remove hunger & feps from some foods

[Harthel]

+1 to OP

[Procne]

I don't know, I like energy mechanic. It's a bit like having to refuel your character. I liked having to restore humours in Salem too.
One of my fondest memories from W12 was running around the forest and crafting pitbaked foods and stuffing them into our kilns for labour chars when they were clearing / flattening / building walls

[VDZ]

Radical alternative suggestion: Remove hunger values above 100%. Getting back to 90% hunger happens quickly enough, and there's barely a difference between 90% and 100%. It's just the 300%/200% that make a massive difference that you're never getting back while playing actively. If the higher values don't exist, 'ruining your hunger' isn't much of a problem since it'll recover in some time. (Specifically, 5 hours for the 90% bar according to the wiki. In contrast, recovering the full 300% bar takes over a real life week of fasting.)

[Procne]

The 300% hunger was originally introduced as a catch up mechanic, I think. So that people, who play less, get some boost to their stat intake. Not sure if it worked that way, but if it was removed then it would be good to put something else in its place.

Similar to how it was done in Salem, satiations could be used. As in some very good, easy to make foods that absolutely ruin satiations

[Sevenless]

Radical alternative suggestion: Remove hunger values above 100%. Getting back to 90% hunger happens quickly enough, and there's barely a difference between 90% and 100%. It's just the 300%/200% that make a massive difference that you're never getting back while playing actively. If the higher values don't exist, 'ruining your hunger' isn't much of a problem since it'll recover in some time. (Specifically, 5 hours for the 90% bar according to the wiki. In contrast, recovering the full 300% bar takes over a real life week of fasting.)

300% food boost as a mechanic is utterly broken, it was never meant to be required. Salt made that vastly worse (localized resources didn't work as intended either while we're on the topic).

I'm not sure I'd want to bandaid to make the current system slightly better rather than trying to fix the actual problem of the catchup mechanic actually being a get further ahead mechanic.

[kirillius98]

300% hunger is mistake - if it is meant to be a catch-up mechanic then it shouldn't be an option for people who is not new to this world. I think it wold be better if this state of hunger can never be regenerated and not being modified by table.

[Sevenless]

300% hunger is mistake - if it is meant to be a catch-up mechanic then it shouldn't be an option for people who is not new to this world. I think it wold be better if this state of hunger can never be regenerated and not being modified by table.

Would mostly be used to boost alts, since actual new players will have nothing to use it on.

[SnuggleSnail]

bump

I forgot how much hunger affects my play early
literally second speeding through a forest so I don't fall out of healing range even though I have food in my inventory because I don't want to ruin my hunger lol

300% hunger is mistake - if it is meant to be a catch-up mechanic then it shouldn't be an option for people who is not new to this world. I think it wold be better if this state of hunger can never be regenerated and not being modified by table.

I've always assumed hunger is an anti-botting measure, and TBH it kinda works. The effort required to bypass it with industrial scale bots is pretty high - but it has almost no effect on average players every the first month or two. Or, it has no effect on good players. I guess IDK what the average players are up to in that regard.

[Potjeh]

I still think hunger is a redundant mechanic that should be removed completely. With some tweaking satiations can do everything hunger does, and do it better because tanking rat on a stick satiation is nowhere near as bad as tanking hunger. Plus it would reward varied diet over spamming cachalot autumn steaks or whatever the current meta is.

[Sevenless]

I've always assumed hunger is an anti-botting measure, and TBH it kinda works. The effort required to bypass it with industrial scale bots is pretty high - but it has almost no effect on average players every the first month or two. Or, it has no effect on good players. I guess IDK what the average players are up to in that regard.

Probably a bit of both. But when a new player gets that "eat to 8000% energy" and starts vacuuming 0.3cha 1% hunger berries to heal up it can nuke their stats. Average players that don't minmax their hunger reduction tables because they don't have good access to metal/etc also happens. It's the difference of having 30ish stats after 3-4 days and having <20 stats.

I think the issue is that hunger has the most directly negative impacts in the earlygame, right when people who don't understand the system take the brunt of it.

I still think hunger is a redundant mechanic that should be removed completely. With some tweaking satiations can do everything hunger does, and do it better because tanking rat on a stick satiation is nowhere near as bad as tanking hunger. Plus it would reward varied diet over spamming cachalot autumn steaks or whatever the current meta is.

I guess it puts a relative cap on the amount of stats you can gain per day? I'm in favour of satiation > hunger, but you've gotta admit with the variety of power foods (which are picked through and mostly ignored due to hunger due to being 5% worse or harder to make) out there the potential FEPs per day could get goofy if it wasn't properly tuned. And the counter to that of "eat 2-3 of something per day for FEPs and that's it" could get annoying really quickly. Honestly it'd devalue high quality recipes massively, since you'd be 95% fine just shovelling varied garbage in your mouth instead.