Wolf hunger and packs

[kamajutsu]

I totally agree that in a true survival situation, holding something long and pointy, i.e. a spear would be one of my top priorities (as it was also, historically). If it can buy you some time, and create a little bit of distance between you and a wild animal, then it could be just enough to keep you alive.

Having said this, I do understand why some people are doubtful of the actual implementation of this into the game. I'm not too sure how this would work, unless they added a proper melee component.

But think about the fire torch mechanic when you brandish it or swing it around and go "HYAAA HYAAA!" and yell. It could be something like that maybe, except you stab with the spear furiously into the air. It could be merely a deterrent for wolves to stay back a little bit so they don't close the gap.

Ingredients - branches or saplings, maybe some extra sticks, hunting knife to carve, fishing wire to tie together, and the workbench (something like this anyway)

[kamajutsu]

** OR you could even have the spear throwable.

e.g. RMB to aim and raise the spear, LMB to throw. You can reuse the spear but they will degrade quickly.

A successful hit should either kill or badly wound the animal so it bleeds and runs away. Like I said above, the spear could merely be a deterrent.

I actually find a spear way more plausible than creating a bow out of wood and some guts...that's pretty weird already.

[octavian]

Oh, and this game seriously misrepresents just how difficult it is to make a bow and arrows, at least, a set that is powerful and accurate enough to actually hit and kill things.

So in your opinion this alleged serious misrepresentation is due to what? Lack of knowledge from the developers? Dumbing down the game? Gameplay?

As for the "Molotov cocktail in the pocket" thing: yes, I am TOTALLY going to waste valuable fuel and a match, for a weapon that WON'T WORK (the bottle will just skid along the top of the snow) :roll: . I hope you recognize just how foolish of an idea that is.

If the bottle would not just skid along the top of the snow, but would work as if the snow was instead dry concrete, would you consider that to also be a serious misrepresentation?

How about fires, is starting a fire on top of snow also a serious misrepresentation, in your opinion?

How about the rifle? Is the effective range of the rifle also a serious misrepresentation?

How about the fact that wolves are extremely aggressive towards the player, is that also a serious misrepresentation?

Or how about the fact that wildlife respawns, is this also a serious misrepresentation of the capabilities of wildlife that we know of?

[Boston123]

Oh, and this game seriously misrepresents just how difficult it is to make a bow and arrows, at least, a set that is powerful and accurate enough to actually hit and kill things.

So in your opinion this alleged serious misrepresentation is due to what? Lack of knowledge from the developers? Dumbing down the game? Gameplay?

As for the "Molotov cocktail in the pocket" thing: yes, I am TOTALLY going to waste valuable fuel and a match, for a weapon that WON'T WORK (the bottle will just skid along the top of the snow) :roll: . I hope you recognize just how foolish of an idea that is.

If the bottle would not just skid along the top of the snow, but would work as if the snow was instead dry concrete, would you consider that to also be a serious misrepresentation?

How about fires, is starting a fire on top of snow also a serious misrepresentation, in your opinion?

How about the rifle? Is the effective range of the rifle also a serious misrepresentation?

How about the fact that wolves are extremely aggressive towards the player, is that also a serious misrepresentation?

Or how about the fact that wildlife respawns, is this also a serious misrepresentation of the capabilities of wildlife that we know of?

1) For the bow, yes. Probably a combination of lack of knowledge (in-game, we "use" the bow ALL WRONG. I don't know how you can hit what you are aiming at, or even how you are supposed to aim, drawing the arrow back like that), and "dumbing down".

The "fastest" I've built a self-bow was about 10 hours. In the video below, the guy builds one in about 6. The thing is: both of us know what we are doing. Give a knife and a sapling to the average person, and they will either 1) make something that is so weak as to be a waste of time, or 2) do something wrong, which will often cause something to catastrophically fail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFTPxK2X0NA

Speaking of "catastrophically fail", that is one of my major beefs with the crafting system. No matter what you are working on, you ALWAYS do it absolutely perfectly. You can shape a bow-stave perfectly, the first time-every time. You can straighten arrows, with no issues. Your rawhide (which is really crappy for actual clothing, by the way) always comes out the "right size", without tearing, shrinking, or the fur falling out. Everything is beautiful. And, to be honest, it really shouldn't be.

2) Yes, I would still consider it a waste, even if the Molotov worked, just through the sheer WASTE of supply that it is. That is, what, 20 fluid ounces of kerosene that you just wasted, killing an animal (in a horrific fashion). Or, you know, you could just stab it with a pointed stick, and kill it quicker, cleaner, and without using anything important

3) Yes, I made a post (forget what thread), about how absolutely pants-on-head asinine the whole "start fires on top of snow" thing is.

4) Yes, the rifle should be able to shoot much farther. The .303 can take game (deer and black bear) out to 400 yards, quite easily. Shoot you be able to hit something that far, without the aid of some sort of stabilizer? Probably not, but it should be able to shoot that far. Oh, and the sight picture? Awful. And how the .303 requires two shots to the body to kill a wolf? The same cartridge that was used to kill ELEPHANTS? Awful.

5) Yes, I've been railing against the "totally-not-furry-zombie wolves" for almost as long as I've had the game. In my opinion, depicting wild animals as nothing more than hostile cruise-missiles-of-death is damaging to them, REGARDLESS of what some title-screen splash might say.

Wolves have spent centuries crawling back from the brink of extinction, as a result of humans killing them off out of fear, and in one place where they are thriving (AKA where the game takes place), they are depicted as berserk, slavering beasts that want little more than to tear your throat out. Disappointing.

In my opinion, the ENVIRONMENT should be the primary enemy, not the wildlife. Should potentially-hostile wildlife be a danger, and a consideration? Of course. But TLD has been "Wolf Dodger simulator 2015" for a while now.

I would also like the wildlife to behave like actual , you know, intelligent animals. Wolves don't kill anything that comes across their path, yet in-game, you can "chase" deer and rabbit into the wolves, who kill EVERYTHING regardless if they are hungry or not. They also use pack-tactics to bring down game. What sounds "better": one wolf charging you stupidly, or getting surrounded and hounded by actually-thinking tacticians? Or, animals actually taking shelter from the weather?

6) Yes, the fact that wildlife spawns is a serious issue for me, not the least of which is the possibility of "exploiting" these respawns to allow for near-infinite survival.

We should be able to almost-completely depopulate an area of animals, of every species. In real life, animals aren't stupid, and if they keep on getting killed when they go to a certain area, they actually try to avoid that area in the future. Or, we could just kill all the individuals in one area, and have to wait for migrants to move in.

Of course, I also want animals to actually be relatively rare, as opposed to the current state in-game. In Pleasant Valley, I've had 5 or so deer on my screen at the same time. Not cool.

I want to actually have to hunt the animals, brave the elements, have there be an element of risk, instead of crouch-walking up to 15 yards away from a deer and shooting it in the head.

7) Don't even get me started on tool degradation mechanics, repairing mechanics, etc. They make me sad.

The game is good, yes, but it could be MUCH better. Of course, then people will say "this isn't supposed to be a survival simulator!" Well, then, as we are playing a SANDBOX in a survival game, what is it supposed to be?

[danicusrex]

The game is good, yes, but it could be MUCH better. Of course, then people will say "this isn't supposed to be a survival simulator!" Well, then, as we are playing a SANDBOX in a survival game, what is it supposed to be?

I love this game. I honestly think it's the best idea for a game I've seen in ages. But I agree with pretty much everything you said, Boston123. It could be so much more than it is (and it's already pretty great).

My #1 thing I want added to this is pack tactics and smarter wolf A. I.

My #2 thing is a spear to deal with the pack tactics and smarter wolf A. I.

[AmericanSteel]

@AmericanSteel:How do you see them working? You craft it and auto-equip it during a struggle like the already available weapons? Then it's literally useless.

I would have the spear with the same perspective as the bow when walking around. You can see part of it in your hand. If you hit the left mouse button it jabs (fast attack for less damage) and the right mouse button is a thrust (slower attack for more damage). Pressing both buttons sets the spear (by using your foot).

I have shown that with the same scripted user input a struggle can end with you having 100 condition or 30 something condition. Do you want a spear that's just a value added into an equation?

If the devs want to make the spear a +50% in melee, that would be fine by me. But I would prefer it to be its own FPS setting. After all, you can't really use a spear with a wolf at your throat. The advantage of it being a pointy lever has been lost. It would be akin to using a rifle with the wolf at your throat.

And to what end? Give you a massive bonus? Do you feel wolf encounters need a larger bonus than already provided by the knife? Are wolves a threat as of .258 so that you require additional firepower?

Its end, bonus or threat is irrelevant. I only ask what is reasonable in a survival situation.

Do you equip it and wait for the dumb wolf to impale and insta-kill itself with it? Do you jab it at the wolf? Then the entire struggle mechanic has to be scrapped and something else put in its place. They already have something because they tested this kind of standard FPS mechanic but they found it lacking and not fitting their vision.

The wolf AI would HAVE to be changed. Right now it is basically a cruise missle. It may bob and weave a bit, but a cruise missile none the less. It seeks the target and then deploys it payload (the in your face combat). If the animal charges and you have the spear set, it should kill the animal IF you centered your set correctly. Otherwise it would become akin to boxing with the player having the advantage of reach. Which means the wolf must defeat your reach to get into biting range, which is realistic. That said, I would not discard the existing melee mechanic. As I see it, if the wolf gets past the spear you would be back to where we are now with the mechanics already in place. I don't want to take away from what the devs have done, just add to it. All that said, they already have something because they are filling in a gap. I would not assume this is the end all/be all mechanic until the game goes live. I try not to speak for other people, as I can only speak for myself.

The bigger question, what is the game lacking that a spear is required, except the spear itself?

If they seek a realistic game and ignore one of time simplest tools in existence, then it is not very realistic IMHO.

Between the rifle, bow, hand-to-hand, where exactly does the spear fit in? If you can survive just fine basically forever with what's already in the game, what point is there for a spear? I don't get it.

Right now there is ranged (where the player has the advantage) then tooth and claw. The spear would be between those to sets. If you had a rifle/bow and a wolf jumped you, its back to basic melee. If you have a spear, it would be the same. Right now you can survive without a gun (I am at 116 and have not fired a shot). You can survive without a bow (people went to what, 600 odd days before the came in). I survived over 80 days without any ranged weapon last patch, because I could not find a rifle. You don't have to have either of them. However, you can survive longer and easier with those tools.

What is the point of the spear? Easy. Look back to our ancestors. Look back to just about every tribal culture that has existed (or currently exists) over the past few thousand years. We find them in just about every single tribal culture, independent of cross influences and with cross influences. If spears were not effective tools, none of them would have used them. They would have discovered the tools use, or lack there of, and tossed them to the side. That never happened. Survival experts today go to making a spear as one of their first tools not only for force protection but also to assist in procuring protein.

What is the point of the spear? They are simple to make and effective killing tools. You don't even need a knife to craft one, though it makes it easier. You don't have to have a fire to harden one, though it does make crafting quicker. It does not take a community to construct one. The raw materials to craft one are almost universal: rebar, some metal fencing, closet rod, curtain rod, bamboo pole, oak stave, the list goes on and on and on.

What is the point of the spear? A tool of subjugation. Does not matter if it is the land, the beasts who live on it or the men who claim it.

[Boston123]

^ I have a spear, actually. Made it myself on a blacksmith forge. Mostly for S + G, but also for the "unthinkable". I also made a bow and arrows and a wooden warclub w/wicker shield, also mostly for S+G, but being prepared is never foolish in my book.

I can take the spearhead off the current shaft and tuck it into a backpack or my truck, and make a shaft in the woods in 5 minutes.

[AmericanSteel]

^ I have a spear, actually. Made it myself on a blacksmith forge. Mostly for S + G, but also for the "unthinkable". I also made a bow and arrows and a wooden warclub w/wicker shield, also mostly for S+G, but being prepared is never foolish in my book.

I can take the spearhead off the current shaft and tuck it into a backpack or my truck, and make a shaft in the woods in 5 minutes.

I was at Field and Stream Friday (picking up some .22 LR for squirrel hunting next month) and saw spear heads in the knife section. Evidently people are picking back up on the idea of using them for prepper purposes. Well, down here in Alabama they are also used for hunting wild pigs. Some of them did have the boar bars on them.

[Aduron]

My #1 thing I want added to this is pack tactics and smarter wolf A. I.

My #2 thing is a spear to deal with the pack tactics and smarter wolf A. I.

See, this is an argument I can understand. It's better than "It's realistic so add it *insert something about wearing pants on head and having a low IQ*".

I agree that spears might someday make sense to add, due to realism, usefulness, etc. But until they don't just seem like an I-win button, no thank you.

I know the "it's alpha" phrase gets both thrown around and trash talked, but keep in mind we all have very little understanding of what the devs are going to add, apart from the fact that there's still much to go, and it's going to be awesome! It could be that animal AI is a priority for them - and if it is, I'm already terrified of the wolf packs of the future. So let's keep this "wish list" from becoming a "demand list".

[octavian]

Its end, bonus or threat is irrelevant. I only ask what is reasonable in a survival situation.

If they seek a realistic game and ignore one of time simplest tools in existence, then it is not very realistic IMHO.

I don't think they do seek a realistic game. Like Boston123 said, pretty much everything is more or less a serious misrepresentation. It's a video game, they focus on the fun gameplay aspect. At least that's how it appears to me.

The wolf AI would HAVE to be changed.

Well yes but they already just changed it, after testing an entire range of mechanics too, including fighting with a knife on-screen, like you would expect, you know, in a video game. Will they change it again?

[toebar]

I don't think they do seek a realistic game. Like Boston123 said, pretty much everything is more or less a serious misrepresentation. It's a video game, they focus on the fun gameplay aspect. At least that's how it appears to me.

I think you are correct.. in a way. Realism is not the ultimate goal-- and how could it be, it's a video game, the goal is to make a good game.

I don't agree that pretty much everything is a serious misrepresentation-- I understand most of the reasons they have for departing from reality, and I expect the game is better for it.

All things considered, I think realism, within the confines of a fictional story, is held to much closer in this game than others in the survival genre.

[octavian]

I think you are correct.. in a way. Realism is not the ultimate goal-- and how could it be, it's a video game, the goal is to make a good game.

I don't agree that pretty much everything is a serious misrepresentation-- I understand most of the reasons they have for departing from reality, and I expect the game is better for it.

All things considered, I think realism, within the confines of a fictional story, is held to much closer in this game than others in the survival genre.

I agree except on the serious misrepresentation part. But that's just, words, depends on how you read them. You see your condition in percentage on the screen, there's bars, objective, definite numbers, like calories. That's... a serious misrepresentation of reality.

The game IS better because of this, just so there's no confusion as to what I'm saying. All video games are a serious misrepresentation of reality. This is why I'm having trouble understanding arguments heavily based on reality when it comes to video games.

For some reason totally unknown to me sometimes I feel that some players feel that saying the game is not realistic is either an insult or pointing out a flaw of the game.

Realism is a moot point. Immersion counts above all else. If you're immersed strictly speaking you're not aware you're playing a video game. That's immersion. Like dreaming, you don't know you're dreaming, that's immersion. Video games do that, as do a lot of other things, like a book or a movie or whatever. If that breaks, gameplay above all else. Just, fun. Fun can come in different ways, for example horror, it's still fun at the end of the day, enjoyable. Same with realism. Realism can contribute to gameplay and immersion, but it can also not.

[toebar]

I say that it's a representation of reality rather than a misrepresentation. Take your pick like you said.. just words. I think either fits (or at least can be argued) but some things fit better in one or the other.

To me, a misrepresentation of reality might be the wolf behaviour--IF it was claimed to be realistic--which it is not.

Things like Condition % are a representation, as they're a way of representing in game a real world equivalent that can't be completely faithfully recreated in a game.

[AmericanSteel]

Its end, bonus or threat is irrelevant. I only ask what is reasonable in a survival situation.

If they seek a realistic game and ignore one of time simplest tools in existence, then it is not very realistic IMHO.

I don't think they do seek a realistic game. Like Boston123 said, pretty much everything is more or less a serious misrepresentation. It's a video game, they focus on the fun gameplay aspect. At least that's how it appears to me.

I don't think anyone expects 100% realism. However, discarding one of the most used tool outside of a club, knife or fire over a bow (which is OP IMHO) shows the devs are exploring options. Right now the gun and the bow are akin to FPS. You just have to hit the moving target. Where will they go next? All I can do it wait and see.

The wolf AI would HAVE to be changed.

Well yes but they already just changed it, after testing an entire range of mechanics too, including fighting with a knife on-screen, like you would expect, you know, in a video game. Will they change it again?

Dunno. I wonder if peeps said that after they changed the AI time before last. Game development is akin to evolution. Adaptation = Survival. Change is a good thing.

[octavian]

All I can do it wait and see.

True. These are interesting times. July was a major change, stamina, firewood and wolf struggle, and then there's the August map. If what I've heard is true the map has a completely different feeling than any other, in terms of setting, locations and such.

New mechanics could be implemented, bolt cutters are in the game since last year this time, weapons too, you always hear about the .357 on the rumor trail. A weapon is a major addition, I think, because you have to tune the rifle at the very least, if it still will be guaranteed on each map, the amount of ammo you can find and so on.

Then there's electricity, which, again, if what I've heard is true the new map has a major electrical, of sorts, location, NPCs, the promised changes to discourage or make hibernation impossible, and, always, wolves, along with general game balance.

Wolves, always, wolves. It's kind of interesting they are constantly an issue.

[octavian]

@toebar:Well, I always open my classes with "the only thing two people can have in common is a misunderstanding" so I think we're onto something :lol: That's the beauty of language, by definition it cannot be objective beyond your eyes, ears or fingers (Braille). Beyond that, it's anybody's guess