Jason's Murder Problem Thread

ZneoC · 2018-06-02 03:29:52

sc0rp wrote:

ZneoC wrote:
Curses.
I think that's a simple answer.
Been proposed many times in this thread:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=6#p15560

Thank you the link! Just started forum and appreciate the help.

However, the curse on the grave mechanic only works if you are dead. And curses should be for the living.

Regardless , a karma system is the best approach.

My approach how ever :

1. Keeps the killer alive, and a chance to "atone" for their "sin(s)".
2. Help the community spread awareness of murderers and briefers.
3. Since only 1 person 1 neg point on someone, attacking, abusing, greifing a large town has greater consequence s.

And since larger towns have more power to mess one person up, being in a large town for protection builds that town.

Dead man tell no tales.

Sry at work

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 03:50:30

ZneoC wrote:

sc0rp wrote:
Been proposed many times in this thread:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=6#p15560
Thank you the link! Just started forum and appreciate the help.
However, the curse on the grave mechanic only works if you are dead. And curses should be for the living.
Regardless , a karma system is the best approach.
My approach how ever :
1. Keeps the killer alive, and a chance to "atone" for their "sin(s)".
2. Help the community spread awareness of murderers and briefers.
3. Since only 1 person 1 neg point on someone, attacking, abusing, greifing a large town has greater consequence s.
And since larger towns have more power to mess one person up, being in a large town for protection builds that town.
Dead man tell no tales.
Sry at work

That makes sense. I've written more detailed proposal here:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16279

ZneoC · 2018-06-02 04:05:56

sc0rp wrote:

ZneoC wrote:
sc0rp wrote:
Been proposed many times in this thread:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=6#p15560
Thank you the link! Just started forum and appreciate the help.
However, the curse on the grave mechanic only works if you are dead. And curses should be for the living.
Regardless , a karma system is the best approach.
My approach how ever :
1. Keeps the killer alive, and a chance to "atone" for their "sin(s)".
2. Help the community spread awareness of murderers and briefers.
3. Since only 1 person 1 neg point on someone, attacking, abusing, greifing a large town has greater consequence s.
And since larger towns have more power to mess one person up, being in a large town for protection builds that town.
Dead man tell no tales.
Sry at work
That makes sense. I've written more detailed proposal here:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16279

I second this motion.

Now that I am off work.

Purgatory sounds great. They can run hell how they want. With other blood thirsty killers.

Last edited by ZneoC (2018-06-02 06:25:24)

aowen · 2018-06-02 10:01:16

I'm fairly new to the game and I had my first murder experience only a couple days ago. It's been on my mind ever since and it's lead to some great discussions with coworkers. Here's some ideas on how to handle griefing as a whole in OHOL.

Some constraints:
- The primary goal of the solution is to give players a way to effectively counter reincarnating griefers. The consequences of being deemed a griefer must persist across lives.
- The solution should be resistant to a griefer exploiting them to generate false positives/otherwise affect a normal player.
- Automatic solutions (stuff that depends on the server determining if a player is a griefer) are too easy to exploit/maneuver around. As a dev, they're a nuisance to maintain. As a designer, you're essentially creating "rules" that define "good" and "bad" behavior (why would murder be necessarily "bad"?).
- - Since it's not automatic, and it (probably) shouldn't be up to the designer, the players must decide what counts as griefing.

A marking system could fulfill this criteria, here are some broad strokes:

- "Dance on the grave" marking system. The punishment for being marked is that you can only spawn as an Adam. An Adam is a 14 year old male. Adams spawn in remote areas like Eves. In order to remove the punishment, and spawn like a normal player, an Adam must die of old age. In order to mark someone, a player must interact with their grave (Round Stone + Grave, maybe). There is a catch; marking someone immediately kills you and you become an Adam as well. Would lead to some memorable moments of selflessness.
- - Caveat: have to remove Adam from firstNames.txt. Eve isn't in there either, so it would follow a precedent. Instead of Adam, could call them a less popular name, like Cain (a cool fit thematically, if "Eve" has any significance)

Some other ideas, which can be mixed and matched:

- Marking by popular vote: players can mark the grave of a griefer. The more people who mark, the more harsh the punishment. To combat exploit, you can only mark a grave if you were a "witness to grief", i.e. voters had to alive during the same timeframe as the griefer's life.

- Alternative punishment: Being marked means you spawn with a physical difference on your avatar (something like red hair or a Harry Potter scar). You spawn with this difference for the next [some timeframe]. Great dilemma as a mother, "I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself" vs "abort!".

- Exponential punishment: every time you get marked, the duration/end condition to become unmarked becomes longer/more difficult. First-time offenders are still punished, but repeat offenders only dig themselves in deeper.

---
I wrote this mostly to sow some more ideas on this cool problem.

Hopefully Jason reads this and it helps brainstorm to a solution that is still within the spirit of the game.

Thanks!

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 10:30:29

aowen wrote:

The primary goal of the solution is to give players a way to effectively counter reincarnating griefers. The consequences of being deemed a griefer must persist across lives.

+1
Agree. I don't think there is any effective method that is limited to single life only.

aowen wrote:

"Dance on the grave" marking system.

I wouldn't limit it to dead players only. This would give them a chance to atone their misdeeds during current lifetime.

aowen wrote:

In order to mark someone, a player must interact with their grave (Round Stone + Grave, maybe). There is a catch; marking someone immediately kills you and you become an Adam as well. Would lead to some memorable moments of selflessness.

If single person is enough, it's too easily exploitable by the griefers themselves.

aowen wrote:

Being marked means you spawn with a physical difference on your avatar

I think that would result in 99% abortion rate. Too harsh. It's like server-wide ban.

aowen wrote:

In order to remove the punishment, and spawn like a normal player, an Adam must die of old age.

Stand by the berry bush and eat berries? That doesn't sound like punishment. It's just boring. Preventing players from playing is not my intention.

aowen wrote:

Exponential punishment

It's part of my proposal. Not exactly exponential, maybe linear is enough.

Last edited by sc0rp (2018-06-02 10:37:35)

Glassius · 2018-06-02 10:47:31

sc0rp wrote:

I think that would result in 99% abortion rate. Too harsh. It's like server-wide ban.

1. I disagree. I am sure players like @Aurora will be keeping all their babies. I also abandon kids only, when I can't support them. I would say, abortion rate to be about 80%.
2. It gives more variety and freedom to players, compared to server ban.
3. With some more spawn mechanics (Im sure current solution is temporary) you can have a village of only griefers. And it will start wars

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 11:14:26

Glassius wrote:

sc0rp wrote:
I think that would result in 99% abortion rate. Too harsh. It's like server-wide ban.
1. I disagree. I am sure players like @Aurora will be keeping all their babies. I also abandon kids only, when I can't support them. I would say, abortion rate to be about 80%.

I the case that only mother see the mark - it may 80%. But that would allow griefers to easily pair up, which is not my intention. If all players can see it, mortality rate would be much higher. With just 3 players around chance that they will keep such kid is already less that 1% (0.2^3=0.008 - assuming independent random decisions, which is not completely true, in cases like last girl in village). I personally would almost always grab such kid and feed him to the bear. Even if that's last girl. Short term pain (village lost), for long term gain (detering griefers).

Glassius wrote:

2. It gives more variety and freedom to players, compared to server ban.
3. With some more spawn mechanics (Im sure current solution is temporary) you can have a village of only griefers. And it will start wars

Good point. It doesn't need to be server ban. They can spawn on any server. It's just enough that they are only Eves, or childs of other griefers, and get only other griefers as kids. The risk is that they start preparing slaughterhouses like those https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … 876#p15845
So the spawn spots, even if on the same map, may need to be exclusive for griefers.

See also an addendum here, showing how to make parents happy that griefer is born as their kid:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16290
Make griefers great again!

Last edited by sc0rp (2018-06-02 11:35:31)

TrustyWay · 2018-06-02 11:32:28

Pronghorn wrote:

I agree with the those that think a murderer should have some sort of bad consequence for the action but also that medicine should be added to the game for the victim or villagers to administer.

We already went throught that like ten times, medicine and consequences, it is no.

The bad consquences of killing is the super long freeze, blood and the scream. Which always make you kill because the stabbed guy screams your name.

There shouldn't be consequences over than that because game cannot tell if it was a good kill or just a murder. Imagine having the crown, you always end up killing people trying to kill you for your social position.
Even if my killers failed, they should go in the bad place not me. See, ladders system doesn't work.

Game cannot detect if your behaviour was bad or good. And griefers will understand how it works to sniper more easily peaceful players.

New players will end up with bad players, I don't mean griefers, just players having troubles playing. As they are bad, system would send them in the bad place. = huge bad game experience.

And medecine, murderers would keep the medecine hidden before kill. So it will rather be a murderers item. It would even promote to murders with a buddy. Big slaugthers.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-06-02 11:37:15)

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 11:39:26

TrustyWay wrote:

Game cannot detect if your behaviour was bad or good.

Yes. Nobody is suggesting this, except you. I don't know why you are repeting this strawman argument over and over again.

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 11:42:24

TrustyWay wrote:

New players will end up with bad players, I don't mean griefers, just players having troubles playing.

New player will have curse shield (maybe not complete). It's already in my proposal. Did you read it?
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16279
With following addendum post:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16290

Last edited by sc0rp (2018-06-02 11:46:29)

TrustyWay · 2018-06-02 11:50:31

sc0rp wrote:

TrustyWay wrote:
New players will end up with bad players, I don't mean griefers, just players having troubles playing.
New player will have curse shield (maybe not complete). It's already in my proposal. Did you read it?
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16279
With following addendum post:
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewt … p=2#p16290

Get good fast or go to hell. Doesn't sound friendly.

The game isn't about forcing you to play in a specific way if it give you the abilty to do something else

It is almost a trap.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-06-02 11:50:41)

breezeknight · 2018-06-02 12:19:03

TrustyWay wrote:

...
And medecine, murderers would keep the medecine hidden before kill. So it will rather be a murderers item. It would even promote to murders with a buddy. Big slaugthers.

so because killers would have easier to kill
that's why all innocent & peaceful victims are let bleeding to death

that's the civ we all need
to protect easy killing of everybody
what a game

TrustyWay · 2018-06-02 12:24:24

breezeknight wrote:

TrustyWay wrote:
...
And medecine, murderers would keep the medecine hidden before kill. So it will rather be a murderers item. It would even promote to murders with a buddy. Big slaugthers.
so because killers would have easier to kill
that's why all innocent & peaceful victims are let bleeding to death
that's the civ we all need
to protect easy killing of everybody
what a game

Medecin can be good, that is a viable suggestion. It is more about gameplay preferences. I really like that when somebody get stab he goes crazy, It would make me sad see on most lineage trees ''GET THE MEDECINE QUICK''

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-06-02 12:24:40)

Kinrany · 2018-06-02 12:28:36

aowen wrote:

Some constraints:
- The primary goal of the solution is to give players a way to effectively counter reincarnating griefers. The consequences of being deemed a griefer must persist across lives.
- The solution should be resistant to a griefer exploiting them to generate false positives/otherwise affect a normal player.
- Automatic solutions (stuff that depends on the server determining if a player is a griefer) are too easy to exploit/maneuver around. As a dev, they're a nuisance to maintain. As a designer, you're essentially creating "rules" that define "good" and "bad" behavior (why would murder be necessarily "bad"?).
- - Since it's not automatic, and it (probably) shouldn't be up to the designer, the players must decide what counts as griefing.

Problem statements like this one are very useful.

While automatic solutions are most likely impossible, I disagree that determining what counts as griefing shouldn't be up to the designer. Griefing is a problem with the game's design, so it's the designer's job to fix it, like any other. And design by committee never works.

There are several problems here that are hard to disentangle, but it's still necessary to discuss them separately, and they need their own names, more specific than just "griefing".

Here's one: terrorism is the kind of griefing where the weaker party can cause disproportionate damage to the stronger party.

It's bad because in a highly competitive environment this would lead to everyone being stuck at level 0 forever. The real world is not a highly competitive environment, but it approximates one.

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 13:16:19

TrustyWay wrote:

Get good fast or go to hell. Doesn't sound friendly.

I wouldn't call it hell. You'll be playing for a while with players that share your playstyle. That may be even interesting and challenging. What's wrong with that?

breezeknight · 2018-06-02 13:30:47

TrustyWay wrote:

Medecin can be good, that is a viable suggestion. It is more about gameplay preferences. I really like that when somebody get stab he goes crazy, It would make me sad see on most lineage trees ''GET THE MEDECINE QUICK''

but it doesn't make you sad at all to see murder, even multiple murder in every lineage

sc0rp · 2018-06-02 13:32:48

Kinrany wrote:

While automatic solutions are most likely impossible, I disagree that determining what counts as griefing shouldn't be up to the designer. Griefing is a problem with the game's design, so it's the designer's job to fix it, like any other.

I would agree with you if we were talking about PVP FPS/TPS or RTS game. It's designer's job to balance things there. But OHOL is survival game. There are literally hundreds of ways you can fail in it. If you balance all this things in a way that cannot be exploitable by griefer, you'll get completely different game, definitely not survival one.

Kinrany wrote:

And design by committee never works.

I'm aware of this. That's why I'm asking for suggesstions and for pointing out flaws in my proposition, but then take decision to include or change anything on my own.

breezeknight · 2018-06-02 14:08:48

i think the main problem with this murder problem is
that players, Jason included, are more afraid to have options which benefit all, even the killers than they are afraid of being killed
they are even more afraid of being griefed, means to lose their in game possessions than to lose their in game life
& they are willing to sacrifice the peaceful gameplay because of that fear

in the current state of the game there are no options included to play in a peaceful way
all suggestions which point in that direction are always rebutted with the same one argument - it will benefit the killer & griefer
nobody is ever thinking about the peaceful gameplay which would be enhanced also, everybody is stuck in the killing loop & the fear to lose the easy way to kill the griefer

& that is probably a basic problem of this game, a game where you have exchangeable names, exchangeable faces, exchangeable families, exchangeable lives - did you lose that one life ?, there is always another life around the corner, so why bother ? why regret that one life lost ?

the life itself in OHOL is less worth than any work done, any possession built
& that's just not a good foundation

if life was more valuable in OHOL then maybe players would be more inclined to save it
so far to kill is more worth than to survive
the life, one life should be more precious & not a dispensable multipack good

- - -

Last edited by breezeknight (2018-06-02 14:14:31)

Baker · 2018-06-02 14:53:59

Let this thread die like an eves baby.

Kinrany · 2018-06-02 19:33:09

sc0rp wrote:

I would agree with you if we were talking about PVP FPS/TPS or RTS game. It's designer's job to balance things there. But OHOL is survival game. There are literally hundreds of ways you can fail in it. If you balance all this things in a way that cannot be exploitable by griefer, you'll get completely different game, definitely not survival one.

I see two ways to interpret this:
1. "Removing griefing from OHOL is hard, therefore it should be the community's job, not the designer's."
2. "Removing griefing from OHOL is impossible without ruining the game, therefore we shouldn't do it."

Am I reading this correctly? Which interpretation is correct (if any)?

If #1: How should the decisions be made? Why would they be better?
If #2: Why is it impossible?

sc0rp wrote:

I'm aware of this. That's why I'm asking for suggesstions and for pointing out flaws in my proposition, but then take decision to include or change anything on my own.

Uh, I was replying to aowen...

Glassius · 2018-06-02 22:33:53

breezeknight wrote:

the life itself in OHOL is less worth than any work done, any possession built
& that's just not a good foundation

When you are multiplying as bacteria, your life matters the same as bacteria's?

But you are right. We do not have to put any effort into having kids. So, why should we value them?

breezeknight · 2018-06-02 23:02:57

Glassius wrote:

breezeknight wrote:
the life itself in OHOL is less worth than any work done, any possession built
& that's just not a good foundation
When you are multiplying as bacteria, your life matters the same as bacteria's?
But you are right. We do not have to put any effort into having kids. So, why should we value them?

yes, there is lots of balancing needed & some radical general new ideas to be implemented

i would suggest to spawn new players more as childless Eves than anything else, either they learn to swim & survive alone or they will drown
cause i think only a player who values the ways of survival is of any actual help to any settlement, every other spawn is just a burden
but that's oc only my opinion

i would also limit the options to perform advanced technologies only to those players who managed already the survival as childless Eve, that limitation would be frustrating as hell, but it would enhance radically the value of life & being alive at all

kids & lineages should be spawned first to an Eve after that Eve managed to survive several times from scratch to 60, plus after she managed to go through all the tech tree available alone building in singleplayer mode an own settlement life after life spawned in the same place

kids would be in that setting true treasure, something extremely precious
kids would enable the prolongation of a lineage, to be able for a player to be not only an Eve but finally someone else
kids would be a reward for the skill learned & would be earned the hard way

i would also suggest at first to spawn male babies to Eves & first after that kid managed to survive to 60 as well, then to reward that Eve with a female kid
family & lineage would become that way a reward as well & not something to count the numbers to hit the record score

btw
bacteria as any other high populace species with a short life span doesn't value the quality of life highly, at least i suppose it doesn't
the amount of persons counts, not the quality of life, for humans it's rather the opposite, so we shouldn't try to copy bacteria or fruit flies or mold, cause those don't build human civilizations

- - -

Last edited by breezeknight (2018-06-02 23:09:20)

aowen · 2018-06-03 00:00:30

sc0rp wrote:

aowen wrote:
"Dance on the grave" marking system.
I wouldn't limit it to dead players only. This would give them a chance to atone their misdeeds during current lifetime.

Atone as in become a productive member of society again? I'm happy with that scenario, but that's probably a difference of opinion.

One problem with any "after death" solution is that the griefer gets a chance to respawn before they've been marked. I'm not sure there is any way around that. In my experience, player's don't spawn into towns often, but that's probably just the current state of the game. If, at any point, it becomes commonplace to spawn into a town, then "after death" solutions have an unfortunate loophole that I don't know how to sew shut.

sc0rp wrote:

aowen wrote:
In order to mark someone, a player must interact with their grave (Round Stone + Grave, maybe). There is a catch; marking someone immediately kills you and you become an Adam as well. Would lead to some memorable moments of selflessness.
If single person is enough, it's too easily exploitable by the griefers themselves.

This is true, but I think marking an innocent might be a little too much trouble for a griefer. A griefer' goal is to affect many player's game experience, not just one per hour.

sc0rp wrote:

aowen wrote:
In order to remove the punishment, and spawn like a normal player, an Adam must die of old age.
Stand by the berry bush and eat berries? That doesn't sound like punishment. It's just boring.

I disagree that it's not punishment. People don't like being bored. It's like a time-out that parents give to children.

sc0rp wrote:

Preventing players from playing is not my intention.

I think that this is really cool.
I've read your suggestions, but I haven't put them all together to see if there are any holes. Response incoming (probably later in the day). : )

aowen · 2018-06-03 00:40:09

Kinrany wrote:

While automatic solutions are most likely impossible, I disagree that determining what counts as griefing shouldn't be up to the designer. Griefing is a problem with the game's design, so it's the designer's job to fix it, like any other. And design by committee never works.

I agree with this. What I meant by "not up to the designer" is Jason, himself, monitoring specific players and making a judgement call on whether or not that person is a griefer.

Kinrany wrote:

There are several problems here that are hard to disentangle, but it's still necessary to discuss them separately, and they need their own names, more specific than just "griefing".
Here's one: terrorism is the kind of griefing where the weaker party can cause disproportionate damage to the stronger party.

This is a great point. It occurred to me that this thread is named "Jason's Murder Problem", but I am (and I think many people here) are talking a much larger problem space, griefing as a whole.

Joriom said that he kills most players by sabotage, not a knife. That is definitely griefing, but clearly not murder.

Terrorism, as you've defined it, is really a consequence of integral parts of the game.
1) The game is trying to kill you
2) It is possible to mismanage resources and starve the village
3) It is easy to do (2)

All you need to add is
4) There are players who are interested in doing (2) intentionally to other players

What if we added this?
5) It is possible to recover from mismanaged resources

Now we've got a new question (and one I like a lot), which is, "how do we implement (5)?"
(5) may already be possible in the game, but not if everyone in village is dead, which takes us back to murder. So, maybe murder is the appropriate topic for this thread, as opposed to griefing. Hm.

Sorry, this reply is way beyond the scope of what we've been talking about. I'm going to start thinking about murder more.

breezeknight · 2018-06-03 05:44:05

@aowen

i think your suggestions & your line of thinking are great !

maybe players & Jason will be able to think past griefing after we have dealt with that occurance & have added more options to react & do something about that
& maybe then finally we will come to the hard realisation, that direct murder is not just griefing & needs a special way to be addressed
atm, everybody's vision & judgement of the murder problem, Jason included, seems to be clouded by acts of griefing

i am not playing anymore not because i lived in towns & settlements where griefing took place but because i was successfully attacked by another player & was unable to save myself
because i have no options of prevention, no options of protection & no options of cure
because murder happens in an unrealistic way, with one click, because it never fails & because it never backfires
all my suggestions, everything i am asking for is always rebutted by the same argument & same "solution" - "it will also benefit the killer & griefer, so we don't want it included - suffer alone & play the game of revenge instead"

One Hour One Life Forums

#176 2018-06-02 03:29:52

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#177 2018-06-02 03:50:30

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#178 2018-06-02 04:05:56

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#179 2018-06-02 10:01:16

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#180 2018-06-02 10:30:29

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#181 2018-06-02 10:47:31

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#182 2018-06-02 11:14:26

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#183 2018-06-02 11:32:28

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#184 2018-06-02 11:39:26

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#185 2018-06-02 11:42:24

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#186 2018-06-02 11:50:31

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#187 2018-06-02 12:19:03

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#188 2018-06-02 12:24:24

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#189 2018-06-02 12:28:36

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#190 2018-06-02 13:16:19

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#191 2018-06-02 13:30:47

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#192 2018-06-02 13:32:48

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#193 2018-06-02 14:08:48

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#194 2018-06-02 14:53:59

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#195 2018-06-02 19:33:09

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#196 2018-06-02 22:33:53

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#197 2018-06-02 23:02:57

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#198 2018-06-03 00:00:30

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#199 2018-06-03 00:40:09

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

#200 2018-06-03 05:44:05

Re: Jason's Murder Problem Thread

Board footer