Burdened increases hunger rate

[Grey]

I have to post this because it's been irritating the hell out of me watching some of the league games on the server... For all the idiots who rely on IGB for information and don't seem to notice anything from just playing the game: moving around on Burdened makes you hungrier!

I thought everyone knew this, like it was basic simple information - just play 5 minutes on Burdened and the difference is easily noticeable. But it seems the IGB contains some poorly researched info that people are more interested in paying attention to. The source of this info is the following thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...e08a5a0548684/

Unfortunately I'm having trouble finding the response that was a couple of days later debunking this. Malte's testing only had a char staying still whilst checking satiation. When moving the picture is much different:

Burdened: +1 hunger rate
Strained: +2 hunger rate
Strained!: +3 hunger rate

Thus for a normal char burdened will double your hunger rate. To be honest most of us know this from normal play... It's really frustrating to watch people in the leagues using up food and prayers becuase of this or walking around Hungry and Burdened at the same time. Open your eyes, people! Guidebooks will not teach you everything, 'Improved' or not!

Right, rant over...

[LuciusKain]

I assumed that was pretty obvious. I mean, it just makes sense.

[Ars]

People often trust guidebooks more than their own sense it seems.

[Epythic]

Thus for a normal char burdened will double your hunger rate.

Still shocking, I didn't expect it to be *that* significant.

We already knew most people are dumb and believe everything they are told.

Here's my personal, alternate interpretation:

This case clearly shows the problem of an unfree documentation that is maintained by a single person - who will go and change the (I)GB? Noone. Next time (read: JADE, in case it ever comes out) we should go for something more wikilike, or at least something that is released under a free (freedom, not beer) license.

People often trust guidebooks more than their own sense it seems.

Yeah, most people seem to like to have someone above them telling them what to do.

[Laukku]

It's mentioned in the in-game manual, at least in section S. It's kind of funny that people read third-party spoilers but ignore the official documentation :P.

Or maybe it is that people don't expect it to be *so* significant - I wouldn't have expected either.

[JellySlayer]

This case clearly shows the problem of an unfree documentation that is maintained by a single person - who will go and change the (I)GB? Noone. Next time (read: JADE, in case it ever comes out) we should go for something more wikilike, or at least something that is released under a free (freedom, not beer) license.

I was actually thinking something similar to this just the other day. There's a lot of information about this game that is lost in years-old forum posts that isn't known to the wider community because there is a lack of an up-to-date compendium of this sort of information available. For newer or casual players who haven't spent much time in the ADOM community, there's no reason to doubt that a resource like the Guidebook, improved or otherwise, should be wrong--certainly not as frequently as it is. An public domain ADOM wiki that members of the community would be able to contribute to and update would be a fantastic resource for this game, and something that might be worth considering if enough people would be interested in it. I'd certainly be willing to help out with something like that.

I think the problem would mainly be the initial overhead of getting it started. There's so much information that would need to be covered that would still be essentially rehashing topics covered in the Guidebook or elsewhere.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

I personally always believed from my game experience that Burdened increased hunger, but recently I read somewhere that it didn't (I think it was not on the IGB, since I have the regular GB in my HD and that's the one I usually use... so I guess it was in some thread that took its info from the IGB). And I said, "wow, that's great, I didn't know that!" and began to walk around Burdened.

Things are always easier to believe if we like them

I agree that having a wiki or something like that would be cool. The Guidebook was probably the best possible solution when it was made and it is an outstanding piece of work, but now that we have the web 2.0 and all that it would be good to use it. However, as JellySlayer says, it would be a lot of work to create a wiki that could be at least on par with the Guidebook.

Apart from that, there could be problems with people not agreeing on, for example, whether information coming from reverse engineering should be included or not. Not to talk about citing the IGB. Perhaps too many religious issues. :/

[Grey]

Has anyone ever seen a wiki that actually works well? As in doesn't require huge amounts of moderation and isn't filled with junk and wrong info?

[Silfir]

Dwarf Fortress Wiki - the immense popularity of the game helps here. UFOpaedia, at least for the original X-COM. Those that stick closest to the wikipedia template, especially design-wise, tend to be the most pleasant to read and therefore to work on. Actually, I often found myself looking at the Dwarf Fortress Wiki and thinking "If only we had something like that for ADOM!"

What also helps is that both the Dwarf Fortress Wiki and the UFOpaedia have a certain humorous style that makes perusing the thing a pleasure in itself - and any article always discusses strategy implications. If you read an article on, for instance, the Plasma Pistol in the UFOpaedia, you not only get information on its stats and the stats of its ammunition, you also get to enjoy an in-depth analysis of how actually useful the thing is and in what situations and what people have done with it and so on and so on, and possible talk pages that debate the merits even further.

ADOM has thousands of forum posts where people do the exact same thing. Analyze, strategize, research, argue, think. We have lots of forum users with a sense of humor, some serious writing skills, and a great deal of insight - not all rolled into one person maybe, but does that matter in a wiki?

You need to mobilize passionate people who love talking about all aspects of the game and thinking everything through - there are plenty of those people in the ADOM fanbase, but their insights and research gets lost here eventually - old users can dig up the posts from anywhere, but new users are simply lost. If you manage to convert these people, and create a base of really good articles, informative, compelling, and entertaining to read, you have won.

ADOM wikis have been made and failed, because they didn't manage to mobilize the ADOM fanbase. The one who really has the power to do that is Thomas, and he even did announce an ADOM wiki once. If that official adom.de ADOM wiki became a reality we'd have something on our hands that might finally surpass either of the guidebooks as the source of up-to-date, accurate information.

[Grey]

Except we all know that it's difficult to TB to manage anything...

A wiki would work well if it required a link to some research post to back it up - that could be here, RGRA, Brinkster, or the Guidebook. Code-dived info would be a big problem though.