You mean encourage, at least compared to the current system, where not drinking doesn’t slow down dehydration.[/quote]
Good point, although I imagined it as having diminishing returns when drinking water when already slaked without hard capping hydration. With gradualy increasing penalities to stats and morale from dehydration, I hoped that would discourage players from perpetually keeping their character in “water saving mode”, but it could probably be gamed depending on the nature of the dehydration penalities.
I really don’t like the idea of forcing the player to manage excess calories in an apocalypse situation. Sounds like one of those ideas that “make sense”, but then end up actually not doing so because of some weirdness (say, conflict with vitamin system, unfinished implementation or something like that) and result in everyone getting obese, despite working hard all day and having grievous wounds to heal.
DDA is prone to this kind of mis-simulation due to sheer size of the game.[/quote]
Yes, excess calories should probably not be a disadvantage to the player. The phenomena of fat being a problem is a modern issue. However, I still feel that there is some merit to “bulking up” an energy reserve to survive the winter or a siege. The Hibernation mutation could be an extreme manifestation of this.
This could work if we had an auto-eat system. That is, ability to queue items for the character to eat in spare time.
Otherwise it would end up annoying, taking more from the game than adding to it.[/quote]
Satiation was not meant to nerf the ability to eat. In my head satiation would progress at the approximate rate of the current hunger, with calories being more long term.
[quote=“Coolthulhu, post:2, topic:13867”]It would need to be so strong, that some kinds of food would not grant enough calories to offset the satiety they cause, forcing the player relying on those to stay below “well fed” level of calories.
If you could just be satiated by eating for calories and drinking water, the satiation mechanic would be barely noticeable.[/quote]
Granted that excess calorie penaleties should not be a problem, I would rather frame it as a buff for energy dense foods. Think of the three 3s rule of thumb: 3 minutes without air, 3 days without water, 3 weeks without food. While the caloric value would be more variable than the current health stat, it would still be a bit more long term than hunger or satiation. You could stay indoors during the winter with water and candy and still survive, but as candy is not filling, you have to choose between wasting high energy food to feel full or tough it out with painful hunger for the duration. The “not enough calories per satiation” problem should be rare, probably if you live on raw wild vegetables and spend the entire days clearing rubble. Wastebread and mushrooms could probably be the prominent “more satiation, little calories” consumables.
Satiation acting as a limiter was not meant to be an extra hassle for the player, but a way of keeping calories uncapped while preventing the player from eating an entire grocery store and negating the need for food for two seasons. You could say that the current hunger stat IS satiation specifically for food with calories being assumed as avaliable as long as you are full.
Does this make any more sense? Thanks for the feedback.