a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
jasonrohrer wrote:As I've said, killing is a necessary ingredient in this game... otherwise, how would you dispatch such a griefer, even with majority consent?
There's no reason to assume that a griefer has to get dispatched unless we know that the griefer would be destructive in terms of family survival if not dispatched. This was a mistake I made in my previous post, mostly because I was assuming trying to make a permanent town of sorts.
1. Suppose it were the case that 0 murders per life existed. No families would die out to murderous griefing then.
2. Suppose buildings couldn't get blocked off so easily OR that walls could easily get deconstructed by hand OR that buildings just weren't built for functional purposes as did happen for a long period of the game's history. In either of those cases people dying to starvation because of blocked off buildings (or city walls) doesn't seem like an issue.
3. Encourage more migration... especially if griefers were doing things which makes it difficult to advance a town.
That would seem to solve the issues with respect to griefers killing off lineages. How it would work in the context of bs2 and how players would react to it is NOT known, NOR do we have good enough information to know how players migrating due to griefing would be affected.
If there was no danger for griefing (no way to be killed), players would have a field day griefing a town.
Abuse hungry work, eat the entire town's food and waste all their wood. Speaking of which, light all kindling and chop all wood into kindling to light.
Take any item, especially horses, off away from town and hide/lose them. This is something players already do, but if caught are killed (stopped).
They can't kill directly, but they can still run off with your baby and dump them in the wild. And you can do nothing to stop them.
Or how about trapping you in property fences, or putting your entire food supply inside of it? Sure, you can find more food, but if you're trapped in a property fence, you're basically at their complete and utter mercy.
They can make you run out of water fast by doing the first trick with your crops. And they can burn all the seeds.
Speaking of which, they can murder all your animals and you can't stop them.
The list goes on and on. I'd rather deal with a murdering idiot that can have their damage relatively easily fixed (if you have pads/needle & thread) than deal with a griefer ruining the town that I could do literally nothing to stop. Yeah, you can curse them... so what. Even if they go to Donkey Town, they'll come back and find you.
The fact that your third suggestion is to "migrate farther away because of griefers" points out just how flawed this is, sadly... it is both completely ineffective (because griefers can still potentially be born to the family) and a bad necessity even if it could work -- you have to move away from civilization out of fear of a single griefer? Really? Why should you have to punish yourself because of a single idiot?
Last edited by Bowser (2019-12-08 22:41:15)
Offline
The list goes on and on. I'd rather deal with a murdering idiot that can have their damage relatively easily fixed (if you have pads/needle & thread) than deal with a griefer ruining the town that I could do literally nothing to stop. Yeah, you can curse them... so what. Even if they go to Donkey Town, they'll come back and find you.
Killing a griefer is short-sighted thinking. It isn't a good solution to a chronic problem. A dedicated griefer isn't going to stop griefing because he has been killed. Why should he? Death means nothing in a game with anonymous reincarnation. From your limited perspective it might feel like the danger is over, but it continues in the next town. And your village needs other villages to be alive and inhabited in order to keep going in the long-run. In your next life, you will be born in another town - maybe even the same town that the griefer was reborn into because you killed him. What has killing the griefer really accomplished? He might be "dead", but he isn't finished. He can keep coming back, again and again. Death is NOT the end.
Without a more permanent solution for serial griefers, killing is just a band-aid on a bullet wound. It lets you feel like you are helping your village, but doesn't fix the real problem.
We need to stop seeing murder as the best solution for murder.
Offline
Bowser wrote:The list goes on and on. I'd rather deal with a murdering idiot that can have their damage relatively easily fixed (if you have pads/needle & thread) than deal with a griefer ruining the town that I could do literally nothing to stop. Yeah, you can curse them... so what. Even if they go to Donkey Town, they'll come back and find you.
Killing a griefer is short-sighted thinking. It isn't a good solution to a chronic problem. A dedicated griefer isn't going to stop griefing because he has been killed. Why should he? Death means nothing in a game with anonymous reincarnation. From your limited perspective it might feel like the danger is over, but it continues in the next town. And your village needs other villages to be alive and inhabited in order to keep going in the long-run. In your next life, you will be born in another town - maybe even the same town that the griefer was reborn into because you killed him. What has killing the griefer really accomplished? He might be "dead", but he isn't finished. He can keep coming back, again and again. Death is NOT the end.
Without a more permanent solution for serial griefers, killing is just a band-aid on a bullet wound. It lets you feel like you are helping your village, but doesn't fix the real problem.
We need to stop seeing murder as the best solution for murder.
Well, if all you have is a bandaid and a gunshot then the bandaid looks pretty attractive. IMO killing should stay as a tool against griefers but other things should come in too like maybe there's a way to hogtie a griefer and stuff him with food like a duck to keep him alive and imprisoned, but it takes a handful of people to be able to do it, or maybe the remaining spawn tokens can be deducted by curses, who knows... Submit ideas if you have em
Offline
Perhaps curses take a huge chunk out of your genetic score. So with enough curses you wouldnt be able to use any tools making killing near impossible.
Last edited by Toxolotl (2019-12-09 00:59:53)
Offline
Perhaps curses take a huge chunk out of your genetic score. So with enough curses you wouldnt be able to use any tools making killing near impossible.
Maybe, but genetic score is stupid easy to keep up at the moment... It seems to measure how many lives you have rather than how proficient you are, so it would have to be very severe and then the leaderboard jockeys who absolutely have to be top 10 will cry bloody mary when they get mis-cursed. Maybe if cursing had the current effect, and lowered meme score, and removed 8 spawn tokens, and the spawn tokens regenerated slowly enough for them to ever mean anything at all, then maybe cursing would matter
Offline
Perhaps curses take a huge chunk out of your genetic score. So with enough curses you wouldnt be able to use any tools making killing near impossible.
I'd be perfectly happy if killing other people or being cursed by other people would damage your genetic score.
But if you suggest it, many regular players will complain about getting cursed by mistake or needing to kill to protect the town. You only need one slot to kill and no slots at all to grief. Peaceful villagers need every tool slot they can get. You will hurt them a lot faster than you will hurt a dedicated murderer.
Offline
If there was no danger for griefing (no way to be killed), players would have a field day griefing a town.
Abuse hungry work, eat the entire town's food and waste all their wood.
Griefers could do such things, yes. But, they have a reputation for lacking intelligence. So, I really don't know how many griefers would figure out how to game hungry work or how to fire grief.
Also, so what if they could wreck a town? The question isn't whether or not they could wreck a town more easily. The question is could they destroy lineages more easily if they didn't have murder?
They can't kill directly, but they can still run off with your baby and dump them in the wild. And you can do nothing to stop them.
They can't do that if women hold their children.
Or how about trapping you in property fences, or putting your entire food supply inside of it?
I think elder fence removal exists. But, no, really are you building those things? Property fences aren't good in general, and Jason apparently is still trying to prove that they can have value, AFTER MONTHS OF THEM EXISTING. That's Jason for you... it takes him a long time before he even seems to consider that an idea of his could be seriously flawed, if he ever admits his idea as flawed.
The list goes on and on.
They can't grief all of the wild food or grief all of the resources on the post or pre-rift map. It's still open as to how the prospects of lineage survival would change were it the case that murder didn't exist. Migration is possible after all.
The fact that your third suggestion is to "migrate farther away because of griefers" points out just how flawed this is, sadly... it is both completely ineffective (because griefers can still potentially be born to the family) and a bad necessity even if it could work -- you have to move away from civilization out of fear of a single griefer? Really? Why should you have to punish yourself because of a single idiot?
Uh... so we had a low pop griefer on the server I usually play on a while back. Killing sheep and hacking up trees, extremely excessive reed skirts, tried to make an old style pine-wall building looting everyone's milkweed. The smithy I had built didn't meet the expectations I had for it in terms of temperature, so I worked on destroying the walls and the griefer told me "good job", I guess not suspecting that I was the person who ran the town. Destroying adobe walls may be more difficult than destroying anything else in this game, but I digress. Anyways, two other people decided to make new camps off of the road, because of that griefer. I think they just ran from the road to their hideouts. I also made a new town, but I did so on an new Eve spawn, so I think I started it up differently, just running away from where I had seen rabbits (later I learned that my guess about the nearby town location was more or less correct). Painful? No, not really. Boring? No.
Were it the case that I had to live like I was in DonkeyTown sure, that would get dry and dull. But, having started over basically because of a griefer, I'm not quite so sure it's as bad you think. I could be wrong here though, because maybe there would be sooo many more breakaway camps without murder in the game, I don't know. But, strange enough, griefers rarely target Eve camps and when they do people generally have expressed surprised, because it's rather rare and said things like "who the hell griefs an Eve camp?". So, if your family migrated, I'm skeptical to say the least that you would get targeted by them again.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
IMO killing should stay as a tool against griefers but other things should come in too like maybe there's a way to hogtie a griefer and stuff him with food like a duck to keep him alive and imprisoned, but it takes a handful of people to be able to do it, or maybe the remaining spawn tokens can be deducted by curses, who knows.
An eye for an eye makes the world blind.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
But if you suggest it, many regular players will complain about getting cursed by mistake or needing to kill to protect the town.
Towns? Towns don't have a direct effect on genetic score. There is no score system for having a well-built town. There is a score system, though it seems to have flaws from some comments I've seen on the OHOL discord, which measures how well players do with respect to lineage preservation. Protect the town??? Seriously, would someone think of the children?
Alright, maybe you were thinking of the children, but the emphasis on towns is off. Lineages and children make for what matters in terms of the scoring system.
Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-12-09 02:43:31)
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
jcwilk wrote:IMO killing should stay as a tool against griefers but other things should come in too like maybe there's a way to hogtie a griefer and stuff him with food like a duck to keep him alive and imprisoned, but it takes a handful of people to be able to do it, or maybe the remaining spawn tokens can be deducted by curses, who knows.
An eye for an eye makes the world blind.
It's not a punishment, it's a vehicle for preventing them from respawning and getting a fresh start
Offline
Toxolotl wrote:Perhaps curses take a huge chunk out of your genetic score. So with enough curses you wouldnt be able to use any tools making killing near impossible.
I'd be perfectly happy if killing other people or being cursed by other people would damage your genetic score.
But if you suggest it, many regular players will complain about getting cursed by mistake or needing to kill to protect the town. You only need one slot to kill and no slots at all to grief. Peaceful villagers need every tool slot they can get. You will hurt them a lot faster than you will hurt a dedicated murderer.
Could work well with the blessing idea. Blessings could counter the negative points curses apply. So if someone accidentally curses you they could use their blessing token to null it. I dont think killing should effect your score unless you kill someone who would effect your score anyway.
Offline
Bowser wrote:If there was no danger for griefing (no way to be killed), players would have a field day griefing a town.
Abuse hungry work, eat the entire town's food and waste all their wood.
Griefers could do such things, yes. But, they have a reputation for lacking intelligence. So, I really don't know how many griefers would figure out how to game hungry work or how to fire grief.
Also, so what if they could wreck a town? The question isn't whether or not they could wreck a town more easily. The question is could they destroy lineages more easily if they didn't have murder?
The problem here is that you are running off of assumptions. Griefers can be stupid, but they can also be smart. The worst griefers are already doing these things behind the scenes... do you really think a bear randomly found your town? That your primary building got jacked up by accident? No, someone did that on purpose. The difference is in this case they could do so blatantly and you couldn't do anything to stop them.
Bowser wrote:They can't kill directly, but they can still run off with your baby and dump them in the wild. And you can do nothing to stop them.
They can't do that if women hold their children.
Another poor assumption, for a number of reasons. First of all you do not know if they are intentionally killing your children until it is too late. Secondly, and more critically, a mother will often times have more than one baby to care for... she can't leave 2-3 babies to save one. This is natural instincts. Last, and not least, anyone who can't nurse can literally just hold onto a baby until it starves, and you can do nothing to stop them if the baby is too young to escape.
Bowser wrote:Or how about trapping you in property fences, or putting your entire food supply inside of it?
I think elder fence removal exists. But, no, really are you building those things? Property fences aren't good in general, and Jason apparently is still trying to prove that they can have value, AFTER MONTHS OF THEM EXISTING. That's Jason for you... it takes him a long time before he even seems to consider that an idea of his could be seriously flawed, if he ever admits his idea as flawed.
Oh yeah, elder fence removal does exist. You need an elder with a spare tool slot, as well as someone else in order to remove them. And you may not (almost certainly won't) have time to save starving players if the paper is not already ready to go, let alone the knife. Had a griefer who did this yesterday, we didn't have a knife up so we couldn't remove the fences and almost everyone involved starved. If it were not for a bow I crafted, said player would have still been griefing wherever they could. But I did have that bow, and they did get killed off. We were only able to save one person, and it's the absolute shittiest way to go.
Bowser wrote:The list goes on and on.
They can't grief all of the wild food or grief all of the resources on the post or pre-rift map. It's still open as to how the prospects of lineage survival would change were it the case that murder didn't exist. Migration is possible after all.
Migration is just as likely to kill off a family as a griefer at times. Too easy to get separated, too hard to keep kids alive with babies popping constantly and mothers starving themselves to feed everyone. Especially making a significant journey.
Bowser wrote:The fact that your third suggestion is to "migrate farther away because of griefers" points out just how flawed this is, sadly... it is both completely ineffective (because griefers can still potentially be born to the family) and a bad necessity even if it could work -- you have to move away from civilization out of fear of a single griefer? Really? Why should you have to punish yourself because of a single idiot?
Uh... so we had a low pop griefer on the server I usually play on a while back. Killing sheep and hacking up trees, extremely excessive reed skirts, tried to make an old style pine-wall building looting everyone's milkweed. The smithy I had built didn't meet the expectations I had for it in terms of temperature, so I worked on destroying the walls and the griefer told me "good job", I guess not suspecting that I was the person who ran the town. Destroying adobe walls may be more difficult than destroying anything else in this game, but I digress. Anyways, two other people decided to make new camps off of the road, because of that griefer. I think they just ran from the road to their hideouts. I also made a new town, but I did so on an new Eve spawn, so I think I started it up differently, just running away from where I had seen rabbits (later I learned that my guess about the nearby town location was more or less correct). Painful? No, not really. Boring? No.
Were it the case that I had to live like I was in DonkeyTown sure, that would get dry and dull. But, having started over basically because of a griefer, I'm not quite so sure it's as bad you think. I could be wrong here though, because maybe there would be sooo many more breakaway camps without murder in the game, I don't know. But, strange enough, griefers rarely target Eve camps and when they do people generally have expressed surprised, because it's rather rare and said things like "who the hell griefs an Eve camp?". So, if your family migrated, I'm skeptical to say the least that you would get targeted by them again.
Uh, I was targetted as an Eve by 1-3 different players (depending on how many accounts they had), and it was the worst griefing I ever experienced, so I can definitely say that you are mistaken in saying that Eve camps are not targetted... they definitely are, because griefers know how vulnerable they are. You get someone like I am describing in a camp like this and you will have a 0% chance of survival, it's hard to survive at times even without a griefer.
I mean I can respect your opinion, I hate murder and I wish this game could exist without it, but the simple fact is that the alternative is worse, much worse in fact. There are a lot of ways to counter murderers, but no way to counter the griefers I am talking about above in a world where you can't kill them. I'd love a way to disarm and imprison them, however, as opposed to killing, for a large number of reasons. But that is not likely to ever happen since it would be used by the griefer rolepalyers who 'enslave' people or whatever.
The sad truth is that we need to be able to kill players because it's better than the alternative.
Offline
Uh, I was targetted as an Eve by 1-3 different players (depending on how many accounts they had), and it was the worst griefing I ever experienced, so I can definitely say that you are mistaken in saying that Eve camps are not targetted... they definitely are, because griefers know how vulnerable they are. You get someone like I am describing in a camp like this and you will have a 0% chance of survival, it's hard to survive at times even without a griefer.
Lol yeah the other day I spawned as an eve and the first kid that popped out ended up pulling out a bow and arrow out of their fucking hat or something when they were just old enough to use it while babbling like a noob idiot the whole time, sneakiest mfer ever.
Offline
The worst griefers are already doing these things behind the scenes... do you really think a bear randomly found your town? That your primary building got jacked up by accident? No, someone did that on purpose. The difference is in this case they could do so blatantly and you couldn't do anything to stop them.
Bear caves don't respawn any long and bears can get killed.
Why build buildings in the first place? They might be interesting and amusing, but in terms of usefulness, there still exist questions about them. Also, before the temperature overhaul, one didn't have to live in a hostile climate which seemed to suggest fully floored buildings as desired. Players could just trap mosquitoes in an old type jungle or settler along desert edges. I think Jason still has the version history of all versions on his Github. Thus, I don't think it would be difficult for him to have a biome system similar to what it was from the period of the introduction of jungles to the temperature overhaul. Fertility issues were not as present, since you didn't have to stand on a fire if trying to kick your spot in the fertility queue up, you could MOVE along a desert edge abutting a neutral biome (grassland, swamp, badlands, or praririe) or MOVE through a jungle. Eveing, according to LostScholar, was more interesting, because knowledge players would take up the challenge of finding a good temperature spot to raise children (not all good temperature spots would work... some of those had deadly snakes... or mosquitoes that people didn't know how to trap) and you wanted water and soil closeby also, unlike the whole 'we'll set up anywhere near water and soil' that is much simpler and more boring (I agree with Scholar... it was MORE complex and thus more interesting to Eve pre-temperature overhaul... and you could still set up in netural biomes then... clothing barely changed at all... there was NO change in the insulation numbers on clothes). Eveing successfully did become harder after it, but that was mostly because Eves couldn't make things easier on newer players all that well. Smart eves had decreased opportunity to make life easier for their descendants. Migration would also be easier under that temperature system since experienced players could run along desert edges (and hope/try to avoid the snakes... death by snakebite used to be more common before the temperature overhaul, I suspect) which had near perfect temperature.
So again, buildings, why build them? Griefing is a larger issue than players not building buildings or wearing clothing according to a designer's taste. If buildings are bad because of griefers, so much the worse for buildings. They aren't needed for this game to be fun, or interesting, NOR for civilization building as there exists many other facets of civilization building, and anyone who tells you that they are necessary probably didn't play without them much or wants to force players into their taste box instead of listening to their tastes.
Secondly, and more critically, a mother will often times have more than one baby to care for... she can't leave 2-3 babies to save one. This is natural instincts.
No, players in OHOL use to do basically that and I did it myself. It use to at least be somewhat normal to not feed children until one had found a spot as Eve. It wouldn't work for how I would Eve usually, because I would make the three primary tools (rabbit snare, fire bow drill, and stone hatchet) and a basket, and then run until I found a spot. There's no way to carry a child and a basket, since there's no baby sling and even if we got one, it seems doubtful that Eve could craft it out in the wild, so caring for every child didn't seem at all practical. Not feeding kids in the hope of having a better spot for future children was just the price you payed. And it was an interesting choice to make. Because it left one wondering whether one was responsible by trying to make for an easier life for future children, or irresponsible for not feeding present children. No one knows whether Eves running around and not saving children until having spot would be better for their genetic score or if trying to save every child would have been better, at least not in a pre-temperature overhaul, dynamic temperature system (temperate constantly changed when you moved a single square anywhere pretty much.... it was complex) since genetic score didn't exist then.
Had a griefer who did this yesterday, we didn't have a knife up so we couldn't remove the fences and almost everyone involved starved.
Well so much the worse for property fences. They've never worked out like Jason has expected. They've resulted in terrible decaying, ugly sheep pens, and that's the best thing they've had going for them. Such is not a problem for not having murder in the game. What you describe is a problem with property fences. Probably they should just get removed from the game, and really it's not unreasonable to suggest that they should have gotten removed long ago. Private property is a great concept. It is very convenient in the real world. That doesn't mean that shoehorning into the context of OHOL is or ever has been a good idea though.
Migration is just as likely to kill off a family as a griefer at times. Too easy to get separated, too hard to keep kids alive with babies popping constantly and mothers starving themselves to feed everyone. Especially making a significant journey.
I feel that it's more interesting to die by nature than due to some murderous jerk. It is easy to rightly blame a murderous jerk. It is not so easy, nor reasonable to blame nature. It requires taking responsibility for oneself to avoid dying by nature. It's not so clear that you need the same level of responsibility to try to avoid dying from some murderous jerk, especially with a combat system where there is no dodging and your best hope is a silly and unrealistic system of speed which somehow makes someone with a bow and arrow slower if trying to kill someone.
All the hideous, unrealistic, and jarring effects in the game like slower movement after using a knife to kill a character, or not being able to put down a knife because it has blood on it (please... it's SO unrealistic, and it's not funny or amusing either... it feels and looks like a goddamn eyesore), would go away if murder didn't exist in the game. Blood somehow all over your screen like you threw up spaghetti sauce on it? Talk about fugly. Interesting story because of a murder? But it's completely different when you see it in game. It looks like ass. And there's always mass confusion when it happens in town. So much chaos.
Uh, I was targetted as an Eve by 1-3 different players (depending on how many accounts they had), and it was the worst griefing I ever experienced, so I can definitely say that you are mistaken in saying that Eve camps are not targetted... they definitely are, because griefers know how vulnerable they are. You get someone like I am describing in a camp like this and you will have a 0% chance of survival, it's hard to survive at times even without a griefer.
I didn't quite say that they weren't targeted, I think, just that it seemed rarer. Also, I don't think what you say is likely to hold in a general sense. Or even if it's likely, that's only under the dull and rather static temperature system that we have in existence with so little jungle and desert compared to what we used to have.
I mean I can respect your opinion, I hate murder and I wish this game could exist without it, but the simple fact is that the alternative is worse, much worse in fact.
You speak so surely, but you have NOT played OHOL under those conditions and seen what happened to lineage length. You simply do not know such as a 'sad truth'. By the same token I don't know whether or not OHOL would work better without murder in it. But, in order to know, some sort of real experiment would have to get tried AND we would have to honestly measure how lineages actually did, not merely believe that people were doomed by non-murderous griefing with them migrating away.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
Bowser wrote:Uh, I was targetted as an Eve by 1-3 different players (depending on how many accounts they had), and it was the worst griefing I ever experienced, so I can definitely say that you are mistaken in saying that Eve camps are not targetted... they definitely are, because griefers know how vulnerable they are. You get someone like I am describing in a camp like this and you will have a 0% chance of survival, it's hard to survive at times even without a griefer.
Lol yeah the other day I spawned as an eve and the first kid that popped out ended up pulling out a bow and arrow out of their fucking hat or something when they were just old enough to use it while babbling like a noob idiot the whole time, sneakiest mfer ever.
I once had an Eve run pre-temperature overhaul where my only daughter shot me. You wouldn't have the ugliness of apparently vomited spaghetti sauce on your screen if murder didn't exist in the game. Not from another person at least.
There is some probability of survival though if you don't get murdered, and you couldn't get murdered, if no one could murder in the game.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
Bowser wrote:Had a griefer who did this yesterday, we didn't have a knife up so we couldn't remove the fences and almost everyone involved starved.
Well so much the worse for property fences. They've never worked out like Jason has expected. They've resulted in terrible decaying, ugly sheep pens, and that's the best thing they've had going for them. Such is not a problem for not having murder in the game. What you describe is a problem with property fences. Probably they should just get removed from the game, and really it's not unreasonable to suggest that they should have gotten removed long ago. Private property is a great concept. It is very convenient in the real world. That doesn't mean that shoehorning into the context of OHOL is or ever has been a good idea though.
I managed to get a bear into a property fence bear pen earlier, that was pretty exciting. Sadly it managed to just barely nick me with its paw as i was slipping out, but with my dying breaths I made sure it was there to stay. Until the fences decayed 2 hours later I guess and then it was presumably suddenly released *shrugs* sorry town. But hey they got a zoo for a bit, seems worth it.
Offline
Had a griefer who did this yesterday, we didn't have a knife up so we couldn't remove the fences and almost everyone involved starved.
Newly-built shaky property fences can be cut down with knife, sharp stone, or ax. Maybe hatchet as well. But IIRC once they're established they can only be removed by naturally decaying or an elder removal paper which takes like 10 minutes to break them down.
Property fences are a pretty shitty mechanic right now, useful only for easy starter sheep pens but then you get people setting up newb-killing pens and baby jails. It's ridiculous.
Offline
Spoonwood wrote:Bowser wrote:Had a griefer who did this yesterday, we didn't have a knife up so we couldn't remove the fences and almost everyone involved starved.
Well so much the worse for property fences. They've never worked out like Jason has expected. They've resulted in terrible decaying, ugly sheep pens, and that's the best thing they've had going for them. Such is not a problem for not having murder in the game. What you describe is a problem with property fences. Probably they should just get removed from the game, and really it's not unreasonable to suggest that they should have gotten removed long ago. Private property is a great concept. It is very convenient in the real world. That doesn't mean that shoehorning into the context of OHOL is or ever has been a good idea though.
I managed to get a bear into a property fence bear pen earlier, that was pretty exciting. Sadly it managed to just barely nick me with its paw as i was slipping out, but with my dying breaths I made sure it was there to stay. Until the fences decayed 2 hours later I guess and then it was presumably suddenly released *shrugs* sorry town. But hey they got a zoo for a bit, seems worth it.
I like bear pens myself. I've remember a particular streamer trying one long ago. I've seen them turn into a mess on some low populations servers, and seen successful and stable ones on low population servers also. It's not surprising to me when people fail at bear pens, and make things worse. I do like it hearing about people trying them, but it's just because I like the idea of bear pens (or can think people fools for trying them). At best they are a motivational tool for players... but they are dangerous to the point that I don't recommend anyone try to make one. Also, as a motivational tool, I think there's some serious question as to them motivating the sorts of things that fall within the spirit of the game. A beautiful rose garden may motivate organized farming or watchiing the kitchen a little more closely I suppose. But, what does a bear pen motivate?
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
Property fences are a pretty shitty mechanic right now, useful only for easy starter sheep pens but then you get people setting up newb-killing pens and baby jails. It's ridiculous.
There's an old Simpsons episode where Lenin rises from the dead and says "Must crush capitalism!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDXtVlG2VW0
Jason almost seems to think the opposite "Must crush communism!"
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
jcwilk wrote:Spoonwood wrote:Well so much the worse for property fences. They've never worked out like Jason has expected. They've resulted in terrible decaying, ugly sheep pens, and that's the best thing they've had going for them. Such is not a problem for not having murder in the game. What you describe is a problem with property fences. Probably they should just get removed from the game, and really it's not unreasonable to suggest that they should have gotten removed long ago. Private property is a great concept. It is very convenient in the real world. That doesn't mean that shoehorning into the context of OHOL is or ever has been a good idea though.
I managed to get a bear into a property fence bear pen earlier, that was pretty exciting. Sadly it managed to just barely nick me with its paw as i was slipping out, but with my dying breaths I made sure it was there to stay. Until the fences decayed 2 hours later I guess and then it was presumably suddenly released *shrugs* sorry town. But hey they got a zoo for a bit, seems worth it.
I like bear pens myself. I've remember a particular streamer trying one long ago. I've seen them turn into a mess on some low populations servers, and seen successful and stable ones on low population servers also. It's not surprising to me when people fail at bear pens, and make things worse. I do like it hearing about people trying them, but it's just because I like the idea of bear pens (or can think people fools for trying them). At best they are a motivational tool for players... but they are dangerous to the point that I don't recommend anyone try to make one. Also, as a motivational tool, I think there's some serious question as to them motivating the sorts of things that fall within the spirit of the game. A beautiful rose garden may motivate organized farming or watchiing the kitchen a little more closely I suppose. But, what does a bear pen motivate?
I think it's interesting to take games like this where there really is no coded point, no winning scenario, no avoidable losing scenario, no defined goals, etc, and sort of turn it on it's head with a left-field goal like "I want to own a bear". No one really knows what owning a bear motivates or leads to, I think you have to own one to find out. For a brief, fleeting moment I tasted the unknown... I want another taste
Offline
I think it's interesting to take games like this where there really is no coded point, no winning scenario, no avoidable losing scenario, no defined goals, etc, and sort of turn it on it's head with a left-field goal like "I want to own a bear". No one really knows what owning a bear motivates or leads to, I think you have to own one to find out. For a brief, fleeting moment I tasted the unknown... I want another taste
But it was you who was tasted.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
For a brief, fleeting moment I tasted the unknown... I want another taste
So does the bear.
Offline
Back in the Rift days, before there was a limit on how many bears you could get from a bear cave, I once commanded an army of bears. We wandered the countryside together as brothers, until I was too old to ride a horse.
It was glorious.
Offline
Back in the Rift days, before there was a limit on how many bears you could get from a bear cave, I once commanded an army of bears. We wandered the countryside together as brothers, until I was too old to ride a horse.
It was glorious.
Lolll RIP my sides. Maybe we're actually the NPCs and the bears are the players, ever think of that mannnnnn
Offline
Back in the Rift days, before there was a limit on how many bears you could get from a bear cave, I once commanded an army of bears. We wandered the countryside together as brothers, until I was too old to ride a horse.
It was glorious.
Yeah... it sounds like there existed a lot of veterans who were griefing The Rift. Kind of like a game designer made a poor choice for his playerbase and had to pay the consequences for it, because of the wrath of veteran players.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline