Blood N Bones [Hardcore Survival]

squeek502

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
146
0
0
It seems like SoL is rounding down rather than up for it's hunger value based on %. Means things like juice lose half their value after the first drink, not entirely sure yet what I think about that....
You're right about that. I'm going to make it round to the nearest integer in the next update; that'll also allow for a simpler formula to get the same results (1/2 hunger bar foods staying on 100% nutrition was to get around anything less than 100% resulting in 0 hunger).
 

-shhfiftyfive

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
60
0
0
Why can you not continue to do hamburgers and other foods? Sure, if you want to eat the same thing all the time they lose value, but you just use them along with other foods.

And don't kid yourself that lots of people made varieties of foods and this will just make them go the easy route. Most people already did that. Most of the players just lived off of blood from a smelter, carrot juice, melon juice, baked potatoes. The easy route just isn't so easy anymore.
its not about difficulty. its about common sense. if i make some hamburgers, and i eat some hamburgers... i should be FULL after a couple. if i ate hamburgers yesterday and was full, i should also get full today if i eat another couple hamburgers...

but SoL makes it so a hamburger on day 2, 3, etc makes your stomach treat them like they are a light snack. that's just ridiculous. SoL logic tells you to just skip hamburgers and make a REAL light snack instead.

always resorting to the same 7 light snacks (SoL) is not interesting.

i'm sorry, but that part of SoL is in direct contrast to what harvestcraft and hunger overhaul mods are designed to do. they conflict. goals are not in sync.

one wants you to tech up your food, the other (SoL) wants you to ignore all that and find 7 easily reproducible and cheap snacks to cycle through. its not good for the other mods.


as i said above, a way to fix this, and let the mods work in harmony, would be to change the code so that instead of x amount of "foods" being eaten required to reset the diminishing returns... make that x amount of "hunger points restored" for it to reset... that way we wouldn't see SoL defeating the purpose of the other mods, and not boil down to 7 snacks in rotation, and we can actually make other foods without such ridiculous a formula being used..
 
Last edited:

wolfenstein19

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
236
0
0
Basicly the concept of SoL atm forces you to abuse the fuck out of all the light meals and easy prep foods, heres a list of what can be done. Using any complex meals is highly discouraged since when you make them, you usually do so in bulk. No point to that now.

1) Stock
2) Carrot Juice
3) Apple Juice
4) Fruit Punch
5) Baked Potatoes
6) Bread
7) Toast

Setting up the infrastructure to make more complex foods is not only unrewarding, but also more difficult now that the watering can has the expensive recipe.
Whats the point of a Hamburger if it heals barely anything after a few?
 

-shhfiftyfive

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
60
0
0
is this intended?

the amount of exp required to level up your mattock (from clumsy, etc) keeps going up depending on some bad formula.

if for example you happen to also have a shovel and/or and axe... and say you level one of those 2 tools up before the mattock... once one of those other 2 tools levels up, the max exp required for the mattock to level up formulates/compensates for the new total sum of your upgraded shovel and clumsy axe.

its still a clumsy mattock, but the amount of exp to level it increased as soon as my shovel leveled to comfortable.
 

Mikhaila666

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
673
0
0
its not about difficulty. its about common sense. if i make some hamburgers, and i eat some hamburgers... i should be FULL after a couple. if i ate hamburgers yesterday and was full, i should also get full today if i eat another couple hamburgers...

Sorry, but 'common sense'? In Minecraft?

What you're saying is "it bothers me" or "i don't like it". It's just a game mechanic. I don't find it any more ridiculous than anything else in the game, and quite a bit less than many things.

And as for the easily made foods:

1) Stock
2) Carrot Juice
3) Apple Juice
4) Fruit Punch
5) Baked Potatoes
6) Bread
7) Toast

People used mass produce and eat just ONE of these, and not bother with anything else.

The mod doesn't change a lot. The players that wanted the easiest/most efficient food will still do so, they just have to figure out what the easiest path is. The players that liked making the more complex foods and having a variety can still do that. I think what people don't like is that it makes the game a bit harder, takes up some time, and is one more way you can get into trouble if you have the wrong food with you. Unfortunately, i think those are actually the effects Eyamaz is hoping to put more of into the mod :)
 

-shhfiftyfive

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
60
0
0
mikhaila666, sorry, but no. we don't mind hard. that's why we're actually playing this pack. and why we play hardcore.

finding 7 easy foods is NOT HARD.

the point is, SoL currently defeats the purpose of the other food mods. you cannot deny that. SoL creates a simple "gamey/cheesy" "tactic" of finding 7 simple foods and mass producing them. that's not allowing the other food mods to serve their purpose, nor is it difficult. and no, it doesn't make a lot of sense with the formula it is currently using.

we aren't asking for SoL to be removed. we are hoping the author will/can edit the code/formula to make more sense and not conflict with the goals of the other food mods it is packed with.
 

squeek502

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
146
0
0
as i said above, a way to fix this, and let the mods work in harmony, would be to change the code so that instead of x amount of "foods" being eaten required to reset the diminishing returns... make that x amount of "hunger points restored" for it to reset... that way we wouldn't see SoL defeating the purpose of the other mods, and not boil down to 7 snacks in rotation, and we can actually make other foods without such ridiculous a formula being used..
This is a good idea. I'll definitely try to add it as an option.
 

PearlescentDragon

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
10
0
0
Throwing out my two cents on the whole Spice of Life mechanic, especially since the developer for it responded here.

My understanding of Spice of Life is this: it is supposed to encourage players to branch out their options of food, requiring players to farm multiple different types of crops. In my opinion, the best way to encourage players to branch out their gardens/food options is to have each of the various food types give very minor buffs that last for a lengthy period of time. As a player, this creates choice and interest in expanding your food options. Players can have staple diets, but they are rewarded for creating a number of different foods. Reward mechanic vs punishment mechanic.

Core foods (those farmed by crops or animals) would have a certain buff associated with them. Complex food built on combinations of core foods would have both buffs represented, but perhaps diluted for the trade-off of health and saturation. The buffs being minor are quite important to prevent too much power being budgeted to a player, but lengthy to allow a player to consider them worthwhile to invest into (also to reduce the annoyance factor of trying to optimize). Hopefully the buff duration is tailored to how long that food is being churned in the player's conceptual stomach.

Crappy example: Milk gives a half an absorption heart for 10 minutes. Wheat gives a minor jump boost (less than Jump Boost I perhaps?) for 10 minutes. Making a Grilled Cheese (basic ingredients are wheat & milk) yields both half an absorption heart and jump boost, but either may last shorter than 10 minutes in order to reduce the effectiveness of super-foods. If you want more buffs, you have to expand your farm/ranch. Maybe certain highly useful buffs are only available to higher tiers of food...

Potential Problem: This system requires the buffs to be very minor; I don't know how small you can make some of these buffs in minecraft, or how many buffs would be needed for all the basic foods.

This also might budget quite a bit of power. Players will want to optimize and bring all the buffs they can (which would require quite the garden, especially if non-plains/forest crops hold useful buffs). In a hardcore modpack like this, that means you can budget power to other areas and get to be especially brutal to the people subsisting on blood.

I know this is a modPACK, not a mod, so the thread is not dedicated to the development of an individual mechanic is not being developed here. Sorry if it's horribly out of place.
 

-shhfiftyfive

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
60
0
0
-shhfiftyfive said:
we aren't asking for SoL to be removed. we are hoping the author will/can edit the code/formula to make more sense and not conflict with the goals of the other food mods it is packed with.

as i said above, a way to fix this, and let the mods work in harmony, would be to change the code so that instead of x amount of "foods" being eaten required to reset the diminishing returns... make that x amount of "hunger points restored" for it to reset... that way we wouldn't see SoL defeating the purpose of the other mods, and not boil down to 7 snacks in rotation, and we can actually make other foods without such ridiculous a formula being used..


This is a good idea. I'll definitely try to add it as an option.
good to hear. looking forward to it!
 

Eyamaz

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
2,373
0
0
What I would like to be able to do is literally:

Player eats food y times. If y >= z then set hunger and saturation == 0.

Pretty sure I can do this with the formula, I think, without a code change. The only restraint I have is time.
 

squeek502

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
146
0
0
What I would like to be able to do is literally:

Player eats food y times. If y >= z then set hunger and saturation == 0.

Pretty sure I can do this with the formula, I think, without a code change. The only restraint I have is time.

Code:
MAX(0, ROUND(1-count/12,0))
where the '12' is double the amount you want the drop-off to occur at (so this would have 100% for 0-6 recently eaten and then 0% for 7-infinity).

Here's a spreadsheet with that formula: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10m4SRFVBIfKj7ATrGDHy1Op3p9jkWhPDGJiamz0vI1I/edit?usp=sharing
 
Last edited:

wolfenstein19

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
236
0
0
What I would like to be able to do is literally:

Player eats food y times. If y >= z then set hunger and saturation == 0.

Pretty sure I can do this with the formula, I think, without a code change. The only restraint I have is time.
Why do you insist on breaking HO and Pams Harvestcrafts food concept?
All this does is encourage gamey and cheesy ways to bypass that system.
 

Batch2

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
183
0
1
What I would like to be able to do is literally:

Player eats food y times. If y >= z then set hunger and saturation == 0.

Pretty sure I can do this with the formula, I think, without a code change. The only restraint I have is time.

Please do. The only thing I don't like about the play style of the pack with SoL is that it penalizes me for carrying stacks of food. Having to take 1 of 30 different foods if I want to eat without penalty for all those foods is a bit of a drag. The biggest problem with the current system is how steeply the return drops just after eating something once. It would be so much better if it was like eat more than 5 of a food item out of the last 30 and then get no hunger/saturation.

You could even keep a diminished returns formula and just make the decrease exponential to make it smoother. Something like 1 - (count^2)/z would yield the following if z = 100: 100, 99, 96, 91, 84, 75, 64, 51, 36, 19, 0.
z could be set higher or lower depending on where you want the zero point to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anesos

Blargerist

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
292
0
0
You could even keep a diminished returns formula and just make the decrease exponential to make it smoother. Something like 1 - (count^2)/z would yield the following if z = 100: 100, 99, 96, 91, 84, 75, 64, 51, 36, 19, 0.
z could be set higher or lower depending on where you want the zero point to be.

The problem with this, is that the mod currently rounds down, so while you're only losing 1/12th of your 100% currently when you eat a food, even 1% loss is still at least one hunger bar lower. Thankfully going to be changed in the next version.


PS: @squeek502 lets say I wanted it to keep it at 100% value for 5 consumptions, then have it lose 20% per consumption subsequently. Is that possible? If it is, what would the config line for it be?
 

Batch2

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
183
0
1
The problem with this, is that the mod currently rounds down, so while you're only losing 1/12th of your 100% currently when you eat a food, even 1% loss is still at least one hunger bar lower. Thankfully going to be changed in the next version.

Yep. That's why I'm proposing it for the next version ;)
 

Dontremb

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
3
0
0
Hey, I really love the mod pack, and even the new Spice is Life concept.

What I'd really love, is if there is someone who would like to join the server, with basically the primary goal to farm and cook.

This is a small server with 2-3 players, but frequent, and it's just the mod pack with no other addons/pluggins.

We would, of course, provide for anything required of our chef like ingredients, safety, and building materials. (Or, if preferred, we will just build what our chef requires.)

((This is a serious post.))

(((I realize now that by posting that bit about it being a 'serious post,' it's probably more likely you will think I'm being sarcastic. But I'm not; I think a player who wants to, and thinks it would be fun to be a mostly full time chef in a mod pack would add an interesting dimension to our game.)))

((((Oh, if you're interested, please send me a PM. Thanks. ))))