Brickbreaker wrote:I'll state the things I personally don't like about the current system. I don't know what loftar would consider a good thing or a bad thing.
-Permanent effects of the size of the bar
That, however, is a good thing for the same reason that permadeath is a good thing: Your choices matter in the long run.
Brickbreaker wrote:-Little room for specialization
It is true that the game does offer too little incentive for specialization as it is, but that is (as has been pointed out already) not a problem with the FEP system, but with the general lack of content. If anything, the FEP system in itself encourages specialization, since it is far easier to level only one or a few stats than all of them. What the game needs is reasons to specialize; not a stat system that forces it.
Brickbreaker wrote:-(As far as I see) Multi-stat foods are pointless because of the random factor
They are not pointless as long as you do not seek to explicitly avoid leveling all but one stat, which you almost never do. As Burgingham rightly states, the game would be better served by removing single-FEP foods than it would by removing multi-FEP foods. The random factor is, on the contrary, the exact thing that makes multi-FEP foods meaningful -- if all foods were single-FEP foods, then the random factor would almost never matter.
Brickbreaker wrote:-People eat the same thing, without the need to diversify
That is simply false. If you eat the same thing without diversifying, you would simply be leveling more slowly than would people who do diversify, much because of the diversification bonus. God knows I eat as diverse foods as possible.
Brickbreaker wrote:Stat decay solves these. And I would stop hinting that idea until someone says something validly bad about it.
The plain and simple truth is that your premises are (as shown) wrong, and therefore your decay system is not motivated.
Brickbreaker wrote:And I don't mean....Potjeh wrote:I am not obliged in any way to write a god damned essay on why I dislike something.
To be fair, all Potjeh did was say that he didn't like the idea and that, in a poll, his vote would be to the negative; he didn't, by way of that, consider it disproved (though I don't like putting words into other people's mouths; I hope Potjeh and sabinati will forgive me).
Brickbreaker wrote:sabinati wrote:your posts are bad!
To be fair again, sabinati isn't just trying to troll, but rather means is that it seems evident to all reasonable people why your posts weren't taken seriously and that, instead of asking people to offer their own time to explain to you why that is, he would encourage you instead to take a step back, look over the arguments and see if you can't see why that is so. I myself will abstain from affirming or denying that assessment of your argumentation, but you should probably treat his post as such, rather than as a pointless attempt at trolling.