Deep Forest Wood Gathering: Much Harder?

[harobed1156]

See the "branch" in this video? In-game, it would require a hatchet. Watch how easy it is for the guy to break it into useable pieces.

The in-game method makes zero sense.

And it took him 30 seconds to get four pieces, not twenty minutes.

[Boston123]

Well he breaks that piece of wood because he can use those trees as tools, and that wood seems also really damaged, you wont get that on demand everytime you see a big branch

beside, everything is frozen in TLD.

Tell me, what are we surrounded by in TLD?

Are they .... trees? NO :roll: What could we use as levers to assist in breaking branches, even when they are frozen?

Oh, and just because they are frozen, doesn't mean they are impossible to break. I've broken frozen limbs using that method before. In fact, it is probably easier to break them like that when they are frozen, as opposed to "green", because the frozen branches have MUCH less give to them.

Hell, if they are frozen, why are we chopping at them with our hatchets? That is a pretty good way to damage the hatchet!

[McGuffin]

Tell me, what are we surrounded by in TLD?

Are they .... trees? NO

Yes, but you dont get my point:

You need a specific setup of trees to do what's in the video.

But, well, I am pretty sure you can find a video on youtube, where a guy cut down an oak with is teeth.

The thing is it's also a game.

I didnt say I am not voting for realism, I am, but also for common sense : Big pieces of wood needs hatchet and smaller one can be broken by hand, that seems fine for me.

[Boston123]

Tell me, what are we surrounded by in TLD?

Are they .... trees? NO

Yes, but you dont get my point:

You need a specific setup of trees to do what's in the video.

But, well, I am pretty sure you can find a video on youtube, where a guy cut down an oak with is teeth.

The thing is it's also a game.

I didnt say I am not voting for realism, I am, but also for common sense : Big pieces of wood needs hatchet and smaller one can be broken by hand, that seems fine for me.

You DON"T need a specific "setup" of trees to do the above. All you need is two trees reasonably close together, which are plenty common.

Forcing you to use certain tools when other methods are available sans tools, and are arguable MORE effective than the tool-using method, is nonsensical at best

Hell, you don't even need trees! A doorway would do fine, or the columns of a porch or railing.

[McGuffin]

Forcing you to use certain tools when other methods are available sans tools, and are arguable MORE effective than the tool-using method, is nonsensical at best

Well, I am sorry, but it's common sense that you need tools to cut (or even break) a big piece of wood.

Maybe, in some specific circonstances you can break a tree with your hands, but here, in a game, there is a need for a balanced , relevant and regular way to do stuff

[Bill Tarling]

Posted on Steam by Hinterland:

"All resources in the game are balanced for gameplay. The new fuel resources respawn to the extent that there would be no logical reason why you would prefer to carry out the extremely strenuous, energy-consuming, task of chopping down a large tree with a small hatchet (even if this were possible, which is debatable), when you can simply harvest the sticks, branches, and limbs, we have spawned for you. They also respawn at various intervals, to replenish the supply. All balanced around our in-game economy."

That pretty much explains the system purpose nicely.

[harobed1156]

Well, I am sorry, but it's common sense that you need tools to cut (or even break) a big piece of wood.

Maybe, in some specific circonstances you can break a tree with your hands, but here, in a game, there is a need for a balanced , relevant and regular way to do stuff

In real life, you need tools to break "a big piece of wood" into cedar or fir firewood.

You don't need a tool to break a smaller branch into two sticks. You can hold one end in your hand, set the other end on the ground, and stomp in the middle with your foot. Takes a few seconds and you get two sticks.

In the game, these sticks burn for only seven minutes, and they don't raise the temperature much, so a ten minute investment of time out in the cold, isn't very well balanced. If anything, these branches only exist in order to tempt players into making poor decisions.

[Bill Tarling]

In the game, these sticks burn for only seven minutes, and they don't raise the temperature much, so a ten minute investment of time out in the cold, isn't very well balanced. If anything, these branches only exist in order to tempt players into making poor decisions.

I disagree - for gameplay balance I think they work well...

They're available in abundance [the sticks require no cost other than weight to pick up], and gathering a few quickly while travelling can save you. You can gather hours and hours worth of wood for the fire fairly quickly and easily.

As for the 10-minutes to break into 2 smaller stick with about 7 minutes and 1 degree each -- those sticks add up very quickly when collecting. I usually break down branches while I'm in good health travelling, and leave them for later use [such as in bad weather when I can't afford the time to break things down].

The alternative would be saying "okay I don't think it's worth the time so I would choose to freeze to death as a better value"... It's like using the premise that fishing is pointless because you'll burn more calories -- the alternative is no food (and sometimes no calories to recover health when needed).

Not everything in survival is about getting a higher payout from supplies... in survival sometimes the option is paying the cost because the alternative is not surviving. The game balances fairness and returns as much as possible - so for some things you get huge returns while using, while others are a cost of surviving so you can use the other things that give you the bigger reward payoff.

[harobed1156]

As for the 10-minutes to break into 2 smaller stick with about 7 minutes and 1 degree each -- those sticks add up very quickly when collecting. I usually break down branches while I'm in good health travelling, and leave them for later use [such as in bad weather when I can't afford the time to break things down].

I lived in Vermont for five years, burned firewood exclusively for all heat and cooking, and collected it all by hand or with an axe. If I was so incompetent that it took me ten minutes to break a stick in half, I wouldn't have lasted through the first summer, let alone five winters. I also wouldn't have considered that (10 minutes for 2 sticks) a worthwhile use of spare time. Do you know why? Because right over there there's a branch I can break in a few seconds.

The alternative would be saying "okay I don't think it's worth the time so I would choose to freeze to death as a better value"... It's like using the premise that fishing is pointless because you'll burn more calories -- the alternative is no food (and sometimes no calories to recover health when needed).

I think that's a false dichotomy. Another alternative is to not waste time on small branches, and look for large branches and sticks instead. Like you, I've been watching Alone, and not one of those players has been dumb enough to spend ten minutes breaking a stick. There are far more worthwhile things for them to do.

Not everything in survival is about getting a higher payout from supplies... in survival sometimes the option is paying the cost because the alternative is not surviving. The game balances fairness and returns as much as possible - so for some things you get huge returns while using, while others are a cost of surviving so you can use the other things that give you the bigger reward payoff.

I don't think the game is balanced yet, and that's basically why we disagree. You may see clothing shredded by bad weather and 10-minute sticks as balanced fairness, but I see them as poorly contrived. I think the developers can come up with more ingenious ways to increase difficulty than this.

[McGuffin]

I think that's a false dichotomy. Another alternative is to not waste time on small branches, and look for large branches and sticks instead. Like you, I've been watching Alone, and not one of those players has been dumb enough to spend ten minutes breaking a stick. There are far more worthwhile things for them to do.

I totally agree with that. I was talking about that a bit earlier, and my prediction is that no one will bother with branches since there are instaloot-sticks everywhere.

at least a branch should give 4 sticks (instead of 2) in 10mn

[SteveP]

As long as the calorie budget at time budget are satisfied, in good weather, you would have no problem gathering the same amount of wood as the old "magic" method of foraging. However, at night, in a storm, on the ice or stuck out with howling winds, you just cannot use this method to stay alive at night. The energy and damage budget is just too high. You would be forced to carry a stock pile and with the narrow budget for weight, this is very problematic. I think we need to examine the possibility of either building up firewood caches (sledge?) Sledge wishlist! or providing some small caches of firewood near the fishing shacks. It is very difficult to predict (based on past storm experience) how long you're going to need to stay in the hut. 12 to 15 hrs in the past has not been uncommon, often longer!

Gathering wood is very boring in the game. I don't want to have to spend this time getting tiny sticks. I would prefer that time passed quickly while I got on with more interesting game play.

I think we need to remember something important; real survival is boring most of the time and the loneliness is terrible. There is a TON of drudge work but that is not enjoyable game play.

Only a few players on the Alone TV show seem to use their down time to craft useful stuff. At least the guy made a fish trap however he could have done that while waiting out the rain storm. I would like to see a much greater variety of craft items and crafting snares outside, not at a silly work bench. :-)

[Fluffy]

I enjoy picking up sticks whilst I walk (s-l-o-w-l-y) across the map from one location to another. As a result, I'm never out of wood (or tinder). It's something else to look out for, along with the wolves and the corpses and the rose hip bushes. In my last game I didn't even harvest a tree limb until day 30 - and then I only did it for the novelty. Sticks are even easier to light than most other things.

In the early game, if you don't want to get cold you can even harvest wood indoors now, straight from the furniture.

I don't think that wood gathering is at all harder in the Deep Forest update. In fact it's somewhat easier, because I'm less likely to accidentally become dehydrated or starving through attempting to do too much at once.

[TWM]

I'm not a survivalist, so I'm going to put it out there: do trappers in the outback carry around scores of wood just in case of a blizzard?

Because a blizzard just caught me by surprise on what was a fairly modest trek from the Homestead in Pleasant Valley to the Three Strikes Farmstead, and I was stuck there for about 15 hours. I managed to cut some limbs nearby during the blizzard, which kept me warm throughout the night, but when the storm hadn't settled by dawn, I started freezing real quick.

Ended up with hypothermia on the way back, which meant I was grounded for a day back at the Homestead. Fortunately for me, I'm playing Pilgrim, so my food rations are pretty well stocked and I don't burn up a lot of calories.

Still, with the new foraging mechanic, if you get caught out there without wood, you're pretty screwed. It makes icefishing quite a dangerous enterprise too: imagine being stuck into one of those shacks and having to spend the night there: better bring plenty of wood along.

And with the hypothermia condition, the penalty for miscalculating the weather has only gotten steeper.

[Boston123]

I'm not a survivalist, so I'm going to put it out there: do trappers in the outback carry around scores of wood just in case of a blizzard?

Because a blizzard just caught me by surprise on what was a fairly modest trek from the Homestead in Pleasant Valley to the Three Strikes Farmstead, and I was stuck there for about 15 hours. I managed to cut some limbs nearby during the blizzard, which kept me warm throughout the night, but when the storm hadn't settled by dawn, I started freezing real quick.

Ended up with hypothermia on the way back, which meant I was grounded for a day back at the Homestead. Fortunately for me, I'm playing Pilgrim, so my food rations are pretty well stocked and I don't burn up a lot of calories.

Still, with the new foraging mechanic, if you get caught out there without wood, you're pretty screwed. It makes icefishing quite a dangerous enterprise too: imagine being stuck into one of those shacks and having to spend the night there: better bring plenty of wood along.

And with the hypothermia condition, the penalty for miscalculating the weather has only gotten steeper.

No, you usually 1) Have MUCH more warning when inclement weather is on the way, by paying attention to the winds and cloud formations. I am referring to HOURS, if not DAYS, of forewarning, and 2) most trapping and such nowadays is heavily mechanized, either through snowmobile, bushplane, or dog-sled. Therefore, if the weather does change unexpectedly, you can move to shelter quickly.

As for wood: many homesteaders (not just people in Alaska/Canada either, but in the Lower 48) have literally months/years of wood stacked, dried, and stockpiled at their homes.

[Scyzara]

I think that's a false dichotomy. Another alternative is to not waste time on small branches, and look for large branches and sticks instead. Like you, I've been watching Alone, and not one of those players has been dumb enough to spend ten minutes breaking a stick. There are far more worthwhile things for them to do.

I totally agree with that. I was talking about that a bit earlier, and my prediction is that no one will bother with branches since there are instaloot-sticks everywhere.

at least a branch should give 4 sticks (instead of 2) in 10mn

Agreed. Atm I just ignore branches. Why bother to stay outside for another 10 minutes just to get two sticks? I'd rather spend one minute to walk 100m further and probably find 3-4 sticks there.^^

Apart from branches being useless I like the current amount of sticks & limbs. The respawn time for limbs could be a bit longer for my taste (to make longer foraging trips necessary instead of farming the very same nearby spots every time), but that's not a big deal really.

[elloco999]

As for the 10-minutes to break into 2 smaller stick with about 7 minutes and 1 degree each -- those sticks add up very quickly when collecting. I usually break down branches while I'm in good health travelling, and leave them for later use [such as in bad weather when I can't afford the time to break things down].

The alternative would be saying "okay I don't think it's worth the time so I would choose to freeze to death as a better value"... It's like using the premise that fishing is pointless because you'll burn more calories -- the alternative is no food (and sometimes no calories to recover health when needed).

Or you could spend those 10 minutes picking up 10-20 sticks that are lying on the ground. That's a 5-10x greater ROI.

And if you want to use the sticks as a stash in case you need it later, drop them back on the ground in a neat little pile. I haven't tested this, but I'm pretty sure new sticks will spawn if you drop the sticks you picked up, so your stash could grow pretty fast if it's along a route you travel regularly.

If I stop to break each branch I find into 2 sticks, I'll be freezing in no time. Then I will need those sticks to warm back up.

[Bill Tarling]

True, and reasonable point...

Myself I don't find the 10 minutes awkward (but most likely because I look at other mundane tasks taking longer, so I simply consider it the cost of doing business so to speak)... I also consider it a reasonable exchange since we also get so many sticks for free [which may actually be why 10 minutes for two sticks seems unfair to players].

Now that being said, I don't think it would unbalance things too much if the devs decide to lower the time for the branch harvesting just a little. In doing so, I think it would also then be a fair balance to cut down the number of free sticks dramatically - that would also give more value or reasons why taking 5 minutes (or whatever time is set) for branch breakdown is a survival cost.

Alternatively players can simply ignore branches altogether if they prefer, or if they feel it's not worth the cost. There's nothing requiring them to harvest the branches if that goes against their cost/reward decision. Just because it's there, doesn't mean they have to use it.

This is the first iteration though, so quite likely there will be additional tuning and tweaking if future updates for the stick, branches, and wood.

[McGuffin]

In doing so, I think it would also then be a fair balance to cut down the number of free sticks dramatically

I dont vote for that at all, it's kind of a great feeling to pickup sticks in the wild, just like we could do in real life. Beside, it's still dangerous, weather changes, and wolves are lurking around.

Also, when I need to do a big fire (to cook a bunch of meat and boil some water) i find more convenient to stock up fir firewood.

Sticks are mainly convenient to raise up the fire temperature.

[Bill Tarling]

In doing so, I think it would also then be a fair balance to cut down the number of free sticks dramatically

I dont vote for that at all, it's kind of a great feeling to pickup sticks in the wild, just like we could do in real life. Beside, it's still dangerous, weather changes, and wolves are lurking around.

I definitely agree with you on that part... I don't mean remove all the sticks, but rather cut down on the quantity since players say [and quite rightfully so] that with so many sticks that have to time cost and can simply be picked up, so time to create 2 'free' sticks feels like a waste of time to them.

So it's looking at ways to consider balancing the value or reason to make harvesting branches into sticks worthwhile. If you lower the total spawn quantity of sticks [there would still be plenty] and lower the harvest time for branches; then the branches do have a little more value for their harvest time.

Another possible tuning might be to get three sticks from each branch - but the problem will still be players looking at it as "but I can get plenty of sticks for free, why should I have to pay a harvest time cost to get free stuff?"

It is hard to argue "why should I spend 10 minutes on that branch when I already have 20 sticks right beside it that I can use?"... I'm sure the devs will find a balance that works as they go along fine tuning the settings.

[SteveP]

When harvesting, you used to be able to get a stick of hardwood in 12 minutes IIRC, now when breaking down branches, the ROI or return on investment time is much lower per heat value of the wood. Limbs on the other hand, are probably about the same investment as the old harvesting paradigm however the granularity of work is much larger so the player may incur freezing risk while breaking them down although you get a lot of fuel.

[SteveP]

I suppose it balances a little if you start an hour long fire with sticks to warm during the process, if possible.

[selfless]

I like branches. I don't hardly harvest them, but I like that they are there.

How dull will it be if the only things that ever spawn are there just to feed you? Why can't some of them be less helpful than others? Maintain some illusion of choice, decision making, struggle. God forbid they start spawning poison sticks that look almost exactly like the useful ones...

Complaints seem to be "Branches distract me from grabbing sticks." Good. "The wolves and stamina get in the way of my running all over the map to see which bunker I got." Awesome. Life is struggle.

Obstacles = Gameplay.

[LucidFugue]

Branches are less useful once you have an axe. But I've used them to buy me some more time on a low fire while I forage for more. You'll find yourself in a situation sometime where it'll be worth it, trust me.

I'm adjusting though. We took firewood too lightly before this update. I would not really care about it because you could spend 15 minutes to get a fire going wherever you were, whatever time it was. Then when you found a cabin and felt like staying a while you gathered enough to keep a fire going for a whole day and boiled all the water you'd need. If you were on the move you only needed to carry 1-2 cedar logs and that would pretty much sort you out no matter what.

Now, it's part of the decision-making. I carry less food and water around because I'm making shorter journeys (walk/sprint doing its thing), and I either collect sticks on the journey, or if I'm going from camp to camp I look out for fallen limbs. I've taken 2 fir limbs and 2 cedar limbs back in after a blizzard this way.

Now instead of having 1 base stocked up to last for days, I'm hopping between places to widen my resource gathering area, but also my storage locations. It's slower, but I still have good stockpiles of wood and water in 2 buildings, and I'm much more conscious of leaving myself rest stops along the way. Food's the only constant due to spoilage, but wolves are so much easier to fight off I feel like trading an old man's beard bandage for a fresh deer (and the wolf if I find it died during its escape) is making me feel like living off the land will still be very viable for a long time. I only need the rifle for taking down bears.

[elloco999]

Now that I've found some better clothing, I can spend more time outside. I'm more inclined to break branches now, even if I still don't do it much.

I think lowering the time required to break a branch to maybe 2.5 min per stick and a branch returning 2-4 sticks depending on the size of the branch (some branches are much larger than others but still return only 2 sticks) would be a huge improvement. And I wouldn't mind if the amount of sticks lying around was also lowered a good bit but maybe not 'drastically'. Say 40-50% less sticks.

The system needs a bit of tuning, but overall I'm loving the new forage system!

[McGuffin]

Complaints seem to be "Branches distract me from grabbing sticks." Good. "The wolves and stamina get in the way of my running all over the map to see which bunker I got." Awesome. Life is struggle.

it's not a complain but a discussion about game balance and economy.

The point is: for the time being, I never bother with branches, this have nothing to do with "distraction"

This can be a design choice, in a game where everything matters, but if it's not, this have to be adressed.