Print

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

[Rooster]

I have a couple of minor ideas that could really change the gameplay later on:

1) Metabolism: Dwarfs eat a LOT so I think that they should eat more than any humanoid race but they should also regenerate faster. Of course trolls should eat once /six days or even less! Not like the dwarfs that eat once/ fifteen days. Also  it would be best if it would be done in raws, just like the temperature.

2)modyfing genes of plants: People now are doing it so why not? Humans are doing it by cutting young branches of different plants and then "glue" 'em together till they won't need any support anymore. I'd love to see "sweet helmets" without restarting the game

3)Symbolism of clans: my next idea is that dwarfs should have more tools and rocks in their engravings that show a person or a family

I hope you liked my ideas

[Sowelu]

That...that isn't...GRAFTING PLANTS DOES NOT CHANGE THEIR GENES!

I like using symbols for families, though.

[mickel]

Hang on. "Dwarves eat a lot", and then "dwarves eat once every fifteen days"?

I eat about five times in a day. If twice per month is a lot, where does that put me?

[Lightning4]

Well we can assume, much like other parts of the game, that it is abstracted.

Unless, of course, the dwarves have really, really, really slow metabolisms.

[mickel]

I think the dwarves having really slow metabolisms sounds like a really fun idea. Maybe it's combined with really long intestines, too, making them the opposite of a ferret?

[Capntastic]

Alcohol is, if I recall, the highest calorie nutrient.   Something like seven per gram compared to a carbohydrate's 4.   I dunno.   But that ought to be important to their metabolism.

[Tamren]

Foods should have a calorie rating. If you eat a donut, thats a lot of energy in one small package. But if you eat nothing but celery, you will starve to death. Celery contains less calories than it takes to EAT the celery.

This wont be an issue until we get spoilage and food preservation but it would be interesting to consider.

[Faces of Mu]

Istpi Onorrand cancels eat celery: Going to McDwarfs.   :p

[mickel]

Food containing less calories than it takes to burn them is a myth if I remember correctly. I've heard it with everything from rice cakes to jellyfish. Celery was a new one to me though.

[JT]

Not a myth.
http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/celery.asp

[mickel]

I wouldn't count that article as much of evidence, but let's get back on task. Do dwarves even have metabolisms at the moment, or is there just an arbitrary counter for a "food value" or something?

If we're to introduce a more complex metabolism, we'll ultimately need to keep track of all the energy passing through the dwarves. The energy they take in through food and the energy they use up in their daily lives. That means keeping track of how much energy it takes for the dwarf to carry out each and every task they undertake. We wouldn't just have calorie counters on all the food, we'd have calorie counters on every task there is.

That's a lot of data, and a lot of calculations.

[Poil]

quote:Originally posted by mickel:
<STRONG>Hang on. "Dwarves eat a lot", and then "dwarves eat once every fifteen days"?

I eat about five times in a day. If twice per month is a lot, where does that put me?</STRONG>

An invincible god of regeneration. Or just incredible fat.

Imagine how horrible if dwarfs had to eat even once every day. They'd starve to death in the food stockpile because they couldn't gobble it down fast enough.

[Seryntas]

quote:Originally posted by mickel:
<STRONG>That's a lot of data, and a lot of calculations.</STRONG>

You can broadly stereotype jobs so the exact calories for each job aren't needed, and of course one more calculation isn't going to rape the game.

[JT]

quote:Originally posted by mickel:
<STRONG>I wouldn't count that article as much of evidence, but let's get back on task.</STRONG>

I'll get back off the topic for a moment to ask why you don't trust Snopes.  They spend their lives debunking internet myths.  I consider them more reputable than even The Straight Dope. =P

[mickel]

quote:Originally posted by JT:
<STRONG>
I'll get back off the topic for a moment to ask why you don't trust Snopes.  They spend their lives debunking internet myths.  I consider them more reputable than even The Straight Dope. =P</STRONG>

The article wasn't very well written, and I saw from the sources it wasn't well researched either. It didn't strike me as something written by experts who knew what they were about. At least not experts in nutrition and human digestion.

I haven't looked much at either Snopes or The Straight Dope, but the general impression is they're in the "funny but not scientific" category along with Mythbusters and similar.

And of course, there's the Internet factor to weigh in against them, too.

[ October 12, 2007: Message edited by: mickel ]