The role of males in the game

YAHG · 2018-05-01 15:12:29

kubassa wrote:

powa wrote:
Well that's a good point, that we shouldn't be spending too much time at the farm.
That was not my point at all.
The biggest problem I have seen in the game regarding starving settlements is that most people expect someone else to tend the farm. The person off hunting rabbits that runs past the farm when it is "picking time", "planting time", and or "watering" time, just sponging food kills everyone all the time. Same goes for all the people who want to do their own thing and just eat food. Seen it many times rows and rows of carrots seed because 1-2 people cant pick them fast enough.
The point was that just because you feel you are the "forge" or the "rabbit" person doesn't mean you can't help when it's needed on the farm. This is what causes the starvation a lot of the time. People expecting others to do the farming because they don't want to.

Harvest time is super important, both in game and irl. Supposed to be all hands on deck .

Kinrany · 2018-05-01 20:37:52

I think player behavior is not important. Either the game makes it (philosophically, physically, statistically and economically) possible to do something, or it doesn't. Biases that prevent people from following the optimal strategy can be seen as personal preferences. The game determines the range of possible behaviors, the players can only choose from that.

Similarly, gender identity issues and physical advantages are not important. If they collectively wanted to, humans IRL would have been able to ignore the advantages even if they were 2x, not 1.3x or whatever.

I'm not a biologist, but the reason male/female ratio is 50/50 IRL is the same for all sexual species: Fisher's principle, the minority gender has reproductive advantage, so the genes that lead to more children of the minority gender propagate.

In OHOL players don't care about making their genes more popular. There *are* no genes, but just having them in the game wouldn't be enough either, the game would also need to reward the players for having more descendants.
I've suggested mood mechanics and spawning as one's own descendant earlier for these reasons.

kubassa · 2018-05-01 20:42:38

Kinrany wrote:

I think player behavior is not important. Either the game makes it (philosophically, physically, statistically and economically) possible to do something, or it doesn't. Biases that prevent people from following the optimal strategy can be seen as personal preferences. The game determines the range of possible behaviors, the players can only choose from that.

Ok when i spawn with you all I will do is eat a carrot every time my health bar goes down 1 box. We will see how unimportant my game behavior is. I'll have your whole family starved out in the first 45 seconds i can start eating myself.

Not sure what game you are playing..........

YAHG · 2018-05-01 22:06:10

kubassa wrote:

Kinrany wrote:
I think player behavior is not important. Either the game makes it (philosophically, physically, statistically and economically) possible to do something, or it doesn't. Biases that prevent people from following the optimal strategy can be seen as personal preferences. The game determines the range of possible behaviors, the players can only choose from that.
Ok when i spawn with you all I will do is eat a carrot every time my health bar goes down 1 box. We will see how unimportant my game behavior is. I'll have your whole family starved out in the first 45 seconds i can start eating myself.

Not sure what game you are playing..........

Bewhere teh Carror sponge <3

Auner · 2018-05-02 00:34:51

Kinrany wrote:

I'm not a biologist, but the reason male/female ratio is 50/50 IRL is the same for all sexual species: Fisher's principle, the minority gender has reproductive advantage, so the genes that lead to more children of the minority gender propagate.

While I appreciate this point, as it has a researched thesis instead of "I think this"-- this is a little too complex for the game. Good FYI though. The issue I see here is basically the main paradigm this article is based on.

So if we're going to simplify humanity in terms of those who reproduce and those who do not reproduce---- those who do not reproduce profit not only in not having to bare the child- but they also get the benefit of spreading their DNA much easier.

As you can see, we do not have sperm or male line-age in the game, nor is implementation of such easy-- or what we all want.

Personally- I very much believe we should focus on decreasing infant deaths- because in reality as the game changes, gender desires will change. In 6 months, it might be exceptionally difficult to play as female, or if you're born a man you might find it a repeat to your last male life- who knows!

Tane · 2018-05-02 00:50:24

Kinrany wrote:

I'm not a biologist, but the reason male/female ratio is 50/50 IRL is the same for all sexual species: Fisher's principle, the minority gender has reproductive advantage, so the genes that lead to more children of the minority gender propagate.

Actually the birth ratio is 2.5/1 in favour of females. A bit over twice as many
That's without the increase in developed nations because of the hormone change some plastics cause.

I liked bio at uni.

dejawolf · 2018-05-02 02:14:50

men may be stronger and faster on average, but women require less food.
average man requires 2200 kcal a day, a woman only 1600 kcal a day.
the stronger you are, the more you need to eat to maintain that strength.
although i think in a survival game like this, implementing something like that would make male babies even more likely to be tossed into the garbage bin..

Anshin · 2018-05-02 02:49:52

Tane wrote:

Kinrany wrote:
I'm not a biologist, but the reason male/female ratio is 50/50 IRL is the same for all sexual species: Fisher's principle, the minority gender has reproductive advantage, so the genes that lead to more children of the minority gender propagate.
Actually the birth ratio is 2.5/1 in favour of females. A bit over twice as many
That's without the increase in developed nations because of the hormone change some plastics cause.
I liked bio at uni.

Not+sure+if+anime+meme+or+italian+meme+_9ea786c3596f664f7d4ab40020b73154.jpg

YAHG · 2018-05-02 02:58:02

Yeah 2.5 to one is bullshit there are more men than Women but only like 102:100 ish.

Was just a Man, built nice stone floor in city center and sheep pen, also clothed a few peeps. We not useless.

sammoh · 2018-05-02 09:50:36

Results so far of Mistery Mom update/test on 2HOL:

-Dads are pretty good moms.
-Eve spawning is almost completely impossible with so many eligible parents.
-A single family line took over the entire server at one point (3rd cousin 18 times removed etc).
-That family has since died and nobody has last names now.
-Some people have said this hurts RP. I'm not sure what that means, but I think they meant immersion.
-Some people have said this makes being a man annoying because you can't do projects (welcome to the pain of womanhood)
-City spawns are increased. You are more likely to be born into a thriving society than a random Eve in the wilderness.

I have considered enabling bad mothers to let people "cheat" into being an Eve, but I think this punishes people actually playing the game.
Testing continues....

Anshin · 2018-05-02 10:49:20

sammoh wrote:

Results so far of Mistery Mom update/test on 2HOL:
-Dads are pretty good moms...

Is it possible to change the titles to Dad, Grandfather, Brother, Uncle, etc.?

sammoh wrote:

-Eve spawning is almost completely impossible with so many eligible parents...
-City spawns are increased. You are more likely to be born into a thriving society than a random Eve in the wilderness.

Random Adam spawning?

sammoh wrote:

-A single family line took over the entire server at one point (3rd cousin 18 times removed etc).
-That family has since died and nobody has last names now.

and add the ability to name yourself if you have no name? (Default first name Adam for those missing both names.)

sammoh wrote:

-Some people have said this hurts RP. I'm not sure what that means, but I think they meant immersion.
-Some people have said this makes being a man annoying because you can't do projects (welcome to the pain of womanhood)

Welcome to the joys of parenthood!

- No male breastfeeding though, make them feed babies manually.

Last edited by Anshin (2018-05-02 11:01:13)

sammoh · 2018-05-02 11:02:00

I can change the titles, but the way I accomplished this was to remove genders completely from the game.
The game no longer checks to see if you are female when considering valid spawns.
So technically men are no longer men, I guess.
Or women are no longer female.
I don't remember.

Will require client rebuild/update to change the lineage names, since these are determined by the client.
Trying to hold off on more client updates for another week so we can get an autoupdater running.

Kinrany · 2018-05-02 13:24:47

Auner wrote:

While I appreciate this point, as it has a researched thesis instead of "I think this"-- this is a little too complex for the game. Good FYI though. The issue I see here is basically the main paradigm this article is based on.
So if we're going to simplify humanity in terms of those who reproduce and those who do not reproduce---- those who do not reproduce profit not only in not having to bare the child- but they also get the benefit of spreading their DNA much easier.

I agree that it's better to abstract away as many unimportant details as possible.

I doubt it will be easy though, because the causal chain the game is trying to model is just too complex by itself.

Tane wrote:

Actually the birth ratio is 2.5/1 in favour of females. A bit over twice as many

Do you have a source? Wikipedia's numbers are between 0.94 and 1.15.

Christoffer · 2018-05-02 13:57:06

I would suggest to give males a possibility to help the family line along.

First some math:
In real life, a family tree grows through childbirth and marriages, and through both men and women. In OHOL we have the situation that only childbirth and only women grow the tree. If we simplify significantly, we can estimate that it is _at_least_ twice as hard for a OHOL family line to survive to a new generation, than a real-life family. This means that for a OHOL line to survive for another 10 generations is 1000 times more difficult than in real life, and 100 generations is 10^30 more difficult to achieve (which means that it will never happen naturally).

Special male-only feature: adopt a stranger into the family line.
This would not change normal game-play but it would impact the long view, for players who are interested in that.
The mechanism could be something like this: 1. A male takes a certain object in hand and says "You are (name_of_family)", and drops the item. 2. The player who wants to join the family picks up the item and says "I am (name_of_family)". The item could be a leaf or a bone needle (alludes to mixing of blood) or something.

What do you think?

The_Llamacorn · 2018-05-02 17:21:32

karltown wrote:

Maybe there could be a pregnancy point for a woman that occurs for a minute where she can't feed herself and only males can feed her. It could have problems with no one feeding or cooperating, but that's what happened with early hominids. The males brought food to the women who were raising the kids. In a way, it's "providing" for a short period of time.

Maybe you could be slower when you're pregnant and your food would go down slower? Then people would have to help you but you're not completely helpless. But I don't know how that would work for eves or women living alone? maybe it wouldn't affect them? But how would it choose who it should affect?

Nopik · 2018-05-02 20:23:57

Uncle Gus wrote:

kubassa wrote:
It's NOT a real life sim dood. SMH.
I didn't say it was. I was tempering stickyflipper's comment with another point to consider.
Maybe Jason should turn the birth cost back on at a low setting, and turn the bad mother back on as well, so that if people really don't want children, they can just let them die. Also, I think it should not be possible to have a baby within 30 seconds of breastfeeding a baby.

Breastfeeding as contraception. Best idea I've read yet. And I think it would be fairly easy to implement.

Go! Bwah! · 2018-05-02 21:07:04

Nopik wrote:

Uncle Gus wrote:
kubassa wrote:
It's NOT a real life sim dood. SMH.
I didn't say it was. I was tempering stickyflipper's comment with another point to consider.
Maybe Jason should turn the birth cost back on at a low setting, and turn the bad mother back on as well, so that if people really don't want children, they can just let them die. Also, I think it should not be possible to have a baby within 30 seconds of breastfeeding a baby.
Breastfeeding as contraception. Best idea I've read yet. And I think it would be fairly easy to implement.

yay nature

Spoonwood · 2019-12-12 08:06:04

jasonrohrer wrote:

Females gestate and give birth to babies, and males do not.
In terms of the impact on human history and the development (or re-development) of civilization, I think that this one difference explains almost everything.

No. It doesn't explain the leading role men in a priori type fields like philosophy, theories of government, and especially mathematics. Jason you're a computer programmer, and computer science is another a priori field. Women aren't less capable of programming or having mathematical theories about computer programs because of pregnancy. Computing has been enormously influential since it got invented. The history of your own field, game development, can't get explained adequately by the fact that women gestate and men don't.

jasonrohrer wrote:

Some people say men are stronger that women. But while this might be true in terms of averages, it is not true for each pair of individuals. There are plenty of women who are way stronger than me, for example, and loads of women that are faster than me.

Yes, 'men are stronger than women" is not true for each pair of individuals. But it's not false either. The statement 'men are stronger than women' cannot logically get evaluated by pairs of individuals, because 'men' and 'women' are in the plural, while a comparison of pair of individuals compares two singular entities.

jasonrohrer wrote:

But a society that sends their women to war loses every chance at a future.

There is plenty in human society that cannot get understood via war.

jasonrohrer wrote:

Relatively speaking, males are, and have always been, kinda worthless. Cannon fodder. Miners. Death row inmates.

Jason you typified men by the worst instances of men. You didn't take into account male civic leaders. Male builders in human society. Male scientists. Male engineers. Male fire figthers. Male builders of museums.

Honestly, if's as if you were given a set of numbers {2, 3, 6, 8, 12, 15, 17, 23, 29, 34, 48}, and typified that set as one of prime numbers.

Most men are not criminals. You simply cannot logically make a statement about the general condition of a class by referring to a minority of individuals. Your judgement of the value of men in comparison to women is thus built on a foundation of sand... no scratch that, thin air.

Also miners aren't worthless. How the hell is the power system that runs the computers that people play your game running? The most common power generation source is coal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation

Spoonwood · 2019-12-12 08:28:29

Lum wrote:

Let's not diverge into sexist speech if possible. We're here to find advantage for both males and females. It's about finding a balance.

There was sexist speech in the original post. Jason evaluated men as having less value than women by making inferences from what he considers bad cases of men, which discriminates against men, since he didn't do the same for women. I scanned through the comments above your comment and didn't find anyone evaluating the value of men and women. Saying that group A is better than group B at X, Y, or Z does NOT imply that group A has more value than B overall, nor that group A is better than group B at A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, *and* Z.

Last edited by Spoonwood (2019-12-12 08:30:07)

pein · 2019-12-12 12:50:52

cannibalism solves famine and overpopulation

just saying

Spoonwood · 2019-12-12 13:00:30

Pein,

I'm literally laughing here. But, I kind of feel also that your humor, as funny as it is, is a bit out of place.

Sopbucket · 2019-12-13 03:24:07

Christoffer wrote:

Special male-only feature: adopt a stranger into the family line.
This would not change normal game-play but it would impact the long view, for players who are interested in that.
The mechanism could be something like this: 1. A male takes a certain object in hand and says "You are (name_of_family)", and drops the item. 2. The player who wants to join the family picks up the item and says "I am (name_of_family)". The item could be a leaf or a bone needle (alludes to mixing of blood) or something.
What do you think?

That kind of sounds like marriage. If we had a patrilineal marriage system, men could pull women from other families into theirs by marrying them; at least, women would be the only ones worth pulling in. That might be a little too screwy though, would all the woman's children switch to the new family as well? They might have to, otherwise you'd have brothers and sisters from different families, and I imagine that'd be more work to implement than it's worth.

If marriage helped increase fertility though, that could be something. It would give men a role in reproduction, but also delegate most of the child rearing to players that affirm that role by getting married in the first place. I think matrilineal marriage would work best, with the father retroactively adopting all of his wife's former children as his own - that just fits within the system as is without any hitches I can think of.

Personally, I think men are just fine as is, but I would like to be called "Dad" in game, one of these days.

Randomname · 2019-12-13 05:43:56

We have experienced the last female dying out and everyone notices, no one notices or cares that Jimbo and Mugen left ten years ago to get rope but haven't been seen since. They also don't care about silly Pomp going about town saying he made it back but he never managed to find any other family. Nor do they care about the boys that SID.

This is just my view. In this game if there was marriage (and I hope for marriage) the boy would have to take on the females last name as we are matriarchal society starting with Eve. Honestly I hope for no name changes at all, unless we go back to whoever names the child gives the last name. I've said in other thread the main allure of marriage should be mix race children, speaking the mothers language but knowing only the biome of their birth race.

I'm also very pro in giving boys an extra tool slot over girls, they should be working to support their mothers and sister after all. Before anyone says this is not fair, we are all born males at some point which means we would all experience the benefits. It evens out, boys have more skills to work/build with and girls have the joy of seeing their line continue. Benefits to both sexes.

pein · 2019-12-13 05:52:09

Spoonwood wrote:

Pein,
I'm literally laughing here. But, I kind of feel also that your humor, as funny as it is, is a bit out of place.

I was lazy to quote but was related to something people say on page two I think, some overpopulation and famine thingy

anyway
just in the other topic I thought that "would be nice but too powerful" (the different colour kids)
then I remembered this topic

what if

Your male babies can born as different skin tone if your females spent at least x minutes near a different colour male

Now think about it.
I understand Jason, I'm not totally agreeing with his statement but:

-You need constraints so your choices matter. The race update isn't fully bad, but the main things shouldn't be limited too much, Newcomen and rubber is around mid-level tech and it kills off most camps not having it.
-You need an identity. You are born into a ginger family you do ginger things, sauerkraut and igloos and oil maybe. Browns can do tattoo and rubber, blacks can get horses and painted clothes, photo paper.
If you could easily overcome this, would make no sense.

having a different colour male baby would create funny situations. I actually never killed male eve kids if they weren't offensive. Sometimes wild eves were griefing or stealing or just lazy, keeping their daughters kinda killed off your own family, seen that many times, 40 minutes later they overpopulate and your family has fewer girls, 3 gen later they take over, a few kills speed that up, your fences worth nothing, and your ancestors probably built them for a reason. But if a male baby works, it's totally fine having him, he can't have babies anyway Now even better, a male baby can do a special job for other families.
Also would be funny that suddenly you got a half-blood kid or a different colour.

-Right now male babies are despised, often starved or ridiculed, and they get less clothing and love.
-Males are cursed and killed more often, sometimes without any good reason.
-Females got their kids so in a situation where there is no witness or clear argument, females get support from their kids while males probably lost their mom and have no relation with their brothers and sisters.
-A town cannot continue without males and it's depressing when you can't save your town. Also, griefers ignore them if they are hard to kill so often you witness the death of your family.

SO the above idea would be a tiny bit of situational buff.
travelling males could have sons in other families. Different colour males could help out towns and leave a son behind who can do some special jobs, get some items for them, but won't have kids so the impact of him is temporary.

Maybe just half-blood son, then it would be more special. The skin tone would be a mix of two, and he could only do the other race special actions if he reaches age 30.

Male babies suicide more often. If they stay until 20, they probably survive to 60. The proportions are around 1:3. Some females suicide after they can't have kids, while males live until old age if they decide to stay, so old age males are more frequent.

There is one advantage of males: distraction-free work. I'm not the best mother or best meme score, but if a kid want to live and can follow, I feed her/him until it can eat and lead home, or drop the baby off on a safe spot with warmth and ask someone to look at it. Even so, as a female, that's a lot of time lost while doing a project. I try to just feed kids each 0.4 sec but some of them really scared and spams for talks a lot of non-sense and disturbs you later. As a male, I made several cars, as female-only did it once (from scratch or almost from scratch without tool slots or special items) and even then I lived mostly as a man, didn't cared much about kids.

So if males got to travel or work bonus, that can be just as good as having babies. Either that or worst case scenario ability: if there are no females around for 10 minutes, you can follow an exclamation mark in a longer distance. Keen senses kinda.

It could also be a passive bonus. The female boost was my idea. You need 3 females at all time for security, so that was a good addition to the game. Families don't die so often. 6 was too much, 4 is a bit too much but it's ok.
What about, linking that to males? if a family has male majority the buff is 4x, if it has no males, the max can be only 2x. So if they don't keep the males, they won't get females either.

With the outposts and pseudo camps, you get weird situations where you got no females on one camp and other has all of them, there should be some balancing, that males could buff that, so if a family is in 2 places, then you get more babies in both if you got many males. So pseudo eves better get some male companions to ensure their survival.

WalrusesConquer · 2019-12-13 07:14:22

who keeps necroing topics dammit

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2018-05-01 15:12:29

Re: The role of males in the game

#52 2018-05-01 20:37:52

Re: The role of males in the game

#53 2018-05-01 20:42:38

Re: The role of males in the game

#54 2018-05-01 22:06:10

Re: The role of males in the game

#55 2018-05-02 00:34:51

Re: The role of males in the game

#56 2018-05-02 00:50:24

Re: The role of males in the game

#57 2018-05-02 02:14:50

Re: The role of males in the game

#58 2018-05-02 02:49:52

Re: The role of males in the game

#59 2018-05-02 02:58:02

Re: The role of males in the game

#60 2018-05-02 09:50:36

Re: The role of males in the game

#61 2018-05-02 10:49:20

Re: The role of males in the game

#62 2018-05-02 11:02:00

Re: The role of males in the game

#63 2018-05-02 13:24:47

Re: The role of males in the game

#64 2018-05-02 13:57:06

Re: The role of males in the game

#65 2018-05-02 17:21:32

Re: The role of males in the game

#66 2018-05-02 20:23:57

Re: The role of males in the game

#67 2018-05-02 21:07:04

Re: The role of males in the game

#68 2019-12-12 08:06:04

Re: The role of males in the game

#69 2019-12-12 08:28:29

Re: The role of males in the game

#70 2019-12-12 12:50:52

Re: The role of males in the game

#71 2019-12-12 13:00:30

Re: The role of males in the game

#72 2019-12-13 03:24:07

Re: The role of males in the game

#73 2019-12-13 05:43:56

Re: The role of males in the game

#74 2019-12-13 05:52:09

Re: The role of males in the game

#75 2019-12-13 07:14:22

Re: The role of males in the game

Board footer