TemporaryMan

Winona crafts slowly at 50 hunger, so meaty stews are only worth +100. To spend a full day crafting requires 49 meaty stews. There's also the complication that meat dishes have a longer chewing animation. So now we're down to 4.5 - 5 seconds gained per stew eaten, or 22.5% - 25% faster crafting (versus having someone else do it and not bother making the stews), and it only costs 49 meaty stews per day. Since meat can be given to the Pig King for gold, that's equivalent to 147 gold to craft 25% faster for one day. It still doesn't look like a good deal to me. If the point of the hunger loss is to add extra work that cuts out of the time gained by crafting quickly, it'd be less hassle just to directly nerf the perk to 33% or 25% faster crafting and skip the hunger loss altogether. I had a similar idea: +300% hunger loss for 10 seconds after crafting things.

Exactly. It takes an extra 64 dragon pies to save half a day's worth of crafting. Can you even make 64 dragon pies in half a day? Edit: spare you the work, I did the math. If you have 12 crock pots - that's 2 stations with a circle of 6 around some ice boxes - it'll still take six batches to cook all those dragonpies. At 40 seconds each, that's 4 minutes, or half a day, not counting the time to fill the crock pots and walk between them. That's also ignoring the time needed to get the twigs, plant the farms, renew the seeds, make the books, read the books, harvest the fruit... so even in the best case scenario, you'd be better off just having Wickerbottom do the crafting and the other player be Wolfgang instead of Winona, and to heck with the pies. Was that about the lights? It looked like they were talking about the catapult.

If they automatically powered on and off when people were in range, they'd be more useful and it'd be easier to keep them fueled. Lacking an on/off switch for the catapults, okay, sure, if you build 18 of them they're better than 2 extra Wolfgangs, so I can accept that. But the lanterns are just so uncompetitive with other options. With automatic power conservation, you could build them in the ruins, fuel them, and they'd be ready for you on return trips and you could just top them up once in a while as needed.

While I understand the reasoning behind your criticism of the update, I just can't help but think using a poem about the Holocaust to discuss a character rebalance that wen't poorly is, well, a bit much? That aside, there have been numerous suggestions how to rebalance the hunger cost to make fast crafting less painful and keeping a full-time Winona on the team for fast crafting more useful.

Well said. I think it's very unlikely other character updates will follow this model. Crafting recipes fit Winona's theme, and she was given a downside because she didn't have one yet. The way I look at the spotlights is this: they're hands-free, uneqipped, heatless sources of light, so the thing they most closely resemble is lanterns placed on the ground. The way I see it, the spotlight is mostly useful if you want to fight something in the dark, in a predictable location, with your equipment free for weapons and armor, with freedom to run around, and without having to worry about setting fire to objects on the ground. That doesn't come up very much: just the raid bosses, and of them, only dragonfly sets fire to things. In fact, you might be better off just placing a bunch of lanterns on the ground to keep the whole area lit up instead of having the light follow you, and carrying a luxury fan to save your lanterns if they catch fire. On the other hand, if you have no caves then lanterns aren't readily available.

I'm actually inclined to suggest it might be better to make it work like this: If Winona's hunger rate is normal, crafting increases her hunger rate to x4 for 10 seconds. If Winona's hunger rate is currently increased, reset the time remaining to 10 seconds. The increased hunger rate works out to at most 4.6875 extra hunger per craft, if you pace them the full 10 seconds apart, but it gets cheaper if you craft many things quickly in a short period of time. For crafting a single item it's almost the same as it is now, but sustained crafting sessions only raise her total daily needs to a maximum of 300 hunger/day (not 4875). Needing as much hunger as 4 people to do the work of 2 isn't so bad, and early-game crafting wouldn't be as punishing since most of that would be in short bursts; crafting 8 things in 20 seconds (plus another 10 seconds after the last craft) would only cost ~14 extra hunger, not 40. Of course, this is just a rebalance, not something more interesting than the existing system. At least it would put a limit on the amount of grind or farming necessary to feed an industrious Winona (4 dragon pies per day instead of 65). Also it introduces a little bit of skill since it's more efficient if you can navigate the crafting menu quickly. This is obviously easier in the early game when fewer recipes are available. It also has the advantage that since it works by altering metabolism, it rewards wearing a belt of hunger or hibearnation vest.

Wolfgang 32.5.

@CaptainChaotica No, not him. Canadian.

I can think of somebody who actually advocates for that, but he's a political extremist, so it's probably better just to say there is someone that stupid (well, childishly spiteful) and leave it at that.

I normally don't ship anything unless it's cargo with other cargo. But...

Actually, the last time I updated my sample, my numbers were as follows: Common: 66.7% Classy: 24.3% Spiffy: 5.7% Distinguished: 2.8% Elegant: 0.6% So community-based sampling was pretty close to the true numbers. Willow didn't start the fire. It was always burning since Wagstaff's portal was... spiraling.

Or made into rosehip jam.

My point wasn't that few reasonable people hold the opinion. My point was there was an emerging consensus among Warbucks mourners that Klei had been bullied into doing this by an angry mob of horrible, awful, censorious people, without supporting evidence. That's not the case. Klei made the change because they felt it was the right thing to do. Statements in favour of removing Warbucks have generally been civil and reasonable, not threatening or intimidating. I don't agree with your assessment of the bigger picture, but I'm not sure here's the right place to discuss it.

I'm sorry, I've agreed with most of your more nuanced arguments in the other thread, but I've read the discussion about this top to bottom and I've only seen maybe two people actually say they found him offensive. Just two, and only after the argument had been going on for pages. An additional three said they were glad to see him gone, but didn't say whether they were personally offended or not. Otherwise I've seen abstract hypothetical discussion about how he might be offensive to someone, or how he doesn't match the degree of separation other characters have with addressing the evils of colonialism through some fantasy counterpart, so he doesn't really fit the style of the other characters. And I've seen the devs say he was cut because he was problematic and wasn't varied and interesting enough. But I haven't seen this supposed sinister mob "pressure" violating Klei's "aritstic integrity". This was Klei's choice, and a fairly reasonable one. Klei's made it clear they use a highly-iterative process, and it's a best-practice not to be afraid to throw work out if it isn't working, ideally sooner rather than later. This is speaking as someone who was down with having a colonial player character if it's clear he's an arrogant, hypocritical villain like Maxwell. But the way the upset at his removal is teetering into scapegoating and blaming others is giving me doubts. The way things are now, players who absolutely don't want to deal with a British colonialist whatsoever get what they want. Players who want a character that satirizes British colonialists have a mod that re-enables his code that remains in the game. Sounds good enough to me.

Unfortunately, some people are allergic to the dead human skin in dust. It's, uh... it's not easy for them. Also, practically every auto-immune disorder ever. Yes, I quoted something from page 2. I read this whole thing backward from the end, I figure I earned the right to do so.