Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

Randomname · 2018-10-22 21:22:59

Tarr wrote:

Actually I just realized something really funny. There's a suicide baby in Jason's trailer for the game. At the 1:05 minute mark you see a baby run from behind a tree out into the wilderness alone.

Had to rewatch the trailer lol

JonySky · 2018-10-23 16:39:37

Randomname wrote:

Tarr wrote:
Actually I just realized something really funny. There's a suicide baby in Jason's trailer for the game. At the 1:05 minute mark you see a baby run from behind a tree out into the wilderness alone.
Had to rewatch the trailer lol

Jason is a prophet ...

Baby suicide is really a big problem for ALL the towns of OHOL, of any size (early camps or big cities)

I have started many early camps like EVE and many times I have died alone or with my first child, because all the others have committed suicide ... or worse, before committing suicide they have called a bear and they have attracted him to the camp. .

Very sad!

boggers · 2018-10-23 17:47:56

Throwing another idea out there:

If changing the longevity is out of the question, how about giving players a choice of their spawn conditions - but only if their average lifespan over their last few lives exceeds a certain threshold, maybe 40 minutes?

ksaturn · 2018-10-24 18:31:31

jasonrohrer said he he going to try something else first, but I and several others here still think changing max lifespan could be a good incentive.

It doesn't have to be extreme to have an impact. To add a cost to suicide and other early death. Something that maxes lifespan out at 60, but bottoms out at 50 could still motivate some people.

xclame · 2018-10-24 23:46:44

ShadouFireborn wrote:

IMO it should be in the front, though, and take the clothing slot. No apron while wearing a baby, but that person out hunting rabbits doesn't have to leave their backpack full of traps or food or whatever they're carrying for their job behind so they can wear a baby sling in case they have a kid

The reason I would be against a front sling is because I don't want baby feeding to be automatic, feeding babies should be an active task and not just something you start and forget about. I think having it take the backpack slot while also being a small item that can be stored in a backpack or basket is the best, that way you can carry one with you just in case. You store one in backpack while working, if you have a baby you take it out put it on fill the backpack with the supplies you been gathering while you raise your baby, in most cases your child will be willing to give you your backpack back afterwards, especially if you were using it to get supplies.

Korilian · 2018-10-25 06:56:49

xclame wrote:

2) Mother that is way out in the middle of nowhere (almost always don't even have a name yet). The perfect example is a mother that doesn't have anything but is walking through a large snow biome. Again I suicide to help them out, this way they don't have to stop and freeze and costing more food, etc.

Actually in this scenario I prefer you don’t suicide. As an Eve I always pick up the baby and run. By the time we find a decent place to settle my baby is about old enough to help me get the camp started. It’s a big help, especially if I start popping out more kids. In my experience I tend to loose a sharp stick and maybe a basket in these early stages. Thise are easily replaced.

WomanWizard · 2018-10-25 17:37:45

xclame wrote:

The reason I would be against a front sling is because I don't want baby feeding to be automatic, feeding babies should be an active task and not just something you start and forget about.

I couldn't agree more! A reminder to everyone making suggestions for holding babies: It's not supposed to be easy to care for a child. It doesn't hurt to give us a way to travel with the baby and whatever tools/supplies we're working with, but feeding the baby should still be something that you have to actively do.

ShadouFireborn · 2018-10-26 19:30:44

I'll just say this: I'd rather carry the baby myself and lose the ability to hold that basket full of rabbits, than have to switch my backpack out for a baby sling and lose the backpack and the food and snares it holds. Back carrying baby slings would not be an improvement.

I never said that the front carrying sling had to auto-feed the baby. That was never even a consideration, so don't try to put that in my post. If it was in my post, I wish you'd tell me where, rather than rip apart my contribution to the idea on the grounds of something I didn't say.

Randomname · 2018-10-26 20:12:29

I like the idea of a sling taking the BP slot, as a baby is way bigger than one item which is all that an apron holds. To have the sling on the front seems overpowered. I like the idea of choosing BP or sling. As you have already said when traveling you can carry the BB and your stuff using a BP.

My vision is when working in a town you can have the child on your back, work in a cold place but the BB stays warm (body heat) and within your sight, no panic about getting back to the warm spot in time.

I also like the idea of putting a baby in a cart, so you can run fast and carry items. I can see it taking up a basket or twos worth of space.

BladeWoods · 2018-10-26 20:51:00

Maybe young babies (<2 years) shouldn't spawn a corpse, or maybe a baby corpse that disappears over time.

Just so suicide babies don't fill towns up with corpses.

CrazyEddie · 2018-11-14 20:00:36

Looking back on this thread now from the other side of the Steam release it seems like a discussion from Bizarroland.

I came in with the Steam crowd. I occasionally see a baby run away from its mother. The first few times it happened I was utterly puzzled, but I eventually realized "Oh, okay, they don't want to play this particular scenario." I still see it happen, but it happens so rarely that I would rank this maybe #11 in the top ten problems with the game right now. The pressing issue now is not baby suicide but rather baby abandonment. I've shared my view on this in another thread.

On this thread, I'll add my voice to those imploring Jason to give up trying to force players to play a game they don't want to play. I completely understand the aesthetic he is shooting for; I love that aesthetic and admire him for creating it. But Jason, please consider this: your aesthetic is lost on those players who are so desiring of playing only Eve, or playing only in a small camp, or playing only in a big town, or playing only a boy, or whatever, that they will spend life after life killing themselves in hopes of eventually getting to play the game they want to play. You can't force them to play your game your way; more importantly though, you can't force them to appreciate the game you want to make.

But at the same time, your aesthetic will not be lost on those of us who do appreciate what you're trying to do... even if you make an optional UI that caters to those who insist on the perfect spawn. The rest of us will just ignore it and keep on clicking "Get Reborn" and take the hand that fate deals us.

And without such an optional UI, the game is worse off for ALL of us. THEY have to go through the tedium of spawning and dying just to get to play the game they want to play, and WE have to deal with babies popping in and then running off. Better for us if they never spawned near us to begin with.

"Pick your own birth location" isn't going to happen thanks to the lineage ban. People are never going to return to their old town to keep it going. You've fixed that already. What's left is "Pick your own birth circumstances" - Eve, small camp, big town. Just offering those few choices - as options for those who want them - would likely be enough to satisfy most of those who are riding the suicide express to find a satisfying spawn.

That said, I feel like this is a small problem. It apparently was a big problem before Steam, but Steam releases have a way of changing your entire world.

mikekchar · 2018-11-14 23:03:16

I really like boggers suggestion. It doesn't really matter if you distinguish between suiciding and abandoned babies, because the -1 or -2 minutes is inconsequential until it adds up. You aren't going to be abandoned 10 times in a row (unless you are only playing as twins ;-) ). You can easily balance it by surviving longer the next life. It only means that if you want to sustain your longevity you have to survive to 40 or more every second life on average. If you are suiciding 3 or 4 times for every long life, you will whittle away your potential pretty quickly.

Getting a +2 for dying of old age is a good idea too because if you are a noob and you are constantly dying before 20, maybe your longevity gets down to 40 minutes. When you live that long, then you get a +2. As you get better at the game, you can live longer.

The numbers might need some thought, but overall I think the idea is really good.

One Hour One Life Forums

#76 2018-10-22 21:22:59

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#77 2018-10-23 16:39:37

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#78 2018-10-23 17:47:56

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#79 2018-10-24 18:31:31

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#80 2018-10-24 23:46:44

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#81 2018-10-25 06:56:49

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#82 2018-10-25 17:37:45

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#83 2018-10-26 19:30:44

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#84 2018-10-26 20:12:29

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#85 2018-10-26 20:51:00

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#86 2018-11-14 20:00:36

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

#87 2018-11-14 23:03:16

Re: Suicide is OP - Should it be nerfed?

Board footer