Boston123

I want to know why the moron in-game doesn't lash things down better, to avoid making so much noise.

A "modern" crossbow of about 120lbs is basically the equal of a 45-lb bow, due to the difference in power-stroke length. The power-stroke is the length the string (and bent limbs of the bow) travels from "fully drawn" to "at rest", which is usually a little less than the length of the projectile. The longer the power-stroke, the more energy is transferred to the projectile, and (generally) the faster the projectile. Bows usually have a projectiles of around 30 inches. Crossbows are shorter, usually around 20 inches. Bows are "more effective" than crossbows despite being "weaker" because they are capable of transferring greater amounts of force into the projectile. http://www.drawloc.com/content/crossbow-vs-compound-bow

In that case: thrusting spear all the way, hands down. No questions asked

Clarification: they are complex in different fashions. With atlatls, both the dart and the throwing arm have to have high degrees of flexibility. Too little, and the lever is not effective With a bow, just the bowstave has to flex. Of course, having arrows spined to the bowstave is nice, but not truly necessary. I can fire a range of arrows from my bow, and they will all be relatively accurate. Long, short, flexible, stiff, not too much difference. The bow does most of the work. Plus, atlatls are only really effective on megafauna, and/or over open terrain. In close-in, forested terrain, and on smaller animals, the bow will be more effective. Less body movement. I would know. I have made, and used, both. I vastly prefer the bow. It is easier to carry, easier to make ammunition for, and easier to use. I was not impressed with atlatl darts made from phragmite shafts. I was very impressed with arrowshafts made from phragmite cane, to the point where it is my preferred material to date. My survival guide has a section on primitive weapons. It completely ignores the atlatl, and focuses on the bow. But, to each their own, I suppose.

Atlatls are as complicated, if not more, than bows, actually. Bows are simpler, and are more effective for both the terrain and the animals we are going to hunt. There are reasons, after all, why the atlatl fell out of favor around the end of the last Ice Age.

Boil your food at 212+ for 5+ minutes, and nothing will be pink inside. Boiling at a high temperature cooks meat all the way through. Not to mention that roasting your food over a fire is a great way to lose valuable fat. I had a kid in my survival class roast a rabbit haunch black over a hot fire. He ate in and got food poisoning. The outside cooked, but the interior never got to proper temperature. I boiled the other haunch of rabbit for about 10 minutes at a rolling boil, along with some bones, the liver, blueberries and cattail roots. The meat was grey through and through. Perfectly safe to eat. Rather tasty, actually. Made a nice soup. This mechanic, to me, seems more of a desire to avoid actually fixing the attacking wolves and bears as opposed to any actual real-life reference, even if only slightly. Even after the update, I still have more (much more) wolf meat than rabbit or deer. Wolves remain easier to hunt.

See, this is why I boil all of my "wild food". Bring water to a rolling boil, then drop in whatever you need cooked. Let it sit for a couple of minutes. Boom, 99% of parasites killed off, as well as making a tasty soup. I have always maintained that we cook food all the "wrong ways" in TLD. The above is one of them.

"In real life" hatchets are almost useless for anything resembling actual work. Full-sized axes are better at felling/chopping/delimbing, saws are better at cutting trees into manageable pieces, and mauls are better for splitting firewood. In my Scout troop, I don't think the kids have used a hatchet "seriously", once. They get all excited and bring one on a campout, then when they try to actually use the thing, they realize that other tools are "more effective", and the hatchet gets put away. I don't carry a hatchet on me when I am in the woods. I do, however, carry a 3/4 axe and a folding bowsaw. They never leave my pack. In-game, the hatchets are "too effective" at what they do.

True, variety is not a bad thing. That's the main reason I suggested the .22LR. It's a very common gun with very common ammunition that might (barely) bring down a wolf if you hit it perfectly but it's really a rabbit/grouse gun. If I had to choose between a .22 and a .303 or a 12 gauge and a .303 it would definitely increase game variety and make ammunition drops a little more interesting. A light weight firearm that's no good verus deer/bears versus the heavy, powerful rifle... Still, I am adamantly opposed to handguns of any type. Yes, some trappers do carry them for protection but you will not find the average Canadian in possession of a hand cannon. Ammunition would be non-existent. Shotguns are far more likely since they are, like the .22LR, a common hunting gun. I also would disagree with the birdshot and slugs variable ammunition option. Not because it's unrealistic - quite the opposite really - but just to prevent people from min/maxing. If I can use a shotgun to kill everything just by swapping ammo than I'm no longer faced with choices and consequences am I? .38 Special, a "hand cannon"? :lol: That is funny. Oh, and our survivor ISN'T the "average Canadian". They are bush pilots, the very people who would be the most likely to carry a revolver for self-defense. AS for ammunition availability: you get 12, 6 in the cylinder and 6 on the holster. It would be meant for early-game self-defense, not as a life-long tool like the rifle or bow. NOTE: In the early Pre-Alpha footage, the character was equipped with a .38 Special revolver. You have to actually HAVE the ammunition before you can swap it out, correct? And if there is a greater variance of ammunition spawning, then the chances of finding the ammunition you want becomes less, not greater. Having a variance of ammunition is the very definition of choices and consequences. Couple that with ammunition actually being rare and ...... Take all the current "ammo spawns" and split them among 4 different ammo types: .303 rifle, 12G buck, 12G bird, and 12G slug. You aren't going to have people sitting on top of 50+ rounds of rifle ammo any more, like they do currently. That means you can't just miss shots and "eat the loss", like they do currently.

IMO, snares need to be changed, drastically. They are far too successful to be even remotely realistic. A major point about snares in "real life survival" is that you generally need A LOT of them in order to have even a slight chance of catching anything. Myself, I have set out 20+ snares, on three different rabbit runs (that were busy, as I saw both live rabbits and evidence of travel), 7 snares to a run. After 3 days of trapping, checking the snares each day, guess how many rabbits I had? Two. Many bushpilots in Alaska carry .38 Special revolvers for defense from wolves or other "small" predators. A lightweight revolver that can be tucked under a bushplane seat isn't exactly gamebreaking. Asides, it would be really difficult to hunt with a .38 Special, meaning the only real use for it is for defense against charging wolves. Same thing for a 12G double-barrel shotgun. Birdshot for small game, buckshot for hunting, slugs for defense against bears. Having 2 shots isn't exactly gamebreaking. Besides, I think it could actually be interesting to see what effect having different types of firearms with appropriate ammunition has on the playerbase. Imagine: you just started a new game, so you have a .38 Special revolver with 12 rounds. All you find are Rifle rounds. Or, you have a shotgun chambered with birdshot. You can't really hunt anything with it, so is it worth carrying the weight? Or, you have a rifle with 3 rounds in the magazine. All you find is 12G buckshot. I, for one, find it face-palmingly annoying that ALL the ammunition we find magically fits into every rifle, which is itself always the same. Having some variety would 1) make the player actually make CHOICES when it comes to equipment, and 2) be more true-to-life. Survival is all about choice, not shoehorning into the "best" option. Of course, I am still confused as to why we can't make spears yet :roll:

Absolutely agree on that! The thrill isn't yet given ingame. There should be ONE handgun and ONE shotgun. All with malfunction/jamming mechanics, of course. I like the idea of BlackGlennJr on the 1st page very much: A classic six-shooter and a two-barrel-shotgun would fit in perfectly. The Shotgun Only short range (up to 30 yards), only 2 shots. Emergency defense weapon, limited hunting capability. The Revolver Short to medium range (up to 50 yards), can fire 6 shots in close succession. Versatile weapon. The good, old Enfield-Rifle Short to long range (up to 150 yards), 10 rounds bolt-action, thus slow rate of fire. Emergency defense weapon, good hunting capability This would be more than enough firearms, for a survival game. But also one, or two self crafted weapons like (throwing-)spear and boomerang would have their raison d'être. But most import is: All of the weapons (as for the ammo, of course) have to be very, very rare; respectively hard and time consuming to craft. It should'nt be unusal to get no hands on a firearm during 1 or even 2 weeks of exploring. It must be a thrill to find a firearm. You have to enjoy every finding of an appropriate shot of ammo. You have to be euphoric, when the magazine of your gun is fully loaded, for one single time. You have to think hard about: Is it really worth and necessary to shoot now? I has to be an event, when you squeeze the trigger, - followed by a full, loud bang, accentuated by a long reverberation. A double-barrel shotgun and a revolver are essentially never going to jam. Firearms jam when the casing/shell fails to extract from the firearm. Firearms where the casing/shell are removed by the user cannot jam. That is one of the many reasons they are commonly used in the backcountry. That, and they tend to be rather powerful. 12G buckshot will kill wolves with ease, and will definitely hurt Black Bears (although I would want to use slugs for a more immediate kill). .38 Special, which is probably the most common revolver cartridge in the world, is capable of taking down wolves. I know in Alaska, bush-pilots are required by law to have "survival kits" in their planes, 24/7. Many of them include firearms, both for hunting and for self-defense. My uncle lives in Alaska, and he knows a bush-pilot that keeps a double-barreled shotgun tucked under the seat. Birdshot for small game, buckshot for large game, and slugs for bears and other things that go bump in the night.