Civilization is over-rated

DJ · 2018-06-17 03:03:01

Doesn't it get boring starting over when the best you can accomplish in a lifetime is continually being lessened by the extra steps being introduced?
Funny thing- It takes very little effort to live a full life by simply wandering around so you never use up the resources in a specific area. You can wander about, consuming everything you come across like a plague and there are zero consequences, whereas if you painstakingly attempt to advance your town, building things for future generations, you are far more likely to starve, or be attacked. This contrast is especially useful if you're a prick that just wants to murder those you come across and were lucky enough to come into possession of a knife you didn't forge.
I'm not encouraging that behavior, but the point is that civilization is over-rated in this online world, whereas team work, contributing to society, and all the things that are essentially the object of the game are actually counter-productive in this way. That seems like a glaring flaw.

For example: In this game, a little clothing MIGHT (depending on your surroundings) make your food last a little longer, and if we're talking real life; I could totally see how wearing clothing would make your body temperature hotter then being nude in a hot desert, but it also shields you from some exposure, whereas being naked would leave you burnt and beaten. Point being: Wearing clothing shouldn't ever be a negative, especially if it takes many years of your life to accomplish it from scratch.

I know it's certainly possible to spend your life-time farming in an endless mundane repetition but other then that, your odds of living a long life are reduced with every accomplishment a player pursues.
Maybe I'm just scrutinizing too much- and certainly it makes sense that building things would be more difficult then simply scrounging off the accomplishments of others, but I've outlived entire groups with nothing more then a sharp rock and a willingness to wander, and that's counter-intuitive.
It seems like actually contributing SHOULD be advantageous.

Then again, maybe that's the point? Between the apocalypse blunder, the idea that fertile soil can only be used once in a life-time, and all the other nonsensical steps that are being added, perhaps the whole idea is to string you along with empty promises while you get screwed with.
Additionally, I've noticed many players complain about over-population, and just like real life; that's only a legitimate problem when people are using more resources then they produce. Yet if you just nomad the landscape doing exactly that, survival is much much easier.
If the point is to build the world as a collective- then this was clearly not thought through very well.

SpreadDaWord · 2018-06-17 11:36:19

I would be pissed if you meant Sid Meier's Civilization

Lum · 2018-06-17 11:57:13

Now if you just think for a second you'll realize that the point isn't to survive but to have fun.

TheRedBug · 2018-06-17 12:34:44

Dont tell me you are one of these people who doesn't like making stew?!?!

LHO · 2018-06-17 12:48:18

But what's the point of just living in the wild going from bush to bush?

In a way you fucked either way. If you live as a wild nomad you'll be forever restricted to primitive technology with most of the game locked behind building up a town. One day you'll just get killed by a snake.

In a town you have to deal with additional challenges like griefing and food shortages.Your town is stuck in an endless farming cycle, Just barely getting by each generation. The endless food production is occasionally interrupted by griefing, sweet little Rose just got old enough to use that knife. Towns are inevitably doomed to fall at some point even if it's 50 generations down the line.

Last edited by LHO (2018-06-17 13:06:13)

Alleria · 2018-06-17 12:52:16

DJ wrote:

...but the point is that civilization is over-rated in this online world, whereas team work, contributing to society, and all the things that are essentially the object of the game are actually counter-productive in this way. That seems like a glaring flaw.
...
Additionally, I've noticed many players complain about over-population, and just like real life; that's only a legitimate problem when people are using more resources then they produce.

Sure you can survive longer by yourself, but that's completely irrelevant. This game is about civilisations, and I know you can't keep a civilisation going longer by being nomadic than by settling down (I'd know, since I've been part of all the top 3 longest lasting civs).

There's a hard and soft cap to overpopulation, and yes, both are based on how hard players want to work, but you can be pretty accurate by just going off the average player contribution. This is limited primarily by the water in an area, but also in the long term by the amount of iron.

DJ · 2018-06-17 15:36:48

Lum wrote:

Now if you just think for a second you'll realize that the point isn't to survive but to have fun.

I refer you to my opening line.

DJ · 2018-06-17 15:57:35

Alleria wrote:

...and I know you can't keep a civilisation going longer by being nomadic than by settling down (I'd know, since I've been part of all the top 3 longest lasting civs).

Actually, some of the most meaningful contributions I've personally made (which on at least one occasion, probably saved the township's generation) was done by doing my work far from town and bringing back the needed supplies and crafts. Admittedly this strategy hasn't worked every time, and yes, being a lone wanderer is nearly as pointless as declaring monarchs in game, but going full-on hillbilly worked because going nomad spared the limited resources of society, while still filling the needs of the group; thus demonstrating once again that civilizations are over-rated and generally self-defeating.

Alleria · 2018-06-17 16:27:47

DJ wrote:

Alleria wrote:
...and I know you can't keep a civilisation going longer by being nomadic than by settling down (I'd know, since I've been part of all the top 3 longest lasting civs).

Actually, some of the most meaningful contributions I've personally made (which on at least one occasion, probably saved the township's generation) was done by doing my work far from town and bringing back the needed supplies and crafts. Admittedly this strategy hasn't worked every time, and yes, being a lone wanderer is nearly as pointless as declaring monarchs in game, but going full-on hillbilly worked because going nomad spared the limited resources of society, while still filling the needs of the group; thus demonstrating once again that civilizations are over-rated and generally self-defeating.

I'd call that foraging rather than being nomadic. Foraging is one of the most important roles in society, especially early on. I agree that being a nomad and everyone moving in different directions and raising children and telling them to go off is viable, but I'd much rather work towards developing a town and culture.

I should have used the word dynasty, instead of civilisation/civ in my previous post.

zennyrpg · 2018-06-17 16:40:32

Alleria wrote:

I agree that being a nomad and everyone moving in different directions and raising children and telling them to go off is viable, but I'd much rather work towards developing a town and culture.

I wish this was viable. When I am an eve looking for a good spot I tell my kids to make a basket and fend for themselves once they are old enough. I feel bad letting them die so i raise them until they can grab and try to leave them by a bush with a few berries.

But they are always like "mom i love you" "mom i can help" and "lets build here". NO! Go find a nice spot in the opposite direction of me and double our long term chances.

YAHG · 2018-06-18 01:58:55

The foragers life is soooo boring is the problem.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2018-06-17 03:03:01

Civilization is over-rated

#2 2018-06-17 11:36:19

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#3 2018-06-17 11:57:13

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#4 2018-06-17 12:34:44

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#5 2018-06-17 12:48:18

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#6 2018-06-17 12:52:16

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#7 2018-06-17 15:36:48

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#8 2018-06-17 15:57:35

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#9 2018-06-17 16:27:47

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#10 2018-06-17 16:40:32

Re: Civilization is over-rated

#11 2018-06-18 01:58:55

Re: Civilization is over-rated

Board footer