A few ideas for the wolves issue

[Boston123]

In my opinion, a "survival game" should have the environment be the enemy. Let there be less (or more, and you have to work out how to save them over time) resources, more blizzards, colder temperatures, etc

In real life, wolves require an AWFUL LOT of territory; between 50 and 1000 square miles of territory for one pack, which can range from 2 to 15, and rarely, 30 individuals.

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/wolf/aboutwo ... iology.htm

http://www.nwf.org/wildlife/wildlife-li ... -wolf.aspx

So, feasibly, there should be only a few wolves in each area. Also, once a wolf gets killed, it should STAY DEAD, not respawn.

At this point, the wolves are little more than "replacement zombies", which is upsetting.

[Ryan CM]

Fair and valid points. Im in favor of the bi weekly patch schedule they had a few months ago now. The current schedule Is dragging.

We are working at our capacity and have an update scheduled before month end: http://hinterlandforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4498 We have had hotfixes for bugs on a more frequent basis but no full updates in the past on a biweekly schedule.

The change in update schedule, including the welcoming of a newborn baby to one of our core team members, has been posted about here as well: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=4398

We apologize for the delay and thank you for your patience and understanding.

[TLDFAN]

All fair comments, though I don't think weekly release of updates would be sustainable with any level of quality-- and buggy updates are worse than fewer update imo.

I think the current value of wolves is the threat they pose--it sets the tone for the game. I agree they could be implemented differently though, such that the threat remains but the wolves are not the only major threat. I've supported in another thread a fourth 'difficulty' level (game mode is more accurate), where the wolves are more realistic, but there isn't a Pilgrim's bonanza of loot.

Agree. Seems the dev team was willing to branch into 3 divided difficulties. Maybe in the future some customization on the AI will be afforded. Or a slider as to how many of a particular type of animal spawn. I don't know. I just know right now there are too many ill acting wolf-amatrons. Of the players leaving feedback, it is of course split along a vocal few here. However on the STEAM forums there are something like 100+ pages of feedback on wolves, so clearly they'd don't have that "feature" right.

[TLDFAN]

In my opinion, a "survival game" should have the environment be the enemy. Let there be less (or more, and you have to work out how to save them over time) resources, more blizzards, colder temperatures, etc

In real life, wolves require an AWFUL LOT of territory; between 50 and 1000 square miles of territory for one pack, which can range from 2 to 15, and rarely, 30 individuals.

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/wolf/aboutwo ... iology.htm

http://www.nwf.org/wildlife/wildlife-li ... -wolf.aspx

So, feasibly, there should be only a few wolves in each area. Also, once a wolf gets killed, it should STAY DEAD, not respawn.

At this point, the wolves are little more than "replacement zombies", which is upsetting.

Wholeheartedly agree that the zombie feel is alive and kicking or "dead and walking in slow patrol routes" as would be more accurately described. While the engagement AI is different, it is not varied, neither is a sense of being stalked, because there is none, it is all or nothing, combat or flee, there is no curiosity in the wolves just shallow AI. I get that it is alpha but with as many of them in game as their are which is a whole separate but equal issue, they come up every time you try to go anywhere in the game.

[TLDFAN]

Fair and valid points. Im in favor of the bi weekly patch schedule they had a few months ago now. The current schedule Is dragging.

We are working at our capacity and have an update scheduled before month end: http://hinterlandforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4498 We have had hotfixes for bugs on a more frequent basis but no full updates in the past on a biweekly schedule.

The change in update schedule, including the welcoming of a newborn baby to one of our core team members, has been posted about here as well: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=4398

We apologize for the delay and thank you for your patience and understanding.

Congrats on the baby.

Hoping for some patch details or a bit of a rundown on the scope. The post you shared indicated a hoped release last week and providing details as it gets closer.

Happy to share not a single survey taker thinks the game is moving in the wrong direction which is a huge vote of confidence and in line with the massive positive feedback rating from STEAM. Regarding the wolf issue, most players surveyed favor keeping wolves as they are in terms of danger level, but 2:1 favor fewer of them at whatever difficultly level they are playing.

Some things to consider.

[toebar]

Wholeheartedly agree that the zombie feel is alive and kicking or "dead and walking in slow patrol routes" as would be more accurately described. While the engagement AI is different, it is not varied, neither is a sense of being stalked, because there is none, it is all or nothing, combat or flee, there is no curiosity in the wolves just shallow AI. I get that it is alpha but with as many of them in game as their are which is a whole separate but equal issue, they come up every time you try to go anywhere in the game.

Do you feel the wolf numbers are too many across the board? I can't speak for PV (yet), but I don't mind the current number in ML-- it's CH where I find them really excessive. I don't know if this is the difference in terrain, or if it's an actual difference in wolf numbers..

[Ryan CM]

Happy to share not a single survey taker thinks the game is moving in the wrong direction which is a huge vote of confidence and in line with the massive positive feedback rating from STEAM. Regarding the wolf issue, most players surveyed favor keeping wolves as they are in terms of danger level, but 2:1 favor fewer of them at whatever difficultly level they are playing.

Some things to consider.

Thanks for that TLDFAN

[FoneBoneJay]

Wholeheartedly agree that the zombie feel is alive and kicking or "dead and walking in slow patrol routes" as would be more accurately described. While the engagement AI is different, it is not varied, neither is a sense of being stalked, because there is none, it is all or nothing, combat or flee, there is no curiosity in the wolves just shallow AI. I get that it is alpha but with as many of them in game as their are which is a whole separate but equal issue, they come up every time you try to go anywhere in the game.

Do you feel the wolf numbers are too many across the board? I can't speak for PV (yet), but I don't mind the current number in ML-- it's CH where I find them really excessive. I don't know if this is the difference in terrain, or if it's an actual difference in wolf numbers..

In their current implementation in Stalker I think they are excessive everywhere they are found. Clearly they are a deterrent and challenge for acquiring items in loot locations. I get that. They also need to act as a villan right now, got that. While in voyager it is better, but still in Coastal there are too many.

Now when I say too many, I say looking at it from various perspectives. Yes it is a challenge, sometimes ridiculous, but in any realistic way the density of wolves just meandering like they do while also observable without triggering their hunt instinct is simply just poor implementation.

Players want challenge. I get that too. Where is the challenge for making water? There is none, once you can make fire, you can essentially make an unlimited amount of water indefinitely form one match so long as you only keep that fire going. You can forage for wood indefinitely as well so long as you have the calories to do so.

Really though challenge should come from FROSTBITE, should come from WATER CONTAINER CARRYING CAPACITY, challenge should come from being able to skillfully being able to make fire with a FIREBOW and the possibility to fail. The wolves are either a stopgap or just simply a poor mechanic. Yes if you get into a fight with a wolf it should hurt, it should weaken you substantially and it should also be lethal sometimes. However the number one cause of all death by all players in the game is Wolf attacks. So of course I think the density and populations are way over the top. You should not be able to boil and store more water than you can contain in a vessel. Which means unless we start finding gallon sized jugs laying around we are limited to soda cans, cans of beans, and dog food, once empty. Would open up a whole new mechanic.

People saying the other factors compare, I'll give you an analogy, if I eat glass, nails, and screws, yes I will die from starvation eventually, but in almost all if not most most cases I will die from the wounds form the sharp objects. Same thing for wolves, the magnitude of the threat is so much larger than is should be.

Make wolves stronger, make them faster, make them see you from farther away, but make them stalk you, make them crazy so you dont know if they will attack or just play with you, but make it so there is one-five of them on a map instead of 25. Make it so they can't be used to hunt for you, and exploited.

When you get these necro posts from players who join and have 3 posts and one of their posts is on this topic and how they are struggling with it and can't make it past a few days because of the wolves well there is a problem. A problem for 100+pages of posts about it on STEAM. Bottom line, ok difficulty is good, challenge is good, and a threat is good, being on the edge is awesome in this game.

However, the asinine cheap deaths everybody gets at the hands of the wolf eventually to me say that should be changed to not happen so damn much. Best way to do that is to reduce their numbers, and a small but clear majority of player surveyed agree with that. What is a thing is the new players who come on who are having a good experience in pilgrim and hitting the wolf attack wall in the other modes. Any mechanic which ends the ability of a player to endure, without a strong counter, to which even the gun isn't in some situations, is in my opinion unbalanced to the point where it will drive newer players away from the game.

[AmericanSteel]

I understand wolves don't really go out of their way to attack humans. We have proven to be the alpha predator. However, in a world turned upside down I am not sure the same rules apply. That said, I think the biggest problem with wolves is they lack a pack mentality. As pack predators, they use numbers to run down and weaken larger prey. I have only played on Med Diff, so if this exists in the high levels then please... ignore my rant Small pray they can handle on their own without any problem. A lone wolf jumping on a buck may find they get kicked in the jaw (so death of starvation) or gored before they are able to jump. Where pounce = kill right now.

I really wish they would just put an animal head count on the map and give the ability to fluctuate a few every week or so (due to hunting migration). If I go out of my way to kill a half dozen wolves in a game area, that should significantly reduce their numbers (maybe even wipe out a pack). Once their numbers start to dwindle, their boldness in attacking humans is going to reduce. One wolf is probably not going to attack a lone human, unless they are evidently wounded. However, a strong pack of 6 to 8 might not think twice. Also, how hungry are they? A few wolves that have eaten recently are not going to run down a prey animal. However, make them starving and the game changes. If we had less animals, then the calorie count of the existing animals for food could be boosted. Making a kill would become a big deal instead of just a two days of food.

I think the other answer is we need more villains in the game (which has been said). A lone cougar would be a hell of a threat. However, they would also be lurking in specific areas. You would see one up in the wood line but not down on the coast tracking across the ice. Also adding a variety of prey animals to mix it up would be neat. I don't know if porcupines or skunks live in that region, but they would be good additions to the food chain and behavior AIs too. Also, I think adding a Coon Skin or Skunk Cap would be a welcome addition for crafters

[Boston123]

Part of the issue I have with wolves in-game is the fact that they don't think. In real life, wolves are very intelligent, which is why they use pack-tactics and pick-and-choose prey to kill. They don't just attack any prey animal they find. AS it was said before, even a deer can quite easily kill a lone wolf, or a wolf that attacks the deer stupidly. This is why they swarm the prey, wear it down and tire it out, before going in for the kill.

This is the exact opposite of TLD wolves. They patrol an area singly, and when they spot you, they charge right in, Leroy-Jenkins style. In real life, with very few exceptions, 99% of animals are terrified of human beings, due to us being extremely unfamiliar and weird looking. This often includes wolves. However, while they are scared of us, they will often be curious enough to follow and stalk us, both to figure out what we are, and to see if we get injured/tired enough to be huntable as prey.

This is what I would like to see instead of the current spot-and-charge: stalking. A wolf spots/smells you, and instead of charging you, instead follows you around, back to your campsite, and....waits. Multiple wolves come, and you start noticing them following you. Ranging alongside you when you travel, circling you when you stop to do something. If you are hurt, they come closer, sensing/smelling the weakness. If/when you get distracted, then they attack from behind. One runs in, to attack you from behind, only to run away when you retaliate. Then, another. And another. And another. Eventually, you have to stay up all night with a blazing fire, to keep them off your back. And, because you stayed awake all night, you are tired and groggy the next day. More effective prey. That is terrifying, instead of the current "if you are at 100% condition, go out and fistfight a wolf for food" level of predictability.

Also, I would like to be able to fight off wolves a little more effectively. Right now, you instantly fall on your back when the wolf charges, AKA "here wolf! Have immediate access to all of my vital organs while I simultaneously remove all the advantages bipedal locomotion offers!" While 8olbs (the "average" size of a North American grey wolf, although they can get bigger) is not a trifle to take on the charge, stepping forward into the charge and bracing against it is going to do WONDERS when defending yourself. Considering how our characters can walk and run through the snow no-problem, it must not be deep enough to effect movement in this manner. Also, why can't we step "to the side", AKA dodge the jump? Difficult, to be sure, but it is surely what I would try to do. Finally, SPEARS. literally the first thing I would make in a TLD-style situation, and would be easily capable of keeping the wolf back and off-balance, at the very least. Remember, madden'd-by-the-geomagentic-whosawhatsit or not, wolves aren't STUPID, and almost nothing on the planet wants to get hurt. Jabbing something sharp at them will keep them back from you at least, and if they charge, then you let them impale themselves on the spear.

[AmericanSteel]

I agree 100%. The first thing I would do, if possible, if create something to increase and magnify force protection. At the very least, a friction hardened spear (which is like a fire hardened spear, but you don't need a fire). Given time and material, turn it into a boar spear. Not saying a wolf is going to plow on through BUT it also magnifies the tip of the weapon. It may not be any bigger, but it sure looks bigger. Perception = reality.

Also, if I know wolves are a problem then I plan on making a bracer. Basically, what we used to train dog to bite in the MP core while I was in the Army. Give them something to bite on and shake against. Smash your hand down onto the snout (which hurts) will also cause most dogs to let go. SO, we hit them in the snout to harden them so they would not let go. I don't think wolves would act much differently on the bite and shake move if given an arm to chew on. You will get some bruises, but you get to keep your arm.

[coryduran]

I've posted so many times on the wolf topics, I ignored this one when it first got posted but it's grown to such a beast.

I don't want to make a super long post but I will say that this game, even on stalker, would be really easy if the wolves were made less of a threat. I'm not saying that there aren't mechanics that could be changed (even though I personally, along with many others don't see wolves as THAT dangerous right now as it is), but even with these mechanics being changed, I would hope that wolves would remain just as much of a threat as they are now. Perhaps if you want to make the other aspects of the game more likely to kill, then you could tune down the wolf threat, but I only ever die right now from wolf attacks (either two wolves get me back to back, or a wolf gets me when I'm far from home and in bad conditions and can't make it back in time). If wolves weren't as dangerous as they are now, well shit I don't know if I would ever die, which kinda defeats the purpose.

I also understand how that basically confirms some of the points the pro-change the wolf camp is bringing up, and I agree too, but if we're going to have a discussion about the wolves being the killer too often, it should be done hand in hand with a conversation about making the rest of the game more likely to kill you.

My ideal version of the game would probably be an overhaul of mechanics related to wolf movement/speed/fights, without significantly changing the threat they pose, but maybe making overall likelihood of an encounter lower, while making weather/exposure etc significantly more likely to kill you, perhaps more extreme weather/longer lasting blizzards things along those lines.

People who are strictly talking about wolves being too hard seem to be missing the point, and I feel like that kind of statement leads to these battles of people arguing over difficulty, not specific mechanics which almost everyone agrees could be worked on or changed in ways.

Would a cooler mechanic for fighting the wolves be good? Sure, I don't know how it would work but the current mechanic does leave a bit to be desired. That being said, current wolf fights aren't that hard and can be survived with more than 60% condition once you know how it works. (I agree the mechanic could be better, but disagree about difficulty).

Would I appreciate more realistic wolves? Yes, I would, but I understand that there are limitations for the developers, and I can respect that they aren't trying to create a realistic wolf.

I think focusing on specific mechanics and what not makes for a more meaningful conversation than "Wolves are too hard" or vice versa.

[coryduran]

Also, I would like to be able to fight off wolves a little more effectively. Right now, you instantly fall on your back when the wolf charges, AKA "here wolf! Have immediate access to all of my vital organs while I simultaneously remove all the advantages bipedal locomotion offers!" While 8olbs (the "average" size of a North American grey wolf, although they can get bigger) is not a trifle to take on the charge, stepping forward into the charge and bracing against it is going to do WONDERS when defending yourself. Considering how our characters can walk and run through the snow no-problem, it must not be deep enough to effect movement in this manner. Also, why can't we step "to the side", AKA dodge the jump? Difficult, to be sure, but it is surely what I would try to do. Finally, SPEARS. literally the first thing I would make in a TLD-style situation, and would be easily capable of keeping the wolf back and off-balance, at the very least. Remember, madden'd-by-the-geomagentic-whosawhatsit or not, wolves aren't STUPID, and almost nothing on the planet wants to get hurt. Jabbing something sharp at them will keep them back from you at least, and if they charge, then you let them impale themselves on the spear.

I agree with you that there are significantly more effective ways to fight a wolf than how our hero does it in the game lol, I completely agree. I just wonder how difficult it would be for the developers to make the fights more realistic. My understanding of a situation like this is that the best bet for a fight would be to stand your ground, sacrifice an arm and go at it with the other arm + knife. Can the developers implement that system? I have no clue.

I disagree that truly lifelike wolves would be an improvement though. I THINK it would be cool, but I dunno, fighting wolf packs would probably upset a lot of players who often talk about dying too much from wolves.

I definitely think there are a lot of good ideas for possible changes to mechanics though in the later pages of this thread, and I hope the developers can take a look at some of them. It would also be interesting if we could get a TINY amount of insight into what the developers are thinking about wolves/what they want from them. Nothing specifics but even just a "Yeah we want to rework the mechanics at some point" or something.

[Boston123]

Of course, when I think that wolves should be made more realistic, and their attacks less lethal, I ALSO want the environmental hazards to be ramped up in response.

To me, as someone trained in wilderness survival, the ENVIRONMENT should be the #1 enemy, not the animals that inhabit it. In my experience, the environment is "Enemy #1", you yourself is "#2" (injuries, poor decision making, etc), and "hostile" animals are "#3"

[FoneBoneJay]

...

I don't want to make a super long post but I will say that this game, even on stalker, would be really easy if the wolves were made less of a threat. I'm not saying that there aren't mechanics that could be changed (even though I personally, along with many others don't see wolves as THAT dangerous right now as it is), but even with these mechanics being changed, I would hope that wolves would remain just as much of a threat as they are now. Perhaps if you want to make the other aspects of the game more likely to kill, then you could tune down the wolf threat, but I only ever die right now from wolf attacks (either two wolves get me back to back, or a wolf gets me when I'm far from home and in bad conditions and can't make it back in time). If wolves weren't as dangerous as they are now, well shit I don't know if I would ever die, which kinda defeats the purpose.

Exactly the problem with the game. The environmental challenge is too easy. While the wolf challenge is too cheap.

I think focusing on specific mechanics and what not makes for a more meaningful conversation than "Wolves are too hard" or vice versa.

Been down that road a few thousand times here and on the STEAM forums.

[FoneBoneJay]

Of course, when I think that wolves should be made more realistic, and their attacks less lethal, I ALSO want the environmental hazards to be ramped up in response.

To me, as someone trained in wilderness survival, the ENVIRONMENT should be the #1 enemy, not the animals that inhabit it. In my experience, the environment is "Enemy #1", you yourself is "#2" (injuries, poor decision making, etc), and "hostile" animals are "#3"

Exactly, have you ever heard of the "widowmaker" in the forest, it is an old tree that is diseased or termite infested that can break off limbs that can seriously injure or kill a person after an icestorm. There should be more ways to get hurt in the game than just being gangbanged by wolves.

[Boston123]

I worked as the "Assistant Ranger" for a local Boy Scout camp, I've dealt with many a "widowmaker"

[Ryan CM]

Thanks for all the continued discussion. I am passing your feedback on to the dev team.

[The_Hawk35]

I personally don't think that widdowmakers would have a lot of benefit to the game. With the artwork in the game I think it'd be pretty hard to see where they are.

[AmericanSteel]

I personally don't think that widdowmakers would have a lot of benefit to the game. With the artwork in the game I think it'd be pretty hard to see where they are.

"Most" of the time, widow-makers are easy to spot. I think they get you when you find that great camp site and there is a branch that looks a little spooky up in the tree. It then becomes, "Well, that won't fall on me"... maybe. The other situation is there is a bad tree twenty, thirty, fifty feet away and it falls toward you campsite. You then have to worry about that tree and the branches of every tree in its path. While I was in the Army, I learned the number one priority was security. I have taken that mantra with me into every other aspect of my life and camping is no exception. Sometime what looks like a good place to bed down, at first glance, is actually one of the worst. The best method for finding a good campsite is never stop looking for a good camp site. In the Army, we would establish rally points (a place we would fall back to just in case) as we marched. When I take my kids out camping, I do the same thing BUT I do it in locations that are good camp sites. I would rather back track a few hundred meters or even a mile to a better camp site then just make due.

[TLDFAN]

Widow makers are just an example, could be weak ice near the rivers when it is sunny out, could be side of a hill that gives away and causes a snow shelf to drop 50ft with you on it if you are close to the edge, maybe roll an ankle, could be tree falling into one of the cabins every 60 days, could render the shelter useless. Etc... The environment is really only hazardous from falling into the ice, and from the cold, but really rain when temperatures permit would make the environment soaking wet and slippery, travel on wet ice covered snow is much more dangerous and in just snow. Players want challenge, add some a platitude of bushes to make your line of sight less of an expanse, thickets, and some places where it is so thick you can't see beyond 100ft.

I suspect they are going to make crossing the ravine a one-way trip soon but I don't favor that type of environmental challenge, just things to make it more treacherous.

[toebar]

I suspect they are going to make crossing the ravine a one-way trip soon but I don't favor that type of environmental challenge, just things to make it more treacherous.

What makes you think this? Seems to be against the whole idea of sandbox...

[FoneBoneJay]

I suspect they are going to make crossing the ravine a one-way trip soon but I don't favor that type of environmental challenge, just things to make it more treacherous.

What makes you think this? Seems to be against the whole idea of sandbox...

Last sentence of the first line of this post by the Boss...

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4498

I could be reading this wrong and it is just speculation but it is my thinking. The patch is "what I'd call past due" and they are being pretty tight lipped about it.

[coryduran]

Last sentence of the first line of this post by the Boss...

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4498

I could be reading this wrong and it is just speculation but it is my thinking. The patch is "what I'd call past due" and they are being pretty tight lipped about it.

That's interesting, I hadn't given that idea much thought actually.

I'll say that initially I thought the idea of making travels like that a one way trip would be pretty stupid, and I still don't know how much I like the idea overall, but I guess that if I really look at my play style, it wouldn't be THAT much of a game ender. It would mainly be annoying for me because generally when I'm leaving ML to go to CH i usually have too much stuff to carry over on one trip, making it into a no return trip would definitely cut into that area. That being said though once I'm established in the new area it's been pretty rare for me to return to my first map in the history of my play throughs in game.

[FoneBoneJay]

I have no inside knowledge about that and it may be wrong but it is how I concluded it