Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
General Dexter

Cooking has now become obsolete

Recommended Posts

Hmm, I'm surprised at no one has discussed about interval estimation or Markov inequality, sticking with (joint) probability.

Surprised? 90% of the people on this forum will have no idea about Markov's, so it would be pointless to examine in a discussion. Although, I had to refresh myself on it (thanks for making me ;) ), and I still can't see how it would actually do much good here.. sure, bounds are useful, but in this case the reality is rather obviously limiting, and the useful bounds are found at the ends of the max sta bar (fed to full vs poisoned down to 25 (or so)) and outcomes (got +10 or -125 out of that steak).

 

Also even no expected value of getting food poisoning or of required foods to fulfill to max.

 

That's essentially what the thread has been about, although in layman terms. I did mention that the expected value of a corn bread is negative once you have a pretty full stomach, but yeah.. going mathematical would require an audience that should understand it... :)

 

Feel free to do so though, I'd at least read a decent analysis of the current mechanic, possibly even understand ... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll give it a shot....

 

You have a 4% chance of getting food poisoning, as we know.

 

The question isn't "what is my chance of getting food poisoning on my 5th cornbread?", because the answer to that is 4%

The question is actually, "what is the chance I got food poisoning at least once after eating 5 cornbread"

 

I could give you the formula (or you can just look in this thread, it's been mentioned a couple of times) but the answer is about 18% chance.

 

As others have mentioned, sometimes its easier to think of it in terms of coins.

 

"what is my chance of getting tails on my 5th coin toss?". The answer is 50%

"what is the chance I got tails at least once after 5 coin tosses". I hope its obvious that it's not a 50% chance. It's about a 97% chance that 5 coin flips will produce at least 1 tails.

 

But what about a double headed coin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But what about a double headed coin?

 

Then clearly you would get food poisoning.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem we have with complex dishes or stews is that even though they fill a lot of max stamina, the player should never neeed to fill that much at any time.

The current systems forces the player to eat at an almost consistent rate, on small portions to keep that bar up, whereas a sudden drop o max stamina 2 or 3 times per day, is not only more realistic, it also adds another reason to go after cooked food, please add this.

 

When that stat lowers just a bit, the player already suffers the consequence and eating a complex but expensive(time and ingredients) meal is wasting resources.

 

I just stick with boiled meat or beacon and eggs, I prefer to take the chances of food poisoning over that. When the buffs come to cooked meal, the problem gets diminshed, but doesn't go away.

 

TLDR, make max stamina not depend linearly from hunger, but in 3 or 4 steps

Edited by EstebanLB (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem we have with complex dishes or stews is that even though they fill a lot of max stamina, the player should never neeed to fill that much at any time.

The current systems forces the player to eat at an almost consistent rate, on small portions to keep that bar up, whereas a sudden drop o max stamina 2 or 3 times per day, is not only more realistic, it also adds another reason to go after cooked food, please add this.

 

When that stat lowers just a bit, the player already suffers the consequence and eating a complex but expensive(time and ingredients) meal is wasting resources.

 

I just stick with boiled meat or beacon and eggs, I prefer to take the chances of food poisoning over that. When the buffs come to cooked meal, the problem gets diminshed, but doesn't go away.

 

Thats not exactly true. You can overeat, building up an excess of food so that it takes longer before you drop below full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my biggest issues with the hunger mechanic in this game is the constant need to eat and carry stacks of things so you don't die after a days work without food. Someone on here once mentioned "slow starvation" and it has been stuck in my head ever since. You shouldn't need to eat more than once or twice a day and food should be much more rare. Failing to feed yourself for a day should have consequences for the next day going all the way to day 7 at which point you are pretty much close to death (zero stamina and other problems). Eating on day 7 doesn't simply eliminate all that either, you gotta work your way back up to full strength by eating well for a while.

 

Of course this is a very rough idea and it would take a lot of thinking to make it work but that's what "survival" looks like to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of my biggest issues with the hunger mechanic in this game is the constant need to eat and carry stacks of things so you don't die after a days work without food. Someone on here once mentioned "slow starvation" and it has been stuck in my head ever since. You shouldn't need to eat more than once or twice a day and food should be much more rare. Failing to feed yourself for a day should have consequences for the next day going all the way to day 7 at which point you are pretty much close to death (zero stamina and other problems). Eating on day 7 doesn't simply eliminate all that either, you gotta work your way back up to full strength by eating well for a while.

 

Of course this is a very rough idea and it would take a lot of thinking to make it work but that's what "survival" looks like to me.

 

In a game where crops grow in 3 days, having hunger consequences after a day is reasonable to me. Needing to eat throughout the day when you are burning a ton of calories is also reasonable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a game where crops grow in 3 days, having hunger consequences after a day is reasonable to me. Needing to eat throughout the day when you are burning a ton of calories is also reasonable to me.

 

Yeah but nobody dies of starvation after a day or two of hard work without food, water is a different story. Right now we have tons of food and eating is used like energy drinks. Crops and everything food related would have to be adjusted to the new system of course, nothing would stay as is. You could even add spoilage to a system like this as long as plenty of ways to prevent it are added.

 

Everything happens too fast. You find food too fast, you are hungry too fast, you die too fast and you get tired too fast. It seems to be on a daily cycle and I'd like to get it to a weekly cycle and reduce these massive amounts of food we see. Food would be the most rare thing you could ever find in this post apocalyptic world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but nobody dies of starvation after a day or two of hard work without food, water is a different story. Right now we have tons of food and eating is used like energy drinks. Crops and everything food related would have to be adjusted to the new system of course, nothing would stay as is. You could even add spoilage to a system like this as long as plenty of ways to prevent it are added.

 

Everything happens too fast. You find food too fast, you are hungry too fast, you die too fast and you get tired too fast. It seems to be on a daily cycle and I'd like to get it to a weekly cycle and reduce these massive amounts of food we see. Food would be the most rare thing you could ever find in this post apocalyptic world.

 

Right, nobody dies after a day or two in real life.... and as I mentioned, crops don't grow in three days. Everything is accelerated because if realistic time frames were used for things, the game would be boring. Imagine waiting for crops to grow, injuries to heal, food to cook.... that would not be fun. You can't accelerate time for the good stuff and leave the bad stuff at a more realistic pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, I'm surprised at no one has discussed about interval estimation or Markov inequality, sticking with (joint) probability.

 

Also even no expected value of getting food poisoning or of required foods to fulfill to max.

 

See my food poisioning calculator. I used simple differential equations to approximate the food needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem we have with complex dishes or stews is that even though they fill a lot of max stamina, the player should never neeed to fill that much at any time.

The current systems forces the player to eat at an almost consistent rate, on small portions to keep that bar up, whereas a sudden drop o max stamina 2 or 3 times per day, is not only more realistic, it also adds another reason to go after cooked food, please add this.

 

When that stat lowers just a bit, the player already suffers the consequence and eating a complex but expensive(time and ingredients) meal is wasting resources.

 

I just stick with boiled meat or beacon and eggs, I prefer to take the chances of food poisoning over that. When the buffs come to cooked meal, the problem gets diminshed, but doesn't go away.

 

TLDR, make max stamina not depend linearly from hunger, but in 3 or 4 steps

 

I hope the devs listen to this and make it so that there is no stamina consequence for a nice margin of food consumption—sayy, for example, from 150 to 100 there would be no stamina drain at all. A nice margin like that would mean a good amount of time before needing to eat and then eating a meal that added up to 50-60 fullness would make sense.

 

If only....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope the devs listen to this and make it so that there is no stamina consequence for a nice margin of food consumption—sayy, for example, from 150 to 100 there would be no stamina drain at all. A nice margin like that would mean a good amount of time before needing to eat and then eating a meal that added up to 50-60 fullness would make sense.

 

If only....

 

Not that I disagree, but wouldn't you get that buffer from over eating? I eat a stew or 2 every morning and have a really nice buffer of food. Unless I'm mining all day, I generally don't have to eat again that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope the devs listen to this and make it so that there is no stamina consequence for a nice margin of food consumption—sayy, for example, from 150 to 100 there would be no stamina drain at all. A nice margin like that would mean a good amount of time before needing to eat and then eating a meal that added up to 50-60 fullness would make sense.

 

If only....

 

"If only the UI reflected that in a way that one can understand it"? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not that I disagree, but wouldn't you get that buffer from over eating? I eat a stew or 2 every morning and have a really nice buffer of food. Unless I'm mining all day, I generally don't have to eat again that day.

 

;););)

 

"If only the UI reflected that in a way that one can understand it"? :)

 

I agree that an indication on the bar showing the amount above max stamina would be helpful—but in your case and mine we both already DO understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suggest implementing spoilable food by increasing the food poisoning chance over the age of the meal. :p

I agree and this could go further as I stated before, by needing refrigeration for fresh food. You could start with a ice cooler and some snow or ice and this would keep fresh food for about 3-5 days, upgrade to a beverage cooler and you can keep fresh food for 7-10 days, then have the food poisoning and maybe other effects as well based on how long the food has spoiled after the 3-5 days for the ice cooler and 7-10 days for the beverage cooler (or hopefully another fridge like in A16). Then the food poisoning chance would be based on how long the food has spoiled.

 

I would like to see expiration dates on canned goods as well, given a date on the can food from say 2-24 weeks or something based randomly and after the expiration date you can get food poisoning at that point on, say 1% chance 1 week after expiration and accumulating the chance every day or week from then on.

 

This would put the food poisoning to a realistic real world system and make it a little more challenging as well, by needed to keep an eye on your food.

 

 

As a side note people that screw with other peoples food are the scum of the earth, this is from experience.

 

Sorry but I have had this happen all the time when I buy food at stores and eat out. these people are some of the lowest form of garbage that exists.

 

I have eaten some things that were made for me in restaurants that would make someone literally sick if it happening to them, there is no excuse for this

 

Edited by bobrpggamer (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope the devs listen to this and make it so that there is no stamina consequence for a nice margin of food consumption—sayy, for example, from 150 to 100 there would be no stamina drain at all. A nice margin like that would mean a good amount of time before needing to eat and then eating a meal that added up to 50-60 fullness would make sense.

 

If only....

 

I get the sarcasm. And I like the overeating mechanic as well. But lets be absolutely real here.

Lets say I do not have any more vitamins, since I already used them all, because I don't go into fortitude.

I have 160stamina (210 effectively) and I come home after one day of mining.

I am now at 40 stamina. I need 3 of the top tier foods (chili dogs or sham chowder) to be full again.

That is a near 12% chance of needing to eat double that. Okay its fine, but the question is:

 

WHAT is the gameplay purpose?

This is the best food you can get. so every 10 days you are going to get food poisoning (roughly), where is the benefit here?

WHAT does this add to the game, except that it is a ressource dump?

THIS should be the real question. What does this system add? And could it be so much more?

Again and again, because I feel like its beeing ignored when I say that:

I like food poisoning. I was one of the first who said that it would be the only way to validate cans.

I always play on the highest difficulty and rarely ever die. I like to have a challenge.

 

What I am saying is, that this food poisoning, how it is currently implemented IS NOT FUN.

It is not a challenge, since I always have enough back up food. And it does not add anything but frustration and a ressource dump.

And the worst thing is, that it is random. So there is no way to plan for it. Either you waste a vitamin pill for 2 stews or you are rolling the dice twice.

 

You said you didn't like the current version either. So why are you still defending it as if its the greatest thing since blood moon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
;););)

 

 

 

I agree that an indication on the bar showing the amount above max stamina would be helpful—but in your case and mine we both already DO understand it.

 

Wow... how did I miss your sarcasm? I guess I'm just getting used to general disagreement. I feel shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

WHAT is the gameplay purpose?

 

 

To make you make decisions. Buy iron gut, find more vitamins, stick to canned foods.... etc.

 

What I am saying is, that this food poisoning, how it is currently implemented IS NOT FUN.

 

 

It's been said before many of the challenges in the game are not fun. Reloading a weapon is not fun... waiting for a broken leg to heal is not fun.... blowing up your gyrocopter with a stray shot is not fun.

 

But thats what a survival game is, isn't it? Dealing with unexpected situations.... sometimes by doing something creative.... sometimes by just stockpiling more food than you think you're going to need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yeah. Not everything in the game is "fun".

Zombies doing damage to you is not fun but I don't see a lot of players asking for that to stop. =P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, yeah. Not everything in the game is "fun".

Zombies doing damage to you is not fun but I don't see a lot of players asking for that to stop. =P

 

Really lol..... Lots of good points have been brought up in this thread. just sayin'. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, yeah. Not everything in the game is "fun".

Zombies doing damage to you is not fun but I don't see a lot of players asking for that to stop. =P

 

That is the biggest pile of bull I think I've ever read from you... and I was there in your edgy phase :D

 

I know you are just handwaving me away with a ridicoulus example, but lets take them at face value and compare them, shall we?

 

Zombies doing damage to you:

 

1. does it add to the challenge? (since all of you think that is the only important question for a mechanic in a survival game)

Yes. For obvious reasons.

2. does it add to the gameplay and does it connect to other mechanics??

Yes. Death is a possibility so you will be more cautious, you will try and dodge and predict zombie swings, you will sneak and you will need to heal. (so healing all the perks, sneaking, sound, xp and more)

3. Is there counterplay to beeing hit?

Yes. Playing cautiously and preparing well means you are nearly never hit and if you are, if you are only hit once or twice it doesnt matter all that much. Healing can be done via so many methods (healing items are abundant, food heals you, perks heal you, fortified grip heals you...) *edit*also armor/movespeed, how much ammo do you have and much more.

4. Is it fun? If you overcome the challenge and stand tall at the end of a Tier V building or hordenight YES it does. Otherwise you'd just stand still and shoot.

 

now lets take food poisoning:

 

1. does it add to the challenge?

Meh... probably for the majority. I personally never run out of food, even if I try, but I'm not the majority so I'll say yes.

2. does it add to the gameplay and does it connect to other mechanics?

No. You just have to eat more of it. Meaning the only thing it does do is more challenge. Maybe vitamins and one specific perk.

3. Is there counterplay?

Only if you count prevention (that you can not always do and never feels like you need it since the chance is so small) with vitamins or iron gut. If you have it, the only thing you can do is eat again.

4. Is it fun? No. I do not feel like I did something special after not beeing food poisoned. I do not feel special for "wasting" vitamins or perkpoints.

 

 

So there. Beeing hit is well integrated into this game, connects well to other mechanics, is rewarding, changes the playstyle, has counterplay and is fun when overcome.

Food poisoning... is a ressource dump to artificially create challenge where there is none.

 

 

Thank you for your time, I'm here all week.

Edited by Viktoriusiii (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...