The current torch pull randomizer is bad for the entire game

[Guest jeffpeng]

Hello fellow survivors,

as the more experienced ones among you will know and the less experienced ones will learn the condition of a torch you pull from a burning fire is not entirely random. Well, it's technically random, but the value it's condition is calculated from is based on your physical position in the world, so unless you don't change that position, you will always get the same condition for each torch you pull from a fire. The result is that you make teeny tiny movements after each torch pull, until you pull out a torch with good condition, let's say 45% - with 50% being the optimal, and 20% (iirc) being the worst outcome - and then stand perfectly still, and you can get as much 45% torches as you have firewood to pour into that campfire.

Now how does such a thing work from a technical standpoint? Well. Computers are physically not capable of producing a random number. One might even argue that true randomness can only be achieved on the quantum level (and even that is a topic of hot debate), so what is "randomness" actually in our macroscopic world? Randomness is the outcome of an operation of which I don't know all variables applied to - so it isn't really random, but more unpredictable, and here come the important part: to me. With the throw of a dice I do not know the exact angle and momentum I will throw the dice at and with, and I do not know the initial state of the dice since I did not look. Would I have looked, and would I be a superhuman being that had put in the practice to throw the dice at the exact angle with the exact right amount of speed ... I could reliably achieve six eyes with every throw. Or to make things even easier: Let's say I ask two of you to name a number between 1 and 5, and then I go ahead and multiply both numbers. Since I do not know which numbers you will tell me the outcome is unpredictable to me until you tell me those numbers - but it would have been with absolute certainty if I had known said numbers.

For a computer it is very hard not to know its state and by design its operations yield always the same results. Moreso: since every state is the result of a deterministic operation, all states of a computer are determinable before you even started the computer. It is designed that way, or it would not be possible for it to function. So how does a computer create "randomness" or better "undeterminabilty" then? By taking an operand that the computer had no way of knowing before making the calculation: by introducing a human factor, and then applying a simple algorith - the randomizer - to it to determine a value inside the bounds specified beforehand. Like ... "Give me a random number between 0.2 and 0.5". This initial factor the randomizer is based on is called the "seed". If you input the same seed into the same randomizer the result is always the same, hence deterministic.

Most "random" actions in the Long Dark are determined by the way the host system (for most people that's Windows) creates randomness, and that is mostly based off time. But for reasons that eluded me so far the random seed for the condition of a torch is the position of the player in the world. This makes it possible for the player to input the same seed (by standing in the same spot) into the randomizer, getting always a desireable result. Maybe this actually is intentional with the reasoning that when a player pulls the same torch out of a fire, it should technically have the same condition .... ? I don't believe that's the reason, but let's assume it is for the sake of argument. But as almost everything in The Long Dark the why's and how's are not communicated. The player has to find out, it's part of the learning curve, which is The Long Dark's true progression system.

Now say a relatively new player discovers this. They will make the connection that chance is tied to where they stand and make a mental note about it, from now on exploiting this fact to get better torches. Now the player repairs his Ski Jacket and fails. The player tries again and fails again, but then remembers that chance is based on the position in the world. The player moves, tries again, suceeds and finds themselves confirmed in the false assumption (== a false positive) that there is a determinabilty to how successful they are repairing clothes or tools. We could spin this even farther that a player would now assume that there must be certain places in the world that have a higher chance of causing a critical strike to an animal if you fire an arrow from there, and so on, and so on....

My point is: by making chance manipulatable in one instance players are incouraged to find ways to manipulate chance in other cases - which they can't. But since they never get confirmation that they can't they will always (or at least for a long time) believe that they could if they just knew how, hence making the player believe in an almost superstitious way that there is no chance but an elusive hidden mechanic, and believeing it a failure on themselves to be unable to successfully employ it. Just think about it: if you knew that the outcome of flipping a coin isn't random, but is depending on the kind of breakfast you ate .... wouldn't you try to find the right breakfast to win the lottery? Or find the right animal to sacrifice when Jupiter and Mars align so that the RNJesus will grant you lush harvest?

That's why the current torch pull randomizer is bad for the entire game.

[TheEldritchGod]

And... okay. What if every torch you pulled was a flat 50%? Explain how this is a problem. How about every one you pull is 20%? What's the difference? You need to carry x2.5 more torches for the same amount of light? Some time for chaining the torches so... Let's say three times the torches. How is this game breaking?

Torches from the fire, in my opinion are a concession to make the game easier for players. I'd prefer the brands. The fact that torches can be turned into sticks which have more burn time than the torch it came from makes no sense. In short, this is a way to "put out a fire" and save the wood for later. Which you should be able to do. I should be able to stomp out a fire and save the wood for later. We cant, but we can pull torches.

Torches in general are bad for the game, but it's included because without them people would bitch they can't make a torch from a fire. It's just a game mechanic, nothing more. Realism is important, but game balance should always come first. The fact that you can find the right "spot" isn't exactly game breaking.

[ajb1978]

Good observation on player positioning, but I have to admit this is getting pretty far into the weeds in regards to game exploits.  I would argue starving yourself all day and surviving on 2 candy bars and a cup of tea right before bed is a much greater exploit than harvesting 50% torches.  I personally prefer the brands we used to be able to harvest, since that makes much more sense, but I can live with torches.

[Guest jeffpeng]

On 9/23/2019 at 2:29 PM, TheEldritchGod said:

And... okay. What if every torch you pulled was a flat 50%? Explain how this is a problem. How about every one you pull is 20%? What's the difference? You need to carry x2.5 more torches for the same amount of light? Some time for chaining the torches so... Let's say three times the torches. How is this game breaking?

Torches from the fire, in my opinion are a concession to make the game easier for players. I'd prefer the brands. The fact that torches can be turned into sticks which have more burn time than the torch it came from makes no sense. In short, this is a way to "put out a fire" and save the wood for later. Which you should be able to do. I should be able to stomp out a fire and save the wood for later. We cant, but we can pull torches.

Torches in general are bad for the game, but it's included because without them people would bitch they can't make a torch from a fire. It's just a game mechanic, nothing more. Realism is important, but game balance should always come first. The fact that you can find the right "spot" isn't exactly game breaking.

You missed the point entirely. That torches pull with random condition isn't bad. The fact how it is calculated is bad, not game breaking, but bad for the game. I spent half of that humongous post explaining why I think that is. That torches are in itself not "good" but probably a neccessity I agree upon.

On 9/23/2019 at 2:49 PM, ajb1978 said:

Good observation on player positioning, but I have to admit this is getting pretty far into the weeds in regards to game exploits.  I would argue starving yourself all day and surviving on 2 candy bars and a cup of tea right before bed is a much greater exploit than harvesting 50% torches.  I personally prefer the brands we used to be able to harvest, since that makes much more sense, but I can live with torches.

+1 on the brands. I don't know if I would call using a mechanic so easily observable "exploit", but maybe some might never actually notice. That starvation is a worse "exploit" than that I even tend to agree on. I vigorously hate that starvation is a valid gameplay approach, but that's another topic. But still not the point entirely.

I mean I really went some lengths to explain my reasoning on this. But obviously I failed at conveying it, so maybe in a more TL;DR way:

Because one random mechanic is based off player positioning players might be lead to believe that other random mechanics are based off the same value - which they are not. This might lead a player that is not reading up on this on the interwebs (which should not be required to play a game) to try and waste a lot of time on this without actually ever getting a confirmation that their position has no effect whatsoever on their random chance at anything BUT pulling a torch. That's unhealthy game design.