Ghurcb

...then no one could max out any skill. My last Stalker run lasted for ~150 days. I didn't die, just got bored. I can't imagine lasting for 750 days on one save. Yeah, I think level 5 cooking should only lower your poisoning chance by 50%. Completely removing it seems a little terribly OP. I talked more about it here Maybe I should make another post here, roasting every skill except for sewing. One day... No, actually, my intention was the complete opposite of this. The time it takes to break anything is unrealistically long. In real life I couldn't spend more then 15 minutes trying to break a chair, as that would be one INTENSE workout. And the fact that my survivor can spend an HOUR (sometimes more) doing this, leads me to believe he's slacking off for 90% of that time. I would prefer it if Harvesting took more calories and energy, but less time.

Honestly, I considered that it would be better to only give half a point, or even 0.1 of a point for every harvested object, as breaking 100 of anything isn't that hard (especially if this anything can be quickly destroyed, like a crate or a hat), but that would go against how other secondary skills work. Maybe the progression could be even tied to time spent harvesting? I'm sure, with some tweaking, you would spend a reasonable part of your game with noodle-arms, and reaching 100% harvesting skill would feel like something you worked for. And the game would definitely become harder when it comes to harvesting items in your inventory. At the end of the day, I don't think The Long Dark is a "balanced" game, and saying "this will make TLD easier/harder", is not a valid criticism of an idea. Maybe harvesting furniture SHOULD be made easier?

BTW, harvesting sticks shouldn't upgrade the skill. This would be too easy.

Quite often it takes an unreasonably long amount of time to break something in The Long Dark. Seriously, can you imagine spending an hour to break a chair? With a hatchet! Honestly, I would concede defeat after half an hour, as this piece of furniture is clearly indestructible. And all of this would make sence if we assumed that our survivor is just an average nerd with weak noodle-arms. But the same wouldn't be the case after 100 days of survival, when you've defeated a few dozen wolves in hand-to-paw combat. But how do we show this progression? The same way all character progression is shown in The Long Dark. Through skills! Harvesting would be a new, secondary skill, like cleaning, sharpening, and repair. When you start out, you have 0 points in this skill, and your first harvesting action will take you 50% more time to complete. But with each harvested item, you will gain one point, and harvesting the next one will take 1% less time. This way, upon fully levelling up this skill, you would go from 150% of time to 50%, at the end being twice as efficient as you are now. But this skill is not only limited to destroying the furniture. After all, you can also harvest things in your inventory. Which reminds me... Why can I use tools when cutting curtains and sawing a metal locker, but not when I need to turn my socks into rags? And how is it even possible to break a prybar with your bare hands? In my opinion, it should be possible to use the knife when harvesting clothes, while destroying some other pieces of your equipment shouldn't be allowed without proper tools. For example, harvesting a rifle would require a set of repair tools, breaking a prybar would require a hacksaw, and if you want to destroy a hatchet, you'd need to find another hatchet to do the job (hacksaw will do too). Of course, since a hunting knife is usually found early on (unless you're playing on interloper), harvesting your clothes bare-handed will take more time then usual. With this new skill, while starting out weaker, after some practice, you will learn to instill fear into every inanimate object that stands in your way. What do you think about this suggestion? Would you like to see it added into the game? Let me know!

Well, bleeding already increases your scent. And stitching the laceration should take a lot of time, so the player will be discouraged from treating it immediately.

Okay, some of you have already caught me on a lie. There is already an affliction in The Long Dark called "laceration", but together with the "bruise" they don't work in the same way other afflictions do. So, all the other afflictions are, basically, debuffs that will harm you in some way until they are treated. Laceration and bruise, on the other hand, are... Just damage. That's it. You get into a wolf struggle, recieve the "laceration", your health goes down. But this can be greatly improved upon by... Remaking this affliction, turning it into something completely different. I present to you LACERATION 2.0! Now, when you get attacked by a wolf, or mauled by a bear, you can get an open wound, that you won't get rid of with just a bandage. Laceration appears alongside with bleeding and risk of infection, and itself does no harm to you. But once every hour it will affect you with bleeding and risk of infection. That means, until you stitch it, you will keep on bleeding, devastating your supplies of bandages and antiseptic. In order to stitch the wound you would need to have a sewing kit and 30 min of spare time. You can also use a fishing tackle, but then the process will take 45 min. This might seem like too long, but in my opinion, it's just enough for this affliction not to have an immediate fix. After all, when you were attacked by a wolf, it would be a good idea to find a safe place to treat your wounds, instead of doing it out in the open. What do you think about this suggestion? Would you change or add something? Let me know!

Yeah, that would work, but it would probably confuse players a little. If there's some game mechanic, it's better for it to be consistent, so that players don't ask "why do I have to survey 80% of Mystery Lake, but only 20% of Desolation Point?". What I meant is, if you surveyed all the important locations, the game can just as well fill in everything in-between them. Look at the Pleasant Valley, for example. It's mostly empty spaces, so surveying the surroundings of the Molly's farm or that big red barn is a complete waste of time. Sure, you can do it so that the map looks more complete, but that's exactly what I think should be done automatically. Really? I tried surveying vistas before finding a polaroid, but it never worked. Ehh, maybe I'm doing it wrong.

That sounds a little too arbitrary. How would players know that they have to map at least 75% of Hushed River Valley for the game to complete the rest? Once you've mapped all the locations and vistas in a region, there's not much utility in doing the same to every square meter of land. I don't think it's easy to speedrun surveying every named location, find the polaroids and survey all the vistas afterwards. And if you can do all that in a few in-game days, that should be rewarded, not punished.

Look at this piece of art, this beautifully drawn map of Timberwolf Mountain. Isn't it great? And here's my best attempt at surveying it... Those black spots are (mostly) parts of the map that couldn't be surveyed, because they are too high up. And there's no way to map the mountain range that surrounds the region. And this isn't the worst example. Here's Desolation Point. Did you know that when you're in Blackrock, you can't map the Blackrock mountain? It's the most important landmark of the region, and you cannot put it on your map. What's the solution? I think, when you've surveyed every location and every vista in a region, its whole map should be uncovered. "You've completed this region, here's the reward" What do you think? Would you want to be able to uncover the whole map of every region?

@conanjaguarI don't think it's a good idea. For the same reason I wouldn't want albino animals added. Killing albino animals and cubs for fur... That's poaching. And I don't think it's the kind of behavior the game should encourage. These ideas are great But I wouldn't want them gated behind killing defenseless moose calves.

If I understand it correctly, this separation will only happen on the level of code. It would still be the same .exe file. Basically, nothing changes for us, players, but Hinterland can test new features faster this way.

Here are some animals I'd love to se added 1) Mountain lion. I think that there should be one heavily forested region, where cougars spawn. With very few shelters, the player would feel exposed most of the time, when they're outside. And who knows, what lurks behind those trees? When it gets close to you, a suspenseful music starts playing. Mountain lion should be the silent hunter. Hiding, stalking you, making no sound, keeping its distance. I don't know what the reward for killing one should be. Perhaps, you could craft a hat from its hide? The thing is, you shouldn't be hunting them for fur and meat. They should be hunting you. Maybe, the region has a unique and useful item hidden somewhere deep in the forest (much like the ash canyon does). And those beasts, are the wardens. Oh, also, no wolves should spawn in that region. That's cougars' terf. And it should have sort of a horror feeling to it. 2) Birds. They don't even have to serve any function. Simply by existing they would improve the feeling of wilderness. Right now you can hear many different birds, but you can never see them. Having them flying from one treetop to another would make the world feel so much more alive. 3) Female deer/moose. It's kinda weird that all the deer and moose we see have antlers. In case of deer, all Hinterland would have to do is to remove the antlers. And when a deer is spawned there's a 50% chance that it has no antlers. The difference is purely cosmetic. I don't know how it would work with moose, though. Female moose are not as aggressive as males during mating season, but making them neutral until provoked wouldn't be good for game's balance. To fix this problem, here's the next suggestion... 4) Bear cubs and moose calves. Female moose will always spawn near a calve. That would be a great excuse for them to trample you at first sight. If you kill the mom, its baby would act confused and scared, making you feel like a complete asshole. Some bears should spawn with one or two cubs. Bear cubs would act like scouting drones. You see, bears usually travel at set paths that you can easily learn. But the cubs can stray from them. If you run into a bear cub, well... You're dead. If you get too close to a bear cub, its mom will immediately spot your position and start running towards you. Not walk slowly, as bears in TLD usually do, but RUN. How does it work? Idk, maternal instincts or something?.. Doesn't matter. What matters is, if you see a bear cub, you should stay away. Neither baby versions should give you pelts (because they are too small), but you can still harvest meat and guts... If you are a heartless monster that is.

Yeah... The HUD is terribly non-configurable. Personally, I'd like to have no HUD at all, unless I press Tab. But if you turn the HUD off, Tab does basically nothing. The Long Dark would greatly benefit from more display options.

I think you should be able to burn brands in a campfire (but not start it with one) and turn them into charcoal. Those would be reasonable ways to dispose of them.

I think it's an exploit that should be removed, not pushed further. Seriously, if Hinterland wanted to add a compass, they would do it properly. The dropped items should align with the direction you're looking, not the north of the map. This would make placing items easier, and you would have to actually find your way, when you're lost.

Actually, torches are VERY useful. For one, a torch is like a multi-use flare. Is a wolf bothering you? You can light the torch, throw it at the aforementioned wolf, and then extinguish it. But if you use a flare, it will keep burning until it's empty, even though often a few seconds is more then enough. Not only that, but torches outperform lanterns in both fuel and weight efficiency. Assuming that you actually crafted the torch using 0.1L of oil, it will burn for 1.5 hours. A lantern burns 0.25L of oil per hour. Torch provides a 2.7 times more efficient use of oil. A full lantern weighs 1.8kg. It's a much as 6 torches weigh, and together, they can burn for 9 hours. I'm telling you, torches are OP. The only downside is that they don't burn in the wind, which is rarely an issue.

Torches are great! Too great, in fact. It seems unfair, that you can make a torch by throwing a stick into a campfire (and then take the stick back). It also makes the crafting recipe pretty much useless. And it makes no sence that you can pull a literal torch that you can relight with a single match out of a campfire, instead of just a piece of burning wood. Torches are OP, brands would make more sence in terms of realism, and serve as a cheaper version that isn't as good.

Of all the changes that were made to the game, the removal of brands makes the least sence to me. I'm a relatively new player. I started playing around the time of Steadfast Ranger update, so I never really experienced using firebrands outside of a few short Time Capsule sessions. That also means I'm not nostalgic about them. Still, I think the brands should be reintroduced to the long dark. For those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here's a screenshot. Back in the days, you could pull those out of campfires. Brands were, basically, torches but worse. "Why would we need torches but worse?" One word. Balancing. Or maybe you could call it otherwise. Anyway. Do you know that it is possible to craft a torch using 3 sticks, cloth, and 0.1L of oil? I don't. Because there's no need to craft torches. You can take them straight out of a campfire! Sure, the condition can't get above 50%, but even this way it is crazy OP. A single torch gives +3°C, but to make it you only need to throw one stick into a campfire. That means, you can throw a bunch of sticks into a fire, extract them as torches, pile them up in the same place, and this pile would give you way more heat, way more quickly. And then you can turn each one of them back into a stick. What sort of magic is this?! But I don't really care about this little exploit. What I care about is the fact that players never craft torches. Not to mention, that pulling a torch out of a campfire, instead of a burning piece of wood, is not particularly realistic. If instead of torches you got the firebrands, all these problems would be fixed. I don't know the specific details of how much heat firebrand gave or how long they burnt. But I think it should be +1°C for 30 minutes (~2 irl minutes). That sounds perfectly fair. You shouldn't be able to throw it, just brandish. The brand would weigh 0.15 kg and once it's burned, you can turn it into a piece of charcoal. Also, if you drop it on the ground, it is immediately extinguished. And you can't re-light it. I think, that's a great idea. What's your opinion?

1) Different weapons work differently. Heavy hammer is high risk / high reward, as it can scare a wolf away immediately, but won't protect you well if it doesn't happen, knife deals the most damage, hatchet provides the best defence, and revolver can kill a wolf on the spot. I think it's great that you can pick the one, that fits the situation better. 2) It's easier to measure a circle than it is a bar. 1/2 of a circle, 3/4, 2/3, 1/8, they are easy to picture and easy to identify. Not only that, but circles take up less space than bars of the same length. The needs were displayed as bars in earlier versions of the game, but they couldn't be shown at all time, as it would take too much space on the screen. Later they were replaced with icons that would deplete top to bottom, but that was hard to read accurately. Circles are the perfect final step of this evolution. At least, that's my opinion.

... What?

Ehh... I don't think that this kind of realism is a good thing. I mean, the world of The Long Dark is already in some sort of alternate history present/near-future, so the current canadian gun laws wouldn't necessarily apply. Also, players would be VERY mad if Hinterland removed the revolver.

Hm... My comment got deleted. Is it because I replied to the person whose comment also got deleted (for a good reason), or did I too say something wrong? @Admin

On the topic of unique abilities. Maybe, once you reach a certain firestarting level, your campfires become more wind-resistant? Not fully, of course. It shouldn't be possible to start a fire amidst a blizzard. Here's how perfect firestarting levelling would look, in my opinion. Level 1 - No base firestarting chance. Tinder can add +15% to +45%, depending on which one you're using. Level 2 - Firestarting bonus +10%. Level 3 - Tinder becomes optional. Firestarting bonus is now +15%. Level 4 - More wind-resistant campfires. Firestarting bonus +20%. Level 5 - Coal can be used when starting a fire. Recipe for bow drill unlocked (crafted with guts and maple saplings, can be used ~15 times, as (in)effective as cardboard matches). Firestarting bonus +25% With this change, your firestarting chance won't rise as high, as it does now. But it would only benefit the gameplay, as items like tinder, books and accelerant won't become obsolete once you level up high enough. And in my opinion, getting new skills is WAY more interesting then simply seeing numbers go up. What do you think? Would it be better, than the levelling The Long Dark has now?

"I'll take it!" No, you won't. Why would you even need that piece of scrap metal? I'm not taking it! Who do you think you are to tell me how to play?! "I need to find water/food". Okay... Have you looked in your backpack? And the most annoying one... "I need some first ai- OUCH! Damn, it hu- AUGHHHG. I can't t- ARRRRRRRRRRRRGH" EDIT: Almost forgot... "Hope, nobody needs this anymore" Me, looking at the corpse I took this thing from: Yeah... About that...

Okay, I said that this suggestion is morbid, but today I went to visit Bleak Inlet for the first time, and you know what? Turns out, that idea would fit the tone of the long dark quite nicely. Perfectly, I'd even say... What is that?!!!!!