Condition recovers too quickly

[Kayosiv]

One thing I found very immersion breaking was just how fast condition increases. A full night's sleep seems to recover 55% condition, which is the difference between nearly dead and almost totally fine.

To me, it would seem far more appropriate if you perhaps recovered 1% condition every 4 hours of time spent awake and 1% for every 1-2 slept or somesuch. That way if you were severely injured it would actually take you a week to recover. Right now you can get mauled by a bear, drink some tea, get a good night's sleep and be totally fine the next day. 

I totally understand that game design and pacing needs the player avatar to recover from injuries far faster than a real person would. However, I don't like how I can go out and fight 3 wolves and just sleep and be at 100% condition the next day. It makes afflictions and animal attacks carry no real weight. if you survive them and get back to shelter, they might as well not have dealt damage to begin with.

When I see a wolf I want to think "Am I up to this? Is it worth the risk of walking around injured for a few days or maybe a week?" Rather than "It's a wolf, I have plenty of sewing kits so I should be fine."

What does everyone think about the current recovery rate of condition? Obviously I would like it toned down, especially on the harder difficulties.

[mystifeid]

What mode are you playing (Pilgrim, Voyageur, Stalker, Interloper) ?

[Kayosiv]

Mostly on Stalker.

[GorillaDust]

9 hours ago, Kayosiv said:

I can go out and fight 3 wolves and just sleep and be at 100% condition the next day.

 

6 hours ago, Kayosiv said:

Mostly on Stalker.

You must have great defensive clothing. Recently on my last 4 Stalker FM-only runs, single wolf attacks are dropping me from 100% down to 40% or lower. Any time I've faced a second wolf at any point I'm doomed. Of course, I'm running around in long johns and sport vests...

You basically said it yourself in your first post. This is a game first and a simulator second. I wouldn't much enjoy the game if a wolf attack meant I would have to hang around my camp for the next 3-4 in-game days. Camp days are boring days. Overnight healing allows me to get out and explore this amazing world.

You could also try Interloper, which has much, much slower healing times. But bring some lubricant the first few times you try it.

[mystifeid]

Yeah, I'm not sure how fast you heal in Stalker but in Interloper 10 hours sleep will normally regain 30% condition. Drinking tea beforehand will provide a bonus and the bed in the Trappers Cabin in ML is magical. It provides something like 42%.

[Hotzn]

27 minutes ago, GorillaDust said:

You could also try Interloper, which has much, much slower healing times. But bring some lubricant the first few times you try it.

I'm not sure what you mean by that...

[GorillaDust]

Well, it's a joke. Interloper will treat you roughly the first few times you try it. Lubricant will make it hurt a little less, you see.

[Pillock]

10 hours ago, Kayosiv said:

One thing I found very immersion breaking was just how fast condition increases. A full night's sleep seems to recover 55% condition, which is the difference between nearly dead and almost totally fine.

To me, it would seem far more appropriate if you perhaps recovered 1% condition every 4 hours of time spent awake and 1% for every 1-2 slept or somesuch. That way if you were severely injured it would actually take you a week to recover. Right now you can get mauled by a bear, drink some tea, get a good night's sleep and be totally fine the next day. 

I totally understand that game design and pacing needs the player avatar to recover from injuries far faster than a real person would. However, I don't like how I can go out and fight 3 wolves and just sleep and be at 100% condition the next day. It makes afflictions and animal attacks carry no real weight. if you survive them and get back to shelter, they might as well not have dealt damage to begin with.

When I see a wolf I want to think "Am I up to this? Is it worth the risk of walking around injured for a few days or maybe a week?" Rather than "It's a wolf, I have plenty of sewing kits so I should be fine."

What does everyone think about the current recovery rate of condition? Obviously I would like it toned down, especially on the harder difficulties.

I totally agree. I've got used to it, and I find myself immersed in playing 'how the game works' rather than in doing things that feel natural or intuitive. And I think that diminishes the experience overall.

I always thought injuries and afflictions should have longer-lasting effects, really. We can currently suffer things like "bruising", which doesn't seem to do anything at all to our character's well-being (or even show up on the health screen); we have sprains that are cured instantly with medicine; and we have condition loss that can be totally regained in under a day; even hypothermia is negligible if you have a warm shelter to go to and some food stocked. When I was newer to the game, I thought these things might be place-holders for more complicated mechanics to come - and there is something about it in the roadmap if I remember rightly - I'm still hopeful that this will be looked at and improved upon.

For me, if afflictions and injuries caused you to play differently over several days to a week, it would add more variety to the gameplay and present you with different choices and priorities from the norm. And that would be good.

[sarudak]

I think the too fast condition recovery if changed would have a huge beneficial effect on the game. As it is clothing damage hurts far worse than condition damage from an animal encounter. That just feels so wrong.

[Kayosiv]

16 hours ago, GorillaDust said:

You must have great defensive clothing.

I have never paid attention to the defensive rating of clothing, only ever looking at weight/warmth. I have noticed the attribute was there, but it didn't seem to matter.

The issue might be that I'm just really good at clicking super fast, and wolf fights require no skill other than rapid clicking. Wolves in general might not be dangerous enough to those that have good clothing or those that can click at hyper speed, and too dangerous to those that don't fit that description.

Either way, I would like condition loss to compound. Right now if you go out and fight a wolf every day and lose 30% condition every day, you're fine. You can do that forever. However if you only regained 10% condition a day, eventually all of your wolf injuries would compound and get you killed. The fact that you got injured should change how you play and what decisions you make for more than the single day that the injury happened. Otherwise, why have injuries? There should just be 2 conditions, injured and not injured. The 0-100% system is effectively meaningless, because you can always just go sleep and be "not injured" again.

I don't want you to get injured and then have to wait around for 5 in-game days to become 100% again because it's certain doom to go out at 80%, but rather if a series of events happens and you find yourself at 40% condition, maybe you wait to recover a few days before going out doing dangerous stuff again, or risk the consequences. It is a fine line of balancing to be sure. You dont' want to force the player to twiddle their thumbs resting in bed too long, but I also feel like injuries should have more weight. I don't really want them to be permanent, but they should have some lasting effect that lasts for at least a few days to a week.

[farce713]

4 hours ago, Kayosiv said:

The issue might be that I'm just really good at clicking super fast, and wolf fights require no skill other than rapid clicking. Wolves in general might not be dangerous enough to those that have good clothing or those that can click at hyper speed, and too dangerous to those that don't fit that description.

true words here.. its a shame that this game requires you to think on your own and make wise decisions in all parts except for the last stand wolf fighting.

[LonelySurvivor]

I think I agree with the overall sentiment of the OP

I got mauled by a bear 3 times in a row (don't ask) yesterday in Stalker and went from 100% to 5% so first thing that came to mind was that I should be dead and wasn't (the first 2 times took me from 100 to 12 so I was very surprised the last time did not kill me). A cup of tea and a good night sleep and I was as good as new.

Most annoying part of the event? Lost a rifle due to a ground bug and got 3 pieces of clothes ruined. That definitely should not be the most annoying part of having a bear making sweet love to you 3 times in a row.

I did my first Voyager play through thinking these things were all serious business and now on Stalker when I am forced to push my luck a little further I find that I was worrying about nothing and feel somewhat disappointed. The food penalties are also quite unremarkable - there is little point to actually feeding yourself properly. I think muscle mass should be tied to this somewhat - maybe affecting how much you carry and how fast you tire.

[Kayosiv]

On that note I'd really like food and water to go down at like half the speed they currently do but have SERIOUS consequences, like 4x the condition loss they do now. You realistically can not eat or drink for a day and really be fine. If you don't for a few days though it should hurt your condition as well as totally sap your stamina.

[KD7BCH]

Condition decay and recovery is one of the more balanced things in the game. If you find it too easy to maintain then you are ready for the next level of difficulty. Once you get to Interloper you won't be able to keep your condition nearly as high on average as in Stalker. Stalker is a true breeze after about day 10 however interloper keeps you on your toes for at least twice as long while you work to secure the necessities of self sustainment. 

I feel the values for condition loss and stamina drain when out of calories are about right. The body does have about 24-48 hours of stamina after its last meal and after that it begins to drop off. While you begin to lose condition overall at 1% per hour as soon as you are empty stomach. I think these two factors are very well modeled. Water on the other hand is modeled a bit more heavy handed but the consequences of going a day or two without water are not good, going 3 days without water and you simply won't have enough energy to go a 4th. 

There is no magic recovery either, best recovery is 30-40% under ideal conditons, however as you play and live, you suffer other characteristics and conditons which affect this and so while the base rates which are pretty accurate may feel too extreme when you combine them as a system as a whole rather than just looking at an individual metric it really comes together in a realistic fashion without sacrificing gameplay which is a key component. 

[mystifeid]

2 hours ago, KD7BCH said:

Condition decay and recovery is one of the more balanced things in the game. If you find it too easy to maintain then you are ready for the next level of difficulty. Once you get to Interloper you won't be able to keep your condition nearly as high on average as in Stalker.

Agreed. It does seem pointless saying that things aren't hard enough when there is a more difficult game mode. And if you ever feel Interloper is becoming too easy there are innumerable challenges you can set for yourself to make things tougher still.

I have found that it is not uncommon to be taken to 20-25% health by a wolf and with tea being a bit of a luxury in Interloper, it might be two or three days before I feel comfortable facing another wolf. Once I was taken to 1% health by two consecutive attacks. With no antiseptic it took six days to regain full health so I'm pretty happy with the recovery rate the way it is now.

[LonelySurvivor]

45 minutes ago, mystifeid said:

Agreed. It does seem pointless saying that things aren't hard enough when there is a more difficult game mode. And if you ever feel Interloper is becoming too easy there are innumerable challenges you can set for yourself to make things tougher still.

Don't really agree here. There are 4 difficulty modes. Not sure why only 1 of them should be a challenge (which the challenge seems to come mostly from weather and a "fake" shortage of loot not from recovery times taking longer). With the exception of Pilgrim which is "tourist mode" all other modes should present a challenge especially if the player blunders (e.g. being mauled by a bear 3 times in a row).

[mystifeid]

3 hours ago, LonelySurvivor said:

Don't really agree here. There are 4 difficulty modes. Not sure why only 1 of them should be a challenge (which the challenge seems to come mostly from weather and a "fake" shortage of loot not from recovery times taking longer). With the exception of Pilgrim which is "tourist mode" all other modes should present a challenge especially if the player blunders (e.g. being mauled by a bear 3 times in a row).

Well all the difficulty levels probably do present a challenge when played once or twice but after you understand the mechanics of the game and have explored the maps, maybe it's time to try Interloper.

Challenge is added to Interloper by the loot levels only if you have become accustomed to playing Stalker. Once you become accustomed to Interloper you will find that there is quite enough to ensure survival for a long time. Sure the weather is harsher but given the environment that should be expected in this game. There are many other things that do add real challenge like : being forced to hunt only with a bow/arrow; being forced to craft your own bow, arrows, knife and hatchet; fiercer predators; longer animal respawn times; very limited equipment/clothing on spawn; random spawn points that will always be a map or two away from essential equipment requiring more mobility in the initial part of the game; wildlife becoming rarer with time.

I think if you want to talk about fake loot levels you should look at what can be gathered in Stalker in just thirty days :

This is the reason I started finding Stalker too easy (and subsequently lost interest in the game until Interloper arrived on the scene).

[LonelySurvivor]

 

33 minutes ago, mystifeid said:

 

This is the reason I started finding Stalker too easy (and subsequently lost interest in the game until Interloper arrived on the scene).

But that thread is all about the loot and that is what I am saying - there should be more than loot levels (and weather) to balance the game. Staying in bed for a week after being wrecked by a bear instead of a couple of hours for example would be one of those ways.

 

PS

I put "fake" in quotes because the interloper loot doesn't seem realist to me (it feels like scarcity for scarcity sake) - but that depends on what your expectation of the world is based on the few bits of story we have so far. My main point on this thread however is that for anything below stalker you never reach the condition percentage below 60-70 unless you blunder bad and the game lets you get away with it too easily when you do. There could be longer term consequences even that could make late game more interesting (like frostbite for example but more variety).

[mystifeid]

15 minutes ago, LonelySurvivor said:

But that thread is all about the loot and that is what I am saying - there should be more than loot levels (and weather) to balance the game. Staying in bed for a week after being wrecked by a bear instead of a couple of hours for example would be one of those ways

If it is possible to stay indoors for long periods of time the game just becomes easier still. A mechanic - cabin fever - was even introduced to prevent this. If you say that injury time should be excluded then I will say that it's very easy to go outside and injure myself slightly.

A significant part of this game involves being thrust outside to deal with the weather.

[LonelySurvivor]

2 minutes ago, mystifeid said:

If it is possible to stay indoors for long periods of time the game just becomes easier still. A mechanic - cabin fever - was even introduced to prevent this. If you say that injury time should be excluded then I will say that it's very easy to go outside and injure myself slightly.

A significant part of this game involves being thrust outside to deal with the weather.

Quite contrary of what I was thinking - no one goes out of his way to get frostbite because it gives him more time indoors.

[mystifeid]

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Why would anyone deliberately get frostbitten?

[GorillaDust]

39 minutes ago, LonelySurvivor said:

Staying in bed for a week after being wrecked by a bear instead of a couple of hours for example would be one of those ways.

I can't emphasize enough that changes like this would make the game less fun. More realistic, sure. But I don't want to play a game that restricts me to stay in bed, or very near my camp, for a week of in-game time just for the sake of realism.

I understand the concept of this thread and even agree with many of the points made - it is a little silly to insta-cure yourself back to full health in one night's sleep. But this is a game. Death comes from going into the wild unprepared, or being unable to escape multiple wildlife attacks in a short period of time through carelessness. The emergency rush of 'must get back to base safely!' is really exciting. Boiling water and chopping firewood for a week around camp to get back to full health is not.

Edit: Again, Interloper difficulty sort of offers this. So if that's what you seek, it's there! The lower difficulty levels are more about exploration and fun gameplay.

[LonelySurvivor]

19 minutes ago, mystifeid said:

I'm sorry, I don't understand.

 

I think you missed my edit on the previous reply - sorry about that but did not want to double post. Was wanting to make my thoughts clearer: My basic premise is that the game is too forgiving of blunders on anything below interloper. The OP approached this in a way of making healing take longer which is one way of punishing said blunders but then on my edit I was making a tangent that instead of just taking longer to heal that you could instead have different afflictions if you go too often to a bad condition or if you spend too much time without treating yourself

 

Example: sprained ankle? who cares I am not going to rest as this would just screw up my 'tired bar' - this doesn't feel immersive at all, if you sprain your ankle in CH full of of wolves hauling around you there should be a sense of panic and not a sense of "meh". Last time I went to FM I must have sprained my ankle 15 times in 20 days - I stopped caring (instead of making a lighter backpack as the game seems to want you to do) and I wasn't really punished for that so why should anyone care? And no, it wasn't Interloper but the game should not be balanced around the hardest difficulty. The other modes need some love too.

 

43 minutes ago, LonelySurvivor said:

PS

I put "fake" in quotes because the interloper loot doesn't seem realist to me (it feels like scarcity for scarcity sake) - but that depends on what your expectation of the world is based on the few bits of story we have so far. My main point on this thread however is that for anything below stalker you never reach the condition percentage below 60-70 unless you blunder bad and the game lets you get away with it too easily when you do. There could be longer term consequences even that could make late game more interesting (like frostbite for example but more variety).

 

6 minutes ago, GorillaDust said:

I can't emphasize enough that changes like this would make the game less fun. More realistic, sure. But I don't want to play a game that restricts me to stay in bed, or very near my camp, for a week of in-game time just for the sake of realism.

I understand the concept of this thread and even agree with many of the points made - it is a little silly to insta-cure yourself back to full health in one night's sleep. But this is a game. Death comes from going into the wild unprepared, or being unable to escape multiple wildlife attacks in a short period of time through carelessness. The emergency rush of 'must get back to base safely!' is really exciting. Boiling water and chopping firewood for a week around camp to get back to full health is not.

 

Ok I can understand that - what if instead of forcing you to stay in bed it gave you an affliction that lasted 7 days? Call it "bear scar" or whatever where you can still move about (and probably should unless you already stockpiled) but are at a disadvantage?

Also lets be clear here - your condition taking longer to recover on Stalker would NOT force you to stay in bed. You don't have to go out only at 100% (as interloper demonstrates)

[GorillaDust]

4 minutes ago, LonelySurvivor said:

Ok I can understand that - what if instead of forcing you to stay in bed it gave you an affliction that lasted 7 days? Call it "bear scar" or whatever where you can still move about (and probably should unless you already stockpiled) but are at a disadvantage?

That's much more reasonable and I would definitely be a fan of its integration into Stalker and Interloper difficulties. Something in between the permanent frostbite damage and the 2-hour sprained wrist that can be insta-cured with some delicious berry tea.

[GorillaDust]

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 11:53 AM, LonelySurvivor said:

I got mauled by a bear 3 times in a row (don't ask) yesterday in Stalker and went from 100% to 5% so first thing that came to mind was that I should be dead and wasn't (the first 2 times took me from 100 to 12 so I was very surprised the last time did not kill me).

This is very interesting and confirms something I've suspected for a while after a similar experience of being mauled by a bear at 40% that didn't kill me. I think that bear attacks are not designed to kill you, no matter what health you're at. I haven't ever 'died of bear attack' the way I have 'died of wolf attack.' I have only died of 'blood loss', 'freezing to death', etc in the aftermath. They make you bleed, suffer instant and serious temperature drop through damaged clothing, and a loss of equipment.

Then it's up to you to get to safety immediately to recuperate. That is an absolute adrenaline rush, and super-rewarding if you can do it after an unexpected attack deep in the wilderness. But once you're at your base, you have 'beat' that challenge, assuming you can attend to health damage and repair clothing. Not convinced that your exploration and fun should have to be put on hold for a week of gametime.