You keep telling me I'm trying to limit how you build your base, even though you're the one calling for artificial building restrictions and I'm suggesting a more adaptive response. I'm going to say this as politely as I still can: if some twigs and 2 C4 get me into your base, your base design [B]blows[/B] ... regardless of how classically pretty it is. If you concentrate on building it should take a fraction of your weekend to put up a base twice the size as the one you described, and five times as cost-prohibitive to raid. What are you going to do when they introduce ladders and movable siege weapons, like they've been alluding to for god knows how long now?
I think what you really mean is you think you should be allowed to put your storage boxes in a stylish sunken open-roof grotto under the stars in the name of architectural creativity ... with the absolutely firm expectation that raiders will have to schlep through the 6 armored walls and 5 metal doors you put in their path. Aside from the fact that you still want to artificially dictate mandatory choke-points as a rule, this is a conversation about aesthetics... and that's a separate conversation. There are ways to make the building system more complex so we can have more stylish, smaller and less predictable bases ... but it requires trade-offs, and balance. And balance is something very distinct from the ideal world you've been describing, where human beings have lost the knowledge of how to scale simple walls without spending hours making shape charges.
[QUOTE=Murdo;47387049]You keep telling me I'm trying to limit how you build your base, even though you're the one calling for artificial building restrictions and I'm suggesting a more adaptive response[I]. I'm going to say this as politely as I still can: if some twigs and 2 C4 get me into your base, your base design [B]blows[/B][/I] ... regardless of how classically pretty it is. If you concentrate on building it should take a fraction of your weekend to put up a base twice the size as the one you described, and five times as cost-prohibitive to raid. What are you going to do when they introduce ladders and movable siege weapons, like they've been alluding to for god knows how long now?
I think what you really mean is you think you should be allowed to put your storage boxes in a stylish sunken open-roof grotto under the stars in the name of architectural creativity ... with the absolutely firm expectation that raiders will have to schlep through the 6 armored walls and 5 metal doors you put in their path. Aside from the fact that you still want to artificially dictate mandatory choke-points as a rule, this is a conversation about aesthetics... and that's a separate conversation. There are ways to make the building system more complex so we can have more stylish, smaller and less predictable bases ... but it requires trade-offs, and balance. And balance is something very distinct from the ideal world you've been describing, where human beings have lost the knowledge of how to scale simple walls without spending hours making shape charges.[/QUOTE]
Do you not sense the contradiction or irony in your argument with this statement, while also arguing that people shouldn't be able to build a tower? Without tool cupboards literally every base is raidable. What you're suggesting here is to make it easy for yourself.
What I really mean is exactly what I say. Like I have been saying this entire time, if you remove tool cupboards or allow people to build crappy stuff within tool cupboard radius, it's essentially pointless putting any effort into your base. You're suggesting smaller and less predictable bases, what like a maze of rooms? How is that any different to a linear tower (not that I have one)? It's not, the c4 just goes on a different wall.
Like I keep saying, you want it to be easy to raid so you don't have to put an iota of effort into it.
Edit: I'd also like to point out, I would expect siege weaponry to take a fair amount of resources to make, especially to be effective against armoured buildings, which would mean having a decent base to build it a requirement. If you take out tool cupboards and shift the game even more in favour of raiders, all you would have is small bases large enough for a sleeping bag and furnaces.
[QUOTE=Murdo;47386674] I'm positive I'm not the only Legacy player who felt a moment of disgust when you referred to building up to someone's base a "cheat code". [/QUOTE]
About 1800 hours invested in legacy, and it drives me nuts when people continue to want the freedom to build as in legacy for raid purposes, but ignore the trade-offs that were in place in legacy like indestructible foundations/pillars/ceilings and the fact that properly placed foundations with pillars on them prevented towering right next to a base.
Twig should have such a poor stability that it can only be built up one floor for starters. When they add something to the game that let's you construct barriers to foundation building, then we can start talking about getting rid of the magical exclusion zone that is provided by the cupboard.
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47387109]Do you not sense the contradiction or irony in your argument with this statement, while also arguing that people shouldn't be able to build a tower?[/QUOTE]
I don't recall ever making that argument. Of course you should be able to build a tower (structure stability notwithstanding). But you shouldn't be able to dictate how I get to the top, which is what would happen if I were prohibited from building my own temporary structures. I would have to follow your path. Do you see why that's dictating mandatory chokepoints?
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47387109]Without tool cupboards literally every base is raidable.[/QUOTE]
No one who thinks Rust ought to have unraidable bases has any business playing on a PVP server.
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47387109] if you remove tool cupboards or allow people to build crappy stuff within tool cupboard radius, it's essentially pointless putting any effort into your base.[/QUOTE]
No, actually, it just means you have to put [B]MORE[/B] effort into your base. More effort than, say, an outer wall and a magical box of build-protection.
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47387109]You're suggesting smaller and less predictable bases, what like a maze of rooms? How is that any different to a linear tower[/QUOTE]
... ?
I'm suggesting more defense options (spikes, wire, protrusions, buttressing, higher armor levels at exponentially higher costs) that would allow you to build more stylish and functional houses... but in such a way that you have to plan it out well, and there are no foolproof defenses. As opposed to "I want to build a 3 story house with a wall and I think you should need 6 days of harvesting worth of C4 to get in".
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47387109]Like I keep saying, you want it to be easy to raid so you don't have to put an iota of effort into it.[/QUOTE]
That's your opinion, and there's absolutely zero basis for it. You keep glossing over what I'm saying, and then telling me what you think I mean.
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;47387122]About 1800 hours invested in legacy, and it drives me nuts when people continue to want the freedom to build as in legacy for raid purposes, but ignore the trade-offs that were in place in legacy like indestructible foundations/pillars/ceilings and the fact that properly placed foundations with pillars on them prevented towering right next to a base.
Twig should have such a poor stability that it can only be built up one floor for starters. When they add something to the game that let's you construct barriers to foundation building, then we can start talking about getting rid of the magical exclusion zone that is provided by the cupboard.[/QUOTE]
I don't hold Legacy up as the ideal for raiding/defense balance. The building system was, for most of our time there, essentially abandonware ... every possible trick to prevent raiding was discovered and employed, and every possible trick to get by those defenses was exploited. But that doesn't make the notion that you have the right to own the airspace around your building any less cringe-worthy. We have suicide bases just as easily here as we did there.
I don't care about the current cost of C4 (much more expensive than Legacy), or the strength of roofs (should be stronger) or various other little details and variables in this glaringly incomplete alpha game we all play. Just like I don't care if the cupboard exists, or if nobody gets raided in the next 6 months. I just want the development moving towards a balanced system of offense/defense, and this "climbing over my wall and attacking my base is no fair!" bullshit isn't getting us anywhere forward.
I just really wish they'd make ladders.
[QUOTE=Murdo;47387443]I just want the development moving towards a balanced system of offense/defense, and this "climbing over my wall and attacking my base is no fair!" bullshit isn't getting us anywhere forward.[/QUOTE]
When combined with what you said above that -- "I'm suggesting more defense options (spikes, wire, protrusions, buttressing, higher armor levels at exponentially higher costs) that would allow you to build more stylish and functional houses... " -- I'm not sure how that's in fundamental disagreement with what deputydawg said.
Without those things, it would be unfair to allow twig building inside a cupboard's radius or to remove the cupboard right now, which is what Anthony Reis suggested, which is what deputydawg disagreed with.
[QUOTE=Murdo;47387443]I don't recall ever making that argument. Of course you should be able to build a tower (structure stability notwithstanding). But you shouldn't be able to dictate how I get to the top, which is what would happen if I were prohibited from building my own temporary structures. I would have to follow your path. Do you see why that's dictating mandatory chokepoints?
No one who thinks Rust ought to have unraidable bases has any business playing on a PVP server.
No, actually, it just means you have to put [B]MORE[/B] effort into your base. More effort than, say, an outer wall and a magical box of build-protection.
... ?
I'm suggesting more defense options (spikes, wire, protrusions, buttressing, higher armor levels at exponentially higher costs) that would allow you to build more stylish and functional houses... but in such a way that you have to plan it out well, and there are no foolproof defenses. As opposed to "I want to build a 3 story house with a wall and I think you should need 6 days of harvesting worth of C4 to get in".
That's your opinion, and there's absolutely zero basis for it. You keep glossing over what I'm saying, and then telling me what you think I mean.
I don't hold Legacy up as the ideal for raiding/defense balance. The building system was, for most of our time there, essentially abandonware ... every possible trick to prevent raiding was discovered and employed, and every possible trick to get by those defenses was exploited. But that doesn't make the notion that you have the right to own the airspace around your building any less cringe-worthy. We have suicide bases just as easily here as we did there.
I don't care about the current cost of C4 (much more expensive than Legacy), or the strength of roofs (should be stronger) or various other little details and variables in this glaringly incomplete alpha game we all play. Just like I don't care if the cupboard exists, or if nobody gets raided in the next 6 months. I just want the development moving towards a balanced system of offense/defense, and this "climbing over my wall and attacking my base is no fair!" bullshit isn't getting us anywhere forward.[/QUOTE]
You're presuming I wouldn't use said defences were they to be available, or if tool cupboards didn't exist and they were my only option. I don't see anything wrong with trying to make your base as unreadable as possible in a PVP server, in fact I think it's a fun challenge to take. I check to see if my base has been raided every morning and each morning so far, I have been surprised when it hasn't been. As far as I am concerned, the fun of the game is building a base and then rebuilding when/if it gets raided.
StrydeKhaos hits the nail on the head in his above post really. I don't actually think we're at odds here, I don't actually care whether the tool cupboard is removed from the game but as long as it is in the game I will use it as a means to defend my base. There are plenty of bases out there that don't use their tool cupboards effectively and until they figure that out, they deserve to be raided. If I had to have an alternative to the tool cupboard to defend my base, I would redesign my base and use those alternatives.
I think there's a lot of argument on this front for nothing. The way people are arguing about this, you'd swear Rust was a V 1.0 completed release. The game is so early in alpha development right now. It's not really about the game play and balance at this point. It's more important for the devs to get the framework and foundation of the game, engine, world, etc in place.
Currently, the tool cupboard and its magical exclusion zone are really the only way to keep a base at least somewhat safe from free raiding. It's not perfect. And I don't like it either, but it is what it is. Until the game gets farther along in development, this temporary mechanism is what we have to deal with.
All these suggestions of allowing twig building, etc would only have the result of making bases easily raidable with nothing that can be done to protect them. If the tool cupboard were removed or the ability to build twig within the exclusion zone added without adding other checks and balances (base defences), you'd basically see people just abandoning playing Rust altogether. Honestly, who would want to even bother building anything if anyone could just mow through their hours of hard work in minutes with no effort and few resources?
Base defences in the style of Legacy Rust will be coming. Obviously, they can't work the same as in Legacy since it's not only walls and doors that are vulnerable now. We can argue this shit till the cows come home. But the fact is this is already planned, independent of our bickering about how this could be best dealt with.
Give it time, people. This will be addressed in a future update.
[QUOTE=Crunchmeister;47392263]I think there's a lot of argument on this front for nothing. The way people are arguing about this, you'd swear Rust was a V 1.0 completed release. The game is so early in alpha development right now. It's not really about the game play and balance at this point. It's more important for the devs to get the framework and foundation of the game, engine, world, etc in place.
Currently, the tool cupboard and its magical exclusion zone are really the only way to keep a base at least somewhat safe from free raiding. It's not perfect. And I don't like it either, but it is what it is. Until the game gets farther along in development, this temporary mechanism is what we have to deal with.
All these suggestions of allowing twig building, etc would only have the result of making bases easily raidable with nothing that can be done to protect them.[B] If the tool cupboard were removed or the ability to build twig within the exclusion zone added without adding other checks and balances (base defences), you'd basically see people just abandoning playing Rust altogether. Honestly, who would want to even bother building anything if anyone could just mow through their hours of hard work in minutes with no effort and few resources?[/B]
Base defences in the style of Legacy Rust will be coming. Obviously, they can't work the same as in Legacy since it's not only walls and doors that are vulnerable now. We can argue this shit till the cows come home. But the fact is this is already planned, independent of our bickering about how this could be best dealt with.
Give it time, people. This will be addressed in a future update.[/QUOTE]
Again, this is exactly what I have been saying the entire time... and it seems to be the only people who want that ability is people who [B]don't[/B] want to have to put in the effort to be able to raid someone.
To be clear, I don't like the tool cupboard and its force field. But I know that at this stage of the game, it's necessary as there's no other way to defend a base. And I use the term "defend" loosely here. I've learned that no base is unraidable. It just depends how much time, effort and resources the raiders are willing to put into it.
A tool cupboard only keeps a base safe against raiders that lack the resources and creativity to get into it. And it seems to me that the "get rid of tool cupboards now" and "let me build into someone's base with twigs" crowd fall into this category.
[QUOTE=Crunchmeister;47392327]To be clear, I don't like the tool cupboard and its force field. But I know that at this stage of the game, it's necessary as there's no other way to defend a base. And I use the term "defend" loosely here. I've learned that no base is unraidable. It just depends how much time, effort and resources the raiders are willing to put into it.
A tool cupboard only keeps a base safe against raiders that lack the resources and creativity to get into it. And it seems to me that the "get rid of tool cupboards now" and "let me build into someone's base with twigs" crowd fall into this category.[/QUOTE]
Don't worry, I did not misunderstand you at all. I have just found it very frustrating to have been arguing this point fruitlessly, with the assumption that I am for tool cupboard-only defences.
I generally avoid this subject, as it's usually pointless. People just seem to treat Rust as if it was an actual game at the moment. We're playing a bare bones framework of a game engine. It's just barely into proof of concept stage at the moment. We're actually lucky that it's even playable at all at this stage.
These arguments are tantamount to people arguing about what the furniture arrangements and wall decorations should be in their new high rise condo they pre-bought when the developers have barely started pouring the foundation for the building.
for the sake of the argument, they will need to remove the cupboards forcefield eventually if they intend to, otherwise the balances for wall health, weapon damage and upgrades will be thoroughly out. if people decide to stop playing because the game has yet again "headed the wrong way", let them. they will come back a month later because the game is actively being developed, and because its fun; we shouldn't let that stunt development.
I'm pretty confident that we'll see cupboards removed at some point. Hence why I don't bitch incessantly about it like some people like to do. I just deal with it, and I'll adapt to the new paradigm once they're removed.
I have been reading this topic as a newbie too rust and like to point out a few problems, lets say that Cupboards are removed.
* It allows again twig building very close to your building. They can just build one twig higher then your roof. Blow the roof and gain access to your building. And because they are going from the top, even if the blow up the stairs by accident is no hurdle.
* It allows people to build into your building area. You do not have any more property area like now with the cupboard. So people can build whatever they want on your area. They can literately take over your spot.
* It allows the grievers to simply wall up your home. You wake up and all your doors are blocked by multi layer walls. Remember that now its impossible to simply remove a wall in your own base! That also means you need to break out of your own base. Lets say that you lack the tools? I had it happen already one time that i died outside and did not have spare key to my door. Took a lot of effort to breach walls when your still with low level ( non-steel ) stone hatchets etc ...
Currently lets be honest ... if a enemy wants in your base with the cupboard system, there are multiple ways:
* Damage a exposed foundation.
* Twig building upwards
* C4 ... used a lot ( too much in my opinion ). Clans get so much they can grief smaller players to no end.
* Hacking into a wall.
Guess what we see done the least? Correct ... they do NOT hack into walls because it take a long time and a lot of tools to do so. C4 or twig is just a easy way to hack into a building.
Most people that i have seen in game are one, two or maximum three players. Not counting the clans who really dominate the game in resources, weaponry and especially breaching ability ( C4 ).
With the current resource spawning i noticed that especially stone is hard to come by. Most smaller players have mostly wood structures ( very easy to breach ).
I do not even get the big deal why some people consider cupboards a problem? It only means you can not build directly near the building. And some people simply cheat by twig building away and jump from height.
Wall health is still important. If somebody want to go the "slow" route by breaking down your wall, they still can. But everybody is just so lazy in there raids that they want to get in with less then 10min of work. So ... twig building or c4's in. That the reason why some people do not like the force fields. Because then they can simply build right next to your building and get in even more easy.
Notice how i did not spoke about defenders? Because most of the raids that i have seen on youtube, and the abandoned home have all fallen when the owner(s) where asleep.
People want cupboards removed? Sure ... give us guard NPC's that can defend buildings during the hours that we are not there. Make building take longer then currently 1 second ( to prevent raiders from building a raid base withing seconds next to your walls ).
There needs to be a balance. And anybody claiming that the current system does not favor raiders is somebody who clearly is out to grieve other players. Because on the few servers i have been, there are wreckage everywhere from abandoned homes that have walls blow or twig invaded ( 3/4 of the building are leftovers ).
No fortress is unbeatable, as history has show us. But in real life it took years to build a castle and it took months of siege up to even years! ( and in a lot of cases the defenders ended up surrendering because they ran out of food / sickness ) or the invading army gave up.
This is in total contrast to how fast anybody can take over a castle in Rust ( even with the current cupboard system ). It takes me 5 hours to gather the resources to build a defensible home. It takes that same attackers:
a) 5 minutes or resources + 5 minutes of building ( twig invasion )
b) C4 ... more difficult to calculate but its a by product from building to get the resources
c) hacking ... maybe 10 minutes on a wall? And the time to get the resources for the tools ...
Frankly i think that the most "natural" invasion tactic ( the hacking the walls down ) is actually the most longest and the one nobody puts time in.
No matter how much time you put in making a defense, currently in rust its way more easy for the attackers to gain massive rewards.
I also miss the ability to actually bury stuff. Like second pair of house keys or spare resources etc. Or how some resources are beyond difficult if you do not have automatic weapons ( like fabrics ... anime hunting is extreme annoying with bow because they flee so fast that if you miss = you totally lose the animal ). I think the game needs a lot more work and the cupboard are not really a problem beyond for the people who like to potentially misuse the building.
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;47387726]When combined with what you said above that -- "I'm suggesting more defense options (spikes, wire, protrusions, buttressing, higher armor levels at exponentially higher costs) that would allow you to build more stylish and functional houses... " -- I'm not sure how that's in fundamental disagreement with what deputydawg said.
Without those things, it would be unfair to allow twig building inside a cupboard's radius or to remove the cupboard right now, which is what Anthony Reis suggested, which is what deputydawg disagreed with.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=deputydawg;47392245]You're presuming I wouldn't use said defences were they to be available, or if tool cupboards didn't exist and they were my only option. I don't see anything wrong with trying to make your base as unreadable as possible in a PVP server, in fact I think it's a fun challenge to take. I check to see if my base has been raided every morning and each morning so far, I have been surprised when it hasn't been. As far as I am concerned, the fun of the game is building a base and then rebuilding when/if it gets raided.[/QUOTE]
Maybe that's true, maybe we are arguing past one another and I'm simply misinterpreting what people mean when they complain that bases are "raidable". But there seems to be one distinction between what I'm saying and what I'm hearing from the three of you (deputy, Stryfe, Crunch): I don't consider the ability to build up to someone's base or climb over their walls to be the game-ending balance-breaking element. I build all my permanent buildings (i.e. ones I bother to upgrade to armor) under the assumption that by whatever method (glitch or otherwise) someone [B]WILL[/B] be able to walk around on my roof and attack from above. If there was no cupboard, and nothing was slid in as compensation (foundation buffer, center pillar etc. etc.), then I would also be building under the assumption that an attack could come at any vertical level. Remember, even in Legacy with indestructible ceilings, there were ways to attack the top floor from the side, or to get on top of that pillar beneath a roof overhang.
I brought up alternative defensive methods, to allow for similar-value defensive measures in a smaller space, to keep the size of bases down and allow for more variety in tactical and aesthetic choices... [B]not[/B] because I thought that was the only way in which a base could survive without an exclusion zone. It is significantly cheaper to build more armored walls than it is to craft C4. Is that ideal? No. But we're talking about logistical reality. Frankly, if the final iteration of the building system any more than vaguely resembles what we have now, I would be disappointed.
But to get back to the point of this thread, this ^ ^ ^ ... is what you do when you run out of ways to amuse yourself in-game. You get into wasteful discussions on forums about things none of you can change.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
