Getting a handle on meat

[Th3Eagle85]

What this thread seems to boil down to is a group of people discussing ways to make things harder, take longer and be more frustrating. People are also not thinking about the whole game or even the biomes that their suggestions to nerf hunting and remove all meat from manhunter packs to make farming needed for meat and leather will effect.

They so far haven't thought about what you are to do for food early game when your meals run out and your rice has yet to grow enough on a desert or other low forage map. Are we supposed to now just not play those maps?

Had a problem and lost your food supply and no crops ready to harvest (raid, fire, loss of power) well that's GG if hunting isn't a thing. Caravanning running low on food, want to stop to hunt so you can make it? Well some of these folks think you should get less food or very little.

Can manhunter packs bring in a lot of meat and leather? Yes. But it is the last combat event that has any form of risk/reward tied to it. Normal raids your reward is a slim chance to have someone live to recruit and then you get penalised by having to bury/burn corpses and the resulting mood debuffs for corpses, late game you also get a ton of mostly useless wealth generating weapons that just increase the next raids size for you. Mech raids now give far less materials on disassembly so their risk / reward is far worse now. Manhunter packs you can choose to ignore but if you do fight them you can get rewarded with meat and leather for your risk. Don#t want the increased wealth from taking those? Don't kill them. Wealth control being a larger concern now with how expectations and raid scaling is now.

Pointed this out earlier:

I am not sure what the real issue is here. Do you want keeping livestock more profitable or hunting less? I usually play on desert maps and am glad if the occasional lizard or emu shows up. Keeping livestock is my main source of animal product (meat/milk/eggs). Hunting in this case does not feel overpowered.

When playing in more friendly biomes does it not makes sense that there is an abundance of animals to hunt. If it feels its OP you could always limit yourself and not kill all the animal on the map.

It feels a little bit like complaining about having a year round growing season on the more friendly biome that you chose yourself.

So far I am still in the blue where the discussion is going or if it will go anywhere.

Again still fully supporting the suggestion of needed an animal product + meat + veggie for lavish meals.

[Aerial]

What this thread seems to boil down to is a group of people discussing ways to make things harder, take longer and be more frustrating. People are also not thinking about the whole game or even the biomes that their suggestions to nerf hunting and remove all meat from manhunter packs to make farming needed for meat and leather will effect.

They so far haven't thought about what you are to do for food early game when your meals run out and your rice has yet to grow enough on a desert or other low forage map. Are we supposed to now just not play those maps?

Had a problem and lost your food supply and no crops ready to harvest (raid, fire, loss of power) well that's GG if hunting isn't a thing. Caravanning running low on food, want to stop to hunt so you can make it? Well some of these folks think you should get less food or very little.

Can manhunter packs bring in a lot of meat and leather? Yes. But it is the last combat event that has any form of risk/reward tied to it. Normal raids your reward is a slim chance to have someone live to recruit and then you get penalised by having to bury/burn corpses and the resulting mood debuffs for corpses, late game you also get a ton of mostly useless wealth generating weapons that just increase the next raids size for you. Mech raids now give far less materials on disassembly so their risk / reward is far worse now. Manhunter packs you can choose to ignore but if you do fight them you can get rewarded with meat and leather for your risk. Don#t want the increased wealth from taking those? Don't kill them. Wealth control being a larger concern now with how expectations and raid scaling is now.

The question is about how to make keeping livestock advantageous enough to be worthwhile.  Right now, on friendly biome maps where you have the natural resources to keep herds of livestock it doesn't make sense because hunting nets you everything you could get from domesticated animals, only faster and at less cost.  No one is suggesting the number of animals be reduced on difficult biome maps where animals are already scarce and raising livestock is already difficult.

I have no issue with manhunter events continuing to deliver leather and meat to your door.  That's a great event and can make or break a colony that's starving. 

[Blato]

As it stands, manhunter packs are fine for me. Sometimes I ignore them because it's not worth risking injuries to colonists since later packs can deal a lot of damage.

As for herding, I'm also in the camp to have lavish meals need eggs/milk to make them. Also, an idea came to mind from reading these posts. Right now, we have a "body parts missing multiplier" for meat and leather, maybe it would be possible to make a third bar that goes with a tame animals' food gauge. If the animal is regularly fed, it's "fatness" would go up, which would increase the meat received multiplier by a %, and if the animal starts suffering from malnutrition, that bar would empty which would in turn quickly lower the meat multiplier.

Maybe adapting the addiction bar from colonists, as it only shows up for addicted colonists. Fatness would only show for tame animals, no bonus meat from wild animals.

[Snafu_RW]

Lavish meals compulsorily requiring animal products gets a thumbs up from me

[MajorFordson]

Re: Meat availability

Would animals "passing through" the map MUCH more commonly help with this? And not large herds, just groups relevant to the species, ie a lone rhinoceros or half a dozen muffalos. This would give more realistic animal behavior (moving around more) whilst providing more short-term opportunities that would need acting on. That would be more satisfactory to me than depopulating the map of animals quickly, or simply always having some wild animals "on hand" at any point in time.

An advanced player with a map-spanning wall could even "exploit" it to trap animals, which is a totally reasonable proposition that would work in real life.