a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
I don't get it how this helps anybody but griefers...
If we removed things that helped griefers we wouldn't have much. It's the curse of an online game.
I wouldn't say its a curse of an online game, it is simply a fact of modern life. Guns can be used to protect lives or take them. Laws can be made that help equality, but can also create loop holes for those seeking an upper hand. Too much or too little of anything can kill you, balance is the key, and without darkness there is no light.
The curse is we don't care? I don't get it... Maybe we should also remove the curse system then to help griefers, because it is an online game.
Sorry, for the this whole issue was a no-brainer, thats why I didn't write a long winded reasoning case of it in my first point. Guess I was mistaken.
Being rude, sarcastic and insulting because someone does not agree with your idea? You don't spout gold out of your fingertips and tip of your tongue good sir, and there is no reason to belittle people because they notice that fact.You consistently ignore balance of both sides, and only favor your own point of view sometimes to a cringe worthy level. Certain questions must be asked before making decisions about game balance.
Can people with negative intentions use certain systems to fit their desires? Yes.
Does removing said system hurt a normal player just as much? Yes.
https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=1544
Going off just the meter doesn't represent the impact of clothes well, but the raw math does. When you look at food consumption of clothed versus not clothed in most of the biomes, there is a pretty big difference between the two data points. Making biomes bigger could have a huge negative impact, displacing resources like soil and water from each other making it harder to start up a village.
Don't tell me though, I am trying to learn everything that I learn from others within the game rather than the internet. More fun that way.
put skinned rabbit into bowl and apply sharp stone, then onto cake crust just as mutton.
Wow really? I shake my head sir...
Psykout wrote:Whats to stop people from using this system to grief? You could hold down a player to starve them or something along those lines. Imagine if a team of griefers came together and just strangled everyone? Never ever trust a triplet spawn...
Because the basic assumption is, the positive forces to still outweight the negatives by a fair amount. Once the destructors woulbe be in the majority it's over anyway, nothing would and should stop them there.
Well if three come together and just strangle someone.. in the woods? Well it wouldn't be so hard for them to get their hands on a (stolen) weapon anyway. So I don't see a big difference there... In town.. well many people would see them, and again, it wouldn't be soo hard to get their hands on a knife/bow&arrow anyway.
The issue is if a negative minority (or single person) can seriously disrupt a vast majority without them being able to do much about it.
Then whats the difference of just having a weapon to kill said griefer? You mention it wouldn't be so hard to get their hands on a knife, same goes for everyone else then. Gotta think of both sides. On the other side of your suggestion, someone could easily use it negatively. Grabbing the smith to troll and grief, mothers trying to feed babies. You would be giving them a way to affect players without even needing a tool, just bare hands. Normal players would never need to use it unless there is a griefer, griefers could use it anytime they want to try and grief. More accessible to those with bad intentions than those with good in my opinion. The destructors are not in the majority, so why do we need this, if there is possibility of more risk added? You say no damage done, but getting locked down for 15 seconds could very very easily just mean death. Also there is nothing right now that is a channel, as in you click it and you are tied to the object frozen for a duration. That itself would be a new element to the game that is far from the others when it comes to manipulating objects/players.
Whats to stop people from using this system to grief? You could hold down a player to starve them or something along those lines. Imagine if a team of griefers came together and just strangled everyone? Never ever trust a triplet spawn...
"bunch of changes"... Pyskout I really don't get why you are freaking out. It's your good right to not like an idea, but you're acting quite hostile IMO. Please keep a friendly attitude. Thank you. Also complaining about splitting etc. And as said, we already have the mechanic on age an ability what do and before the suggestion you would already be dead before having this additional "grace period" to find some food... Oh and you are now mixing up threads. This would have better fitted to reddit where the suggestion is to be discussed.
Adding in a system that changes the way dying to starvation is currently, and coupling it with a disabling effect is a bunch of changes. You tried to tell me to carry on and said I was whining simply because I disagree. I am not freaking out, I am typing out long thought out complete thoughts as to why I don't think your suggested changes fit with the game. I am not saying your ideas are stupid or pointless, I am not telling you to shut up or move along. I have not once been unfriendly, unless you consider someone not agreeing with you as hostile and unfriendly. I am citing examples and actually asking questions about those to see how much you have thought this through. Putting ideas on the internet and being unwilling to receive feedback and have actual back and forths about it is silly.
It's a split with a good reason. Here keep ranting about noobs how stupid they are and make your hair pull out. There a suggestion to make a game more accessible that spawned of it. As I also posted a while ago, this balancing is something that often goes wrong with indy games where devs listens much on the hardcore fans... who want to keep the game somewhat challenging for themselves while the average joe and gal have no chance. For example, and this time a name it, "oxygen not included" the devs realized and it gets easier and easier with every update. Being a hugh fan of the game I often wonder, really? It's not that hard to make a sustainable colony and the challenge gets less and less. And then go to twitch and watch a few streamers how they keep f*** up...
I have seen many games that also catered to snowflake mentality and accessibility more than the core of the game. The game became homogenized with other games of the genre and directly competed instead of filling the niche they started with. I would like to not have that happen to this game. Accepting the current state of the game, the intentions of the dev, and theorizing better ways to utilize the systems BEFORE asking for a ton of changes is necessary.
Adding a specific system that behaves unlike any other system in the game is not going to help accessibility, it will actually make it worse. Yellow Fever shuts down all object interaction. It is clear because there are no if's an or's. You get bit, you get sick, you can't do anything but move. You are suggesting to add Starvation that you can pick some objects up but not others, that is not immediately clear across the board. It will also be a constant thing to deal with, rather than only when being bit by a mosquito. It does not promote accessibility like you believe it does, I am sorry to bring that to light.
I can see you are really adamant, and want to be active in talking about the game, that's great. But I do not believe coming in new and asking for a bunch of changes in any single aspect of life is a good idea, just my personal opinion.
Psykout wrote:Lionon, welcome to the forums, please feel free to interact here instead of trying to move discussions to another format/website.
Actually this is just exactly what Jason suggested for suggestions.
True, its just awkward to be a part of this conversation, see you add on to it, but have to go to reddit to read it, and then come back here to be back in the conversation. Also if my I want my thoughts to be heard by those that were involved here, they have to go there as well. It just split it for no reason when it could be just put in both places, so I did that for you, and mentioned it would be nice to not have threads split between two websites.
I dunno, I feel like lot of time suggestion forums are just a list of what people want, and no one ever talks about them. I feel like most of the suggestions posted here are noticed by us and Jason, and are talked about in depth. Is reading comprehension really at such a low that people can't tell the difference between someone asking for a feature, and talking about an in game feature? Although I am starting to see TLDR for the TLDR on places like reddit....
Love when people do this. I had a mother once that always said she just wanted to fish, but always something got in the way. Rather then let the town go down the drain she'd drop her pole and do what was needed. Don't think she ever got to do the fishing she wanted, so I buried her next to an icehole next to her fishing pole.
Suggestion to make the game a little more accessible to newcomers:
To anyone that doesn't follow the link to reddit or prefers our nostalgic forums...
So many newer players die on starvation, because a) they misjudge their allowment b) rely to much about berries.
I propose to fixes:
a) First the tutorial should be less berry focused. In the tutorial at every corner is a berry tree to sustain you. Obviously players take that mindset over, that berries are their main source of sustainment. Simple fix, instead of placing a berry bush at every corner, alternate food sources in the tutorial. Give them a bowl of popcorn, pre-backed pie etc. as the tutorial progresses. I also suggest adding cooking to the tutorial. At least of popcorn.
b) Have a longer (but harsher) starvation phase. First to talk a little real life here as soo many games get it wrong. In reality we have a long time until we die of starvation. 3 weeks no food. Not missing a dinner and breakfast doesn't kill us.. "unreal world" is by the way IMO the best game with hunger mechanic as it gradually decreases the things you can do, over a long time (not getting water kills you fast tough). Anyway back to the topic, instead of instant death when missing the seconds running to the next bush (yes, I'm aware of previous point lol) have a longer starvation phase. However, when starving you can do nothing put pick up ready made food. No taking branches, no pulling of carts etc. Also make speech bubbles gray. But have a reasonable time to find a quick fix.
3 seconds in game is the equivalent of 18 days. Not eating for X months until you are close to death, and then not eating for another 18 days should definitely kill you. If people are dying because of misjudging their allotment of time left, rather than changing how hunger works (Have you read anything Jason has said about the game? He has clearly stated multiple times he doesn't want to change the game to make it like other games, so referencing other games' features is odd) why not just make the alert of hunger go off sooner? Better yet, how about people start listening to the first one that goes off and take care of it. If I ever die to starvation because I am distracted or stretching it out too much, I usually ignored the very first alarm, and waited until it increased in urgency before I reacted. There is plenty of warning, including the fact your hunger bar takes up a lot of real estate of the HUD. If you lengthen this time purely to curb mismanagement, what happens when the next round of players that ask for more. Soon enough people will start asking if we can be robots so we don't have to eat!
As to having a special condition of starving, so much work for soooo little value. So if you are surrounded my meat pies, eggs, skewered rabbits and starving, you get to sit there for what 20 seconds until you die? As you suggested it has to be ready made, you can not pick those items up to cook them, so unless someone is there to feed you, you die. And it takes longer because you want that too. That sounds like ten times worse than the current iteration of hunger. Hmm how do we fix that then.... okay so now you can pick up any food item to deal with this. Well what if there is no fire, you yet again die surrounded by food because someone else has to help you. Okay so.... now you can pick up and food item and anything you need to make a fire or make a..... see where I am going with this?
Finally to top it off, if ALL of this is to help newbies, I ask you sir..... How in bloody hell is making the game more complicated under the surface helping a new player???
P.S I like Jason's game and I don't want him to have to add code to every single item to determine if it's usable while starving.
Lionon, welcome to the forums, please feel free to interact here instead of trying to move discussions to another format/website.
Also, there is an Eve somewhere along this line who made this camp and survived with her children. I'll work for her and the people who worked before me, I'll work for these silent players and the next generations. For them, I'll stay and keep making this place better. For the town, for the Eve, for the future generations, for the silent workers.
"You never would have come here unless you believed you were going to save them. Evolution has yet to transcend that simple barrier. We can care deeply - selflessly - about those we know, but that empathy rarely extends beyond our line of sight." - Matt Damon: Interstellar
There is oddly a lot of personal ambition seen in this game. People will sit there and make a dozen tools and source piles of iron during a food shortage, because THEY are the self proclaimed town smith. They won't stop their projects to take care of another area if it starts to crumble. When asked to do something, if they don't like the task, they will just do something else. They produce what is deemed useful and an amount that only lasts a few gens. Thing is, sometimes the world doesn't need astronauts, it needs farmers.
One life, I was born to a mother juggling multiple babies in town as their mothers were out gathering. She barely had time to take care of what was needed and keep us on track. She asked me if I could please get rabbits since no one else was doing it. I spent about 45 years trapping rabbits and gathering/growing thread, every baby born was clothed and given a backpack from me. Those clothes were probably passed down for generations, well at least I hope. When my granddaughter was born and asked me what she should do, I told her my life story. I asked if she would accept the torch, to be part of the machine instead of trying to drive it. When she said yes, I told her I have barely a year to live, I put my backpack and clothes on her and picked her up. I spent that last 90 seconds showing her what banana trees to stop by on the way to the savannah and where the good rabbit hole clusters were. I told her thank you, and goodbye. I died of old age with her in my arms, with the words of "You are the best grandma I ever had and I don't want you to go" lingering my head.
A jungle is mostly trash. Why would you bother building there, and having to deal with permanent yellow fever for a few early bananas? The only resources there are super late game stuff, that you don't really need much of anyway. What happened to high risk high reward? That is gone now. Honestly jungle would be a better area if it had no mosquitoes and no bananas, at least then you could have warm tiles without the hassle.
Hmm true I don't think I would ever look at a field of wild onions and burdock the way I look at a group of banana trees, the trees were a league above that and I am not sure if that was their intention. It's a brand new biome and thats hard to do without breaking stuff. Also as you said, rubber doesn't too much until you are pretty deep into the available tech, so the rewards of the jungle don't seem to fit the risk. I would still argue that although it was theorized to be high risk high reward biome, the risk was never that high nor should have it been. Not with using mosquitos, I don't think there is a way to increase the risk via skeeters without making them an ungodly satanic keyboard breaking frustrations. So with such a high reward and not a good way to counter that with risk, something had to be done.
This might seem to stink now, but I think it gives more room for future additions to the biome. It does have some really good things going for it, just not quite enough to make settling there wise considering countering the risk is harder for new people.
- The most ideal temperature out of all biomes
- Readily available scavenged food source
- Plenty of non essential trees for wood supply
- Non lethal (if managed or intervened) animals
Outside of those for the game we got
- A new biome!
-Rubber! Not much to do with it yet, but later on I think will be sought after
-Sickness! An effect on the player that has a duration that wears off that ALSO can "cured" with no tech whatsoever only food
Even with them not respawning, are we denying that having a couple bananas on you allow you to stay out and about for so much longer? When looking for an eve camp you can fill up your hunger and bring some high value snacks to give you plenty of time to look around freely. They are still a great biome to skirt for warmth and food when traveling and searching for resources.
The first iteration was too much and didn't fit the state of the game right now. As Tarr has said, so much of the game is food gathering and production, that if you remove that you lessen too much of the game. Is the nerf possibly too much of a knee jerk response, time will tell, but I like it because it fits better in the here and now, and has the possibility of additions and changes to be a great biome.
I think my favorite time of coming back into a settlement few times through the generations was when I spent one of the lives finding as much iron as I could. Turns out if you give a somewhat stable settlement 20 iron it turns into lord of the flies and all the unmanaged kids make knives and start killing each other. I counted five knives and four bows before getting stabbed and moving to a better place.
Sounds like jungles are not worth it anymore. By the time you have any sort of settlement ready, the bananas will be gone forever.
Pretty sure thats what we were campaigning for... They should have never been a sustainable resource, they should be there to buy you time to get a sustainable settlement, which in your statement is true. A single banana tree could let an Eve camp startup in an optimal area that was a "fixer upper" that needed little work to get going, problem was the trees were the main fuel instead of the tinder, this change should hopefully bring that back in line.
messy camps are the worst, and I am all for adding a feature to encourage players to store things nicely.
This feels like treating symptoms instead of the cause, a band-aid fix, except this band aid could kill you. You are believing in the stick instead of the carrot, its negative reinforcement which has its own merits, but can also backfire. I'd rather teach people to be efficient and clean, and have praise be the outcome. Do this because its for a good cause, rather than don't do this or this bad thing will happen. Apples and Oranges as is most psychology.
Being the troublemaker I am; I plopped in as a new baby and waited to grow up. I had a plan, an evil plan.. Kill the entire village I was born into.
Even if satirical... I just don't get it. Only putting research in because penalized, only changes made when forced...
After playing normally for a while I killed around 4 or 5 people in a village.
How long was this normal play that you didn't even grasp being able to sustain yourself? Genuinely curious to what time frame you went from, my goal is to take enjoyment from others to fulfill myself, to I will play normal, to I am gonna to do it again and more widespread. I am going to straight out say it, I think punishments for these types of acts should be doubled to tripled. The ripple effect of griefing can really stagnate a game like this, killing off playerbase if not kept in check.
The very sad part about this, you aren't just griefing people around you, you are greifing their ancestors too, people you never interacted with. You don't see them typing obscenities, you don't hear them begging on voice into yelling. You aren't making them lose that round, you aren't watching them squirm. You are just taking unknown hours from unseen faces and flushing it down the toilet and thats enjoyable. I just don't get it.
Murdering someone that was going to die in less than an hour anyways isn't even that bad. Shitty because it eats up a lot of productive time, and possibly loose the tools of their destruction. The real scare is when someone puts in the time to know the game well enough to actually kill off a settlement by hitting the animals and tools, filling up all the bowls with palm kernels and all the buckets with rubber... Weak links matter in this game normally, those with intention to break these links are the worst. I would pay monthly to lower the chance of this to nil.
This feature I think comes into play more for low population or empty servers. It's intention with populated servers is maybe to save a doomed eve camp with no females with a fertile woman, little unsure.
On low populated servers (one eve camp or maybe one other)
I have spawned as an eve on top of my starved bones in the same camp
I have spawned as an eve on top of my starving previous child
I have spawned as an eve into a settlement that I died of old age 24-36hrs prior
I have spawned in as an eve 4+ times in a row into the same settlement that only I ever was a part of
When it comes to populated servers
I have spawned as an eve to my previous settlement and started mass producing babies
I have spawned as an eve to a new location instead of where I died
I have spawned as a baby to same settlement
I have spawned as a baby to a new settlement
What I want to know is, do you have to be the eve that started it off to get that chance, or does any old age death give that chance of a new eve to spawn there. If I died of old age and spawn as a baby somewhere else, does another person have a chance to pop up in my old village? Been a few times that as an old man in a sausage party that I said screw it and finished the farm, finished the sheep pen and made every tool, one to practice and two, the hope maybe someone finds it and can use it to launch off of.
That's kinda the point though. If it isn't difficult to survive, what are you even achieving by staying alive?
I've watched streamers using the zoomout. It's cheating in my opinion. Though, I don't have a problem with others doing it. It doesn't matter for my own experience if other people are making it easier on themselves.
Meh the survival debate leaves me scratching my head after the whole banana bonanza update but I will bite. It's already tough enough to get people to work together to accomplish certain goals, making it so hard to survive at the same time is a chore. I like the idea of, is your area viable with the resources that are THERE, I don't like is your area viable if people can even find whats there. Too many times I have seen people starve screaming there's no food when there is 5 full natural bushes 10 tiles to the east of camp. I like the challenge of getting as much groundwork down to get a village to succeed based off what resources are accessible, I do not like the "challenge" of hoping the chickens running around with blinders on will come back with one of six iron that is in the badlands two biomes over. It's rare enough as is, feels crummy that people are walking right by the stuff because it was 6 tiles away from them and they couldn't see.
I like the organization of advanced settlements and the layouts you see, I do not like the garbage piles that happen because layouts are hard to grasp because you can only see 20ft around you. It's to each and its own. Do I feel like I have advantages over those that do not use the mod when it comes to tasks such as gathering further out resources, hell yes. Do I ever feel like other people using it are cheating? Hell no, its part of the beauty of open source, and also 90% of the time the "cheater" is on your team helping you and everyone out so it's a weird catch-22.
If it really boiled down to a spirit of the game issue, I would say balance rather than abolish. Should you be able to scroll back a bit from normal view, definitely. Do you need to be able to zoom all the way out so you see chunk loading on all 4 sides of your view, probably not necessary. Sadly to end this, I am not sure how much I could get into the game being stuck with my face against the screen. Its a similar battle I have had with using an ultrawide monitor - I'd rather stretch my screen out using 1920x1080 and my whole monitor display the game, rather than using native resolution and side bars (on 21:9 they are about two tiles wide and you can click on tiles underneath those bars leading to a lot of misclick moves and accidental deaths) It is physically awkward and mentally frustrating, and it takes away from the charm of a civ builder and forces the survival aspect of too many forced oh shit moments.
I love and adore the game, it gives me hope for games that rely on community and disregards personal ambition. I don't want to see this diminished because of forced handicaps.
Again, why is food spoilage desired, and what alternatives are there to achieve this goal? Food spoilage is pandora's box in my opinion, would rather leave that closed for now.
I heavily second what Tarr said. Another game I play silences players when they get too many negative reports. They can not type in chat and everyone can see the silence icon, it gets ugly fast. Everything that goes wrong in that match is usually blamed on the silenced person, who in turn can't even express themselves. They become a target and are attacked by people hiding behind the idea that the silenced person is a second class citizen, a wrong doer, a criminal, even though the system is automated (X reports false or not can trigger it and appeals aren't easy because of the volume of players) and they are actually trying to be part of the team.
You would become a curse magnet and get stuck in a nasty loop, which is scary because accidental curse trains happen. Some guy few days back was obviously trying to stab me but was awful at clicking so I just avoided him for maybe a minute (stopping to alert people would put me at risk of getting stabbed) The entire time I had my own knife in my backpack because I was the baker and was turning the failed doughs from teaching kids into bread. I figured that if I stabbed him first it was more likely that I got cursed than him.
So yeah lets tack on a big ole flag on top of someone after an experience like that and watch the new grief meta become convince others to curse the innocent. Nothing could go wrong.
Understandable if you have physical limitations, as I said, curious not appalled. Smithing has 30 second windows, the length of the fire in kilns(for pottery like bowls and plates) and forges (for smelting Iron Ore into steel ingots and then into tools). The more you can do in that window saves the resources you consume to fire it. So not being able to make precise and quick actions really cut down on your output. Experienced players can make like 6+ tools in a single 30 second window, others putting out three is challenging.
I would suppose that if you are emulating, both the keyboard and controller could be used in conjunction to alleviate this as well as saving your physical dexterity and comfort. Hard for me to speculate, I have never had discomfort from using a computer, then again I started using them when I was three, so my body has adapted. Heck my pisiform on my mouse hand is what I plant on the desk and pivot off of, after 25+ years of gaming, that bone is significantly larger than on my opposite hand.
Man I should have recorded my first few hours... There is definitely some great new player moments of "what in the world is this game" I am happy there is some substance behind it as well. Only negative is, really small sample sizes don't do the game justice.
This just sounds like an overpriced kitchen gadget.... Yeah you can get a slap chop.... or just learn how to dice by hand instead of buying something that can do ONE AND ONLY ONE thing. I mean sure I could play this game using my Oculus Rift on a 15' screen, but whats the point?
I will give you a hefyt golf clap for mapping this much to a controller, but there is no way it comes anywhere near the efficiency of M/KB. How fast are your interactions? Can you dodge incoming unseen animals easily? Can you do adequate forge firings (like more than a couple tools in one go)
Were you the guy I saw yesterday use one charcoal per Iron/Steel/Tool? Joking but for real, one charcoal to make the bar, one charcoal for the crucible, one charcoal to make the hammer head and so on... I have never wanted a cigarette more in my life than this moment. 3 Generations of kids running around - every tree for miles picked, and we still don't have an axe. He single-handedly killed the whole village by doing this - are you jeopardizing your fellow citizens by doing this?
To me this sounds like someone saying "Yo dude I figured out how to play Starcraft 2 with a controller!" to which my response would be "I am sickened, but curious." Please satisfy my curiosity, why did you do this (As in what part of the normal way of interacting did you not like that you went through these efforts) and can you make a video showing what it looks like in game?
Perfect temperature 22.0 sec/pip 164 pip/hr Worst temperature 2.0 sec/pip 1800 pip/hr Naked in Neutral 4.8 sec/pip 746 pip/hr Insulation 67.3% 8.3 sec/pip 433 pip/hr Coat & all furs 12.4 sec/pip (ins 86.75) 291 pip/hr Clothed + rug 18.0 sec/pip (ins 100%) 200 pip/hr Naked in Desert. 8.3 sec/pip 433 pip/hr Insulation 60.1% 4.8 sec/pip 746 pip/hr Insulation 79.2%+ 2.0 sec/pip 1800 pip/hr Naked in Ice 2.5 sec/pip 1437 pip/hr Insulation 80.5% 8.3 sec/pip 433 pip/hr Coat & all furs 10.0 sec/pip (ins 86.75) 360 pip/hr Clothed + rug 15.6 sec/pip (in 100%) 231 pip/hr Naked in Jungle 20.3 sec/pip 178 pip/hr Insulation 46.5% 22.0 sec/pip 164 pip/hr Insulation 65.2% 20.3 sec/pip 178 pip/hr Clothed + rug 10.0 sec/pip (ins 100%) 360 pip/hrWarning: 40%+ insulation is lethal with fever even if you get to a neutral biome. 55%+ insulation is lethal even if you can get to ice.
You sir are the hero we need but don't deserve. Thank you.
Really good data here, as I said, it might not seem like much going off the in game meter, but woo boy, twice as much food needed if unclothed is huge in the nuetral climates. Obviously clothes are detrimental (which gives weight to sun repellent clothes - looking at you straw hat and reed skirt) in the warm biomes, biggest one for me though, the Tundra. 360 compared to 1437 is the biggest difference by a long shot, a staggering 1k less per hour... I would have expected that it would need a lot more per hour to manage an ice biome compared to grassland. Really think with some subtle tweaks (like being able to eat seals and penguins) you could full on live in Tundra being hunters and fisherman - you just really need to have full set of clothes for everyone to do it.
Right now Tundra and Badlands don't have nearly as much food as the others and they require a bit to access them, grassland - berries/foraged, Savannah - Carrots/Forage/Rabbits/Turkey/Cows, Swamp - Eggs/Pigs/Geese, Badlands - Mutton. It is interesting to ponder the state of the game if each biome had more food sources that just require different means of attaining them. Right now agriculture is a 'set it and forget it' approach with some intervening here and there. Hunting requires constant player interaction and attention. I would be fine if this was a legitimate way of feeding a group of people, because the sheer act of supplying it curbs your ability to progress and you plateau. Each biome could support basic life, but it would be that much harder to scale up. This would still favor settlements on the edges of biomes because of the close access to multiple tech resources, but help eliminate the whole "Well there isn't enough water, dirt, warm nearby, either I look for another 1/4 of my life or suicide and retry" aspect that happens now.
In all, make Tundras and Badlands great again! Let us live there, not thrive, but simply live there, until the next step is possible. As much as I love finding that "perfect" spot as an Eve, it's outweighed by the times I have ran past great clusters of resources because it was too cold or too dry. That glimmer of hope seeing some swamp land near a desert/grassland mix smashed to pieces because its a 5 tile swamp with no ponds (I theorize that biomes are small because a mix of them takes up too much of the budget of a viable settlement. If biomes are too big we'd have less places to settle) I would love so much to have some good conversation about if this could be an feasible end goal of OHOL or if it homogenizes survival too much.