Dear devs / players,
So I'm doing my first post to make a suggestion for a change that could be nice for the game experience of everyone.
1) What are unlootable lootrooms?
Rooms with code locks on boxes, in which you can destroy boxes but have to destroy a matel wall or window to access the loot.
2) Why is this an inconvenient? (in my opinion)
If a raider can reach your lootroom, most of the time he will be able to destroy your boxes, but maybe not to loot it with those designs. In this situation if the raider can't loot he will be frutrated and will at least destroy the boxes so the player looses his loot anyway. So it left a player with an empty base (will probably stop playing for this wipe) and a frustrated raider who can't have benefit from his raid.
Unlootable lootrooms are allowed, but it's kinda like despawning loot during an online raid. It's not fair-play. If the raider succefully raided your design and will anyway destroy your boxes, he could at least profit from your loot.
3) Which solutions / changes?
FIrst change: remove the ability to place code locks on boxes could be enough for loot rooms with low walls. We hardly see it in trap bases anyway and it make raiders looses only a bit of time, won't be such a great loss if you ask me. Could still have it on others items like locker, fridge...
Second change: allowing the placement of window wall ONLY if one side of the window wall is on the outside (for example with the inside of the base on one side, and on the other side either a floor at the bottom of the window or at the top, but not both):
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/314391/54f606a8-0416-4661-a35c-fc07c59d627b/rust.png
That would still allow creative design but preventing their use in loot rooms deep inside the base. It's just a quick thought and I'm sure other ideas could work.
So what do you think, are you as well tired of those unlootable loot rooms design and would like to see it removed? Do you like those suggestions or have other of your own?
Thanks for reading and sorry for my english,
Tritize
What's to say the boxes had anything in them to begin with? Unless this is considered an exploit it seems like a viable defensive maneuver in that time and resources are spent on what was potentially nothing at all.
I don't know what you meant with your first sentence?
If you don't know what it is you can search "rust unlootable loot rooms" on youtube, like :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF3hLj0fsuE&t=195s
Basically I've ran into fews in my raids (the low wall ones), and at the end of each I had zero profit and the people I've raided had lost everything and quit the server (because I destroy the boxes but can't loot it, but he looses it anyway).
...................
I mean quite literally "what if the boxes were empty to begin with?".
As in what if it was a setup? A decoy? What if it was done for the sole purpose of stalling a potential raider and the inaccessible boxes were empty all along?
I really don't know why you would think boxes are empty and I'm quite sure you don't understand what it was. The purpose is that even if you raid you cannot access the boxes so you can't check what's inside.
I'm pretty sure you do not understand what it is so don't feel obligated to give an opinion about something you don't understand / don't have experienced. It's a very unpopular thing and it's more and more a common thing that frustrate players.
..........so, it's out of the relm of possibility that someone set up up such a scenario for no purpose other than frustration? In your eyes a box with a lock always has something and there is no way that someone would set up locked empty boxes just so a potential raider stalls trying to get a box open, then debating if they should break the possibly empty boxes? I am not sure if you are aware but in the past a popular tactic was a large, sprawling structure with locked doors everywhere, yet nothing of value inside. The purpose was that a potential raider would either give up in frustration or expend a large amount of tools and explosives for what turned out to be no pay off.
And please, don't mistake my questions for hostility.
The name given to this tactic of storage is completely misleading. These rooms or vaults are NOT unlootable.
They are simply EXPENSIVE.
The raider has to make the choice of wether to spend those extra resources or not bother at all. What may have looked like an easy two door raid may become quite expensive when they breech the loot room only to find they have to take down a windowed wall to gain full access.
It is not so unlike encountering layered ceilings, as a raider you thought it would cost X but it suddenly costs Y.
It's all about cost. I've had raiders simply destroy my boxes out of spite as they couldn't afford to take down an extra wall... So be it... But I denied them my hard earned loot and in my mind that was completely worth it. I lost the loot but they didn't gain, they lost their time and resources for that raid.
This tactic is not an exploit, it is a simple and effective way to increase the cost to the raiders.
You have to understand, not every raid is profitable!
And please, don't mistake my questions for hostility.
Kinda hard for me when you spam dumb emote and goes like "...." when I have trouble to understand english which is not my native language.
It's not just about having fake loot rooms or empty locked boxes to mislead the raider, with those "unlootable" design the raider either access your loot, or you both loose it. It's not the same thing.
And Biggaboon I never said it was an exploit, and it is nothing like layered ceiling. Layered ceiling are about adding an extra layer of protection to your base. Those "unlootable" designs are about wasting the loot when you get raided. It's like despawning loot when raided, but offline. Like a 2 c4 raid either turn to be a 6 c4 raid if the loot room is "unlootable", or you waste 2 c4 on nothing and you destroy the boxes anyway.
I've done and will do a lot of non profitable raids and it's really not a problem, it's what makes it challenging. Same as having strong loot rooms through smart designs, that would be nice. But here just put a window wall instead of a door and 3 out of 4 times both the raider and you loose everything? I really don't think that's what the game is all about, did you?
That was a bad on my part. Sorry.
But I'm really surprised though, as I was seeing a lot of people complaining against those design in rust servers. I only ran into it twice but every wipe I played latelly people in the chat were all agree to say it was not funny / boring, ... (because like it's frustrated and it's not even smart design of bases).
Maybe it was just people in the servers I was and the majority of players actually enjoy seeing all bases adopting those designs I don't know.
Lastly I even saw bases with all doors except front door replaced by window walls with armored glasses. So you pick it up when you play and replace it when you get raided / go offline.
So each door of your base is actually a metal window wall with armored glasses, so 4 c4 for each. Didn't know rust was meant to be played that way and I just wanted to say that some people prefered when bases had actual doors.
I build dummy loot rooms all the time and dummy bases for raiders to waste their resources on.
Its supposed to be played the way you want to play it, If your base is hard to raid you are doing the right thing,
If players are complaining your base is hard to raid you are doing the right thing,
The game is about survival and keeping your loot safe, What do you think the game is about ?.
Why make it easy for raiders ?, The game is balanced more towards raiders as it is, Getting rid of "twig raiding" would
be even better.
How can I explain my feelings...
When Rust came out, building was super fun, sure there were exploits that were a bit too much but it was FUN.
I understand your pain and frustration about the loot rooms, I do not however, agree. If I see I can't blow it, I don't, literally just wasting explosives for another raid for someone to quit the server until next wipe. If I know I can blow it, or have the TC, I loot it with the box thing.
But my point is, there are already more than enough restrictions in building, it's not about being fair, it's about protecting your loot the best you can with your knowledge and knowing weaknesses etc... You shouldn't just expect a loot room with 4 large chests and possibly traps, let imagination take a role here and make something new...
At this point I don't even know what to say because to me it just sounds ridiculous wanting to get rid of certain loot rooms because they're hard too loot. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! Exploits? Ok, fine, they're not supposed to be here anyways, but this is freedom of building, which 75% of it or more was already scraped off.
This is nothing C4 can't handle. Period
I have found that anything that makes the base more defendable is suddenly called an "exploit".
That is why High external walls have been reduced in health, placing of "normal" walls and foundations close to High External Walls is nealy impossible as there has to be a gap, Walls start to disentergrate when the buildings reach a
certain height and stability disappears, placing foundations and HEW on unevern ground is a pain in the butt and the
removal of half size blocks because raiders were complaining bases were to hard to raid, poor, poor raiders,
Very true, I would like to know what happened to Garry's "You can build what you want whever you want it"
There is a way to loot the little bags that it drops, there is an exploit to the exploit.
How are those loot rooms exploit? You could have done those loot rooms a year ago, no one just did them back then.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
