Your take on suicide bases. - Rust

You're the first person in this heated argument to resort to trolling, you're clearly not mature enough to have an argument with. Clearly you're not smart enough to take something in the proper context and realize what I (and others) meant is that they probably didn't intend sleeping bags to be used in a manner that gains you access to areas you otherwise couldn't get to.

[QUOTE=chicken-;44210199]You're the first person in this heated argument to resort to trolling, you're clearly not mature enough to have an argument with. Clearly you're not smart enough to take something in the proper context and realize what I (and others) meant is that they probably didn't intend sleeping bags to be used in a manner that gains you access to areas you otherwise couldn't get to.[/QUOTE] You can get to it and then once you take away the stairs you cant. This isnt trolling im just tired of peiple wanting rust to be played there way when its not even remotely finished and there isnt a correct way to play it. And making weird references to known bugs and comparing them. Thats how sleeping bags work they move yoi to a place you shouldnt be at this time because you died.

I see a lot of children who abuse sleeping bags in this thread.

Well, day 3. More good discussion except for Chicken Trolling. Just because someone doesn't agree with your argument doesn't mean that you are correct. Name calling and grasping at straws is a clear sign you are out of clever comebacks and any decent input in the thread. I'd suggest you stop before you get forum banned for trolling. The other way to negate the 3rd floor transfer box is to build your base up a decent height next to either a mountain or tower. The mountain needs to be tall enough that you can just be able to jump into/on your house and die from fall damage. You would need to make sure that at no other point you could make it on and survive the fall. Fall, die, and pick up your lootbag. I've built one of these on a server and they work. It is however hard to test where to place the tower or base so that you get the perfect angle to fall at so its a suicide every time and you can get your items safely.

All I am getting from this thread is: Suicide house: Acceptable unintended mechanic abuse. Box stack super jump: Unacceptable unintended mechanic abuse. While a suicide house WAS indeed a clever design from someone thinking outside of the box, it's clearly not fitting in the realm of what this game is about and it needs to be fixed. So if there is a busted exploit that allows you to counter a suicide base, then that's just ingenuity being used against ingenuity and it balances itself out.

[QUOTE=Demoth;44212035]All I am getting from this thread is: Suicide house: Acceptable unintended mechanic abuse. Box stack super jump: Unacceptable unintended mechanic abuse. While a suicide house WAS indeed a clever design from someone thinking outside of the box, it's clearly not fitting in the realm of what this game is about and it needs to be fixed. So if there is a busted exploit that allows you to counter a suicide base, then that's just ingenuity being used against ingenuity and it balances itself out.[/QUOTE] I think both are fair game. Rust is an alpha so anyone expecting to not deal with weird physics bugs do not know what they are signing up for. I think the question is should admins ban users who use these things. I for one cant say anything about abusing a known physics bug in unity, this is up to them. However banning for a suicide base should be considered admin abuse since its not abusing a known bug.

[QUOTE=Totals;44213465]I think both are fair game. Rust is an alpha so anyone expecting to not deal with weird physics bugs do not know what they are signing up for. I think the question is should admins ban users who use these things. I for one cant say anything about abusing a known physics bug in unity, this is up to them. However banning for a suicide base should be considered admin abuse since its not abusing a known bug.[/QUOTE] It's not a bug, but it's exploiting an unintended game mechanic. When a core feature is raiding, and you find a loophole that negates the ability to accomplish this WITHOUT hacking or using another exploit, that's a problem. Ultimately, it is alpha and it's good these things are found out so the dev team can make the decision if it's a clever meta game mechanic or something that needs to be stamped out. It's just annoying reading all this high-horse stuff with exploiters getting mad at other exploiters.

[QUOTE=Totals;44213465]I think both are fair game. Rust is an alpha so anyone expecting to not deal with weird physics bugs do not know what they are signing up for. I think the question is should admins ban users who use these things. I for one cant say anything about abusing a known physics bug in unity, this is up to them. However banning for a suicide base should be considered admin abuse since its not abusing a known bug.[/QUOTE] And if the admin uses a remove tool to destroy their base, or if not running Oxide spawns in as much C4 and grenades as it takes to destroy every accessible portion of their base and walls the rest in, is that "Admin abuse" or is it an admin enforcing his rules? You do realize that admins pay for their servers, and can enforce whatever rules they want on their servers. I honestly wouldn't call banning someone for building a suicide base if they were clear that it was against the rules of the server "admin abuse". I don't even think a server should be blacklisted for that, various servers have different rules, I've seen admins who will ban people for repeated foul language (not directed insults, just foul language). It's their prerogative on their servers, there is no one set of rules that admins have to follow, although there's a reason server site listings exist.

Another decent reason for suicide bases is that you can make them actually ON the map. From my experiences, a base lasts about 2 real days and nights before getting fully raided. The only real way to stay safe and build up a stock of resources for a big base is to make a hidden shack 30000 miles off the map where no one will run. My bases now are in hacker valley south so its decently close to everything but out of the way of prying eyes.

Raiding is a core feature? LOL! Raiding completely ruins this "survival" game. If it was counterstrike or something then fair enough, but it isn't. It's supposed to have more to it than grinding and raiding. Criticising people for finding an innovative use of sleeping bags in order to SURVIVE is hilarious.

[QUOTE=Northcock;44222468]Raiding is a core feature? LOL! Raiding completely ruins this "survival" game. If it was counterstrike or something then fair enough, but it isn't. It's supposed to have more to it than grinding and raiding. Criticising people for finding an innovative use of sleeping bags in order to SURVIVE is hilarious.[/QUOTE] Finding an exploit and using it to your advantage is always innovative. If you don't like the fact you can be raided, go play Minecraft. Fact is, while being raided is annoying and they need to change how it works so no-life basement dwellers don't always have the edge by grinding 20 hours a day, suicide bases are bullshitm If I found a bug that made my character invincible, I could use your excuse of "LOL, dying is a core feature? You're just buttmad I found an innovative way to survive in a survival game"

Couple of things based on the above posters. Raiding is going to get some kind of change currently its a server killing item. As a server admin watch the group of 20 people craft c4 and blow everything up on rust island the server dies. Theres no way to compete with the 20 man group, which is fine you just need to be innovative enough to avoid them. I am a server admin so I know how much they cost. If I can do something on public rust servers non cheating, and its works and isnt a massive exploitation of the unity physics system it should be allowed. If an admin bans for it, thens its abuse. As far as swearing it is an 18+ game so if you cant handle some swearing im not sure what to say anyways. If hes being really bad than the admin will handle it.

[QUOTE=Totals;44225152]I am a server admin so I know how much they cost. If I can do something on public rust servers non cheating, and its works and isnt a massive exploitation of the unity physics system it should be allowed. If an admin bans for it, thens its abuse.[/QUOTE] This is entirely untrue. A server owner pays for and controls every aspect of their server. They make the rules. They ban whoever they want. Just because [I]you[/I] say that it's abuse doesn't make it true.

[QUOTE=Sievers808;44225202]This is entirely untrue. A server owner pays for and controls every aspect of their server. They make the rules. They ban whoever they want. Just because [I]you[/I] say that it's abuse doesn't make it true.[/QUOTE] Controlling gameplay to be what you want it to be is admin abuse. No ones argeuing whether or not they can do it and get away with it. Im saying if the admin thinks they know better than facepunch its def admin abuse.

[QUOTE=Totals;44225320]Controlling gameplay to be what you want it to be is admin abuse. No ones argeuing whether or not they can do it and get away with it. Im saying if the admin thinks they know better than facepunch its def admin abuse.[/QUOTE] No. I pay for my server and I can establish my own rules. If I don't want exploiting on my server that I and I alone pay for, how is that abuse? By saying this you are also saying mods are admin abuse.

[QUOTE=Totals;44225320]Controlling gameplay to be what you want it to be is admin abuse. No ones argeuing whether or not they can do it and get away with it. Im saying if the admin thinks they know better than facepunch its def admin abuse.[/QUOTE] Well sometimes the admins do "know better" than facepunch. The game is still in Alpha and often times something the developers have on a fix it list can be fixed with server rules. A good example was back before they had door sharing. Many admins enabled a mod to allow door sharing, it was not a case of "knowing better" than the developers it was just an acknowledgement that until an official fix was pushed they would use the mod. In the case of suicide bases I highly doubt the developers want an unraidable base taking advantage of clipping issues and the respawn mechanic. They specifically put raiding in the game and some people were clever enough to use the mechanics currently in game to construct a difficult to raid base (only some are clever, most are just copying people with actual creativity). I also doubt it is very high on their to do list so server owners having a rule against suicide bases is not admin abuse. They should make that rule very clear by enabling a server message to periodically show on side chat explaining the rules.

[QUOTE=Totals;44225320]Controlling gameplay to be what you want it to be is admin abuse. No ones argeuing whether or not they can do it and get away with it. Im saying if the admin thinks they know better than facepunch its def admin abuse.[/QUOTE] So then every admin on a modded server is an abuser? Wut?

[QUOTE=laminblake;44189714]suicide bases are an exploit imo. to make it impossible for someone to raid your base is clearly not intended to be a feature of the game.[/QUOTE] Some can still be raided if they are not perfectly designed. I have done so on this one particular design in this video (which is pretty decently built). Obviously flaws can be overcome and every base raid is different but sometimes there is still a way. We did this test on our creative server (RustHelper.com Official Creative Server) [video=youtube;V9SXWN1J_GI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9SXWN1J_GI[/video]

Do you guys notice that there fix wasnt to add door sharing right. Like they could have easily taken the mod and snapped it into the game. They chose to do something more complicated because they thought it was more balanced theres a risk to having a door code. You are free to do whatever you want as an admin. Thats why you pay money. You can give your friends 400 c4 and all is good. All im saying is just because you dont think something should be in the game does not give you a good enough reason to ban. Example: The game currently has a PvP or PvE setting. Some servers make a rule no KoS. This is your right to do as an admin but you are taking something thats in the game and since you dont agree with it you are banning for it. This is an alpha we should be testing the alpha. I dont like mods but sadly they are the only servers with any form of admins to ban insta kill hackers. I dont think mods are abuse because they help you admin for the most part. I think if you feel something from the core gameplay is banworthy then you should prob take a breather as an alpha is not the correct game for you. A suicide base doesnt exploit any known bugs that I can find atleast the ones I make. Systems will change and I promise the current raid format will be changed before the game is done. Raiding is not the entire spirit of rust. I think raiding is fine I think if someone finds a good base design thats fine as well.

[QUOTE=Totals;44226816]You are free to do whatever you want as an admin. Thats why you pay money.[/quote] Then... [QUOTE=Totals;44226816]All im saying is just because you dont think something should be in the game does not give you a good enough reason to ban.[/QUOTE] Wut?

[QUOTE=Totals;44226816]Do you guys notice that there fix wasnt to add door sharing right. Like they could have easily taken the mod and snapped it into the game. They chose to do something more complicated because they thought it was more balanced theres a risk to having a door code. You are free to do whatever you want as an admin. Thats why you pay money. You can give your friends 400 c4 and all is good. All im saying is just because you dont think something should be in the game does not give you a good enough reason to ban. Example: The game currently has a PvP or PvE setting. Some servers make a rule no KoS. This is your right to do as an admin but you are taking something thats in the game and since you dont agree with it you are banning for it. This is an alpha we should be testing the alpha. I dont like mods but sadly they are the only servers with any form of admins to ban insta kill hackers. I dont think mods are abuse because they help you admin for the most part. I think if you feel something from the core gameplay is banworthy then you should prob take a breather as an alpha is not the correct game for you. [B]A suicide base doesnt exploit any known bugs that I can find atleast the ones I make. [/B] Systems will change and I promise the current raid format will be changed before the game is done. Raiding is not the entire spirit of rust. I think raiding is fine I think if someone finds a good base design thats fine as well.[/QUOTE] So much wrong... An admin can ban for whatever they want. It doesn't matter what their reasoning is. Sure, people may not like them, but they can still do whatever they want. I don't like it either, but that doesn't change anything. It's funny to me that you think banning someone for "something that's in the game" is not okay but mods that entirely change how the game works is. The bolded part of the quote is what stood out the most to me. Most (not all) suicide bases take advantage of being able to clip a sleeping bag through a wall or some other item. Also, one usually has to clip a chest or something through a door in order to transfer loot. To me, that sounds like a bug. I can't imagine the devs saying "Oh yea we totally added sleeping bags so that people can clip them through things and teleport to places that are otherwise inaccessible."

[QUOTE=jediaelthewis;44226794]Some can still be raided if they are not perfectly designed. I have done so on this one particular design in this video (which is pretty decently built). Obviously flaws can be overcome and every base raid is different but sometimes there is still a way. We did this test on our creative server (RustHelper.com Official Creative Server) [video=youtube;V9SXWN1J_GI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9SXWN1J_GI[/video][/QUOTE] It was great man, using the same feature that allows suicide house to raid one (sleeping bags used in a non intended way). It was clever and skillfull. For me that is proof enough of suicide house not being against the spirit of the game, they are just another puzzle made by the players to protect their stuff and finding the solution is part of the fun. I got a question for suicide house haters: If the suicide house got one and just one way to be raided by usual methods, built by the owner, will the suicide house be completely legit? Of course that way will be hidden or really really hard but possible by c4s and no exploits. BTW thanks for the server I was looking for something like that.

Wait, I have to ask, how the hell do you get out of a suicide base.

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;44227141]Wait, I have to ask, how the hell do you get out of a suicide base.[/QUOTE] There's usually a place where you can jump down or something... They're built in a way that it's impossible to get up to but able to get down from.

[QUOTE=Sievers808;44227263]There's usually a place where you can jump down or something... They're built in a way that it's impossible to get up to but able to get down from.[/QUOTE] Just wondering, thanks.

[QUOTE=Totals;44226816]Do you guys notice that there fix wasnt to add door sharing right. Like they could have easily taken the mod and snapped it into the game. They chose to do something more complicated because [B]they thought it was more balanced theres a risk to having a door code.[/B] [/QUOTE] I am sorry but as long as someone does not go with 0000 or 1234 there is such a small chance that someone will figure out that code. The only risk is a player backstabbing you, but that was a risk with the mod as well. The point was not that the fix was exactly the same, it was that admins were not considered to be abusing anyone by trying to fix an obvious shortfall in the game at the time. Raiding is not the ENTIRE spirit of Rust but it is a large gameplay component. Take away raiding and you have very little incentive to build a large base. Resource gathering becomes minimal since all resources will only be spent on other items (making wood a useless resource for most players). Without raiding base building is a useless resource sink and the game becomes even more PvP driven. I get that raiding will change, it should change. There should be better base defense measures and I am sure that will be coming. But making an unraidable base is against the spirit of the game. Why are there sleepers if they want you to have safe gear? Why did they include raiding if they wanted you to feel safe in your base?

[QUOTE=Grangoko;44227045]It was great man, using the same feature that allows suicide house to raid one (sleeping bags used in a non intended way). It was clever and skillfull. For me that is proof enough of suicide house not being against the spirit of the game, they are just another puzzle made by the players to protect their stuff and finding the solution is part of the fun. I got a question for suicide house haters: If the suicide house got one and just one way to be raided by usual methods, built by the owner, will the suicide house be completely legit? Of course that way will be hidden or really really hard but possible by c4s and no exploits. BTW thanks for the server I was looking for something like that.[/QUOTE] Short answer is yes, that would make them legit. The thing is the better designed ones apparently require barricade on top of a pillar and then a spike wall hanging off of that to stand on and place C4, which to me is another exploit altogether. Again, most would argue that's part of the "game mechanics" but to me a barricade held up by nothing on a pillar doesn't make sense, nor does a spike wall hanging off into thin air with nothing supporting it and somehow being able to stand on it. As far as the "admin abuse" argument, my stance on that is a simple one. If the admin makes his server's rules clear to his players, he has every right to enforce them and he has every right to make his own set of rules for a server he pays for (they pay as much as we did for the game and usually more per month just for a server). Deciding to make up reasons to ban people he doesn't like is where it starts to become admin abuse ( like Rust-Nation :) )

[QUOTE=jediaelthewis;44226794]Some can still be raided if they are not perfectly designed. I have done so on this one particular design in this video (which is pretty decently built). Obviously flaws can be overcome and every base raid is different but sometimes there is still a way. We did this test on our creative server (RustHelper.com Official Creative Server) [video=youtube;V9SXWN1J_GI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9SXWN1J_GI[/video][/QUOTE] This is why I never use the box through a door trick but put the box on the pillar instead. Without the box through the door there isn't anything to land on and it's to far from the pillar to place (I think anyway). That being said, I quit using these bases because they scream RAID ME and instead I went with a 5X5X8 brick of doors and walls lol Nice vid tho...I'll be using this for sure.

[QUOTE=almosttactful;44228490]This is why I never use the box through a door trick but put the box on the pillar instead. Without the box through the door there isn't anything to land on and it's to far from the pillar to place (I think anyway). That being said, I quit using these bases because they scream RAID ME and instead I went with a 5X5X8 brick of doors and walls lol Nice vid tho...I'll be using this for sure.[/QUOTE] Here's a second trick that doesn't require suiciding. [video=youtube;-3vtoqAChmg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3vtoqAChmg[/video]

[QUOTE=jediaelthewis;44228555]Here's a second trick that doesn't require suiciding. [video=youtube;-3vtoqAChmg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3vtoqAChmg[/video][/QUOTE] You can also use the first trick but with large storage boxes to jump between on both pillars instead of the sleeping bag, no suicide required. But tbh don't know why anyone is still using the original suicide base design, its easily raided (and I will target them because they require less C4 than a similar sized conventional base).