Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

non-removable containers discussion

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • non-removable containers discussion

    To spin off what Apophis and I brought up in the other thread:

    Is having containers that are non-destroyable or removable (without the code of course) good or bad for gameplay?

    It's really freaking annoying when you spend hours building a base only to have the bandits drive around on off-hours, dismantle one crate, get in, and destroy/steal everything you own. On the other end you can potentially block certain things off and completely restrict access to everyone. Thoughts?

    I didn't join a squad once and this guy named Nardini took me into the back room and beat me with a sock of oranges.


  • #2
    Re: non-removable containers discussion

    Is there anyway that certain items like crates cannot be removed with a toolbox, however they have a small % chance of being taken down by a satchel?

    Gates on the other hand maybe have a small % chance with a toolbox.

    I'm still of the opinion that there are ways to counter fortresses right now. Folks just aren't considering all options. So I'm all for making some of these items have small chances to be taken down with a toolbox, satchel, etc.... but if that's not an option then we have to counter with alternate methods.
    |TG-12th| asch
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: non-removable containers discussion

      I like secure. I don't have a ton of time to play, and rebuilding is a pain for sure. I love the bandits that have been setting traps and ambushes, sniping from afar, etc. They give nice spice to the game. The destructors during off hours, that isn't really banditry, that is more like griefing to me.

      As far as indestructibles walling off spawn points, the nature of some of the secure buildings we can use to build our bases around lends itself to covering a few spawns (I am pretty sure the 12th have not covered any spawns, just as a point of reference). I have no issue with that, even if it is like a fire station (some folks feel more secure with a roof). I think if the scale is reasonable, no harm no foul.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: non-removable containers discussion

        I want to hire AI mercenaries to protect my 85+12,5% safe base while i sleep.

        There should be a way to remove something but make it as much work as it was to build that specific object.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: non-removable containers discussion

          I kindof think 2% is reasonable for certain types of barriers, gates and light obstacles, maybe. I'm ok with someone either getting really lucky or spending a lot of time and effort trying. Getting a ton of toolboxes to a site and the time to sit there trying seems reasonable to me.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: non-removable containers discussion

            What about 10% ?

            Right we only need 6 tanks traps to build two containers ? So we'd need 10 toolboxes to ensure success at removal. Seems about right?

            or are my numbers off ? I kind of like the way Buf put it.

            |

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: non-removable containers discussion

              Personally we need to look at more than the simple numbers as Nardini and Apophis have mentioned.

              Do we really want to go back to anything like before where one person could simply zip round the known bases and destroy hours, days even weeks of work so they can feel like a badass. What sort of teamwork is that?

              Furthermore that dynamic leads down the path of short termism. Does DayZ Taviana TG have to be about the constant repetition of the early part of the curve. Work together, exhibit cooperation and teamwork, build something that can lead to a more permanent dynamic only to have one lone troll get on and easily destroy that potential. I have little to no interest in constantly replaying episode 2, season 1 of The Walking Dead when I could be playing Season 3 and having a fight with a group that has staked their claim, has some resource and is ready for battle.

              Banditry in the old set up is so easy its laughable. Plus the general method of bandit play seems very contrary 'reality' too, the kamikaze 'doesn't matter I died, still kicked over your tent' mentality is juvenile, unrealistic, requires no investment of time of teamwork, contributes nothing to a sense of community. I say make it damn hard for the bandits and destroyers, make them have to work, to think, to band together, exhibit some actual tactics and teamwork. Make them play in a TG manner instead of enabling them to be disproportionately successful in comparison to their investment. We have already seen banditry actually increase the teamwork in the TGA by eliciting a unified response when these so called 'bandits' show their face. The fact that some of these 'bandits' are unhappy that they can't just walk up in the dead of night with a couple of toolkits and destroy the fruits of actual teamwork, well that's hardly a suprise and frankly it smacks of whining, "hey, you made the game as hard for me as it is for you, no fair" lol.

              Whatever people want, I would strongly urge caution when increasing the vulnerability of bases. Nothing is stopping these bandits from working together and creating their own bases, consolidating their own forces to rise to the occasion, well nothing other than themselves obviously.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: non-removable containers discussion

                Originally posted by Apophis
                That's about 30 minutes worth of work to obtain.
                Just for the barrier, what about the stuff behind the barrier (or do you mean for the bandit)? Is that worth including in the equation? Either way, bandits or not, I think everyone deserves as reasonably secure base as they can construct. If I am on the hill waiting for Ferris to unlock his base, and tag him as soon as he opens his gate, and then I go in and steal all the depends he has stored in the skoda, I think that is fair game. For me, this is not reality, we just strive to maintain certain aspects of reality. We do this for fun. I would prefer an active healthy bandit community, whose focus is on banditry, not base destruction. Of course, that is my idea of fun, and it is not fair for me to impose that on others. (Shrugs)
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: non-removable containers discussion

                  @Apophis - I am backing off from 10%. 30 mins seems too quick.

                  @Wicks - Do you feel it should be harder to remove a container than build ? How do you feel about Buf's theory on equal times ?

                  |

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: non-removable containers discussion

                    One side note, GhostStalker came into camp the other night(The 18th's Camp) and heard flies near an out side wall of the area we created for the 189th to hold up until they can relocate at their timing. After investigating the inside and outside of the container wall, he noticed a tractor parked real close to the containers where they joined together in line on the outside of the compound. The sound of the flies were coming from inside the container. It seemed like the operator tried to use a glitch of exiting vehicles to maybe put him on the other side of the container so as to gain entrance. It did not work out well for him and we added a tractor to our inventory of used vehicles.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: non-removable containers discussion

                      [Tinfoil Hat Off]

                      For gameplay, irremovable structures are bad ideas. Even structures which can be removed but at a really low probability are bad too. Why? You'll see tomorrow.

                      For long term gameplay, easily destroyed/looted 'caches' are bad too because you can not defend them when not on.

                      The problem, the core problem, is the inability for Generic Dayz to work on a long term level with constant PvP. Basebuilding was introduced to add TvT depth, some 'end game' objectives/sandbox, and some security. Obviously as Basebuilding is tested and worked on for [email protected] we are seeing an over compensation that is inadvertently redefining the game mechanics.

                      Indestructible walls provide too much security and can be placed in such a way to deny the entirety of access to an entire map. Even if you change it to 98% chance of failure and 98% chance of loss of tool box the effect is the same. Actually anything relating to 'chance' is a bit silly, the game should be about planning and competition.

                      AI 'guards' aren't a bad idea in theory but they too would have to be balanced properly.

                      Territory to fight over would be better...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: non-removable containers discussion

                        Interesting Sarge and disappointing that people are still trying to glitch, hope it wasn't a regular.

                        @Warlab. I haven't had time to sit down and 'do the math' as regards hard numbers, which I appreciate isn't helpful. However I think we need to consider the gameplay ramifications carefully. The key concern should not be about a fair chance to remove something, at least in my opinion, but in how the degree of 'removeability' affects non-bandit's long term desire to play, how it affects the type of gameplay that is possible, ie short term goals vs long term. I know that's not very helpful but I am still struggling to come up with hard numbers.

                        At the end of the day someone who trashes bases isn't a bandit, there a vandal, a nuisance. A bandit is an entirely different kettle of fish and much more fun to play against.

                        @Ytman, I disagree with almost everything you say here, categorically. You have failed to provide any real reasoning as to why more permanency with bases is a bad idea. You have posited that the current status quo is an over compensation but provided no evidence as to why you believe that to be the case. You provide no argument as to why making it easy for one person to destroy the fruits of teamwork by utilising no teamwork is good for the game, good for the experience of the majority of TG players or even remotely in line with the general principles that TG aspires to.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: non-removable containers discussion

                          Banditry in the old set up is so easy its laughable. Plus the general method of bandit play seems very contrary 'reality' too, the kamikaze 'doesn't matter I died, still kicked over your tent' mentality is juvenile, unrealistic, requires no investment of time of teamwork, contributes nothing to a sense of community. I say make it damn hard for the bandits and destroyers, make them have to work, to think, to band together, exhibit some actual tactics and teamwork. Make them play in a TG manner instead of enabling them to be disproportionately successful in comparison to their investment. We have already seen banditry actually increase the teamwork in the TGA by eliciting a unified response when these so called 'bandits' show their face. The fact that some of these 'bandits' are unhappy that they can't just walk up in the dead of night with a couple of toolkits and destroy the fruits of actual teamwork, well that's hardly a suprise and frankly it smacks of whining, "hey, you made the game as hard for me as it is for you, no fair" lol.

                          Whatever people want, I would strongly urge caution when increasing the vulnerability of bases. Nothing is stopping these bandits from working together and creating their own bases, consolidating their own forces to rise to the occasion, well nothing other than themselves obviously.
                          I agree with you even if you think I'm one of those bandits. I'm not. Trust me I'm not.

                          I don't agree with blatant off hours destruction and do agree destroying tents/loot is pretty darn bad (tents should be modified to be indestructible). Even destroying vehicles is low (though midnight raids to attack a base and destroy asset XYZ should be considered valid). What is bad is blocking off Camp Martin with no counter. What is bad is allowing a construct to be completely insurmountable.

                          So say you are playing Walking Dead Season 2 Episode whatever-was-the-last-one. The Governor actually had a way to break into the prison and fight the defending group and theoretically if he had succeeded he would have owned that base. You say you want to play Season 3 but you can't if you think you are entitled to owning your base with no chance of losing it at all whatsoever.

                          Season 3, when it comes, will bring you back to the beach with nothing, not even a place to call home.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: non-removable containers discussion

                            I didn't say impossible to breach, I said hard to breach. It's disappointing that for all the role playing going on no one had the smarts to say, "Yeah, you know what, if people are carving up territory I am going to secure me a slice and start trading in items of value". That could have been fun, but after all that does sound like hard work, so perhaps I'll complain instead.

                            Season 3, when it comes, will bring you back to the beach with nothing, not even a place to call home.
                            Lol. I've sent so many 'bandts', tent kickers and midnight heroes to Sandy Bay I've lost count. In fact, so far, I've sent everyone of them I've encountered to the shore. Trust me, when Season 3 gets here, me and my mates are ready.


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: non-removable containers discussion

                              Ok, I tried to be serious in this thread but I gotta say: Season 3 = Taviana/TG War ;)

                              |

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X