When was the Last Time...

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 19:49:30

When was the last time you expected women trying to get pregnant to sign up voluntarily for *active combat duty* in the army?

When was the last time you expected women actually pregnant in the present to sign up for active combat duty in the army?

When was the last time you expected women breastfeeding children to sign up for active combat duty in the army?

If you've never expected that of any woman and those questions sound extremely preposterous, how could war be compatible with a game that is supposed to be about parenting, including pmotherhood or preparing for motherhood?

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-06-01 19:54:52)

DestinyCall · 2019-06-01 20:05:48

One word ... Amazons.

But speaking seriously, we shouldn't be sending our fertile women into battle. We should be sending our children, obviously! Blood for the blood gods. May their sacrifice bring us richer harvests. We just need Jason to lower the age restriction on swords so we can properly arm them for battle. They can be cheap disposable fodder to strike at the heart of our enemies (or their knees, because toddlers are really short).

I can see no way this could go wrong. (◕‿◕)

Last edited by DestinyCall (2019-06-01 20:14:18)

Dodge · 2019-06-01 20:08:26

Sexist.

Keyin · 2019-06-01 20:18:17

Spoonwood wrote:

When was the last time you expected women trying to get pregnant to sign up voluntarily for *active combat duty* in the army?
When was the last time you expected women actually pregnant in the present to sign up for active combat duty in the army?
When was the last time you expected women breastfeeding children to sign up for active combat duty in the army?
If you've never expected that of any woman and those questions sound extremely preposterous, how could war be compatible with a game that is supposed to be about parenting, including pmotherhood or preparing for motherhood?

These are loaded questions. Females in this game will have children whether or not they want to. These questions rely on the assumption that every woman is trying to have kids. There exists no form of birth control in the game.

Also, asking breastfeeding children in the game to join an army is a lot different because unlike real-life infants, there is a teen/adult behind the screen capable of understanding what you mean.

While parent is one of the things the game is sold on, civilization building is another. And just like breastfeeding is a part of parenting, war is a part of civilization building.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 20:27:37

Keyin wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
When was the last time you expected women trying to get pregnant to sign up voluntarily for *active combat duty* in the army?
When was the last time you expected women actually pregnant in the present to sign up for active combat duty in the army?
When was the last time you expected women breastfeeding children to sign up for active combat duty in the army?
If you've never expected that of any woman and those questions sound extremely preposterous, how could war be compatible with a game that is supposed to be about parenting, including pmotherhood or preparing for motherhood?
These are loaded questions. Females in this game will have children whether or not they want to. These questions rely on the assumption that every woman is trying to have kids. There exists no form of birth control in the game.
Also, asking breastfeeding children in the game to join an army is a lot different because unlike real-life infants, there is a teen/adult behind the screen capable of understanding what you mean.
While parent is one of the things the game is sold on, civilization building is another. And just like breastfeeding is a part of parenting, war is a part of civilization building.

No, war isn't about building civilizations. It's about destroying or hampering other civilizations.

I also asked about *women* breastfeeding children, nothing about infants getting breastfed.

And finally, NO, not all of the questions assume that every woman is trying to have children. The 2nd and 3rd questions I have intentded to ask about *any* woman pregnant or breastfeeding.

And you didn't answer any of the questions.

Jason has said he wants 'real play' not 'role play'. But how can one 'real play' something if it simply seems inconceivable in reality?

Guppy · 2019-06-01 20:34:51

IRL, the best technique to win a war isnt to kill all fertile woman. It makes sense that they fight, too, in OHOL. And i have no idea how you could patch this

Keyin · 2019-06-01 20:54:38

Spoonwood wrote:

No, war isn't about building civilizations. It's about destroying or hampering other civilizations.
I also asked about *women* breastfeeding children, nothing about infants getting breastfed.
And finally, NO, not all of the questions assume that every woman is trying to have children. The 2nd and 3rd questions I have intentded to ask about *any* woman pregnant or breastfeeding.
And you didn't answer any of the questions.
Jason has said he wants 'real play' not 'role play'. But how can one 'real play' something if it simply seems inconceivable in reality?

I argue that war does build civilization, and I challenge you to present an example of a civilization that was not built on war and not isolated.

Now that I re-read your post, I see where I made my mistake 'women breast feeding children' I thought you were talking about the children as the subject. my mistake.

At the moment pregnancy does not exist in the game, you can consider any fertile female as 'possibly' pregnant.

I will answer 1 and 3,since pregnancy does not exist in game. Men who have been trying to have a child have been drafted into a war so it is only fair the same happens with female(#1). As for 3, unlike in real life where there is a small period where a woman can typically breastfeed for only a short period of time(rare case some can breast feed for years after). Any women can easily breastfeed a large number of children. As long as you leave one woman to breastfeed, the rest can join your army.

Also, unlike real life there exists no difference in how fit a man/woman are for war. They can lift the same amount, run just as long and as fast, etc.

futurebird · 2019-06-01 21:00:28

We don't have war in this game because we don't have nations. What we have is mass killings.

DestinyCall · 2019-06-01 21:27:59

futurebird wrote:

We don't have war in this game because we don't have nations. What we have is mass killings.

I prefer to call them "genocides" or "slaughters", but you are right. It is a misnomer to call it a war when one or two peope with a sword or knife kill a bunch of unarmed carrot farmers. Or when a single villager decides to kill an Eve or her children "just in case."

The closest thing we have to war right now is when one village discovers another village within horse-riding distance and they decide to organize a raiding party to wipe out their neighbors.

Last edited by DestinyCall (2019-06-01 21:41:06)

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 21:29:40

Keyin wrote:

I argue that war does build civilization, and I challenge you to present an example of a civilization that was not built on war and not isolated.

Winning a war is not the same as *building* upon a war. I think Sweden will work fine as an example.

Keyin wrote:

I will answer 1 and 3,since pregnancy does not exist in game. Men who have been trying to have a child have been drafted into a war so it is only fair the same happens with female(#1). As for 3, unlike in real life where there is a small period where a woman can typically breastfeed for only a short period of time(rare case some can breast feed for years after). Any women can easily breastfeed a large number of children. As long as you leave one woman to breastfeed, the rest can join your army.

Sure doesn't sound very realistic. Additionally, children can get fed for at least 4 years, I think, with picking them and putting them back down. It's NOT a short period for a woman feeding children most of her fertile years, since there exist 26 in game fertile years.

Keyin · 2019-06-01 21:31:47

futurebird wrote:

We don't have war in this game because we don't have nations. What we have is mass killings.

well... we don't really have the tools for that to happen. much more organization than what is currently feasible would need to be put into place.

In the same way, we don't REALLY have civilization, because "social and cultural development and organization" doesn't really happen, especially the cultural and organization aspects.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 21:32:59

I agree with Destiny and future. But, even then I could rephrase these questions something like the following:

"When was the last time you expected women trying to get pregnant to sign up voluntarily for *active combat duty* in the gang/Mafia?

When was the last time you expected women actually pregnant in the present to sign up for active combat duty in the Mafia?

When was the last time you expected women breastfeeding children to sign up for active combat duty in the Mafia?"

I mean if the Mafia can't even realistically expect that of women under conditions of pregnancy or seeking pregnancy or breastfeeding, how can even gang violence come as compatible with a game supposed to be about parenting?

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-06-01 21:34:52)

Keyin · 2019-06-01 21:45:30

Spoonwood wrote:

Winning a war is not the same as *building* upon a war. I think Sweden will work fine as an example.

Heres a list of every war Sweden has been involved in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_w … ing_Sweden
there are eledgidly more before the 1000's during the viking age, but there are no verified written records. I'd say those crusades into Finland built onto their culture.

Spoonwood wrote:

Sure doesn't sound very realistic. Additionally, children can get fed for at least 4 years, I think, with picking them and putting them back down. It's NOT a short period for a woman feeding children most of her fertile years, since there exist 26 in game fertile years.

I was talking about it being a much shorter period in real life. Yes, women can breastfeed 1-4yr old from the age of 14-40.

Which is exactly why you can delegate the task to one female(preferably the youngest) and get the rest to join you in battle. Just leave one female with all the babies by a fire with adequate number of pies and firewood.

Keyin · 2019-06-01 21:51:38

Spoonwood wrote:

I mean if the Mafia can't even realistically expect that of women under conditions of pregnancy or seeking pregnancy or breastfeeding, how can even gang violence come as compatible with a game supposed to be about parenting?

I am still struggling to understand your point. There is no pregnancy in the game. Seeking pregnancy/children is a desire that can be postponed until after the gang accomplishes their mission. Breastfeeding is a chore that can be delegated to any fertile female.

Games can have both gang violence and parenting. Many people's lives involve both. Why can't this game have both?

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 22:08:51

Keyin wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
Winning a war is not the same as *building* upon a war. I think Sweden will work fine as an example.

Heres a list of every war Sweden has been involved in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_w … ing_Sweden
there are eledgidly more before the 1000's during the viking age, but there are no verified written records. I'd say those crusades into Finland built onto their culture.
Spoonwood wrote:
Sure doesn't sound very realistic. Additionally, children can get fed for at least 4 years, I think, with picking them and putting them back down. It's NOT a short period for a woman feeding children most of her fertile years, since there exist 26 in game fertile years.
I was talking about it being a much shorter period in real life. Yes, women can breastfeed 1-4yr old from the age of 14-40.
Which is exactly why you can delegate the task to one female(preferably the youngest) and get the rest to join you in battle. Just leave one female with all the babies by a fire with adequate number of pies and firewood.

You're not proposing something realistic. How can the women keep on fighting when babies pop out at any time during the battle? The nurse system you propose only would work if the children all got born at the main fire where the nurse is. Walk back to your camp when a child gets birthed? I don't see that as feasible, it will just take too long.

Sure gang violence and parenting can exist for the same family. But, pregnant women (one could imagine that all fertile women are pregnant in the game at all times, just a lot miscarriages happen) doing the fighting in gangs? Evolution rules that out in general, or at least makes such highly unlikely. The majority of soldiers in a gang doing the fighting as pregnant or quickly pregnant women? Nope. Things don't work that way. Expecting pregnant or quickly pregnant women to fight whether in an army (not serve in the army ... I mean literally *fight*) or in a gang in substantial numbers just isn't realistic.

Destiny made a joke about the mythological Amazons, but I read on Wikipedia that the myths seem to have something like no interaction with men, implying no fertility for the Amazons.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-06-01 22:15:10)

Keyin · 2019-06-01 22:35:23

Spoonwood wrote:

You're not proposing something realistic.

I think this would work out well, you have a lot more soldiers if you use both sexes. Especially since women are usually the majority by far.

Spoonwood wrote:

How can the women keep on fighting when babies pop out at any time during the battle?

Easy, just let the baby starve. After the baby dies your fertility comes back anyway(you become 9months pregnant after your baby dies)

Spoonwood wrote:

The nurse system you propose only would work if the children all got born at the main fire where the nurse is. Walk back to your camp when a child gets birthed? I don't see that as feasible, it will just take too long.

I agree, those babies are out of luck. No big deal, I get born to mothers speeding away on their horse carts all the time. Just keep fighting and ignore any babies that pop out.

Spoonwood wrote:

But, pregnant women (one could imagine that all fertile women are pregnant in the game at all times, just a lot miscarriages happen) doing the fighting in gangs? Evolution rules that out in general, or at least makes such highly unlikely.

I agree, right now there is no physical impediment to being pregnant/always being kind of pregnant. I would be all for implementation of a pregnancy mechanic that gives men more of an advantage.

Spoonwood wrote:

The majority of soldiers in a gang doing the fighting as pregnant or quickly pregnant women? Nope. Things don't work that way. Expecting pregnant or quickly pregnant women to fight whether in an army (not serve in the army ... I mean literally *fight*) or in a gang in substantial numbers just isn't realistic.

Again, agree. Right now we have this Schrodinger cat of pregnancies where the woman is simultaneously always pregnant/never pregnant. Again right now a pregnant woman is as equally capable as a man in fighting. So one extra pregnant woman to help your fight is the same as another man.

Spoonwood wrote:

Destiny made a joke about the mythological Amazons, but I read on Wikipedia that the myths seem to have something like no interaction with men, implying no fertility for the Amazons.

Yeah, from what I remember Amazons just recruit women to their group

Last edited by Keyin (2019-06-01 22:36:17)

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 22:52:38

Keyin wrote:

Easy, just let the baby starve. After the baby dies your fertility comes back anyway(you become 9months pregnant after your baby dies)

Letting the baby starve isn't parenting. So, if one is consistent one will say the game shouldn't be about parenting, or the parenting aspect has serious and new limitations since swords came to exist.

jasonrohrer wrote:

a multiplayer survival game of parenting
and civilization building

http://onehouronelife.com/

Keyin wrote:

I agree, those babies are out of luck. No big deal, I get born to mothers speeding away on their horse carts all the time. Just keep fighting and ignore any babies that pop out.

The mothers on horsecart potentially care about their families, since the family will need resources. There is no need for offensive wars or fighting in the wild like that. So, that's NOT women playing for their lineages, unlike women on a horsecart would could potentially be doing so.

Thanks for stating where you agree Keyin. I sometimes don't do that so well myself.

wio · 2019-06-01 22:54:42

Sex in OHOL is very poorly modeled by the game mechanics. Women reproduce assexually and males don't reproduce at all. In reality it is more likely that the males are killed and the females are assimilated, but in OHOL it makes more sense just to kill the other family since there is no assimilation. OHOL still has reasons not to send women into war, but those reasons aren't very compelling. Men don't even have a strength advantage over women.

Keyin · 2019-06-01 23:22:06

Spoonwood wrote:

Letting the baby starve isn't parenting. So, if one is consistent one will say the game shouldn't be about parenting, or the parenting aspect has serious and new limitations since swords came to exist.

I agree, letting the baby starve isn't parenting. I will also agree that the sword has made parenting more difficult, because that new play style often does interfere with child rearing.

Spoonwood wrote:

The mothers on horsecart potentially care about their families, since the family will need resources. There is no need for offensive wars or fighting in the wild like that.

Yes, offensive wars are usually not necessary. Defending yourself is usually good enough.

Spoonwood wrote:

So, that's NOT women playing for their lineages, unlike women on a horsecart would could potentially be doing so.

Yes, those women on horsecart are probably gathering iron or some other resource for their family most of the time. However, I will argue that killing others could be considered playing for their lineage, because it decreases the other family's share of the players and has a reasonable chance of increasing yours. (they get reborn into your family)

Staying at home yumming is probably a better way to increase your family's share of they players, but war helps too(especially if you catch them off guard)

But yeah I do see your point, war in this game is usually not good because it is started by 'Roleplayers'/Trolls, and it is usually easy to instead just run up to carts/horses and steal them before anyone notices.

Women also should not realistically be a significant chunk of your army/gang like they currently are, but right now mechanically a pregnant woman is just as capable a warrior as any other adult.

Sure there will be children, but you only need one girl to carry on your lineage, and if you are able to wipe out an entire family, your share of the players will doubtlessly grow. Especially if you take over a second town 200+ tiles away.

Last edited by Keyin (2019-06-01 23:23:09)

futurebird · 2019-06-01 23:29:57

"Taking over" towns by force esp if you send fertile women in to do it isn't very good for your lineage. You are putting the key people at risk. Having just one woman left is bad. Yeah you *can* bounce back but all it takes are a string of boys and a few /die babies and you're done.

The truth is lots of players don't focus on lineage at all. They want to do projects, or talk and role play. Or grief. The first two things can help with a lineage the last one won't.

so-called raids tend to kill both towns involved it's just one dies a bit later than the other. The key to keeping a lineage alive is to have lots of players and maybe a thriving satellite town as a back up.

But in this game lots of people want other people to be their kids and continue the work, but not as many will just do simple things like stack wood and keep the fire going. Now rather than just be disgusted with people we can ask why this is?

I think simple things like
-showing players some stats about how many living relatives they have after they die
-getting the family tree to work properly the lineage depth numbers are often not there or incorrect
-removing /die babies from the tree (or gray them out) so people can focus on how well their kids did

Might help. But then the game isn't JUST "a parenting game" it's also a building and collaboration game, it's also a roleplaying game.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 23:41:19

futurebird wrote:

I think simple things like
-showing players some stats about how many living relatives they have after they die
-getting the family tree to work properly the lineage depth numbers are often not there or incorrect
-removing /die babies from the tree (or gray them out) so people can focus on how well their kids did

At the Ministry of Truth here, we're going to have to put these comments down the memory hole. I'm not the person to implement such a procedure, but I can point out suggestions as not warranted for those at the Ministry of Truth to get to work.

I hope someone found that amusing.

Keyin · 2019-06-01 23:58:23

futurebird wrote:

"Taking over" towns by force esp if you send fertile women in to do it isn't very good for your lineage. You are putting the key people at risk. Having just one woman left is bad. Yeah you *can* bounce back but all it takes are a string of boys and a few /die babies and you're done.

Yeah, I mostly agree. 1 is bad, 2 is okay, 3 is pretty good. Ideally when you leave the one woman you also leave some a few 3-11 yr old girls with her. But, taking over a town >200 tiles away makes it so that when you die you get lineage banned from 50% of your family instead of 100%. So when you die, you have a chance of coming back to the same family.. only you'll spawn into the other town.

futurebird wrote:

The truth is lots of players don't focus on lineage at all. They want to do projects, or talk and role play. Or grief. The first two things can help with a lineage the last one won't.

Yep, I don't focus on lineage at all either. Unless we have a 'cool' last name. Then I'll be a little sad when we inevitably go extinct.

futurebird wrote:

so-called raids tend to kill both towns involved it's just one dies a bit later than the other. The key to keeping a lineage alive is to have lots of players and maybe a thriving satellite town as a back up.

I've only been on a couple raids. One went really bad and the other we didn't really gain anything, so you're probably right on that point.

But, on the point of a satellite town.. easier to take over another town then to build one from scratch... right?

futurebird wrote:

But in this game lots of people want other people to be their kids and continue the work, but not as many will just do simple things like stack wood and keep the fire going. Now rather than just be disgusted with people we can ask why this is?
I think simple things like
-showing players some stats about how many living relatives they have after they die
-getting the family tree to work properly the lineage depth numbers are often not there or incorrect
-removing /die babies from the tree (or gray them out) so people can focus on how well their kids did
Might help. But then the game isn't JUST "a parenting game" it's also a building and collaboration game, it's also a roleplaying game.

I agree with this for the most part... it is difficult to feel motivated to help a family you'll be completely cut off from and may never see again.

And yeah, many different people play the game for many different reasons. Mine is the short session combined with permadeath. In MMORPGs I could never catch up because I would spend too much time socializing and didn't have the hours/money to throw at the game that the pros did. OHOL doesn't have that problem, because your character only lasts an hour.

hmrka · 2019-06-02 00:36:05

Meh, amazon tribes are pretty nice imo. I was born in a boy killing society today, of course I stopped their dumbass law because it could have banned players who could contribute from the town... I almost got killed but it was a good roleplay life. We had no surname so I could go trigger happy with people who pissed me off. I died from old age

I feel like wars and conflict do build societies. Its fun to get born to a mom whos running away from a killer, and get adopted by her murderer lol. Or to grow up to be a badass griefer-killing lady, wearing fully black clothes! Even if pregnancy did exist, it wouldn't stop me. But I do can be affectionate to kids if they deserve it, no matter if im a boy or girl.

And If I'm in the middle of doing stuff dont expect me to drop everything and pick ya up and say "I luv u bb", what you'll be getting from me is a few feedings and a name, then in the nursery you go

futurebird · 2019-06-02 00:42:31

My mom got her PhD (in abstract algebra) while pregnant with me and defended her thesis while nursing me. (she had me with a woman in the hall and had to pop out to feed me so the story goes)

If that isn't war IDK what is.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-02 03:24:49

futurebird wrote:

My mom got her PhD (in abstract algebra) while pregnant with me and defended her thesis while nursing me. (she had me with a woman in the hall and had to pop out to feed me so the story goes)
If that isn't war IDK what is.

With all due respect to your dear mother, I think Galois would beg to differ.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-06-02 03:25:35)

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-06-01 19:49:30

When was the Last Time...

#2 2019-06-01 20:05:48

Re: When was the Last Time...

#3 2019-06-01 20:08:26

Re: When was the Last Time...

#4 2019-06-01 20:18:17

Re: When was the Last Time...

#5 2019-06-01 20:27:37

Re: When was the Last Time...

#6 2019-06-01 20:34:51

Re: When was the Last Time...

#7 2019-06-01 20:54:38

Re: When was the Last Time...

#8 2019-06-01 21:00:28

Re: When was the Last Time...

#9 2019-06-01 21:27:59

Re: When was the Last Time...

#10 2019-06-01 21:29:40

Re: When was the Last Time...

#11 2019-06-01 21:31:47

Re: When was the Last Time...

#12 2019-06-01 21:32:59

Re: When was the Last Time...

#13 2019-06-01 21:45:30

Re: When was the Last Time...

#14 2019-06-01 21:51:38

Re: When was the Last Time...

#15 2019-06-01 22:08:51

Re: When was the Last Time...

#16 2019-06-01 22:35:23

Re: When was the Last Time...

#17 2019-06-01 22:52:38

Re: When was the Last Time...

#18 2019-06-01 22:54:42

Re: When was the Last Time...

#19 2019-06-01 23:22:06

Re: When was the Last Time...

#20 2019-06-01 23:29:57

Re: When was the Last Time...

#21 2019-06-01 23:41:19

Re: When was the Last Time...

#22 2019-06-01 23:58:23

Re: When was the Last Time...

#23 2019-06-02 00:36:05

Re: When was the Last Time...

#24 2019-06-02 00:42:31

Re: When was the Last Time...

#25 2019-06-02 03:24:49

Re: When was the Last Time...

Board footer