Subsistence

Subsistence

Subsistence > Feature Suggestions > Topic Details
Fins Sep 4 @ 5:01am
Solution for "mass growing is too OP" - better one than adding collection time
I propose to remove collection time from plant beds Alpha 54 added, and instead do the following change:

reduce hunger effect of all uncooked vegetables massively, namely to:
- raw onion: +1 hunger point filled;
- raw potato: +3 hunger points filled;
- raw carrot: +2 hunger points filled;
- raw tomato: +2 hunger points filled.

Other stats of raw vegetables would be left as they are.

This change will provide following benefits in terms of game balance:

- mass-growing vegetables and eating them raw will stop to be "way too easy" way to keep player character's well fed, unless truly gigantic farm is being used (on the order of many dozens plant beds). The latter case, massive player's effort needed to build such a big growing operation plus extra time spent to collect great number of vegetables to use them raw for keeping one's hunger bar at bay - would still balance things quite well;

- cooking recipes based on vegetables would become much more attractive thing to use. Currently, there is too little a need to use them for many kinds of players, who simply prefer to eat raw vegetables and not spend extra time cooking them;

- a touch of realism: in real life, amount of calories in uncooked vegetables is many times lower than calories in cooked meat. For example: IRL, beef steak = ~250 calories / 100g, but raw poraroes = 75 calories / 100g, raw tomatoes = 18 calories / 100g;

This change will also bring the following minor issue to game balance:

- wild-growing vegetables will become much weaker source of satisfying character's hunger, which is particularly noticeable for starting players.

To address this issue, i also propose to simply add about +2...+3 points to hunger boost from Blueberries, Strawberries and Kelp, which are overall much more common edibles found in the wild than vegetables. This will completely solve the issue and will also make the game even a little bit more friendly towards starting players.

Please note all the numbers are merely guesses - in no way i say those specific values are the best to use. But i hope the general idea holds much merit, is most easy to implement, and should be applied to the game before Alpha 54 goes out of experimental.

Cheers!
< >
Showing 1-6 of 6 comments
Ahrondus Sep 14 @ 8:24am 
Seeing this change would also make it significantly harder for players to rear animals in the small animal housing (as food percentages provided to the coops would decrease, crops wouldn't be as valuable), which in turn would make it harder to craft the already difficult recipes in the oven.

All you will do is shift player veggie consumption from crops to berries/kelp, which in turn will effectively neutralize an entire section of the game mechanics: Farming and Animal Husbandry. Which then ruins cooking, as players won't take the time to raise animals to their maximum level for the high quality meats needed in baking. Kelp is already abundant and taking a few short minutes to gather a handful to eat, with your boosted numbers, would provide most players all they need.

Shifting the meta isn't a solution.
Fins Sep 14 @ 8:46pm 
Originally posted by Ahrondus:
Seeing this change would also make it significantly harder for players to rear animals in the small animal housing (as food percentages provided to the coops would decrease, crops wouldn't be as valuable), which in turn would make it harder to craft the already difficult recipes in the oven.

All you will do is shift player veggie consumption from crops to berries/kelp, which in turn will effectively neutralize an entire section of the game mechanics: Farming and Animal Husbandry. Which then ruins cooking, as players won't take the time to raise animals to their maximum level for the high quality meats needed in baking. Kelp is already abundant and taking a few short minutes to gather a handful to eat, with your boosted numbers, would provide most players all they need.

Shifting the meta isn't a solution.
I don't think so. Coops percentages do not match hunger values on veggies. Like, tomatoes and carrots provide similar amounts of feed to coops currently, but their current +hunger effects on player character - are dramatically different.

In addition, baking moose and fish has nothing to do with raising animals. Yet it's still baking.

As for Kelp, 1st, +2...+3 hunger increase from kelp is nothing like you said it'd be. Whole hunger bar is ~125 points. Right now kelp gives +3 hunger a piece, iirc. So it'd be ~42 kelp to fill up one hunger bar 100%. Even with +3 bonus on top, it'd still be 21 pieces. Now, you said "few short minutes". I don't believe you can get 21 kelp in "few short minutes". Getting that many in 5 minutes would be exceptional; in 10 minutes - lucky; in 15 minutes - usual. And 15 minutes is more than a half of in-game day (light time). Thing is, any players much advanced and with a good base - would still have much better ways to get lots of nutrition without spending those likes of time collecting food. Like i said, it's for starting players / characters. "Meta" and "late game" has nothing to do with it.

All in all, i think you are making up artificial objections, and i think you're not doing it any well. You probably do not like the suggestion merely because it takes away easy-peasy late-game food source, yet since you're ashamed to admit that - you need to "invent" some other "reasons". If so, then please note that it wouldn't help. ColdGames knows the deal much better than you and me talen together and multiplied by some fairly big number. ;)
Ahrondus Sep 15 @ 7:57am 
You seem a bit perturbed at my response.. No need to be defensive, it's just a critique right?

"... Like, tomatoes and carrots provide similar amounts of feed to coops currently..."
First off, wrong. Appears you haven't touched animal husbandry or farming in a while. Tomatoes by far provide the highest source of food for Animal Housing. Carrots are substantially less. They work, but in larger quantities.

Either way, your OP is about reducing hunger amounts provided by raw vegetables. You then state "... any players much advanced and with a good base - would still have much better ways to get lots of nutrition...". So why should there be a change at all to provided hunger values from vegetables, if players can already get food well enough?

"... baking moose and fish has nothing to do with raising animals. Yet it's still baking."
Correct, but those aren't the only recipes in the oven. Two of the recipes specifically require reared chicken and rabbit meat, which you're making more difficult to acquire by reducing crop effectiveness.

"So it'd be ~42 kelp to fill up one hunger bar 100%."
You're under the assumption that I'm talking about filling your hunger 100%.. Which would be ridiculous and unnecessary since other foods are present and readily available. It's about gathering enough to get by. But let's move on:
'I don't believe you can get 21 kelp in "few short minutes".'
A few short minutes is subjective. But I gathered 35 kelp in 20 minutes. With your numbers that you calculated "Even with +3 bonus on top, it'd still be 21 pieces.", I would have gathered enough to fill 150% of my hunger bar. Tell me again why I would need to do anything else other than kelp dive every couple in-game days, or even as needed since the abundance of other food sources?

I state again. Tweaking hunger values provided by raw fruits/vegetables doesn't solve your issue. You admit to players having a "good base" won't require finding additional food sources, so it begs the question: Do you really have an issue here? Seems like a pointless topic..

As you stated -- "Meta" and >"late game"< has nothing to do with it.

Then you immediately follow up with -- "You probably do not like the suggestion merely because it takes away easy-peasy >late-game< food source..."
-You're contradicting yourself. Again.

Side note: I grow a farm to feed my Animal Housing and for cooking dishes in the oven. I regularly keep proteins and fruit/veggies topped off. Assuming that I use "mass growing" as my only food source only displays arrogance.
Last edited by Ahrondus; Sep 15 @ 8:00am
Fins Sep 15 @ 11:06am 
Originally posted by Ahrondus:
You seem a bit perturbed at my response.. No need to be defensive, it's just a critique right?

"... Like, tomatoes and carrots provide similar amounts of feed to coops currently..."
First off, wrong. Appears you haven't touched animal husbandry or farming in a while. Tomatoes by far provide the highest source of food for Animal Housing. Carrots are substantially less. They work, but in larger quantities.
I did, but not with anything other than tomatoes any recently, yes. So i did not check the numbers, relying on old memories instead. Now i went and checked it. You're right, and i was wrong; tomatoes are +17 hunger, and give +17% feed to the coop. Carrots are +6 hunger, and give +6% feed to the coop.

Thank you much on correcting me, and apologies for being old stubborn crook, if i call myself so. Sorry! %)


Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... So why should there be a change at all to provided hunger values from vegetables, if players can already get food well enough? ...
Because with +17 hunger from tomatoes, which can be grown in really high numbers when using some 8+ plant beds, hunger becomes way too simple thing to manage. It's not just "well enough" - it's "way too easy". The suggestion i made is not because late-game hunger has no late-game solutions which work "well enough" - the opposite is the case: "too well". That's why there should be a change.


Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... Correct, but those aren't the only recipes in the oven. Two of the recipes specifically require reared chicken and rabbit meat, which you're making more difficult to acquire by reducing crop effectiveness. ...
For the last time: i do NOT propose to "reduce crop effectiveness" in terms of raising chickens. Even while you're right about effects from vegetables - let's not forget that chickens can also be fed by blueberries and apples. I did not try strawberries; do those work also? And my suggestion has those +hunger (and thus, coop feed) effects actually increased. And you yourself mention how available "other food sources are" - which i recon include those fruits and berries. So, if you'd object on the grounds that "you much reduce how effective it is to sit in one's base and grow things" - i'd rather agree (yet i don't think it's such a bad thing, though). But if you insist on "your suggestion makes it much harder to raise chickens" - i can't agree, due to the above.

Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... You're under the assumption that I'm talking about filling your hunger 100%.. ...
No, i am not. Those numbers given are just to compare with other possible food sources. Which player gets "anyway" while doing most outdoor activities as he spots them. Shooting a butchering a wolf which just happened to "get in a way" takes about 15 seconds tops for an experienced player, cooking its meat in itself takes may be 15 or so more. For 30 seconds investment, depending on if it's meat and/or liver and 1 or 2 pieces, some 25%....60% of hunger bar can be replenished. More if using the oven. So for an investment of ~1 minute (repair costs per-kill for low-level weapons are negligible extra time per-kill), it's about full hunger bar. Why on Earth someone would insist specifically diving for Kelp when it's ~15 times worse hunger-per-second average? There is just no reason. Kelp can only be taken "as a freebie" when diving for pearls / sandstone, which for most players is far from primary activity in the game - only done occasionally on "as needed" basis. It's all pretty clear, if you'd ask me.

But i bet
You're set
To object,
And my thoughts you're gonna neglect.

See, you made me rhyme. Your attempts made me into romantic mood somehow. Highly strange. %)


Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... But I gathered 35 kelp in 20 minutes. With your numbers that you calculated "Even with +3 bonus on top, it'd still be 21 pieces.", I would have gathered enough to fill 150% of my hunger bar. Tell me again why I would need to do anything else other than kelp dive every couple in-game days, or even as needed since the abundance of other food sources? ...
Ok, i'll tell you again: because diving for kelp cuts you off from most content in the game, which is on land. Reduce your gathering speed / efficiency by half only because you spend every other day swimming around collecting kelp? Seriously? Besides, let's be honest, kelp collecting is boring. Maybe not so boring 1st day and 2nd, but many days spent regularly doing it? I bet nearly noone dreams about doing it over and over. If any player at all.

Good enough? =)


Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... You're contradicting yourself. Again. ...
"Meta" means rationally most efficient way to do late-game / end-game, with corresponding choices being made out of circumstantially preferential possibilities. The situation which i refer to as "easy peasy food source" - is not actually meta: rather, it's a broken meta, or for better term - lack of meta (in the corresponding mechanic). A choice which rationally has no drawbacks, no circumstances at all when it's not "the best". There is no meta in such cases. And usually, it is to be fixed - this or that way, which fix allows for "some" meta to actually become possible. That's why the situation we have - has nothing to do with actual meta. There is no contradiction. There is only confusion about those terms which you seem to have.

This is with all due respect, and of course all IMHO. If you insist, we can ATD. I will have nofurther arguments to present on this matter. Thank you for discussing it, too. Maybe something good with happen as a result of our exchange. Salute!
Last edited by Fins; Sep 15 @ 11:07am
Ahrondus Sep 15 @ 8:19pm 
Originally posted by Fins:
Because with +17 hunger from tomatoes, which can be grown in really high numbers when using some 8+ plant beds...

I have only reached the intermediate stages of the game. I have 4 crop plots, 2 coops, and 3 wood burners and I find it dreadful to micro-manage the fertilizer/water of all the plots on a consistent basis without it sucking up plenty of game time, as well as wood farming (just got a diving station so no coal) to keep the burners stocked, with enough logs left over to actually craft things. That seems like it would take up most of the gameplay..
So if people are growing 8+ plant beds, i honestly wonder what that takes to manage. So I cannot fathom the amount of work it takes for upkeep, so to me the change seems unnecessary. Tons of upkeep, lots of rewards. Seems like a fair trade.

Originally posted by Fins:
For the last time: i do NOT propose to "reduce crop effectiveness" in terms of raising chickens. Even while you're right about effects from vegetables - let's not forget that chickens can also be fed by blueberries and apples.

You aren't proposing that change, but as you've stated in your OP that this change will have a "minor issue to game balance". The hunger change to crops will affect their ability to be used as coop feed as well. -- Yes, you can feed chickens with blueberries/apples/strawberries but the values they provide are (even with an increase) low in comparison, especially to tomatoes.
Also I am still firm that this reduces crop effectiveness, because blueberries/apples/strawberries/kelp are not crops. They cannot be grown. So in terms of plants that you can grow in the plant bed (true crops), their effectiveness for feeding coops is reduced in line with their effectiveness for feeding players. As you said, tomatoes give 17 hunger for players, and 17% for coops. If you reduce that to 2 hunger for players, that would also be only 2% for a coop.

Originally posted by Fins:
Why on Earth someone would insist specifically diving for Kelp when it's ~15 times worse hunger-per-second average?
I for one, don't expect everyone to play Subsistence with peak efficiency in terms of utilizing daylight hours to their fullest potential. You get into the hard numbers, but it's honestly irrelevant. Yes, while it may be more work/take longer/be inefficient, in the end it's effective because it would get the job done. I for one am not saying I do this all the time, nor am I saying that --specifically diving for kelp-- will be a players only food source. I did it once, while looking for pearls, and gathered up an abundance of kelp. So it's entirely possible to do again. That's the point: It can be done. So whether you or I think it's the best use of a player's time, that's up to them.

Originally posted by Fins:
Besides, let's be honest, kelp collecting is boring.
It is. But the point of the dive was for pearls, not just kelp for food. The kelp was just an added bonus.

Originally posted by Fins:
Your attempts made me into romantic mood somehow.
Awkward. TMI. Probably you just trying to get me to leave you alone.

Your "touch of reality", integrating raw numbers about calories/100g.. Sure. But if the hunger bar is roughly 125 points, and an onion fills 1 hunger, I have serious doubts that eating (JUST an example) 125 onions to fill you up is realistic.

I didn't even touch on like.. 3 of the other topics.. Well, too late for that now. This post is already long enough. So..

I've said my piece, as you've said yours. Let's leave it at that then, shall we?
Last edited by Ahrondus; Sep 15 @ 8:33pm
Fins Sep 15 @ 8:34pm 
Originally posted by Ahrondus:
... I've said my piece, as you've said yours. Let's leave it at that then, shall we?
Sure - and it's already done by me. Self-quote: "I will have no further arguments to present on this matter".

This does not mean i don't have further arguments. This means i don't have any arguments which are to be presented on this matter, in this discussion. It's kinda subtle, but important, difference - which explains how i was able to be sure about it even before you made your reply to my previous post. This certainty of mine - is because i think we both contributed more than enough, in sum, to allow anyone's interested to render their judgement about our here initial disagreement.

Cheers!
Last edited by Fins; Sep 15 @ 8:35pm
< >
Showing 1-6 of 6 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

Subsistence > Feature Suggestions > Topic Details