Is this a Woohooer thing or a whole game thing? Sims stupidly ignoring STC

🔥🔥🔥👅👅👅👀👀👀‼‼ Enough said.
Post Reply
KA957
Reactions:
Posts: 98
Joined: May 17th, 2012, 6:00 pm

Is this a Woohooer thing or a whole game thing? Sims stupidly ignoring STC

Post by KA957 » September 27th, 2016, 6:21 am

I guess it's been this way for a while, possibly for all the time I've played for all I know...I think it's probably the game just having sims do stupid things. Maybe even if it is the game the Woohooer can be changed to fix the problem, even though it probably isn't the cause.

The problem in question, you ask? I'll have a sim do some romantic interactions with a sim that they're attracted to (and as always in the game the attraction is mutual-- a weakness in the game, but not the one I'm discussing here).

No matter even if it gets up to the strongest romantic tone ("extremely irresistible", I think), very often the sim will just go to a friendly social. The same happens in reverse, as well. I think the reverse used to be more common, and then I lowered the base score for autonomous romantic interactions, so now it goes the other way.

My guess is that the woohooer doesn't cause this, though I'm asking because I don't know (as well as that, as I said, even if in the more likely event that it's not the cause, that whenever it's updated maybe it can be made the solution).

The context, at least if it's strong, should greatly influence the chance of the type of social chosen. There might be cases where a romantic social shouldn't be autonomously chosen regardless, such as if a sim is attached and either the monogamous test or the sneakiness test if the partner is in the room leads to the sim being faithful-- though the case that just happened involved sims that actually were each others' partners.

It's not the biggest problem in the world, but it is somewhat frustrating. A boyfriend/girlfriend pair attracted to another, being flirtatious and kissing, the mood getting hot, and suddenly one of them says, "Gee, it's been snowing a lot lately."

User avatar
igazor
Organizer
Reactions:
Posts: 12201
Joined: April 8th, 2013, 6:00 pm
Answers: 55

Post by igazor » September 27th, 2016, 10:09 am

My sense is that it's the game. This is more player strategy than a definitive answer from knowledge about the code, but if you keep your active sim's action queue full of romantic interactions always staying 2 or 3 actions ahead of what they are doing, then neither one would have time to sneak in random autonomous remarks about the weather or their favorite television shows. Though it generally feels like what you describe happens less often between two sims who are very highly attracted to each other (as can be measured by a Scan Room) and can also depend on their traits as to whether they stay in the moment even given the chance regardless of their partnership status with each other.

User avatar
ritaxis
Reactions:
Posts: 530
Joined: June 5th, 2015, 6:00 pm

Post by ritaxis » September 27th, 2016, 11:05 am

I deliberately alternate friendly and romantic interactions, always have (in Sims 1 and Sims 2 as well) as I have the impression that the longterm relationship builds better this way? Now I'm questioning my strategy as both of you seem to be thinking that this is damaging?

User avatar
igazor
Organizer
Reactions:
Posts: 12201
Joined: April 8th, 2013, 6:00 pm
Answers: 55

Post by igazor » September 27th, 2016, 12:03 pm

Not damaging. If you are trying to seduce (that doesn't sound very romantic does it, but can't think of a better way to put it) the other sim though, the social interactions interrupt the short term Sim A thinks Sim B is Okay, Being Flirty, Alluring, Irresistible chain and starts them over at Okay again. Or, if you look at it the other way around, the romantic interactions interrupt the Sim A think Sim B is Okay, Sociable, Friendly chain and starts that one over again. Throw some jokes in there and you have a third chain, the sense of humor one, that will also compete.

If your two sims are in a bar having a chat and get flirty, I can see where the conversation might wander around. If they are standing in your sim's bedroom at the foot of the bed at least half undressed, chatting about the rain in the middle of a flirt sequence can seem like, how shall I put this, not a tremendously good use of time. :)

MoMoll
Reactions:
Posts: 648
Joined: September 17th, 2012, 6:00 pm

Post by MoMoll » September 27th, 2016, 12:43 pm

@KA957: in your woohooer settings, do you have romance set to only partner, and do you it set to autonomous woohoo? Since I did that, my sims can't keep their hands off each other. The baby is starving; but, mom and dad have other ideas.

KA957
Reactions:
Posts: 98
Joined: May 17th, 2012, 6:00 pm

Post by KA957 » September 27th, 2016, 9:51 pm

I have romance set to default (I want sims to be able to cheat based on trait scoring), and I do have autonomous woohoo. I actually did have a time when sims were too romantic, where I'd be queueing up friendly interactions and they'd get romantic autonomously with anyone they were attracted to. Then I lowered the config setting for base chance of choosing a romantic interaction and now they won't stay romantic.

The problem, and I'm thinking it is with the game and not the woohooer, is that the STC doesn't seem to have any impact on the choice of socials.

User avatar
littlelambsy
Reactions:
Posts: 4137
Joined: October 9th, 2012, 6:00 pm
Answers: 2
Location: Vancouver Island, BC
Contact:

Post by littlelambsy » September 28th, 2016, 4:19 pm

Interesting question. I find I have households that can't keep their hands off each other and are always running to the bedroom. Then, in other households, my sims do the same thing as yours. They will be kissing, romancing continuously but never take it to the next level and often go off to watch telly rather than go to the bedroom... even if I que up a lot of romantic actions. When the que is done, they go do something esle. I can't figure out sims at all. I would love to know why some are always in the bedroom and others can't get there.

Post Reply