Does anyone else find the KEYS ruin gameplay? [EXPERIMENTAL] - Rust

After crafting two keys for a door, I hid one of them outside near by my base. I locked the front door and went out with the second key on me. I got killed. I spawned at my sleeping bag inside the base and was unable to craft any more keys. I was trapped inside, making my base unusable. (I could keep suiciding until I spawned near the outside of my base, picked up the hidden key and got inside, but personally I dont find that fun) At least make it so whoever puts a LOCK on a door can always craft keys for it (Without having an already made key on their body.) The key and lock system how it is now is just annoying. Garry should play the game as a gamer, and maybe he would feel the same way.

Your an idiot! Why not just break down the door with your rock! No need to suicide [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Rude, great grammar..." - postal))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=halfhand2012;45906518]Your an idiot! Why not just break down the door with your rock! No need to suicide[/QUOTE] Ooohhhhhhh you're a fucking genius no one could've thought of that! Your mom is an idiot. That is not the point, what if it was a metal door instead? Could you also brake down a metal door with a fucking rock smartass? You will spend %90 of your playtime in a house with a metal door anyway, assume you were stuck in a house in that case what would you do? [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Rude. "Your mom is an idiot" REALLY??" - postal))[/highlight]

Put a god damn key to the door INSIDE your house? Problem solved...

No, keys do not ruin gameplay.

[QUOTE=Chekirge;45906929]Ooohhhhhhh you're a fucking genius no one could've thought of that! Your mom is an idiot. That is not the point, what if it was a metal door instead? Could you also brake down a metal door with a fucking rock smartass? You will spend %90 of your playtime in a house with a metal door anyway, assume you were stuck in a house in that case what would you do?[/QUOTE] I had a long response written to this but then i remembered that you cant argue with an idiot so i deleted it.

I'm not a big fan of they key system either.

It will get sorted out eventually. Right now theres no pint in using or making them since, as the OP pointed out i directly, we dont have metal walls or doors so a rock is a great skeleton key

How about making it possible to lock/unlock doors from the inside without a key.. like in real life?

I don't like the key system as it is either. But I do agree with JackYack13. That is a great idea!!!

I like the key idea.

Well i do feel that you should have at least just 'one' which you use for all the doors. Not to have 20 in your inventory all the time.

[QUOTE=sehvi;45910733]Well i do feel that you should have at least just 'one' which you use for all the doors. Not to have 20 in your inventory all the time.[/QUOTE] And then if you die, the guy who loots your corpse can open [B]all your things[/B]. Yes, please, sehvi, stick with this plan. btw what server do you play on, what times do you usually play in, and do you tend to turn your back on nakeds who've promised that they have nothing but a rock? :v: [sp]I hope it's clear that this is a joke, not an excuse to start linking server IPs.[/sp]

Keys will most likely be an early game tech, based on the way they made it sound.

Lol @ postal banning someone for saying 'your an idiot'. I have never hated anybody more on an internet forum in all my life. I dislike the key thing as well to be honest. Nobody seems to like these small features that are just annoying to gameplay. Just look at backpacks (in the old Rust) - I haven't seen a single server use the lockpick feature since it was added.

Keys seem dumb. Its a game, not real life.

Keys are a good and realistic feature. Legacy got it all wrong with its code system. If you dont want people breaking into your house, simply lock your door and stay at home with your pipe shot gun.

i expect that metal doors/walls etc will be breakable too, just take a long time. as for locks, they are rudimentary so far and need some work to get rid of the kinks, but i like them. if you get locked in/out of a house, break it down. i will say this, i would like to see a "punch" option for when you have your rock stolen. it doesnt make sense to be helpless without a rock:)

Honestly I like the concept in theory, but i think in the longrun its a poor decision on garrys part. My biggest problem with it is that you need multiple keys for all of your doors and if and when you die your locked out of your own home. Obviously right now you an just knock down a wall and problem solved, but in the future this is going to make c4 obsolete. Huge mistake, just like in legacy when they had those stupid lockpicks to unlock dropped bags after 5 minutes. It will go away. Im sure of it.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;45910978]And then if you die, the guy who loots your corpse can open [B]all your things[/B]. Yes, please, sehvi, stick with this plan. btw what server do you play on, what times do you usually play in, and do you tend to turn your back on nakeds who've promised that they have nothing but a rock? :v: [/QUOTE] Thanks elix for pointing out that the other possibility i've pointed out regarding having keys in game sucks as well. Let's just get rid of 'em in general shall we? :)) The system with a lock where you insert a code worked fine. Wouldn't mind having to craft the lock as well, but the keys just blow. [editline]7th September 2014[/editline] Also if we would hold on to the system with having to use 20 keys for 20 doors, then every key has to be stored in between the next following set of doors right? Which means that if someone would snag the one key i have on my is still being able to get everywhere in my base. Or i would have to hide 20 keys around my house somewhere. In my opinion that would be a bit of a pain in the ass. Or am i missing something now? Like others have mentioned as well: it's a pretty cool concept. Personally i just don't like the way it's working out at the moment, because it feels it's playing too big of a role. So i'm hoping they will change it back to having doors with locks the same way as in Legacy. Or hopefully a server option will be implemented where the host of the server can either of these systems up to their own liking.

There are other alternative solutions other than a billion keys in your pocket or scrapping the key system. garry doesn't like the code entry on Legacy, but he has said that more sophisticated locks will come in time. Keys are the baseline tier of security. Keycode locks and such will be higher-tier door security. One thing at a time. I suggested there be a keyring item you merge keys into that act as skeleton keys for any key that's been added to it, BUT you can have multiple keyrings, so it doesn't have to be [B]every[/B] key of yours going into the object. You guys need to be patient. This isn't the final expression of keys and locks, it's a work in progress.

I already posted elsewhere my solution for the key system here: [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1419554[/url] [QUOTE] You have two rooms, an internal one and an external one. to enter the internal room you need to walk through the external one. There is a door to enter the house and an internal door between the rooms. The treasure and the sleeping bag are placed inside the internal room, a temporary storage box is placed in the external room. The keys for the internal door are kept inside the internal room and they never exit it. When you respawn, you unlock the door, open it, lock it again and drop the key. (the internal door is still open but locked). Then you move the stuff from the external room to the treasure room, after that you close the internal door from outside. Now there is no way to enter the treasure room without respawning inside it. You can then go outside for normal activities, looted items will be placed in the temporary storage box. if you die, the external room is compromised but the enemies won't be able to reach the treasure room. There are still problems with this approach, an enemy could camp you outside your base, kill you and wait for you in the external room. The solution is to have three levels of doors on both sides of the house. that way you can still exit and enter the house safely while one door is compromised. [/QUOTE]

The idea of a keyring is a good one for sure. But personally i think it's still anoying, having to have different keyrings for different parts or levels of your home. It also goes back to the point that you said that losing 'the one key that opens up all your doors' is a really shitty thing. However if you'd divide your house up in 2/3 key rings you'd still have the same effect going on if you lose one keyring (and probably have the other keyrings stashed in the house in boxes somewhere). It would create a new type of gameplay for sure, having to quickly change locks after you have lost your 'first entry key ring'. But in the end i'd rather just stick with the codes though, but that's me i guess. :) On the one hand i've felt it could be a really nice addition to the gameplay, having keys in general. But from what i've experienced so far it just felt like a nuisance. Of course i realise that we are in an early phase of this system, so i'm really hoping for Garry and his guys to come up with a smarter system for it. If not then at least the option to have keys implemented or just using codes in general would be cool to be implemented for server owners. To be honest having the 'simple' code mechanism first would in my opinion be the right way to proceed, while focussing on other parts of the gameplay to get closer to baseline / Legacy first. After that experimental setups with keys could be added and tried out.

Um, the entire point of making keys now instead of just jamming keycodes in is because [I]now[/I] is the time to focus on getting keys implemented and part of the mix. Getting experimental to baseline doesn't mean "clone legacy's design", it means "offer the same features as legacy" but implement them properly. Rust is about setting problems before you and giving you the freedom to construct a solution. Obviously, at the moment, the key system is raw, but it'll change over time, and a good amount of its evolution will likely occur as a result of the feedback from players. But not if the feedback is "this sucks, go back to the old way because it's way more convenient" when the old way is an artificial UI element that garry hated but jammed in as a placeholder. Which is what you are suggesting he do again now. How many times do you want him to re-implement keys before he actually implements the design he wants to test?

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;45917836]Um, the entire point of making keys now instead of just jamming keycodes in is because [I]now[/I] is the time to focus on getting keys implemented and part of the mix.[/QUOTE] Well there are many aspects of the game still to be included. So to say that the key system is the most important thing to get going on, even though it might be faster and more convenient to get a keycode system in place (temporarily, but also with the server option to keep it for a large group of players who prefer it anyway) really isn't a stupid thing to say i'd feel. In the end it's all just feedback. [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;45917836]Getting experimental to baseline doesn't mean "clone legacy's design", it means "offer the same features as legacy" but implement them properly.[/QUOTE] I personally feel that there are many other aspects which i enjoyed much more from the Legacy version of Rust which i would like to see implemented asap, instead of a key system that apparently not many people like anyway. I have never said that getting experimental closer to baseline / Legacy would mean that it has to become an exact clone of the Legacy version. I've only stated that i personally (and i guess i'm entitled to an opinion) prefer to the system of locking doors back to a state in which it worked for a lot of people and what a lot of people preferred over the new system regarding the usage of keys. Or have an option where admins can choose for one of either systems. I'm guessing that's also because i would like to start playing the experimental version as fast as possible (because like basically everyone on this forum: i really [B]love[/B] this game). So that's why i would rather see the game become [I]relatively[/I] close to what it was before (and how i liked it a lot, even though i am also really looking forward to new aspects). [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;45917836]Rust is about setting problems before you and giving you the freedom to construct a solution. Obviously, at the moment, the key system is raw, but it'll change over time, and a good amount of its evolution will likely occur as a result of the feedback from players. But not if the feedback is "this sucks, go back to the old way because it's way more convenient" when the old way is an artificial UI element that garry hated but jammed in as a placeholder. Which is what you are suggesting he do again now. How many times do you want him to re-implement keys before he actually implements the design he wants to test?[/QUOTE] Evolution of the system will likely occur as a result of feedback from players. Everyone is giving feedback here, most of them that they don't really like the system. So even if Garry and his team would decide to go on with implementing the key system first, wouldn't it at the same time then be a good moment to be vocal about the fact that a lot of people don't like it in general? Is it wrong to suggest a possibility to keep the option open for a keycode system as well? I have been reading the forums for quite some time now. I hardly really dive into posts, but this is the first aspect of the experimental version that i really don't like. The rest, all of it, is so ridiculously awesome. So i'm really looking forward to the development of the new version. However i do feel that there's nothing wrong with stating that you would prefer the keycode system over the keysystem, even if 'Garry hated the old keycode system' and even with stating that you would like a more convenient system than the current usage of keys. One of the main reasons regarding my opinion about keys is the following. I really like the aspect of looting / crafting / using C4 and raiding each other's bases. Instead of just being able to snag someone's key, get in their base and being able to go from there to anywhere (if all keys for the next doors would be hidden somewhere in the next room or the current room that is). The system with C4 and keycodes makes raiding harder in my opinion, because C4 is 'scarce' and you'd have to be tactical about which rooms you were going to raid. The current system with keys make it way too easy and i do feel a base should be a bit more safe than it is now, even if it's the first tier. Then again i am fully aware of the fact that the whole key system is still in development so i guess we'll see where they go from here. Hopefully with the introduction of metal doors there will be a different system in place. If they would stick to this key system just for wooden doors then i guess i'll learn to live with it. :)

I don't like it either... I mean, things like this can happen, and that isn't the point. Doors need to be like in real life: need a key ONLY outside, but can be opened without key ONLY inside. The user could select wich way is "outside" and "inside", this way you can prevent accidents and shit. I've playing legacy, experimental is way too unoptimized so idk if I am right with the concept.

what i would like to see (and forgive me for repeating myself) is 3 tiers of lock. first should a default part of a wooden door, and be an internal latch. use from the inside to lock the door, and when locked anyone on the outside cannot open it. unlocks automatically when you open it from the inside. tier two, the basic keyed lock. i'd probably add the ability to "code" a lock to a currently carried key, so you can have multiple doors on the same key. i'd also probably have doors with locks on them always be locked when they are closed, and only possible to open if you have the corresponding key. i'd also have it that when you install a lock you automatically get a key, and when the door is open you can make a key from the door. third tier would be a simple combination lock, similar to the old system, but again in the form of a lock that has to be applied to a door.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;45916291]There are other alternative solutions other than a billion keys in your pocket or scrapping the key system. garry doesn't like the code entry on Legacy, but he has said that more sophisticated locks will come in time. Keys are the baseline tier of security. Keycode locks and such will be higher-tier door security. One thing at a time. I suggested there be a keyring item you merge keys into that act as skeleton keys for any key that's been added to it, BUT you can have multiple keyrings, so it doesn't have to be [B]every[/B] key of yours going into the object. You guys need to be patient. This isn't the final expression of keys and locks, it's a work in progress.[/QUOTE] You know what would be cool? Being able to make false keys and attach 10 of those onto the key ring along with the real one (Obviously maybe with some type of markings to let you know which key is the real one).

Personally I feel that because of the nature of the game (Respawning, No permadeath and unrealistic nature) the key system should NOT make the final cut as it currently stands. By implementing this system you are forcing players to deal with 2 problems: Overloaded inventories and incredible repercussions for death. Because you have to make keys for every single door, people who make large bases are going to be miserable carrying and putting all those keys away whenever they go in and out of base. The other problem is that players who are less entrenched as other players into the players (All those people who just joined) will face horrible repercussions from dying with their keys. The current lock system in legacy much more viable than the current keys system in experimental. However keys could serve a purpose in things that are easier to replace like cars.

[QUOTE=Crossu88;45929334]Personally I feel that because of the nature of the game (Respawning, No permadeath and unrealistic nature) the key system should NOT make the final cut as it currently stands. By implementing this system you are forcing players to deal with 2 problems: Overloaded inventories and incredible repercussions for death. Because you have to make keys for every single door, people who make large bases are going to be miserable carrying and putting all those keys away whenever they go in and out of base. The other problem is that players who are less entrenched as other players into the players (All those people who just joined) will face horrible repercussions from dying with their keys. The current lock system in legacy much more viable than the current keys system in experimental. However keys could serve a purpose in things that are easier to replace like cars.[/QUOTE] i disagree with you about it being in the final game, but at this moment you have 1337 (leet) posts, so you get a winner badge:) i don't think we can consider this the final format, just a trial of a concept to test if it works, and how to fix it if it isn't. i think it's buggy and clunky, but i like the idea of locking things. also i don't think we can consider this game as not having permadeath. we lose everything when killed, its just that the loot/buildings remain as independent entities in the world for ANYONE to claim. admittedly respawn is unrealistic, but needed given the size of the playspace, and the tiered requirements for crafting.