Procne wrote:I think you guys are min-maxing too hard. If FEP efficiency scaling is linear with the hunger then eating a food with 2 hunger will reduce the FEP efficiency of the next food by... 0.53% (266% efficiency range spread over 1000 hunger, 0.2% of hunger translates to 0.2% of 266% ~= 0.53%) of the base value.
If you eat foods for 100 hunger you will reduce FEP gains by 26% (so from 300% at 0 hunger to 274% at 100 hunger). 100 hunger - that's a length of the old 300% hunger bar.
Is it really that big difference to suddenly do those weird micromanagement gymnastics?
And even if it's not linear I think the values are still going to be too small difference to warrant all this micromanagement.
edit: if anything then the current implementation promoted such micromanagement more, where you would balance at the border between 300% and 200% ranges. As soon as hunger falls to 300% you eat something and then wait for the decay, which is faster in 200% range, to return you to 300%. Is anyone doing such stuff?
Honestly, I am more afraid that the new implementation will make the new meta to eat as much as possible, rather than dealing with hunger. And the winner party will be not the one capable of keeping hunger low (because that will be impossible), but the one able to mass produce more food.
You're saying it's better than before?
Huge game systems that everyone is involved with and that take a big part of the gameplay. How many of those in the last couple years were made more player-friendly/less tedious/more fun vs more tedious/less fun?
Noone said they won't adjust hunger values of the food by like x4. We'll be lucky if we can eat the same amount as before.