Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[syvarris]

@Piecewise
It's one of those math things.  You never, ever, need more than four colors to color every region on a map.  Here's the wikipedia article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem

It is somewhat silly, but there is one decent reason for it--if you choose the right four colors, it makes it easier for partially colorblind people like myself to differentiate between regions.  For instance, regions 75 and 6 (down and rightish of center) look almost identical to me.  115 and 140 (middle left) are also very similar, though I'm not blue-weak.  Using four very clearly different colors would prevent any possible confusion.


As to voter fraud... I'm exceptionally paranoid, and therefore probably not the best judge of whether anything is actually happening.  However, it'd be pretty easy to solve by making a poll thread--not the forum poll "feature", a thread where people post their choices--and telling everyone to use that.  If we restrict the voting to only ER players, Yoink's army of alts won't be able to vote.

Also, since we could let people use the instant-runoff voting system, we would only need to run one poll.  IRV is where each person ranks their first choice, then second, then third, etc, and their vote is transferred to the next preferred if their initial choice is the lowest.  So, my vote for MMWW wouldn't be a wasted vote, because my second choice would be for notER Oro, and that's what my vote would count for since MMWW isn't going to win.

[Egan_BW]

I closed the poll on IRC, and the result is 8 for Oro with no ER connection, 6 for Oro with an ER connection.
Someone voted wrong the first time and then voted twice for the other option so the poll technically says 9-7, but in terms of people who voted it's 8-6.
Only 14 people voted so this is by no means a comprehensive poll, and I recommend we make a tread like syv says.

[TheBiggerFish]

@piecewise:

@Piecewise
It's one of those math things.  You never, ever, need more than four colors to color every region on a map.  Here's the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem

[syvarris]

DocMctaalik also voted twice, once for each option.  He voted first for ER, and said "just kidding" after voting notER.  That could be interpreted as him only wanting to vote for ER and accidentally typing the correct line to vote for notER.  In which case we still have a 7:7 split ^{_{I'm an idiot}} 7:6 majority.

[TheBiggerFish]

Argh, you people...

[Egan_BW]

I forgot about DrMcTaalik. I had assumed that he meant just kidding about voting, which would make it 7:5.

Also, I think RNG want ERo for some reason, I said that odds were for ERo and evens were for Oro, 7 even numbers before a single odd.

[DoctorMcTaalik]

DocMctaalik also voted twice, once for each option.  He voted first for ER, and said "just kidding" after voting notER.  That could be interpreted as him only wanting to vote for ER and accidentally typing the correct line to vote for notER.  In which case we still have a 7:7 split ^{_{I'm an idiot}} 7:6 majority.

Sorry for the confusion. The "just kidding" part was about my initial vote for ER Oro, which was actually an accident. Or maybe I thought I was being clever at the time, I honestly can't remember right now. I've fallen asleep on the couch since then, and my brain is foggy.

To clarify: my vote is for non-ER Oro.

It is somewhat silly, but there is one decent reason for it--if you choose the right four colors, it makes it easier for partially colorblind people like myself to differentiate between regions.  For instance, regions 75 and 6 (down and rightish of center) look almost identical to me.  115 and 140 (middle left) are also very similar, though I'm not blue-weak.  Using four very clearly different colors would prevent any possible confusion.

+1. I'm red-weak myself, and there are a few spots where borders are partially or entirely indistinguishable to me.

[Radio Controlled]

We haven't even hit 30 people voting yet. Let's wait until at least the end of the weekend to see what the results will be. We can still do another voting method then, but I'd just give it some more time for now.

[Xantalos]

How're we voting? I vote ER Oro. Sorry if need to do other thing to vote. Too busy tamping down inexplicable extreme rage right now. Can do in morning.

[Radio Controlled]

How're we voting? I vote ER Oro. Sorry if need to do other thing to vote. Too busy tamping down inexplicable extreme rage right now. Can do in morning.

Front page of wiki, see link in my sig.

[NJW2000]

Both sheets are fine. Welcome. Feel free to wander around. Or go bugger that guy who's keeping hidden shop behind the bar. Nyars is his name.

Looks like the on-ship thread really is devolving into a completely lawless environment. THink we might be overdoing the whole "social Darwinist experiment" thing here.

[Radio Controlled]

@Piecewise
It's one of those math things.  You never, ever, need more than four colors to color every region on a map.  Here's the wikipedia article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem

It is somewhat silly, but there is one decent reason for it--if you choose the right four colors, it makes it easier for partially colorblind people like myself to differentiate between regions.  For instance, regions 75 and 6 (down and rightish of center) look almost identical to me.  115 and 140 (middle left) are also very similar, though I'm not blue-weak.  Using four very clearly different colors would prevent any possible confusion.

Yeah, you never need more than 4 on any (2D) map, but it is true that if you manually color it in (or the program you use is faulty) you might make a mistake and end up with same-colored squares next to each other, but theoretically you don't need more than 4.

[piecewise]

So lets talk a moment about the differences between ORO and ER-ORO

1. Progression
Oro would work in a sort of "Branching pathways" design. Ie one entry point and it expands from there. Tree like. ERORO, where the city is now a malfunctioning auto colony, would have a lot more room for different paths in. Because the game wouldn't have a central goal of "killing" the colony like in ORO, I wouldn't have to worry about obfuscating your path or building layers of difficulty. Rather certain areas would be difficult and you can choose to go there or not.

2. Malevolent landscape vs apathetic one
One of the major differences here would be that ORO's world is literally out to get you. The city is alive and it hates you. Being in the City in ORO is like being a microbe in a living body, you are a target of everything that body can throw at you.  ERORO's city isn't alive in the same way; it's alive due to the auto nature of it, but it doesn't hate you. There can be civilizations or at least groups of beings or things living in there that are neutral, friendly or hostile to you. The best way I can think of to describe it is that it would be something akin to an alien ecosystem, rather than a death trap.

3. Goals vs Desire
In ORO you have a definite goal, Kill the City. In ERORO it would be much more about personal goals. Missions would come in the form of Requests that are made to the Merc population of the bar. Bounties, hired guards, exploration requests, all those kinds of things could be asked for. And whats more, players would be able to create their own requests if they wanted, hiring other players to work for them. If they felt like it.

4.Melee vs ranged
Simply put, ORO would involve my attempts at a more in depth melee system with weapon range, damage type and speed, while ERORO would be based on a more universal system since it would be a mix of lots of different kinds of weapons, many of them ranged.

5. Minor missions
One way I've though of to handle massive amounts of people is to create what I call "minor missions". These would essentially be CYOA style missions, where you would get choices and rolls based on those choices. Ie you would be given a situation and 3-4 options, each of which represents a roll. You could choose the roll you and your teammates want and then do it. Depending on the roll (probably more pass fail than true RTD) you would continue the story until another roll. This would go on for roughly 15-20 turns and then would end, with the number of successful rolls and choices determining your outcome. They would of course be more simple than major missions, with less freedom, but they would give you something to do and a way to make some money or get some items while not on a major mission. This could be done for both games.

[Radio Controlled]

Ooh, I like the sound of both of those.

I feel like ORO would be a very focused game, with clear goals and objectives, while ERORO would be more laid back and free form. ORO would probably also be a shorter, but also much harder, game, and be rather combat/survival focused (and benefit from player structures to guide the struggle against the city). ERORO on the other hand looks to be more about exploring and interacting with the environment.

Secondly, I feel like ORO would probably be a much more serious game, with less room for shenanigans and hilarious failure, especially if mistakes and failure are punished by the ever hostile city. While ERORO has more room for things spiraling out of control without it immediately dooming everyone or every mistake being brutally punished with death and misery.

Am I interpreting things correctly here?

Not sure about the mini missions, sound interesting in concept but I'd like to see them play out in some sort of test first.

[Pancaek]

3. Goals vs Desire
 And whats more, players would be able to create their own requests if they wanted, hiring other players to work for them. If they felt like it.

You mean we'll actually be able to make mad dosh, unlike ER's tokens scarcity? Then use said mad dosh to send other players on missions in order to make even madder dosh?

I like.