Suggestion: A way to discourage the mega-base.

Why megabases are a problem:

They grant too much safety, particularly to large groups.
Fully compartmentalized large bases are essentially unraidable. If you’re looking for a toolcupboard on a 5x5x5, you have to check 125 rooms. If there are 5 loot rooms in the base, you have to check 25 rooms on average to find one, for an average cost of 25 C4.
Stability has limited the size of towers somewhat (or at least I think it does, correct me if I’m wrong) but bases can still be large enough that raiding them is essentially impossible.
By having bases that are nearly impossible to raid, groups stop being raidable and are essentially unassailable. Its stupid to oppose groups in such a base, at least unless you have something similar.
It takes away the idea that everyone is vulnerable.
Even more importantly, if we’re to have no-wipe servers, something needs to be done about base size. If a server is to exist for a long time, what keeps someone from building a 10x10x5 (500 rooms). I firmly believe that every group should be vulnerable to raiding. Building smart and going large should offer some protection, but not this much protection.
So we need a way to discourage the mega-base.

A different kind of airdrop

There should be a second kind of airdrop, with a far more dangerous payload. Once every day, a bomber should drop its payload somewhere on the island. The payload should randomly target structures above a certain size threshold, but be heavily weighted towards the largest ones.
The airdrop should either level, or at least seriously damage the base, destroying loot and killing inhabitants.

How this improves gameplay

First, I believe that a month after its introduction, we’ll nearly never see the bomber again. People will learn just how big their bases can be without being big enough to get bomed.
Large groups will, instead of building a mega-base, build several bases and distrubute loot around them. These bases will be small enough to be raidable, keeping with the philosophy that all bases should be reasonably raidable.
Say that we put a 50 room limit (assuming the base is compartmentalized) on the size of bases, making the 5x5x2 an example of the biggest possible base in Rust. If this is the case, we’ll see lots of bases that have exactly 50 rooms, but people will know to go no bigger.
This also can lead to caves being valuable. Right now caves are neat, but their value mostly comes from the bugs that prevent raiders from entering cave bases. They aren’t hidden, most players that have played for a while can readily identify a cave from distance.
Caves could be the only shelters capable of allowing groups to surpass the size threshold. If you control a cave, you can use it to have a bigger base. Cave interiors can be modified such that they only allow bases of a certain size (say 75 rooms) such that the cave is protection against bombers, and allows you more room to build, but is still fixed to a reasonable maximum.
Now caves are extremely valuable, as they should be, and large groups will fight over who controls a cave. This provides another end game goal.


If we don’t do something to limit the size of the mega-base, then no-wipe servers are going to be a joke. Every server that’s been around over a month will have a mega-base, and those bases will never be threatened. It will be too expensive to raid them, and the probability of pulling out loot will be too low. I played a lot of Legacy, and servers generally died out after a while because some groups became too powerful to be opposed. You can’t get rid of wipes without getting rid of gameplay issues that force a server admin to wipe his server.
If we have a sane mechanic for discouraging base building above a size threshold, then we wind up with lots of medium sized bases, bases which are proper raiding targets. This benefits everyone, and serves to level the playing field between medium and large groups. A large group might support 3-4 bases just below the threshold, while a medium sized group can support 1-2. Things wouldn’t be so tilted in their favor, but they still get an advantage for continuing to farm by having a backup base.

Gathering large quantities of resources and pouring it into building should be rewarded, not discouraged.

Unraidable? hardly, try knocking out the supports on a mega base and watch as your loot falls out and their hard work crumbles.

I believe there should be rewards for working together, just as this is.

That’s not to say the solo player couldn’t fight back with tricks, traps and wit.

As the game progresses this will in turn balance out. It’s not something that needs a hard enforced balance.

another idea for the limitation of mega bases.
the more blocks that are connected together (if possible to calculate) the faster the decay process. This could work to a point where more pieces cannot be added. Also in order to have a mega base you would generally need to have a large group of people, to stave off decay. You know the type of clans that have at least one person on at all times of the day.
sleeping bags could have to be so far apart form each other in order to placed.

I don’t know if this is a problem or if there is a solution, but i would like to see more village type settlements, a wall around a village wouldn’t require a lot of blocks.

Factoring material weight and the amount of weight a certain material can support would also limit this. Wood buildings fall down after 3 or 4 floors. Stone buildings fall down after 5-7 floors, and metal falls down after 7-10. Something like that anyways.

I find it funny that many people come here to complain that bases are not secure enough. They can’t do a run or sleep at night without coming back to their base being raided.

Then we have you who is complaining that some people make their base large enough to make is somewhat secure and you don’t think that is fair to you the raider.

Hey if they want to take the time to build a large base to hopefully keep their gear secure…more power to 'em.

This makes me a bit nervous. If you want to limit the size of your bases on a private server, go right ahead but don’t punish the rest of us for working together. What if we all wanted to connect our individual buildings together for a large complex? Part of the game has been try to build a community. You obviously haven’t been part of a really large group in one building or large cluster of buildings but most of the time the players are not cohesive in these larger groups and end up fighting each other or more commonly, having mass panic when someone is attacking because they can’t coordinate or figure out what is going on.

A smart player or group can always take advantage of a larger base or group of players, finding the tool cupboard/s is really not the end all. Like Malexion pointed out, start knocking out foundations or other things and the bases aren’t what they used to be. Plus, people focus on upgrading the outside first. You’ll find many big bases with twig interiors.

This was my house I built on legacy server na4

I would be quite upset if it just got demolished because someone wanted me out of there- after all, it took me hundreds of hours to build it. I built it so I would be safe and so it could weather many people who wanted what I had in there. I would hope they put in a commensurate amount of time to raid me when persistent servers are released again. I did it so it would be persistent and to that end, I succeed. I hear that after 7 months of not playing legacy, parts of it are still there. If people want to put this much work into upgrading their bases then sorry moses, it should also take you that much work to take what they have. The balance of how you want to play is up to you- do you want to work towards being a raiding bandit, or into a secure base to protect themselves. All in all, I would say that within this last week, raiding has really surprised me with how balanced the game has gotten. Shout out to Garry for making the Raiding to Build Strength so balanced.

[editline]24th February 2015[/editline]

That’s interesting but I would still want the metal (metal pillars from the ground up) to be near infinite, like a high rise essentially. I fear something like this may make the building system even more complicated but I could be wrong. I do see how many people are confused about stability already. Maybe if they fix the part where you don’t have to rebuild everything above after adding pillar support, then it may help that too.

Maybe I just don’t like limits to things but surprisingly like the limits given to us already via stability.

This should be done. I don’t think any buildings should be infinitely tall, and basing it on the material makes a lot of sense. Maybe there would be a very expensive building-block that could allow for another floor or something like that.

I had posted somewhere else about stability stuff, and in there I was thinking you could stack materials to get a big base. The first floors get converted to metal and can support more weight so you put stone, which weighs less, and lets you get a few floors higher. Top floors would have to be wood.

Basically this would let you build your giant base, but you’re going to have easier to raid areas towards the top in order to get it.

Sounds like its worth putting work into developing that then.

The point is to provide an in-game disincentive for the mega-base. That makes sense. Airdrops are already a thing, and while this would happen very rarely, it still needs to be there. It would have a profound affect on the game, even if it almost never happens.

There are much more subtle ways to create size limits rather than bombing people’s bases. I personally don’t like large bases, mostly because of the hit on fps, but I don’t think blatant punishment through bombing for it is fair either. Overall I think this is an interesting concept, and it might work well as an option on a modded server.

I’ll only go along with it if I’m allowed to build on other people’s houses again (which would change everything all over again), allowing me to build a nice skinny tower on top of someone’s house.

To be honest, the base I posted above was somewhat of a blackhole for frames when people got close. I’m not getting the same impression it is having the same impact on fps as it did in legacy but I think the current wood gathering levels and stability amounts would prevent someone from doing a really giant house right now, even if they had a lot more time and servers were up longer. A significant fps impact would be my only issue with a mega base, if it in fact did that. Still, I don’t know if a mega base would be any different than 10 smaller buildings packed together of the amount of materials. As of right now, you miss one pillar and you start having serious stability issues after 3-5 stories. I haven’t seen anyone build anything I would consider a mega base yet. In my experience, the most intense lag in legacy would come from the amount of objects in a condensed area- stuff like stacking 100 ramps to make a ramp safe or layering large storage boxes together were a nightmare for frames when you got close to them. I’ve seen drops from stuff like that recently (like a room with 40 furnaces burning) but nothing enough to complain about.

I’d like to hear about the more subtle ways to create size limits.

Remember, this has to work on servers where there is no wipe. Part of the idea here is to make it so that servers don’t have to wipe at all. If you just raise costs, like say, the cost of wood or stone or metal, people will still build really large, it just takes more time.

You can have the base of buildings decay faster due to the strain, but that would likely just become an annoyance and lead to toppled structures much more quickly. A flat-tax decay rate on every module, varying only by material type and possibly biome, would probably solve all the problems. If the percentage was right, a mega-base or cluster of buildings (a town?) would require a team of people regularly harvesting and repairing… as it should be. The average player with a small to medium sized house would have no trouble keeping up. And unlike Legacy, your roof doesn’t disappear after a day or two of being offline… the whole structure slowly degrades until someone easily breaks in and loots you, or the stability gives way and it collapses.

Interesting thought: raiding a significantly decayed structure could be risky. A raider might decide to selectively repair certain walls while breaking through others to keep the whole thing from coming down on his head.

Having the Tool Cupboard be a limited repository for resources to auto-repair one’s house has been recommended before. That could be a means to prevent decay while regularly bleeding away the stored resources. Make the cupboard cost 1.5 to 2 times as much in resources to auto-counter decay as it would take for a player to run around with a hammer doing it manually. That would further discourage solo players from building huge castles, but shouldn’t be a problem for active groups.

A more robust/complete stability system would do it. I do think this is in the works though, but this is just conjecture based on some of the stuff I’ve seen posted by Garry.

Anyway, each material would have a certain amount of strength, and could only support so much weight built on top of it. Go over this limit and your building crumbles to the ground.

Base defenses. Spikes, trapdoors, tripwires, alarms, etc could be placed to create a more solid defense other than building 50 floors and 200 doors.

In all fairness though if someone spends the time building a large base and it doesn’t severely affect frame rates they deserve it. They also deserve it when someone places a few explosives on their foundations and the whole thing gloriously crumbles to the ground in a pile of shattered pieces.

i disagree.
any player or group of players should be allowed to build as much as they want.
if you see a 5x5x5 you should just say “oh boy” and go on until you have the proper amount of C4.

If you are allowed to make 25 C4, I should be allowed to make a base that needs 26 C4 to raid. If you really played a lot of Legacy, then you’d know that the size of bases didn’t make them safer, it made them targets.

Building a house of metal at the size of 5x5x5 rooms costs at least 40k metal (not counting metal you need for tools to harvest all the metal and wood for smelting). if you have the endurance to do this, you should be rewarded to feel safe.
Though, the shortest route to any room in this cube is less than 5 rooms. So if you are able to estimate the location of the cupboard, you can destroy this huge 40k farming monster in a short time.

Its true that the cost of a room with a minimum C4 safety rating increases geometrically while the cost of C4 is always linear.

That said, this isn’t the way to evaluate safety. Focusing just on rooms with a minimum C4 safety rating ignores the increased ability to hide things within a structure. Sure, with a 5x5x5 any room can be hit at a cost of 5 C4 or less, but you don’t know which room to hit, so its a crap shoot.

If you want a reasonable chance of success without knowing which room has the loot or toolcupboard, you have to hit a lot of rooms. For a 5x5x5 with 125 rooms, on average you’ll have to uncover half the rooms before finding the correct one if the defender places his toolcupboard or lootroom randomly.

Even if you take into account the fact that stairwells take multiple rooms, and that defenders won’t likely place their lootroom in the same location as their toolcupboard, you still have to search something like 50 rooms, costing 25 C4 on average, or something like 135k sulfur.

I did play a lot of vanilla legacy (800+ hours) and my group ran pretty much every server we played on. Legacy was a little different than current Rust. For one thing you could see into walls. You can’t see through stone walls in new Rust. Perhaps the devs will fix that now that third person is gone, but until they do, its a major nerf to raiding in new Rust. I’ll take stone over metal any day if stone means that the raider can’t see which room he needs to hit.

Secondly, I played on servers where very large bases existed that did not get raided. I played on servers where 10x10x5s existed in Next Valley, and it just didn’t get hit. No one was wasting their hard earned C4 on a base like that. If it had big open areas inside sure, but the one I’m talking about was compartmentalized as far as you could see inside, a 10x10x5 has 500 rooms, even being able to see through cracks in walls, good luck finding a loot room in there without a massive amount of C4.

Lastly, Legacy very much had a problem with server death due to established groups. I played on many a legacy server where my group killed the server. We just got established, and raided every other group until there weren’t any left and the population was so low it wasn’t worth playing on.

This will be a problem in new Rust unless the megabase is addressed. It was definitely a problem in Legacy.

There already is a way to limit mega builds, its the Stack Over Flow server error, this causes the server to crash and need a wipe.