on everything within so many tiles of a home marker or something
similar as to how wide its effect would be. If a child started eating all the carrots for example and
you had been in the town caring for it a long time you could uncheck their ability to pick or eat carrots
in town. This would limit, but not eliminate their damage as not everything can be monitored 24/7.
If they wanted they could still leave town and try to live in the wilderness or start their own town.
Those who have the most time vested in a town are least likely to destroy it. When the eldest generation
or group passed away the next oldest would inherit this ability. If you wanted your town restricted you
could do so, and if not you could just ignore this feature. Also for the affected area you could uncheck
murder as an option, unless you wanted that.

Maybe after you had nanotech implants inside your citizens.. Then we could have 1984 mode like you are suggesting.

Alleria · 2018-05-04 02:11:29

Kinrany wrote:

More specifically:
You can be born in any of the bloodlines aka descendant trees that started with an Eve or you.
If you're born as a woman, the rest of the bloodline you've been born into is now inaccessible. Can't spawn as your own cousin.
(Since men are currently defective, cutting the unlucky players out of their available trees would be unfair.)
This way each village has three sources: immigrants, players that haven't spawned in that village before, and players that have successfully raised children.

It sounds like a great idea and would really suit my playstyle, however it has serious unintended consequences. It would mean selfish parents who want to respawn again will not abort any of their girls (or use contraception if added). This means the responsible players will either be forced to kill their cousins, migrate (potentially taking away babies from main town), or to ignore their common sense and contribute to overpopulation - causing the death of their civ. None of those actions are good for the civilisation.

Last edited by Alleria (2018-05-04 02:55:23)

Kinrany · 2018-05-04 14:09:56

Alleria wrote:

It would mean selfish parents who want to respawn again will not abort any of their girls (or use contraception if added).

Another positive side effect :D

Coordination problems are way more interesting than mud farming.

Last edited by Kinrany (2018-05-04 14:10:05)

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-04 15:29:58

Hey, I just had a thought. I don't know if it's already been said because I'm kind of bored with this thread, but what if the supposed lineage cooldowns were different if you got murdered. Let's say you die and get the normal one, but if you actually get murdered, it's doubled or maybe permanent. I think it's an interesting mechanic to get rid of griefers being born into your settlement at all (or at least for longer) and makes murder have a little bit more weight. The problem is, some people are already under the impression that being murdered is the worst thing that can happen to you in the game and this would just exacerbate that.

Alleria · 2018-05-05 02:36:09

Kinrany wrote:

Alleria wrote:
It would mean selfish parents who want to respawn again will not abort any of their girls (or use contraception if added).
Another positive side effect
Coordination problems are way more interesting than mud farming.

You just to watch the world burn, methinks!

Jiub · 2018-05-09 10:36:11

Hey, isn't it possible to detect if someone was a murderer in life, instead of if they were murdered?

Anshin · 2018-05-09 12:34:39

Jiub wrote:

Hey, isn't it possible to detect if someone was a murderer in life, instead of if they were murdered?

The problem is how does the server know if the person "had it coming" or not? If the person murdered was griefing the town by disrupting crops and hiding valuables then perhaps the murder was warranted. Or how does a town defend itself if they too are then forced to murder the murderer? Dancing on graves doesn't help - if the griefer is successful in killing everyone in town he can dance on everyone's graves. This game has a lot of graves, and people love dancing...

InSpace · 2018-05-09 18:03:52

One thing that helps make the babies feel more valuable and desirable is to make having them more fun.

Like add a backpack thing for mothers to hold babies with so you can keep playing with them, like a baby carrier for mid tec. And some silly stuff for babies to do while standing around a fire like a minigame with small items as kids do irl that can be fun to watch.

Like when a mom gets a kid, I would much rather like a postivie "Yes, nice!" feeling instead of "Damn, now I have to deal with this..".

Make some item that supports moving to a new area, like a starter kit cart you can make. Like a really big cart that you can close and then open up and it breaks so it only has one use to bring things to start anew with. The wreck might become like something you can build different small decorative monuments used as the center of the new town, to give it like part of a story. Like here is the bear village, with a wooden statue of a bear made from the starter kit, or a statue that looks like the player who opened it: looking like they did at the time opening it with clothes n all.

These things might be offtopic for this discussion, Idno.

I look forward to seeing what u come up with jason

Last edited by InSpace (2018-05-09 18:08:10)

breezeknight · 2018-05-28 08:32:50

so when is this comming ? cause meantime the remaning handful of players move to violent roleplaying while the others, like me, just stay away

i am not willing anymore to let slaughter me as a "game"

- - -

Last edited by breezeknight (2018-05-28 08:33:11)

One Hour One Life Forums

#101 2018-05-03 16:26:14

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#102 2018-05-03 16:26:47

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#103 2018-05-03 16:28:06

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#104 2018-05-03 16:29:53

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#105 2018-05-03 16:32:45

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#106 2018-05-03 16:41:12

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#107 2018-05-03 16:47:32

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#108 2018-05-03 18:56:05

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#109 2018-05-03 19:37:32

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#110 2018-05-03 19:57:33

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#111 2018-05-03 20:35:42

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#112 2018-05-03 20:36:21

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#113 2018-05-03 21:11:22

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#114 2018-05-03 22:59:53

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#115 2018-05-04 00:56:55

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#116 2018-05-04 01:05:27

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#117 2018-05-04 02:11:00

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#118 2018-05-04 02:11:29

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#119 2018-05-04 14:09:56

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#120 2018-05-04 15:29:58

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#121 2018-05-05 02:36:09

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#122 2018-05-09 10:36:11

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#123 2018-05-09 12:34:39

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#124 2018-05-09 18:03:52

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#125 2018-05-28 08:32:50

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

Board footer