Ludeon Forums

RimWorld => Ideas => Topic started by: Davetlow on August 28, 2018, 11:59:46 PM

Title: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 28, 2018, 11:59:46 PM
I picked up a gourmand.  He starved to death beating out a flashstorm fire, another pawn was at malnourished minor.  He died while she was cooking his food.  While I did note he got hungry faster as his mechanic, I did not foresee how difficult that would make him to use properly.  I think if he would just eat sooner than necessary and maybe pick up more food than necessary for .05 nutrition stuff it would be more sensible than being a fatty who gets malnourished without food and then passes out.  I just want to make sure this is what is actually intended by the trait.  Gourmand raiders are going to be going down on the way to the front door.  I mean the chicks overeat, or they used to, by eating a meal but only having room for a tiny bit.  And it's fine, I guess, how it is, but it's a lot more serious of a trait than it sounds in the description, though, again, the mechanic is described properly, I think.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: 5thHorseman on August 29, 2018, 02:32:04 AM
I have yet to have one starve to death simply because of timing, but they do frequently start "starving" just for sleeping through the night. It's very annoying.

That plus the extra food draw (50% is crazy. How about 10% or something more reasonable?) puts the trait in the top tier of bad. Not quite Chemical Fascination Pyromaniac but maybe Chemical Interest level. Top 10 worst easy.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: RawCode on August 29, 2018, 04:12:22 AM
well, this "trait" is death sentence due to absurd "starving" stuff, it ever worse then pyro.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on August 29, 2018, 10:16:20 AM
Don't forget the regular "binge" mood breaks that will destroy a dozen of your meals or worse. That's enough to destroy an early game colony.

The +50% food penalty isn't so bad, but the big issue is they don't get +50% food storage to go with it. So your gourmand ends up ALWAYS starving like he has tapeworms.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: RicRider on August 29, 2018, 08:20:10 PM
As a gourmand I can assure you that I've never starved to death or become malnutritioned. I'm just a fatty that goes on mental breaks IRL when I don't get my bacon and this is how it should be in RimWorld too.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 29, 2018, 09:43:30 PM
It was a naked start and he was my first hire, I didn't expect gourmand to be a problem because I was in the forest.  Of course he started a fight with her hurling insults (he was also abrasive).  We had food though, of course then one thing lead to another and the food was almost gone, as she we recovering from the fight in bed and there was a flashstorm as the food was gone.  I know a lot of folks don't put a flash storm out in the forest because why, but was putting it out and it takes a long time minimizing damage until it rains, basically.  So, he goes down with extreme malnutrition and the food gone.  Granny (first play, female warrior 61 great stats no injuries) goes to bed, I wake her up have her hunt, but she doesn't finish the food in time.  Died, yes, at the begining of the game.  Might have survived if not for the pshyic sooth that probably stopped him from breaking earlier.  First death mercilous.  Randi was like here take this dude, then save this girl, (I was like, well I don't have that much food, but, I do have 500 hours experience even if I took more than 6 months off), then he goes off, and then a flashstorm.  Yep, even her substantial food horde didn't protect them.  Well, well, well, she didn't die of course, lol.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Third_Of_Five on August 30, 2018, 02:22:55 PM
Agreed. Gourmand is worse than Pyromaniac. I hope there will be a mod out soon that nerfs it, otherwise I'll probably try my hand at making one myself.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: AileTheAlien on August 30, 2018, 02:36:00 PM
I think you might want to practice more with food production; I've had many games with gourmands in my starting lineup, and haven't starved. Having some gourmands just means you need to grow or hunt more food earlier, and delay other things like making statues, or stone walls instead of wood, etc.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 30, 2018, 03:21:19 PM
Nah, it was just my first one.  Also it was Randi Mercilous.  He dumped a bunch of pawns on me and whilst I had two stacks of meals, they didn't last through the other crap that he also through at me.  I don't think you read well, because, as I said, if he had had a break, I would have likely noticed he was starving, but since there was a soothe he handled it until he was starving 80%.  I was impressed with Randi Mercilous.  Granny was still recovering from getting punched.  There was a whole bunch of stuff that happened in a short period of time, and my first gourmand died.  I'm sure I'll be able to keep him alive in the future.  But I started another game in a harder landscape on Randi Mercilous.

If you read closer, you would see I'm not saying gourmand as is is unplayable, it's just really really bad.  Like dude passed out fighting a fire from starvation bad.  Like you probably should either have food stored in the kill box or not use a gourmand bad.  If he just had like 1.2 pawns worth of hunger storage and ate at like .9 or something or some other solution it would not be so bad.  He can't go on a long walk or sleep through the night without eating immediately before or starving, and I feel like that may not be what was intended.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on August 30, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
Quotejust means you need to grow or hunt more food earlier, and delay other things like making statues, or stone walls instead of wood, etc.
See! It's not so bad! Taking a single gourmand merely sets you back multiple tangible game objectives which may cost you days or weeks.

Wait a minute. That's actually pretty damn bad.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 30, 2018, 04:04:27 PM
Yeah, Gourmand is way less desirable to me than many of the things I've just learned to deal with.  I am appalled by the difference between what it sound like and what it does.  I can use a chemical fascination pawn and just wall up the drugs if he goes on a binge.  This dude will starve quickly while drafted, and that really sucks.  He's only good for cooking and research, I had him on research but decided to have him help out with a fire, a decision which lead to his death due to my inexperience dealing with his "condition".  And and, his presence in the colony desensitizes you to the serious starvation flag appearing on the right side of the screen!  But, I've used the scenario editor for a long time to start tribal naked and alone so sometimes people die.  That's just the way it is, I'll try to do better next time.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: RicRider on August 30, 2018, 07:36:14 PM
Davetlow if I had your issues I would restrict the gourmand to the home area and treat him/her like a non violent pawn. Either a hauler, cook or cleaner. I have a gourmand right now who's actually a really good cook and this is working well. She's been malnourished in some fights and I just undrafted her and let her do her business in home area while the rest of the pawns fight. She's basically like a labrador retriever that can cook and clean and haul more things!
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 30, 2018, 08:58:07 PM
Right, I completely agree, but have my doubts that that was the intention of the trait.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: AileTheAlien on August 30, 2018, 09:13:53 PM
The gourmand only has their starvation time reduced by a third, compared to a normal pawn. That's a penalty, but not enough to bar them from combat entirely.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 30, 2018, 10:10:58 PM
I was definitely negligent in my care for the pawn, I understand that, but the fact that we're saying things like "but not enough to bar them from combat entirely.", is the entire point.  You can totally overcome gourmand and the pawn can totally be beneficial to the colony.  It could totally be solved, I think if his saturation went to 1.2 and he ate at .9.  He'd eat even more than .5 extra, but he could still go on raids or whatever.  This is a pawn that doesn't go out for his dinner, lol, and I am not sure this was intended.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: AileTheAlien on August 31, 2018, 10:24:15 AM
(edited; original message was rude)

Nutrient paste dispensers are an easy way to keep the colony stocked with food, since they give 66% more food than simple or fine meals, and even more compared to lavish meals, pemmican, or packaged survival meals. This should be able to help with gourmands.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on August 31, 2018, 10:39:29 AM
Paste dispensers sound like an exploit. There's no way a gourmand would accept hot slime.

I think it'd help if the gourmand was less about having a stapled stomach and more about being picky over their food. Kind of like being the opposite of acetic. Maybe something like taking double mood penalties from bad food and +50% happiness from good food. That means if they eat ant or human meat, it's going to practically be a guaranteed break.

High food standards have a similar outcome as increasing their hunger rate but is far better within player control. You can't feed them cheap bulk junk and must instead invest more food into higher quality nutrition or they get mad.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on August 31, 2018, 03:28:13 PM
Quote from: AileTheAlien on August 31, 2018, 10:24:15 AM

In the mean time, I think you'd want to investigate how easy it is to deal with gourmands. Nutrient paste dispensers...
Are you always this ?  You're going to teach me how to make food.  I stopped reading, because I needed to return the favor.  Did you tell me how to make a corn silo?  Or that you can just roof corn fields because they produce so much the hauling can be unnecessarily time consuming?  I don' t know, you refused to read my post, so I didn't read yours either.

"
Quote from: AileTheAlien on August 30, 2018, 09:13:53 PM...
That's a penalty, but not enough to bar them from combat entirely.

You essentially agree with my whole point here, why be so preachy?  That's right because you kept refusing to read it so you could know everything.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Third_Of_Five on August 31, 2018, 06:55:59 PM
Quote from: bobucles on August 31, 2018, 10:39:29 AM
I think it'd help if the gourmand was less about having a stapled stomach and more about being picky over their food.

Yes! This. 100% this.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: glob on September 01, 2018, 04:55:56 AM
I think its' current state is undesired behaviour and it will be fixed. I'd propose remove starving, make them eat 2x of normal, always eat the most expensive meal even if it is forbidden, except the Packaged survival one. Leave binges as they are. Leave bonus to cooking as it is. This would make this trait neutral or slightly bad in early game and leaning to good in late game.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: 5thHorseman on September 01, 2018, 06:46:21 AM
I don't know about ignoring forbidden, but I think the gourmand should get the fine bonus for lavish meals and no bonus for fine meals, and a mood hit for simple meals. And eating raw should destroy their mood. They should - instead of getting hungry 1500% faster or whatever it is*, just eat when they are even mildly peckish instead of actually hungry.

But they should have some bonus too. Something really irks me that I'm happy to see someone's psychotic but sad to find they're a gourmand.

*I know what it is.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Drewski on September 01, 2018, 06:59:03 AM
Quote from: bobucles on August 31, 2018, 10:39:29 AM
Paste dispensers sound like an exploit. There's no way a gourmand would accept hot slime.

I think you may be confusing a gourmand with a gourmet. Common mistake, but they're totally different. A gourmand is a polite term for a glutton; a gourmet is a polite term for a food snob.

That said, I've been able to manage the 50% hunger without too much trouble - no worse than a slothful starting pawn in terms of lost productivity - but the binges devastate me in the early game. I have a small sample size, but my gourmands seem to binge from wake up until they get sleepy every time, whereas the mental break happens when it happens and often ends in a few hours. About two binges into a game I'm in serious trouble.

Definitely never picking one unless I want an extra challenge.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: 5thHorseman on September 01, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
Quote from: Drewski on September 01, 2018, 06:59:03 AM
I think you may be confusing a gourmand with a gourmet. Common mistake, but they're totally different. A gourmand is a polite term for a glutton; a gourmet is a polite term for a food snob.

Wow. I know I was. And I consider myself a polite term for a word snob :D

I take back everything I said. And instead say they should rename it to Glutton :D
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 01, 2018, 07:09:27 PM
Yeah, because gourmand is like a pretentious word, and I agree, I would much prefer they eat twice or three times as much rather than pretending such a person would actually starve to death in a short amount of time.  During the early game you could just ban the door and they would be fine unless they went crazy, for instance, but it would always be a bit of a pain.  If he's part of the first squad and it's in harsh terrain he and probably everyone else needs to be able punch hunt, lol.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 02:04:16 PM
Quote from: bobucles on August 30, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
Quotejust means you need to grow or hunt more food earlier, and delay other things like making statues, or stone walls instead of wood, etc.
See! It's not so bad! Taking a single gourmand merely sets you back multiple tangible game objectives which may cost you days or weeks.

Wait a minute. That's actually pretty damn bad.
Your speed of development is irrelevant because raids scale with your wealth. You'll get that 20 ppl tribal raid half a year later, so what? And it's great that it's designed this way, because you don't need to be stressed and can chose your own pace of development. And it makes that NB runs with incapable pawns quite viable and a lot of fun.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Third_Of_Five on September 04, 2018, 02:23:53 PM
Quote from: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 02:04:16 PM
Your speed of development is irrelevant because raids scale with your wealth. You'll get that 20 ppl tribal raid half a year later, so what? And it's great that it's designed this way, because you don't need to be stressed and can chose your own pace of development. And it makes that NB runs with incapable pawns quite viable and a lot of fun.

"So what"? You're literally lecturing someone about how they should not be mad about a direct hindrance to normal gameplay. Get over yourself.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: Third_Of_Five on September 04, 2018, 02:23:53 PM
Quote from: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 02:04:16 PM
Your speed of development is irrelevant because raids scale with your wealth. You'll get that 20 ppl tribal raid half a year later, so what? And it's great that it's designed this way, because you don't need to be stressed and can chose your own pace of development. And it makes that NB runs with incapable pawns quite viable and a lot of fun.

"So what"? You're literally lecturing someone about how they should not be mad about a direct hindrance to normal gameplay. Get over yourself.
Sorry about my tone, I should be more careful with words. I personally don't perceive slow development as a hindrance to normal gameplay. The story still develops, events happen. Slow development with lots of challenges and push backs is actually by far the most enjoyable way of playing this game for me. This is why I'm curious why people consider it such a problem.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 04, 2018, 07:44:20 PM
Quote from: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: Third_Of_Five on September 04, 2018, 02:23:53 PM
Quote from: spidermonk on September 04, 2018, 02:04:16 PM
Your speed of development is irrelevant because raids scale with your wealth. You'll get that 20 ppl tribal raid half a year later, so what? And it's great that it's designed this way, because you don't need to be stressed and can chose your own pace of development. And it makes that NB runs with incapable pawns quite viable and a lot of fun.

"So what"? You're literally lecturing someone about how they should not be mad about a direct hindrance to normal gameplay. Get over yourself.
Sorry about my tone, I should be more careful with words. I personally don't perceive slow development as a hindrance to normal gameplay. The story still develops, events happen. Slow development with lots of challenges and push backs is actually by far the most enjoyable way of playing this game for me. This is why I'm curious why people consider it such a problem.
OP:
Me: Re: Gourmand seems unnecessarily bad 

Is it intentionally this bad?  I'd rather just feed him like twice or even three times as much and still have the binges than have him starving after a solid 8 in bed.

Thus folks were ranking how surprisingly bad gourmand was compared to other traits.  I play naked and alone and generally take all comers in, but sometimes they die.  If this hadn't been my first death to gourmand, first it probably wouldn't have happened, but also, I probably would have just loaded, so I thought I would tell the story, as I was puzzled this trait is as bad as it it.  But, it's fine if that's what they meant.  It's just...  you know it's not as bad defensive wise as nonviolent but it's pretty bad to have to babysit this guy's hunger.  Only my best bases have every had a fridge next to the killbox, that is a premium f feature.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Anastasia on September 04, 2018, 09:01:02 PM
Quote from: Davetlow on August 28, 2018, 11:59:46 PM
I picked up a gourmand.  He starved to death beating out a flashstorm fire, another pawn was at malnourished minor.  He died while she was cooking his food.  While I did note he got hungry faster as his mechanic, I did not foresee how difficult that would make him to use properly.  I think if he would just eat sooner than necessary and maybe pick up more food than necessary for .05 nutrition stuff it would be more sensible than being a fatty who gets malnourished without food and then passes out.  I just want to make sure this is what is actually intended by the trait.  Gourmand raiders are going to be going down on the way to the front door.  I mean the chicks overeat, or they used to, by eating a meal but only having room for a tiny bit.  And it's fine, I guess, how it is, but it's a lot more serious of a trait than it sounds in the description, though, again, the mechanic is described properly, I think.
i deifnetly dont think it's worse than pyro, pyro is probably the single worst one ever atleast for me since i tend to make large spread out villages out of wood in forests because i dont really liek min/maxing stuff and just do what feels natural or fun, which usually ends up getting me killed...anyway i feel like it should have some kind of benefit, like maybe they make better food(like it never/rarely gets poisoned) or they make food faster or both, and maybe instead of eating more they will get a mood debuff if they eat anything less than a fine meal or something
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 04, 2018, 11:25:25 PM
Quote from: Anastasia on September 04, 2018, 09:01:02 PM
Quote from: Davetlow on August 28, 2018, 11:59:46 PM
I picked up a gourmand.  He starved to death beating out a flashstorm fire, another pawn was at malnourished minor.  He died while she was cooking his food.  While I did note he got hungry faster as his mechanic, I did not foresee how difficult that would make him to use properly.  I think if he would just eat sooner than necessary and maybe pick up more food than necessary for .05 nutrition stuff it would be more sensible than being a fatty who gets malnourished without food and then passes out.  I just want to make sure this is what is actually intended by the trait.  Gourmand raiders are going to be going down on the way to the front door.  I mean the chicks overeat, or they used to, by eating a meal but only having room for a tiny bit.  And it's fine, I guess, how it is, but it's a lot more serious of a trait than it sounds in the description, though, again, the mechanic is described properly, I think.
i deifnetly dont think it's worse than pyro, pyro is probably the single worst one ever atleast for me since i tend to make large spread out villages out of wood in forests because i dont really liek min/maxing stuff and just do what feels natural or fun, which usually ends up getting me killed...anyway i feel like it should have some kind of benefit, like maybe they make better food(like it never/rarely gets poisoned) or they make food faster or both, and maybe instead of eating more they will get a mood debuff if they eat anything less than a fine meal or something

I just have someone walk around with the pyro and put out the fires and their brake rarely lasts very long.  It does occasionally cause a major problem during a stress situation.  Gourmands are certainly not the same dead weight as nonviolent or wimp, but it's bad and they're expensive, too.  The math is, btw, a gourmand goes 7.5 hours before hunger from full and the pawns you're used to do ~11.2 hrs.  A difference that doesn't matter, really, if they research or make food and that stuff is next to the fridge, but if they have to do anything it's seems unusually painful.  So then you gotta remember to feed this fat pawn before he goes out to fight a fire or stand at attention somewhere.  The pyro needs a babysitter.  For some reason I find this less annoying.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on September 05, 2018, 01:17:17 PM
QuoteThe pyro needs a babysitter.  For some reason I find this less annoying.
The reason is because you can minimize the damage a pyro does without hurting anyone. Babysitting costs extra labor but it's manageable in all but the most doomed of colonies (in which case it becomes extra hilarious). The only way to stop a gourmand from doing damage to your food supply is to send his fat ass rolling on the floor.

When the primary defense against the fat kid is to beat him senseless, it probably hits home too hard for some.  :P
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 05, 2018, 01:42:10 PM
I think it's the stuff the damages my defensive capability per value makes me very disappointed in the pawns.  I mean wimpy and nonviolent are really annoying.  Enemy pawns are coming to enslave them and they're too much of snowflakes to defend themselves.  Still, I do generally take all comers, I just bad mouth them when they're all needy little bitches that can't take care of themselves.  It also grates on me when I need to have another pawn clean their bedroom for them before I have enough pawns to have a cleaner.  Thus, fat, eats a lot, and starving which makes them less useful in defense apparently really rattles my cage, when I thought I would just have to feed them more food, they're actually more like wimpy...  unless they're defending the kitchen, lol.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Anastasia on September 05, 2018, 03:07:35 PM
Quote from: Davetlow on September 04, 2018, 11:25:25 PM
Quote from: Anastasia on September 04, 2018, 09:01:02 PM
Quote from: Davetlow on August 28, 2018, 11:59:46 PM
I picked up a gourmand.  He starved to death beating out a flashstorm fire, another pawn was at malnourished minor.  He died while she was cooking his food.  While I did note he got hungry faster as his mechanic, I did not foresee how difficult that would make him to use properly.  I think if he would just eat sooner than necessary and maybe pick up more food than necessary for .05 nutrition stuff it would be more sensible than being a fatty who gets malnourished without food and then passes out.  I just want to make sure this is what is actually intended by the trait.  Gourmand raiders are going to be going down on the way to the front door.  I mean the chicks overeat, or they used to, by eating a meal but only having room for a tiny bit.  And it's fine, I guess, how it is, but it's a lot more serious of a trait than it sounds in the description, though, again, the mechanic is described properly, I think.
i deifnetly dont think it's worse than pyro, pyro is probably the single worst one ever atleast for me since i tend to make large spread out villages out of wood in forests because i dont really liek min/maxing stuff and just do what feels natural or fun, which usually ends up getting me killed...anyway i feel like it should have some kind of benefit, like maybe they make better food(like it never/rarely gets poisoned) or they make food faster or both, and maybe instead of eating more they will get a mood debuff if they eat anything less than a fine meal or something

I just have someone walk around with the pyro and put out the fires and their brake rarely lasts very long.  It does occasionally cause a major problem during a stress situation.  Gourmands are certainly not the same dead weight as nonviolent or wimp, but it's bad and they're expensive, too.  The math is, btw, a gourmand goes 7.5 hours before hunger from full and the pawns you're used to do ~11.2 hrs.  A difference that doesn't matter, really, if they research or make food and that stuff is next to the fridge, but if they have to do anything it's seems unusually painful.  So then you gotta remember to feed this fat pawn before he goes out to fight a fire or stand at attention somewhere.  The pyro needs a babysitter.  For some reason I find this less annoying.
as a principel is never let pyros into my colony. the last thing i need is them burning down the hospital after a big raid.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: StormGunner on September 06, 2018, 09:54:33 AM
Personally I've yet to pick a gourmand for my colonies, but based on what I'm seeing here it seems like
the problem lies in starvation. Now, this trait is obviously meant to be a hindrance but frequent starvation
does seem a bit over the top. So, instead of making the guy hungry faster, make him actually eat more -
as in make his food 'restore' half as much as it would for a normal pawn - so maybe on his lunch break
he's going to grab two meals instead of just one.

To me this feels like sort of a middle ground here, since it will avoid the issue of starving while sleeping,
all the while making the guy consume more food.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: spidermonk on September 07, 2018, 02:24:14 PM
Quote from: StormGunner on September 06, 2018, 09:54:33 AM
Personally I've yet to pick a gourmand for my colonies, but based on what I'm seeing here it seems like
the problem lies in starvation. Now, this trait is obviously meant to be a hindrance but frequent starvation
does seem a bit over the top. So, instead of making the guy hungry faster, make him actually eat more -
as in make his food 'restore' half as much as it would for a normal pawn - so maybe on his lunch break
he's going to grab two meals instead of just one.

To me this feels like sort of a middle ground here, since it will avoid the issue of starving while sleeping,
all the while making the guy consume more food.

Straving while sleeping is not an issue, it just annoys some people with message spam.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 07, 2018, 03:43:39 PM
Quote from: spidermonk on September 07, 2018, 02:24:14 PM
Quote from: StormGunner on September 06, 2018, 09:54:33 AM
Personally I've yet to pick a gourmand for my colonies, but based on what I'm seeing here it seems like
the problem lies in starvation. Now, this trait is obviously meant to be a hindrance but frequent starvation
does seem a bit over the top. So, instead of making the guy hungry faster, make him actually eat more -
as in make his food 'restore' half as much as it would for a normal pawn - so maybe on his lunch break
he's going to grab two meals instead of just one.

To me this feels like sort of a middle ground here, since it will avoid the issue of starving while sleeping,
all the while making the guy consume more food.

Straving while sleeping is not an issue, it just annoys some people with message spam.

Are you saying you can deal with a gourmand, because I think everyone here is confident in their ability to use a gourmand, this is more about if the trait could be or should be improved.  You think it's just about right, that he should starve even faster or maybe it could be adjusted so he eats more but doesn't starve? 

It's like I need to point out that this threat isn't really about people not being able to use the pawn.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: cultist on September 08, 2018, 09:02:58 AM
It's a pretty bad trait, and it doesn't even make sense... you don't need to eat more because you have refined taste.

A much more sensible take on the trait would be double bonus or penaly from meals - gourmands would really hate eating nutrient paste, but they'll go through hell and back for you as long as there's a lavish meal waiting for them at the end of the day. Maybe even add -5 for eating simple meals, because it's too bland for them. This means a bigger demand on the player to have varied resources, but doesn't drain any extra resources by default.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: StormGunner on September 08, 2018, 10:08:59 AM
Quote from: cultist on September 08, 2018, 09:02:58 AM
It's a pretty bad trait, and it doesn't even make sense... you don't need to eat more because you have refined taste.

A much more sensible take on the trait would be double bonus or penaly from meals - gourmands would really hate eating nutrient paste, but they'll go through hell and back for you as long as there's a lavish meal waiting for them at the end of the day. Maybe even add -5 for eating simple meals, because it's too bland for them. This means a bigger demand on the player to have varied resources, but doesn't drain any extra resources by default.

As mentioned earlier, you are confusing gourmand and gourmet. Gourmand means glutton.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: glob on September 09, 2018, 03:39:52 AM
Quote from: StormGunner on September 08, 2018, 10:08:59 AM

As mentioned earlier, you are confusing gourmand and gourmet. Gourmand means glutton.

Then why not call this trait "glutton"? Gourmand is a French loanword, and it is loaned not just in ENglish but in other languages too. In French it's primary meaning is the one who loves good food and enjoys eating as a pleasure. I believe for most people in the word this word means exactly this, not "the piggy who overeats".

I believe this trait was supposed to imitate exactly the French meaning.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: AileTheAlien on September 09, 2018, 08:05:50 AM
IMO, there could be two distinct negative traits for food. One for the over-eater, and one for the person who needs higher-quality food.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: StormGunner on September 09, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
Quote from: glob on September 09, 2018, 03:39:52 AM
I believe this trait was supposed to imitate exactly the French meaning.

You are certainly free to believe whatever you like, but the english meaning of the word gourmand means glutton, more specifically towards food. That means the person enjoys eating more food or eating more often, not necessarily "extremely good food". This is reflected by the way the game behaves, i.e. the pawn eats more often.
It's quite clear to me the intention behind it, that is why I'm offering an alternative way of displaying the characteristics of the behavior without the "game breaking" issue discussed by the OP by focusing on the "eats more" aspect rather than on the "more often" one.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Drewski on September 10, 2018, 08:40:46 AM
For what it's worth, I'm finding gourmands become trivial in the mid game, when you can schedule less sleep time and not be destroyed by a couple of binges. It's become my least-favorite starting trait but later I'd rather have one than a slowpoke or depressive.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Limdood on September 10, 2018, 12:58:45 PM
My preference would be gourmand as a "bad" trait, but with benefits:

- keep food binges
- +25% hunger decay (instead of 50%)
- cooking passion (no skill boost) and enabled regardless of backstory (or disable gourmand for no cooking backstories)
- "green thumb" style mood boost from cooking meals
- increased mood from fine/lavish meals, increased mood penalty from nutrient paste/raw food, conflicts with ascetic

The gains (guaranteed cooking passion, mood gain from cooking, high happiness with good food) would almost balance the drawbacks (food binges can cause death during raids!, 25% hunger rate would reduce the starving while routine sleeping, but starving while injured, gut wormed, or drafted is still a likely possibility, and don't let him eat raw food!)

I feel that would make it a bad trait (i classify any trait that can cause a break without low mood as bad), but would let you take advantage of the supposed "upsides" of being a gourmand more easily, and it would make sense that a foodie would be quite content with good food and getting to cook a lot.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: RicRider on September 14, 2018, 07:05:13 AM
If a gourmand starves to death in his or her sleep the correct response is, 'Hallelujah!'
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on September 14, 2018, 09:28:07 AM
Another option for gourmand is to push up their hunger thresholds, so that they get unhappy over not eating much more quickly.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 15, 2018, 11:40:18 PM
I am really happy to have brought this lengthy discussion of the trait "gourmand" to Ludeon Studios Forums, and I think we had a good discussion here, and we've at least decided that gourmand is really bad to horrible, especially on a starting character and considered whether or not this seems appropriate to us, not just if it's survivable, because most of the commenters seem to clearly think they can deal with it.  I am happy we came to some general consensus and hope some developers give this a look and get some insight as to what people think of this new feature.  We're at a long 3 pages if not just starting 4 now, so that's really a good amount to read about gourmand.  I hope it is also helpful for this great games development.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Babuchas on September 16, 2018, 10:51:09 AM
Is it normal that they go on food binge even when att 90-100 mood? I thought that was just if on low mood, but 15 days into the game a gourmand pawn has gone on food binge 3-4 times, always att 90-100 mood. Is that normal?
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: vzoxz0 on September 16, 2018, 11:08:00 AM
Gourmand is a perk I consider along the same lines as Pyromaniac. I will never accept a colonist with that perk. It's totally worthless.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: 5thHorseman on September 16, 2018, 12:43:19 PM
Quote from: Babuchas on September 16, 2018, 10:51:09 AM
Is it normal that they go on food binge even when att 90-100 mood? I thought that was just if on low mood, but 15 days into the game a gourmand pawn has gone on food binge 3-4 times, always att 90-100 mood. Is that normal?
Sadly, yes it is normal. 3-4 times in 15 days is excessive but they can food binge at any time. Pyros can light fires at any time, too.

It's one of the more annoying things about already annoying taits.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 16, 2018, 03:37:51 PM
Yeah, it's like they're more likely to do it if they are in distress, but can elect to set fires/food binge as a recreational activity.  I don't know but assume they choose to do so less if there are more fun things to do available.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Anastasia on September 23, 2018, 12:57:41 AM
Quote from: Davetlow on September 16, 2018, 03:37:51 PM
Yeah, it's like they're more likely to do it if they are in distress, but can elect to set fires/food binge as a recreational activity.  I don't know but assume they choose to do so less if there are more fun things to do available.
probably the best thing about gourmand colonists and argueably a redeeming quality is most of the time they mental break they have is a food binge, and not, say, murderous rampage, liek ther was one time where i had 3 colonists at a start, we got shot up and i sent one heavily injured colonist(incapable of doctoring) to rescue two downed allies, well she bled enough that she was downed too, then one of the original downed got up, and carried her back, then he bled to down, and the heaviliy injured girl recovered enough to get back up, and i sent her to save the other downed person, our doctor, so whe went to out doctor, picked them up, then had a murderes rage mental break and cut off our doctors head. so i had 2 colonists bleeding to death, one was downed from serious pain and had 3 medical, and one was bleeding out rapidly and incapable of doctoring, and berserk. if she was a gourmand our doctor might have lived and all that owuld have happend was she would have ate a corpse.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: RicRider on September 25, 2018, 11:49:13 AM
Gourmands continue to amuse me to no end. On temperate forest and boreal forest maps I've never really had an issue with them (abundance of food) but for the first time I tried playing on a tundra map. Well you can guess that my pretty gourmand who I had so much hopes for would become the boyfriend of my main dude, she barely lasted three months in the colony. She was basically eating all the food and on Decemberary 1st I had to make the hard decision to send her on a caravan to nowhere to the north pole. So yeah gourmand is pretty crappy when food is low but otherwise it's just like having two people! I think this game is pretty good at making you take hard decisions, that's for sure...
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Third_Of_Five on September 25, 2018, 02:16:18 PM
The high frequency of food binges wouldn't be a problem for me if they didn't also CONSTANTLY eat food. 150% hunger rate just destroys your food supply. It's not so much "annoying" as just a burden on the well being of your colony.

inb4 5thHorseman does more apologetics for how gourmand is "normal" by referencing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYHDj2sB-rc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYHDj2sB-rc)

Bickering aside though, the above video is a pretty accurate real-world example of what gourmand effectively is. And by extension why it sucks.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Syrchalis on September 25, 2018, 06:12:10 PM
The likelyhood of foodbinges depends on mood. At max mood you will get one every 50 days only.

The upside of the trait, aside from +4 cooking, is that they can ONLY get food binge mental breaks. So if they are unhappy they will just eat a bunch of food and that's it. No beserk, tantrum or catatonic break for 3 days.

This is an upside many forget about this trait as well as pyro. Their breaks are very predictable because they can only get one type. Both are pretty easy to handle.

Though the hunger rate could be a bit lower, specifically because they don't have a higher "maximum hunger". I am developing a race that has 150% hunger rate by default and I'm not having any issues, mainly because they can have 150% total hunger (like some larger animals can).
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: 5thHorseman on September 25, 2018, 08:44:32 PM
Quote from: Third_Of_Five on September 25, 2018, 02:16:18 PM
inb4 5thHorseman does more apologetics for how gourmand is "normal" by referencing this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYHDj2sB-rc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYHDj2sB-rc)
You seem to have misunderstood me. I never said it was good. I said it's what happens.

It's also normal that when people drive though red lights without looking that they hit other cars. That doesn't make it right or good or happy.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Davetlow on September 25, 2018, 11:45:39 PM
Quote from: Syrchalis on September 25, 2018, 06:12:10 PM

The upside of the trait, aside from +4 cooking, is that they can ONLY get food binge mental breaks. So if they are unhappy they will just eat a bunch of food and that's it.

This is not true.  The pawn form the OP as detailed had gone on a mental break insulting, though he was abrasive as well as gourmand.  I don't recall specifically any other kind of mental break he had, I would be surprised, though, if it does anything other than make food binges way more likely.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: bobucles on September 26, 2018, 01:48:55 PM
Food binges happen on their own, no matter how happy or sad the gourmand is. It doesn't do anything about what type of mental breaks the pawn gets. The only benefit is they can't break if they're already insane.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: Syrchalis on September 26, 2018, 03:20:58 PM
Quote from: bobucles on September 26, 2018, 01:48:55 PM
Food binges happen on their own, no matter how happy or sad the gourmand is. It doesn't do anything about what type of mental breaks the pawn gets. The only benefit is they can't break if they're already insane.
This is just wrong. Look at the XML at least. Gourmands can ONLY have food binges as mental breaks - except if they are also pyro/chemical x, but in that case you really don't want the pawn.

They do get food binges randomly, without having to be in mental break territory, but it happens more often at lower mood than higher. It's a linear function from 0% to 100% and 0 days to 50 days MTB. This is the exact same mechanic that makes pyros and chemical interest pawns have random mental breaks and they have similar curves.
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: AileTheAlien on September 26, 2018, 09:24:02 PM
Quote from: Syrchalis on September 26, 2018, 03:20:58 PMLook at the XML [...] Gourmands can ONLY have food binges as mental breaks
If that's the case, then this should be displayed in the game. I had no idea that they could not get other types of mental breaks, and that's a very useful trade-off, which would make me take gourmands (or pyros, if they have the same mechanic).
Title: Re: Gourmand seems unneccarily bad
Post by: vzoxz0 on September 27, 2018, 05:34:23 AM
Confine all pyromaniacs to a fire-proof research lab, equip them with a Nutrient-dispenser that has a firefoam popper behind it (or several), ???, profit! Maybe leave them a small outdoors area they can look at the sky from, to avoid that cooped-up effect.