Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

Saolin · 2019-08-26 17:28:12

For protecting against the apocalypse we're better off having mixed family towns, say there's three families, and three towns. If each town has one family, and a town dies out, the apocalypse triggers. If all three families inhabit all three towns, we could actually get by with just one town surviving if two fail. Though it would be smart to have additional towns similar to the way it's smart to have a second hidden sheep pen, makes it harder to eliminate all of them.

But what is the best way of dealing with apocalypse seekers? Last night again toward the end of my night there were more people going around trying to trigger the apocalypse, despite multiple stable towns existing. Should we just be killing them? Trying to curse them to donkey town? Spread out multi-family towns around the map? The first two seem more likely to delay at best. The latter might work, but there's a certain threshold that will be too much since there's limited resources to support them all.

I have a suspicion that we'll regularly be dealing with apocalypse seekers a few hours into each rift. Thoughts?

Last edited by Saolin (2019-08-26 17:30:23)

Dodge · 2019-08-26 17:35:17

Saolin wrote:

For protecting against the apocalypse we're better off having mixed family towns, say there's three families, and three towns. If each town has one family, and a town dies out, the apocalypse triggers. If all three families inhabit all three towns, we could actually get by with just one town surviving if two fail. Though it would be smart to have additional towns similar to the way it's smart to have a second hidden sheep pen, makes it harder to eliminate all of them.
But what is the best way of dealing with apocalypse seekers? Last night again toward the end of my night there were more people going around trying to trigger the apocalypse, despite multiple stable towns existing. Should we just be killing them? Trying to curse them to donkey town? Spread out multi-family towns around the map? The first two seem more likely to delay at best. The latter might work, but there's a certain threshold that will be too much since there's limited resources to support them all.
I have a suspicion that we'll regularly be dealing with apocalypse seekers a few hours into each rift. Thoughts?

Make a lot of medical aprons, sterile pads, needle ball of thread and knives + stick together.

if a town has 4-5+ medics murders shouldn't be an issue.

But i do think that the time between getting stabbed/shot and dying is a little too short.

jasonrohrer · 2019-08-26 17:49:24

Death stagger time is currently 40 seconds.

It's a live server setting.... should I put it up to 80 seconds?

Dodge · 2019-08-26 17:54:09

jasonrohrer wrote:

Death stagger time is currently 40 seconds.
It's a live server setting.... should I put it up to 80 seconds?

Yes 80 seconds would be nice, maybe it's too high or still too low not sure but it would be interesting to see the data on number of succesful heal before and after or number of succesfful murder before and after.

Lava · 2019-08-26 18:31:50

Yea that would be nice to raise the murder time since a good portion of that is trying to figure out why he/she got stabbed.

pein · 2019-08-27 00:49:38

maybe some sort of patching up
like if you stand next to a person, you can push the wound to slow bleeding
this would mean that you trust him/her, so you keep them alive longer
also a minigame for the killer to scare away those who try to help

or just give back the damn ability to dodge

most cases is that they save the griefer than she revenges later and nobody saves you
cause nobody has a knife and they cant take it from you while sick
or they find pad but no needle or reverse, really it is a clown fest
cant we just have non lethal combat? healing is skill ad tech based while killing is intention based

DestinyCall · 2019-08-27 00:57:43

On the subject of surviving murder ... would it be possible to get more than ONE ball of thread from a whole sheep fleece?

Couldn't it give us a cute little pile of three thread balls instead? That would make producing sterile pads much less exhausting and time-consuming. Most of the time, I feel like we just run out of supplies (or no one bothered to make them), rather than running out of treatment time for regular stabs or bites. It takes forever to refill the bowl after a griefer stab-a-thon.

A longer death stagger would be super helpful to treat arrow wounds, though.

Coconut Fruit · 2019-08-27 04:34:52

pein wrote:

like if you stand next to a person, you can push the wound to slow bleeding

I like this idea

BladeWoods · 2019-08-27 07:53:12

Theoretically, I believe what we should do if we want to maximize survival is to not raise any boys. Always suicide if you're born boy until you're born female. If every player on the server is female, it minimizes the chance of any family dying since it removes one way they can die, no girls rng.

NiGB0 · 2019-08-27 13:00:18

I agree with you Blade, boys in this game can't help families to survive...

Saolin · 2019-08-27 17:18:28

BladeWoods wrote:

Theoretically, I believe what we should do if we want to maximize survival is to not raise any boys. Always suicide if you're born boy until you're born female. If every player on the server is female, it minimizes the chance of any family dying since it removes one way they can die, no girls rng.

Whether a boy survives or dies has no impact on how many girls you have. By killing all boys you're just halving your babies and will end up with the same number of girls. You're not converting any boys to girls..... Well I guess if the baby /dies they can cycle until they're a girl, otherwise they're area banned anyway if they die some other way. So it still accomplishes nothing by killing boys.

Anyway I still don't like your suggestion, because boys have a lot more freedom to work in their lifetime, whereas girls spend almost half their life raising babies. Mothers can drain a lot of resources during their fertile years while not working as much. You might be right that it's correct to /die as a boy unfortunately, but I'm not convinced. I accomplish a lot more productive work for the town as a boy usually over the course of a life, and I think it might be important to have a balance of men working while women raise kids in order to keep a town alive.

Last edited by Saolin (2019-08-27 17:22:10)

BladeWoods · 2019-08-27 21:06:06

Saolin wrote:

BladeWoods wrote:
Theoretically, I believe what we should do if we want to maximize survival is to not raise any boys. Always suicide if you're born boy until you're born female. If every player on the server is female, it minimizes the chance of any family dying since it removes one way they can die, no girls rng.
Whether a boy survives or dies has no impact on how many girls you have. By killing all boys you're just halving your babies and will end up with the same number of girls. You're not converting any boys to girls..... Well I guess if the baby /dies they can cycle until they're a girl, otherwise they're area banned anyway if they die some other way. So it still accomplishes nothing by killing boys.
Anyway I still don't like your suggestion, because boys have a lot more freedom to work in their lifetime, whereas girls spend almost half their life raising babies. Mothers can drain a lot of resources during their fertile years while not working as much. You might be right that it's correct to /die as a boy unfortunately, but I'm not convinced. I accomplish a lot more productive work for the town as a boy usually over the course of a life, and I think it might be important to have a balance of men working while women raise kids in order to keep a town alive.

If all boys are killed, then they'll respawn as girls. So it's forcing everyone to be a girl. Everyone gets more girls.

DestinyCall · 2019-08-27 22:20:06

BladeWoods wrote:

If all boys are killed, then they'll respawn as girls. So it's forcing everyone to be a girl. Everyone gets more girls.

Except for the one clan that accepts all babies and gets twice as many people.

The_Anabaptist · 2019-08-28 16:29:22

Pretty soon we're gonna start needing to define our terminology for the end of whatever.

We've got the tower to end our things.
We've got the rules to end the rift.
We've got griefing to end the enjoyment of the game.
Who knows what else I'm forgetting that ends something.

The_Anabaptist

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-08-26 17:28:12

Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#2 2019-08-26 17:35:17

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#3 2019-08-26 17:49:24

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#4 2019-08-26 17:54:09

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#5 2019-08-26 18:31:50

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#6 2019-08-27 00:49:38

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#7 2019-08-27 00:57:43

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#8 2019-08-27 04:34:52

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#9 2019-08-27 07:53:12

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#10 2019-08-27 13:00:18

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#11 2019-08-27 17:18:28

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#12 2019-08-27 21:06:06

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#13 2019-08-27 22:20:06

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

#14 2019-08-28 16:29:22

Re: Multi family towns protect against apocalypse

Board footer