Messages

Besides, it's common in war and such to destroy the resources of your enemy. Animals are a resource.

That's not the problem here, the problem is that raiders go on a genocidal murder spree the moment they see a tamed animal. Why does a rocket-armed pirate waste his single-use weapon on a rabbit? Why does a centipede stop for five minutes to to mow down a couple of chicken with a minigun? They should be opportunistic in the way they kill animals, in the same way crop-burning is.

If your animals are so important to you, just create an animal zone inside your fortress. Switch the animal restrictions to it whenever a raid shows up and all the animals will instantly run into your most protected sanctuary.

It's really really annoying having to change the zoning reservation twice for fifty chicken and another two dozen assorted animals every time a raid comes. Then you forget once and watch helplessly as all your puppies are beaten to a pulp even though your colonists stand ten tiles away shooting the raiders.

Pawns also prioritise carrying items from lower priority stockpiles to higher priority stockpiles. You would have pawns carrying a meal from the lower-priority stockpile to the higher-priority one every time a meal is eaten.

Not really a bug (apart from the wrong percentages displayed), just a less-than-ideal game mechanic.

It's done that way because animals are treated as another kind of colonists, raiders see no difference between a squirrel and a power-armoured sniper. It really would be nice if there was some threat-analysis calculation that would make raiders mostly ignore harmless animals like chicken.

It's simple: It says that that kibble requires one nutrition worth of veggies, and one nutrition worth of meat. Since one unit of raw food has 0.05 nutrition, so you need 20 of each to reach the required 1 nutrition. It's done this way because eggs are more nutritious, and so you wouldn't use as many of them in the recipe. (if I remember right, each egg has 0.25 nutrition, so you'd only use 4 of them instead of 20).

I agree that it's very confusing, though, it could really use an improvement.

(By the way, kibble has 0.05 nutrition too, so you effectively gain 20% extra food by cooking it)

Cougars for damage. Bears for overall combat effectivity (weaker attack than cougars, but even more durable). Huskies for hauling, they don't eat much and are fast. Alpacas and chicken for money - chicken reproduce really quickly and need only a pasture to live, and alpacas give lots and lots of wool that can be tailored into fairly valuable clothing.

I used to sell corn in Alpha 12, so that's what I tried to do in this Alpha as well. Surprise surprise, in six seasons nobody wanted to buy it, neither trade ships nor caravans, and now I'm sitting at over five thousand corn and have to build a third granary just to have somewhere to store it.

Their needs to be a few ways people can patch things up. Like if someone rescues someone who is down, like them more.

This already happens. Unfortunately it requires your pawn to be downed first, and is only temporary.

Yeah, wargs are roughly in the middle of the food chain, and tortoises are awfully durable. Any prey can do surprisingly heavy damage if they are lucky (I've seen a cougar with both eyes heavily scratched, and a grizzly with brain damage), and turtles can take so much punishment they can defeat even the biggest predators if the predator has poor luck, is old, or permanently wounded.

Does this mean CR disables the vanilla behaviour of auto-killing downed raiders then?

Not sure which behavior you're talking about, pawns shouldn't attack downed enemies to begin with.

I meant how most raiders that should be incapped end up dead instead, even if they don't have any life threatening injuries. It's needed in vanilla because people take days to bleed out, but it shouldn't be needed anymore if combat is realistic.

I like the animal naming after nuzzling, it shows that colonists get attached to the animals, and sometimes you get a little gem:



Still, I would like to be able to name animals myself. I already do this with colonists and it works well to make me more attached to them, to the point where I would probably reload after every game if I wasn't playing permadeath. On the other hand, the animal names are kinda generic (I have had at least four huskies named "Paulette") and once you get more animals they all just start blending together. Perhaps we should be allowed to rename the animals colonists already named themselves?

Does this mean CR disables the vanilla behaviour of auto-killing downed raiders then?

Aw, what a shame. It's basically pointless to have specialists now, since the xp drain at high levels is so ridiculously fast. You can have a colonist go to bed as lvl 20, and wake up lvl 19.

Components are only fun to manage as long as you don't run out. If you realise their value early and build a stockpile it's engaging, but you are stuck if you happen to run out since all the important technology needs components and there are no ready source to get more. If your stove breaks down and you can't repair it, well, tough luck.

As for gold, it's main use it's high market value and beauty. If you sold it to traders, that's fine, but it's main use should be artistic. Statues, floors, tables, just making beautiful impressive rooms for your colonists. Making it the requirement for things needed to progress just feels wrong, gamey.

You can use 20 vegetables and 20 meat to make 50 kibble, a net gain. Plus you can use the otherwise mostly undesirable food - human meat and haygrass - and turn it into universal animal food.