Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]

Author Topic: Food need preferences now too strong  (Read 17831 times)

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« Reply #75 on: May 08, 2016, 01:37:08 pm »

Buying out everything is a horrible idea. We're already fighting a battle against item glut, and I, at least, am also fighting one against food over production.

In addition there would have to be a very significant interface change to allow you to easily buy stuff that's low in stock and in demand (NOT the current situation of first manually type everything present (BEFORE the caravan arrives, as the interface doesn't distinguish between your stuff and theirs) and then manually compare every single item across multiple categories, updating prior to every caravan). Also, there is no reason to buy stuff that were once a novelty, but nobody liked.

Self sufficiency has to be a viable strategy. Trade should be an option that provides a bonus on top of a workable base. Imported luxury consumables, whether food or incense, etc. (easily managed) could provide a boost, especially if developing luxury seeking classes, but shouldn't be required. In addition to that, trade might provide additional benefits (beyond the garbage truck one), including, potentially, a role of strengthening diplomatic ties and as a deterrent to war.
Logged

Bumber

  • Bay Watcher
  • REMOVE KOBOLD
    • View Profile
Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« Reply #76 on: May 09, 2016, 12:38:23 am »

For now, but agriculture will be reworked and recipes are coming eventually. Needs aren't supposed to be that difficult to meet. Pray to deity is as simple as building a temple. Drinking is as simple as having booze. There are ones just for talking to people or viewing art. IMO, we don't need an entire economy based upon a single need.
The whole economy needs to exist, if everybody can be kept happy simply by being given any kind of prepared food then we will never see long distance trading in food ever realistically occurring. Your solution means complete self-sufficiency in food is pretty much going to be the rule, if we were to add in recipes then the recipes will realistically be based upon the presently available foods to a given culture, so no trade there; if we make recipes require unavailable foods then we are back to where we started with unmeetable food needs.
Hillocks (dwarf equivalent of hamlets) were added for this reason. In the future, providing food for a fort is going to take more than a few 3x3 farm plots tended by 2-3 farmers. If you look around in adventurer mode, you'll notice huge fields near hamlets. (IDK if hillocks have them yet, as I haven't adventured much since inevitability update.) Players with non-agarian forts will be expected to trade for food, due to the significant labor investment.

Revealing food needs is actually beneficial since the more likes are revealed the easier it is to meet the needs of the dwarf, since as the original replacement food like remains in play they now have more food likes, any of which will meet their singular food need; the more likes the dwarf has, the easier it is to meet their food need...
How would we balance "easier"? If the player can scrape by with fort produced "close enough" foods, why would they bother with the hassle of trading? They just need to do well enough to avoid stress and distraction. The rest of the happiness can be made up with the legendary dining hall they're eating in.

Seconding what Patrik said about item glut and self-sufficiency. Isolated embark scenarios will need to be doable.

Personally, I would suggest that dwarves could petition their nobles to mandate an import agreement of a certain food for a while. I'm tired of fulfilling production demands for items I don't need, and this mitigates both issues.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2016, 12:47:25 am by Bumber »
Logged
Reading his name would trigger it. Thinking of him would trigger it. No other circumstances would trigger it- it was strictly related to the concept of Bill Clinton entering the conscious mind.

THE xTROLL FUR SOCKx RUSE WAS A........... DISTACTION        the carp HAVE the wagon

A wizard has turned you into a wagon. This was inevitable (Y/y)?

NW_Kohaku

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC:SCIENCE_FOR_FUN: REQUIRED]
    • View Profile
Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« Reply #77 on: May 09, 2016, 02:16:57 am »

The whole economy needs to exist, if everybody can be kept happy simply by being given any kind of prepared food then we will never see long distance trading in food ever realistically occurring.  Your solution means complete self-sufficiency in food is pretty much going to be the rule, if we were to add in recipes then the recipes will realistically be based upon the presently available foods to a given culture, so no trade there; if we make recipes require unavailable foods then we are back to where we started with unmeetable food needs.

[...]

[...]

The problem is not the number of food types, it is fact that not all food types are even obtainable; 200 or 1000 is irrelevant. 

[...]

Okay, I see the problem here is I have been wroting needs when what I really meant is likes.  The needs are there as at present, certain dwarves have the NEED for fine meals which is met by being given a food with one of the ingredients that they LIKE.  What I am proposing is that we continue randomly determine the initial likes of a dwarf as at present, but compare the needs to a newly introduced list of culturally available foods which is separate from the random likes of a given dwarf; the same list can of course determine recipes, hence killing two birds with one stone. 

[...]

Having arbitrary luxury goods is simply not what we want to have.  We want what is a luxury to be determined dynamically by the world economy without us having to define in the raws what is considered a luxury.

Where does this "we" come from?

You don't seem to understand the core disagreement, here: You're trying to solve a "problem" nobody else wants solved.  You're trying to argue that this solution of yours is necessary to ban self-sufficient fortresses or fortress-hill regions to other players who all want those things to exist, and therefore have no use for your "solution" to a "problem" they find an ideal state.  A "problem", incidentally, which is completely irrelevant to the actual topic of the thread to the point of being a derail.

This thread is about the problem of needs being unfulfillable. Adding in arbitrary likes becomes a completely different topic than this, and hopes to achieve a wildly different goal.
Logged
Personally, I like [DF] because after climbing the damned learning cliff, I'm too elitist to consider not liking it.
"And no Frankenstein-esque body part stitching?"
"Not yet"

Improved Farming
Class Warfare

Timeless Bob

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« Reply #78 on: February 19, 2020, 03:08:01 pm »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: February 19, 2020, 03:10:15 pm by Timeless Bob »
Logged
L33tsp34k does to English what Picasso did to faces.

Dwarfopoly
The Luckiest Tourist EVER
Bloodlines of the Forii

Quarque

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« Reply #79 on: February 21, 2020, 01:10:33 pm »

I'd suggest the decent meal distraction to be toned down to be satisfied at least by varied lavish masterworks meals for now, with favorite items allowing satisfaction to be gained with poor, unvaried fare containing the item.

I would suggest to just do this. A varied menu of lavish masterwork meals should count as "decent food". That alone will solve the problem.

The details of how to model special likes are far less important.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]