One Hour One Life Forums

You're ignoring the most important resource - time. Most time is wasted on hauling, and you need to haul a lot more soil and water for berries than for stew. Berries can be better if they're right next to soil and water, but soil pits run out fast. A basket of soil and three bowls of water is sufficient for a pot of stew, but for equivalent calories in berries you need to haul almost twice as much. I wouldn't put that much weight on hoe usage, because you should need a maximum of two stone hoes, steel hoe should be ready by the time the second stone hoe breaks.

Back to OP, I make 3x3 fields for stew and plant carrots and one corn in them. While carrots are growing you can get beans and squash to replant in these fields after carrot harvest.

Stew is perfectly doable as Eve. There's plenty of time to make bowls while you're waiting for crops to grow. Berries just eat up all your time because they use so much soil and water. Heck, I can even smith after stew most of the time. I start with planting one corn and two carrots first, then go look for beans and squash while those are growing. While corn is drying and beans and squash are growing you can prep pot and bowls and maybe even have time to get a rabbit for the forge. There should be enough eggs to keep you going until stew is ready. If there isn't, you're in a shitty spot anyway and the civ is doomed to die of drought in a couple of generations (how soon depends on how many berries they plant).

It makes no sense there's separate seeds for wheat. We should use the actual grain for planting.

Just generic shelves would already be a big step. More items per tile than box (3x3 would be nice), but requires floor to be built. Floors in general would be required for building fancy stuff, and the level of flooring would determine the level of fanciness. For example, a packed dirt floor could let you build shelves. A wooden floor could let you build wardrobes. And a stone floor could let you build an iron stove that functions as both coals and hot flat rock while lit (can do recipes for either, but not coals recipes that get item stuck until coals go out). As for restricting them to indoors, I think these things should decay fairly quickly if not in enclosed structure (no decay at all while structure stands tho).

The main thing I notice in older towns is lack of baskets. So I think burritos are a great food because you can spam wheat for baskets and clean up the grains with less effort and space use than sinking it into pies.

Anatomically modern humans are ~200 000 years old, and ~195 000 of that was stone age.

Though I think counting years from Eve would make more sense.

Smaller society just makes it harder to be a tyrant. You need to be able to extract resources from thousands to give proper lavish rewards to your bodyguards to buy their loyalty, and it still didn't work for Romans. You ain't going to extract much from a group of twenty or so hunter gatherers.

Tundra can support herds of megafauna. Reindeer and muskoxen come to mind. It's just that it can support less than savanna. But savanna still supports less then you'd think. When you watch documentaries on African wildlife you see endless see of wildebeest only because that's what they're filming. What you don't see is vast expanses with no big animals because that's left behind as the herd moves. Current estimates are just 1.5mil wildebeest in all of Africa, which isn't really all that much for a continent 30.39mil km^2 in area. For reference, estimated deer population in USA alone (9.834mil km^2) is 30mil, majority of which is in forests.

Insects can eat wood. Many animals can eat insects, humans included. Eating insects is generally less work than hunting, too, and they're more abundant almost everywhere. Heck, I bet if you weighed all the insects on Earth they'd outweigh all the vertebrates. As for smaller stature, there's plenty of things that could cause it. Bigger size generally means longer growth and slower reproduction, ie less resilience to environmental change. For a hunter in a forest environment being small can be advantageous because it helps with stealth. But let's say that it's food, why is it then that the biggest cats (tigers) and biggest primates (gorillas) live in forest? Or how about the fact that vast majority of largest carnivorans (bears) live in forest?

And since when do humans care about sustainability? Life abhors vacuum and tends to fill up any niche to the brim. Humans are no exception, history of humanity is history of overexploitation of resources. Why do you think we switched to agriculture in the first place? It's certainly not easier than hunting, nor does grain taste better than meat. Our exploding population decimated hunting opportunities so we had to start farming. We're not any better today. Just look at California, people there are devastating already low aquifers so they can grow fucking almonds.

Sure, chimps. But how many Roman emperors were killed by Praetorians?

More like tundra. Greenland would be a lot better comparison. Also, lolwut savanna supporting more animals than forest? Forest has a much bigger plant biomass per area than savanna. Plant biomass determines the potential for animal biomass. Sure, you get bigger herds in savanna, but they're highly migratory so on average it's still lower density.

Also, the whole concept of population having a super easy time getting food is kinda silly. If you got that going on it means a specie is severely under the carrying capacity and the population will quickly grow until it reaches this capacity. Just look at global human population since the green revolution.

And yeah, most native Americans were agricultural, ie irrelevant to the discussion.

And how many of those homicides are commited by members of the same group? Blood feuds between different families are the main cause of murder in primitive society, but since those consists of sporadic murders they don't qualify as warfare.

As for domestic tyranny, that's against women and children. Try doing that to a 20-30 year old guy for an extended period of time, and he'll almost certainly kill you given half a chance.

And a society that can't support a warrior class can't engage in total war. They're too busy feeding themselves.

Flint drill shouldn't even be a thing. There's no use for it before you have steel tools, and if you're at that tech it makes more sense to make a steel auger.

Such people back in the stone age would get their skull smashed in with a rock by a tribemate when they went to sleep. That is, if the whole tribe didn't immediately turn them into a spear pincushion when they saw them attacking a tribesmate. This is why humans are naturally a lot less violent than our close chimp relatives - we simply self-domesticated by killing off violent people. Being violent is really only possible in an urban civilization where the concept of strangers is an actual thing, in a small society where everyone knows everyone and they spend all day together it's virtually impossible to kill someone without being caught, and killing anyone will severely piss off everyone else. Also, unlike games, RL has true permadeath so people are wary of provoking others too much.

HF playing alone in a month or two.