I am not sure how I feel about farms being locked to a single crop

I am certain I can work my strategy around this change...

 

Given that fields will be size locked based on crop type, it probably won't be a simple case of deleting the old field and making a new one... I am thinking that there will be multiple fields lying fallow when the crop is not needed at the given time...

Colony symmetry is in grave danger.

 

I am fairly certain I will like it. You folks have a way of making things work.

 

Frankly, I've been going through the motions on food production for so long that I'm just happy to see something new.

...and I hope malfeasant claw bulbs return.

 

To be honest, I kind of tuned out reading the whole article when it started off with:

"New players have a heck of a time figuring out how to grow enough food to feed their colony....."

As I've pretty much not seen a single person on the Steam discussion boards or these forums comment that their problem with food has anything what so ever to do with growing crops and their output.

Those were problems 6-7 months ago or whenever it was when things grew more simplified and there wasn't all that diversity in crop times, growing periods etc, but since then I've never really seen anyone go "Well shit, I can't grow enough food from my farms to keep my colonists fed", instead the reaction from those:

* New.
* Not familiar with the "true way".
* Know the "true way" and don't want to just pigeon hole their playthroughs.

From what I'd seen are typically either:

1) "I'm making enough food but my kitchen(s) can't convert it fast enough." - Either they aren't hitting the mandatory minimum required kitchen staff ratios. Or feel the required ratios are overkill and involve too much of their population.

2) "My farms make enough food, my kitchens can convert it fast enough, but colonists eat it before the Kitchen can produce a full days cycle" - Pretty much sod all you can do about this spiral once it picks up speed other than kill colonists, exploit imbalanced systems (trading/foreign office)... or you played, know the problems and buffer/scale ahead of time.



So starting off with "Hey new players are having a heck of a time growing enough food! So we're changing all this stuff!", strikes me as talking about a non-issue and addressing a problem that doesn't exist, whilst hoping it avoids having to actually tackle the whole 'Kitchen thing'.

Speculatively, there's probably larger reasons for the change that have squat to do with new players though... like it simplifies the heck out of things and removes having to set up something that can balance itself in a range of situations. Instead you set the environment to single states and simplify everything to the point where farms are just a large static stamp the player plonks down, which then makes it easier to wrap anything else around it to hold the whole situation together as the 'minimal workload solution'... which sometimes is what needs to be done I suppose.

 

Well I have more writing to do then... this game never fails to deliver.

 

Widget chain??

Now that's a great title for an update name, blogpost name or... an industry forum thread name...

 

Is it a sad thing that all of my concerns have to do with the cosmetic aspects of the proposed changes rather than the improved mechanics?

 

Don't really see many cosmetic issues with this change other than it enforces a fixed size, as the number of crops you typically need to use in a colony are what? 1 or 2 crops?

Sure you could mix it up and use a wider range of crop types if you wanted, but really you can get by with using just 1 crop type at present, 2 if you want extra peace of mind and to make at least the crop side of things borderline fool proof.

If anything, as this change removes variation it'll cause more static looking colonies from a aesthetic & symmetrical standpoint, as where before someone might decide to have a 8x14 field one place and a 8x10 another now they're forced to have each side be the same size unless they use another crop, and that other enforced size may not fit, or it may to too small etc.

So a side effect of this change if/when it goes live will be Gaslamp essentially enforcing a passive (but very significant) influence over the very aesthetics of colonies to be one that's much more consistent and less chaotic looking....

If that's a good or bad thing depends who you ask I guess.

 

Hmm, here's my take on it. Currently we have 7x7 stockpile (max) and 14x14 farm (max)

What I think would work nicely is something like:
7x7: Flax, Opium Poppy, Chilli/Cabbage??
7x14: Maize, maybe the berry bushes if released??
14x14 Wheat/Sugarcane
14x21: Pumpkins, Green Bamboo, Coconuts??

Yeah, 2.
Maize
Maize+Wheat (transitioning)
Wheat
Wheat+Pumpkins (for Quality Food)

Though currently I think I would start on Pumpkins even before transitioning, so perhaps having 3 crops (+flax obviously)

 

Bamboo?

 

You posted right as I edited. Bamboo would probably be 14x21, currently it will max out a 14x14 easily. I wouldn't want to try fitting in a 21x21 anywhere though so let's stop at 14x21

 

How does locking fields to a fixed size actually help players? I don't get that part at all.

 

I suspect it's a combination of:

1) Stops players from building 'non-optimal' farm sizes for supplying food.

2) Allows Gaslamp to predict with 100% certainty what each crop can and will produce at full productivity. And with it being a 100% certainty then balance everything around those absolutes.

3A) Allows crops to be boxed into clear 'roles' and identified to players much clearer. E.G. "We expect you to always start with crop A or B because that's how it's balanced to work. Then later we expect you to move to Crop C and if you want to also have farms handle other raw resources also plant Crop D".

3B) By locking field size by crop the size can be used firstly as a clear indication of if that crop is meant to fill the role for a small colony or large colony, and also makes it extremely difficult for players to deviate without meeting a 'end game' scenario in short order as by deviating they could potentially break the pre-calculated intended balance and stumble into holes might exist.

4) Turns complaints about not being able to grow enough food into a even more simple 1-2-3 break down because of how static the options will be, so if anyone has problems after then it'll quite literally be only their fault for deviating. Where as currently it's designed for player freedom, yet balanced for one methodology which would point to a balance problem.... so fixed sizes helps resolve this and identify it as a player issue.

 

That was an interesting blog post. The precise mechanics of how food production works from farm to table was pretty esoteric, which is one of the reasons I made that "How to food" post a while back. It did seem odd to me that such a proportionally large percentage of your total workforce had to be dedicated to keeping your colony fed.

I like how you mentioned the "Sid Meier" approach to balancing. Fun reference

If I remember correctly, didn't Moo have reservations about having cooking be a food multiplier? I sorta recall having that conversation a few months back.

 

I haven't been following the forums so I'm a bit confused, I didn't even notice any changes to farm when playing lol.

What do you mean about farms being locked to a single crop though? Does that mean that certain sizes determine what crops you can grow?

 

A lot of this has to do with this blog post:

https://www.gaslampgames.com/2016/02/24/the-clockwork-razor-purging-agriculture/

 

Yep, was something mentioned during the "Criticism of Kitchens" discussion thread that happened over in suggestions last October.

https://community.gaslampgames.com/threads/criticism-of-the-kitchen.16397/#post-106938