The misunderstood barricade, the limits of them

[Trizzo 632]

Two bones I have to pick about the theory of barricades, what they are meant to do and how I feel as though they have developed their own entitlement mentality.

First, barricading as a means of safe storage of items is an entirely confusing argument. You are essentially constructing a giant "there is human activity within" signpost and your not expecting all manner of unwelcome guests to intrude? Hiding in plain sight, concealment and storing items on your person will always and forever be the best 'solution' to safely storing gear.

Second, barricading might imply an intention to "man the walls" and set up shop but I'm willing to bet nobody is actually going to role-play taking watch for multiple hours at a time. To implement spawn protection areas tips the scales massively in favour of barricades. They get to enjoy wanderlust whilst having their base protected without the implied upkeep in terms of man hours. What's that saying about cake and eating it? It also isn't entirely against the ethos of a of a post apocalyptic sim having your base ransacked from the inside out.

On public servers, final release, there should be in principle no 'magical chests' or areas that are arbitrarily inaccessible to players or cannot be accessed. Mods on hives different story, take your own hive in your own direction.

 

Ideal thoughts dealt with lets get into the meat of barricades from why and how.

Why barricade?

*Immediate: defend and strengthen your immediate position
*Medium: potentially help achevive other goals(planting, repairing)
*Meta: roleplay, endgame, fun!

 

The more I dwell on barricading the less and less i actually see a desperate need to to do it! Don't minsunderstand i want the feature now but...i just dont see it helping what I want beyond an immediate situation. But thats my story and my take. If i go for horticulture or a stashhouse I would choose plain sight hiding because i think it is a better way about going about achevieing those goals.

Functional Barricading Suggestions

Soft Concealment: drawing curtains, spray painting windows to darken a room, because you don't need to build to enchance a defensive postion. Line of sight is equally important.

Locks: handcuff/chainlink/padlock/combination locks, then counters hacksaws, bolt cuttters

 

Construction: Planks/Boards/etc+Nails,

 

Bobby Traps/Harmful Barricades: Glass walls,improvised nail caltrops, this type of crafting covers a lot in terms of setting up a base that could conceivebly deter players away from it in of itself

 

Breaking them down: Crowbar/woodsplitter/axe/saws

 

TL:DR
*Magical chests and exclusion zones go against the public dayz ethos and should not be included going forward
*If you understand barricades as a hard counter to thieves you have it entirely reversed, barricades are a signpost for theft and should not be understood as a counter to theft
*Barricading implies intention to man the walls but in reality nobody is going to do this therefore you don't deserve a feature that does it for you especially in this style of game.

Discussion going forward:
*Where do you stand on the public server side of 'magical chests'
*What are some functional barricading options and interactions from barricades to countering them?
*Will getting ransacked from the inside out doom base building from the outset? Is it a problem? Who but clans will consistently raid bases in coordinating all in attacks? Is this the main fear? Is it really that oppressive?

 

 

Preventing All Ins

Spawn Delay

Hoik made mention of a timed spawn based on the condition or "strength" of an area. I really like this....i thought i didn't a first but the more i think about it the more i do.Why?

 

If nobody is in their base and another group swaps into from another server it doesn't matter because you were not there to defend your base in the first place, tough luck...And if people are in the base then the timed delay will buy them enough time to defend their base! A long enough timer simulates the break in time that you would be doing from the outside. So essentially you spawn like a reverse combat log if the area you spawn into is considered built up enough.

 

Big Bases=No Login from the insideout

You can't scout out a sweet base, server swap and go from the inside out. You simply spawn close by and have to break in from the outside. This should not apply to all bases, perhaps only the "houses" and "homes" Hicks alluded to. This is why we need to get the terms of reference in order. What consistutes a 'base'?

Look forward to your thoughts!

Edited September 13, 2014 by Trizzo

[Judopunch 523]

This post has room for good well thought out discussion.

Among things related to persistence AND barricading, when the player dies what should happen to his barricades?

 

I would personally favor everything last tagged by the dead player to immediately loose a random amount of quality (favoring worn to damaged) unless another player is within 10M of the items/barricades. This would solve for two things firstly it would make it so death isnt just 'run back to where I hid all my crap'. And secondly it would allow for people to 'discover an abandon position' left by a not so fortunate survivor providing gear, but of what quality..

[Baker. 1484]

Nice

[q.S Sachiel 470]

This post has room for good well thought out discussion.

Among things related to persistence AND barricading, when the player dies what should happen to his barricades?

 

I would personally favor everything last tagged by the dead player to immediately loose a random amount of quality (favoring worn to damaged) unless another player is within 10M of the items/barricades. This would solve for two things firstly it would make it so death isnt just 'run back to where I hid all my crap'. And secondly it would allow for people to 'discover an abandon position' left by a not so fortunate survivor providing gear, but of what quality..

i'd rather each item have it's own 'health' which may have a low passive degrade over time, and/or be able to take damage from weapons (locational or otherwise) from weapons based on their current damage rolls.

Repairs are possible at any stage where item is damaged.  Possibility to upgrade an item to the next tier as long as repair state is at full.

[Judopunch 523]

i'd rather each item have it's own 'health' which may have a low passive degrade over time, and/or be able to take damage from weapons (locational or otherwise) from weapons based on their current damage rolls.

Repairs are possible at any stage where item is damaged.  Possibility to upgrade an item to the next tier as long as repair state is at full.

However it doesnt punish a player for dying. If you dont have to work for your survival whats the point of the game? Die, run to the mound of crap you have hidden. I think thats why its preferable to have damage upon player death. Without it your encouraging a first person shooter mentality.

[Rags! 1966]

This post has room for good well thought out discussion.

 

Don't worry. I'm sure we'll get a few noobs in here in no time whining that you can't pilot an Apache Helicopter within seventeen minutes of spawning in with akimbo P90's. 

[hoik 415]

@ Judopunch: hmm not sure how that would work - seems a bit over complicated just to stop people returning to their body... for me its not a major issue if a player wants to spawn-run back to their body/stash, if that's how they want to play DayZ its fine, has no impact on how I play the game. You can't stop people from using knowledge they have gathered about the world from one "life" to the next...

 

OP makes some good points about barricades - I think that many of us come at this from a gaming perspective (magical chests), which I agree doesn't make much sense in DayZ :) . If you think about the most basic barricading on a house: locks, ply-board on windows, barbed wire - this stuff only slows a person down. IMO it is from this perspective that barricading should be considered, not complete impenetrability!

 

From this perspective (barricading as a delaying mechanic) you can approach barricading in this way:

 

- All barricading objects have a durability

- Durability degrades over time

- Durability can be degraded at different rates by different weapons/tools

- barricades can be maintained, requiring constant care and resources

 

This ^ is all pretty straight forward, but where it can be used more interestingly is in regards to server hopping into the building (or as the OP put it, "being ransacked from the inside out").

 

- allow people to server hop into a "barricade" zone (god knows if this type of zoning can be done, but for now lets assume)

- give them a timed spawn penalty based on the combined durability of the barricaded area. This is to simulate the time it would take to break into the building.

- make it so that it always takes less time (if you have the right tools) to break into the area in game than server hopping

 

For me this is completely logical and legitimate way to integrate (which is the important bit) players ability to server hop into buildings into the game, without using "magic chests" or letting players exploit/meta game the mechanic. What do you think?

 

 

Also:

 

- it would be neat to see some physics based "soft" barricading, like pushing furniture in front of a door/window

- Take on Mars has some very nice physics based object manipulation/ basebuilding, would like to see this come across to DayZ.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=SPtIRy9fXRM#t=48

Edited September 13, 2014 by Hoik

[chodeofwar 145]

I have never liked the idea of barricading or base building. I don't epoch. I don't like the idea of having a safe that will stay on a server for ever and no one but you can access it. I don't like the possibility of not being allowed/time penalty to log in/out inside a certain building because on some other server someone may have locked/barricaded that building.

 

The barricading idea I can only see working properly on private hives so that it takes server hoping out of the equation.

 

Then there is still the problem of the loot that spawn inside the building...what would happen to that?

 

"I have barricaded the police station"

"I have barricaded the barracks"

 

Remember all the tank traps people put at the doors the barracks at NWAF.

 

As soon as you let players start adding shit to the map shit is going to get ugly. Its lucky that tents are so rare or you would be seeing rows of them down the main street of Novo. It breaks the immersion and ruins the atheistic of the game seeing objects\items that look out of place in the map.

[pillock 850]

A couple of suggestions:

 

1) When you die, you get booted off that server, locked out of it for 24 hours and have to choose a new one to respawn in if you want to continue playing right away - that way, you don't get "prior knowledge" of loot and player locations when you're supposed to be in a new life. You could return the next day to your "death server", and if you're lucky you might recover some hidden persistently- stored loot; but general spawned loot and players will almost certainly not be in the same places.

 

2) Dismantling/breaking through barricades should take significant time and effort, as well as the correct tools. In terms of "effort", this would have to be paired with a more complex stamina/fatigue system. In terms of tools, you could have degradation in the same way you have it for axes when you cut down trees: therefore, using a crowbar to remove planks is relatively fast and easy, not causing much damage to the crowbar; whereas, attempting to remove them with a spade will break the spade before it breaks the barricade.

 

3) Given that buildings can only be entered via doorways, it seems to me that it oughtn't to be too difficult for the game to recognise when all possible entrances have been locked or boarded up - thereby creating a sealed zone. I don't agree with the idea of player-ownership of such zones, but it could be made possible that neither players nor loot would be able to spawn inside them. That way, if you tried to server-hop into a sealed building, you'd spawn outside it and have to break in manually; meanwhile, any loot stored inside it would persist, but no new loot could appear, thereby preventing people from farming high-value buildings.

 

All this would require quite a lot of extra mechanics to be introduced to the game, but I think it would work pretty well once everything was in place.

[Evil Minion 943]

TL:DR

*Magical chests and exclusion zones go against the public dayz ethos and should not be included going forward

*If you understand barricades as a hard counter to thieves you have it entirely reversed, barricades are a signpost for theft and should not be understood as a counter to theft

*Barricading implies intention to man the walls but in reality nobody is going to do this therefore you don't deserve a feature that does it for you especially in this style of game.

Discussion going forward:

*Where do you stand on the public server side of 'magical chests'

*What are some functional barricading options and interactions from barricades to countering them?

*Will getting ransacked from the inside out doom base building from the outset? Is it a problem? Who but clans will consistently raid bases in coordinating all in attacks? Is this the main fear? Is it really that oppressive?

Look forward to your thoughts!

Magical chests:

Thats stupid and hurts the game by promoting hoarding. Items stored inside would only ever be accessible by the owner which basically removes them from the game for everyone else. All storage should be accessible by everyone in the same way - be it keys (finite number of different ones), damage (should require special equipment) or lockpicking (should also require special eqipment).

 

Exclusion zones:

Without base-building would be senseless as everyone could just ghost in - either by chance or intentionally. So every base/barricaded area should prevent logging in inside - unless you logged out there in the first place. "There" means this specific base on this specific server and only if the exclusion zone was already active. Everyone else might still log in but will be moved to a spawn outside of the zone. Either directly, with some distance or at a respawn point (without losing any gear of course). So once a base enters "closed state" (e.g. surrounded by barricades with all gaps below a certain width) it will project an exclusion zone that only allows people to log in inside if they logged out inside. "People" would be everyone - it does not matter who set up those barricades. If two teams have a firefight inside a base and they all log out for some reason they all might log back in inside. Lets say the exclusion zone disappears (e.g. one barricade gets destroyed) and gets reestablished (e.g. a new barricade in built) it will count as a new zone. Also smaller zones inside bigger zones should have priority/persist (e.g. you build a house and log out inside then someone builds his own base around your house - you can still log in inside your house just as before).

 

Barricades:

Similar to chests barricades should not be permanent or magic - they should be just barricades. They might block movement and create an exclusion zone between them under certain conditions (thats the main purpose). Now there might be different types but in general barricades should require a lot of time and effort to build and they might also require special tools (vehicles for transportation and work, a welder, nails etc.). So building a barricade should be a long term goal - there should not be bases every ten meters. All barricades should be able to be destroyed (which might take quite a lot iof effort though) and/or bypassed. However this should be fairly hard to do depending on architecture. If the entrace to your base is just a gap everyone can just walk in. If its a gate it can be opened by the same means as a chest. If there are only barricades you might need rare things like big vehicles or explosives to break through (keep in mind that you can ghost out of a completely enclosed area - but you cannot ghost back in). No privileges for builders - a barricade is a barricade and blocks you as well. There should not a something like a "quick destruction button" - unless the architect includes some explosives which in turn can be triggered by anyone.

 

Ownership in general:

Nothing that helps the game. Players should be able to build bases, use, conceal, lock storage but they should not have artificial privileges. You can access your chest because you got the keys - if someone takes them from you its now his chest. You can build a barricade but t will stop you just as much as it would stop everyone else. You can even create an exclusion zone - but it has the same effect on you as it has on everyone else. If your squad has a locked base an manages to get wiped - the base will stay locked to them as well. No items/areas/tools etc. should have an assigned owner.

 

Offline compensation:

As most players would be offline more often than true base owners would be away in real life the measures to break into bases or destroy parts of them should be a little weaker. So a wooden wall should be more durable and not break after a few strikes with an axe. Heavier barricades should not be able to be destroyed by most players - however building those should take a lot of time as well. You should not log out in some random place and after logging in the next day you realize someone built a base around you. Neither should you finally finish your base only to log back in the next day finding nothing but ruins. Both might be possible but very unlikely: The first would require a great and organizedgroup of people all working together for hours, restless, without any setbacks while getting the right mterials in sufficient numbers. The second would require someone to stumble across you base and just happen to have an abundancy of extremely rare and valuable items and deciding to spent quite some time and resources to destroy everything.

 

TL:DR: By abandoning the ownership and permanency concepts and adding effort base building could be a valuable and viable long term or cooperative goal. Bases should be hard to build, hard to crack but still interact with every player in the same way. It does not matter who holds the key - it does matter to hold the key - unless you got explosives. Explosives solve everything.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Evil Minion

[Katana67 2907]

Risk/work = advantage.

 

If I expend time/effort/risk collecting supplies, construction materials, and tools to construct a barricade... then there should be some advantage conferred on that action (i.e. relative protection of what's stored within). I'm not sure what precedent or developer statements you're citing whereby barricades are providing 100% security. They will be counterable, hence why we're getting locks and lockpicks as indicated in one of the recent devblogs.

 

And smart folk won't barricade insanely obvious buildings. They'll barricade off-the-beaten-path cottages and barns. I may not even be able to see a barricade, if it's able to be constructed on the inside of a building. Much less counter it at any given time, depending on the variables (padlock, deadbolt, wood door, hardened wood door, sheet metal, steel, etc.)

 

I think that you're right in suggesting that nobody will "man the walls." But I don't think anyone has ever been operating under that illusion/assumption. People have precedent for that, in mods like Epoch, where bases could be made 100% impenetrable and construction wasn't really a hassle. Obviously it's not a 24/7 job, but people still did it. And folks could potentially do it more often if there was an actual chance (which there really wasn't much of in Epoch) of infiltration. But, I'd agree that it's unlikely to be the norm. However, that doesn't then mean that barricading will provide for 100% impenetrable structures as a consequence.

 

That and you're assuming that there's no level of acceptable risk when people barricade a building. I put up tents in vanilla DayZ, people did all of the time, knowing there's a chance that it could get looted. But that mitigation of risk was provided by stealth, not hard protection. It wasn't absolute. The same dynamic applies to barricades, it's a bit more high-profile (but certainly not to a prohibitive level) and it trades stealth for outright protection. I also don't think that anyone's operating under the assumption that barricading will provide for 100% safe storage anyhow.

 

Your grievance seems to have more to do with what you seem to think people think of barricading, rather than the advantages/disadvantages of barricading itself. Back when I was fighting for this inclusion (barricading/construction) a year ago, these were the two most common critiques leveled at barricading - "it's too visible and therefore useless," or,  "WHAT? You want 100% protected locations?! That's not DayZ."

 

Well, no, I don't want that. And I don't think anyone's ever asserted that bases/barricading should be this way. Developers included.

 

The only "exclusion" zones that have been discussed by the developers, are with regard to server hopping. Dean has stated that it will be impossible for a player to spawn inside a player structure via server hopping, due to some spawn exclusion zone system they have planned. Other than that, there will be counters to entering barricaded buildings.

 

There's a difference between area denial, and movement impediment. Both of which are not absolute.

 

That and I think people, given what I'm seeing here, might have a warped view of what "ownership" implies. It implies that you own something now, not that it's yours forever. I own my apartment, but it could be taken away from me if I don't pay my rent. Simply because one "owns" something, doesn't mean that it's theirs forever. So I think there's a lot of confusion between what constitutes ownership/advantages/counters, and 100% impenetrability.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Katana67

[pillock 850]

If I expend time/effort/risk collecting supplies, construction materials, and tools to construct a barricade... then there should be some advantage conferred on that action (i.e. relative protection of what's stored within). I'm not sure what precedent or developer statements you're citing whereby barricades are providing 100% security. They will be counterable, hence why we're getting locks and lockpicks as indicated in one of the recent devblogs.

 

And smart folk won't barricade insanely obvious buildings. They'll barricade off-the-beaten-path cottages and barns. I may not even be able to see a barricade, if it's able to be constructed on the inside of a building. Much less counter it at any given time, depending on the variables (padlock, deadbolt, wood door, hardened wood door, sheet metal, steel, etc.)

 

I like the rest of your post (and the other one, long though they are!), but I want to pick up and expand on this bit.

 

Barricading a building should be a deterrent to access, not an advert.

 

I think when we talk about the "effort" of constructing something, then that needs to be physical effort determined by a stamina/fatigue system - otherwise it won't work. Your character needs to have the strength (or not) to achieve physically demanding tasks - it's by far the best way of balancing any work/reward situation, especially when it comes to barricading. If you nail a single plank across a doorway, it's not going to take much out of you, but nor is it going to take much out of whoever comes across it and decides they'd like a look inside. However, if you've expended significant time and physical exertion of your character in constructing a solid barrier, the next fresh spawn with a fire axe who spots it might just tire their character to exhaustion before they;ve got half way through their attempt to bash it down. This could make barricading "obvious" buildings in high-traffic areas just as valid (as long as you don't get shot or mugged while you're in the process of putting it up).

 

Similarly, cutting through chains or padlocks with a hacksaw can only really be made 'difficult' if it requires exertion on the part of your character, not just time on the part of the player.

[q.S Sachiel 470]

However it doesnt punish a player for dying. If you dont have to work for your survival whats the point of the game? Die, run to the mound of crap you have hidden. I think thats why its preferable to have damage upon player death. Without it your encouraging a first person shooter mentality.

Yes, i get that you can just return, but doesn't that punish everyone else too?  There are more players than just you on the server.  If you've barricaded a position and you die, what's to stop someone else inhabiting that spot?  Having arbitrary degredation would annoy me.

Like others have said though, having barbed wire across certain high-loot spots was quite inconvenient when playing the mod.  Barbwire you could cut with pliers, so as long as there's a counter, and the item does degrade this should be minimised but not eliminated.  I'd see a predictable decrease as being more acceptable than a random decrease (or life in time) of the barricade personally.

Edited September 13, 2014 by q.S Sachiel

[Judopunch 523]

Yes, i get that you can just return, but doesn't that punish everyone else too?  There are more players than just you on the server.  If you've barricaded a position and you die, what's to stop someone else inhabiting that spot?  Having arbitrary degredation would annoy me.

Like others have said though, having barbed wire across certain high-loot spots was quite inconvenient when playing the mod.  Barbwire you could cut with pliers, so as long as there's a counter, and the item does degrade this should be minimised but not eliminated.  I'd see a predictable decrease as being more acceptable than a random decrease (or life in time) of the barricade personally.

Nothing would stop them. They would just have to fix the place up a bit!

[q.S Sachiel 470]

unless they'd hurt it a bit getting in to kill you, or getting out for that matter, slugged you and bits disappear because they go to ruined due to their being linked to your health like a blood golem.  Would also be an indirect indicator of kill in this scenario.

[KrackProphet 28]

I love the idea of bases. No special privileges outside of the right keys as stated. Player death should not effect anything in game other than the gear on that person.

[blackberrygoo 1416]

However it doesnt punish a player for dying. If you dont have to work for your survival whats the point of the game? Die, run to the mound of crap you have hidden. I think thats why its preferable to have damage upon player death. Without it your encouraging a first person shooter mentality.

In my opinion , barricades and locked doors by dead survivors should recieve half the damage of its health , for instance a lock on a door has health of worn (the lock) and after you die , your door lock becomes badly damaged ... Then when you get back to the door , you first have to lock pick it (if keys are in game then you must find a key again even though it was your locked door ) after that you'd be able to have access to your stash again , but ALL items inside the perimeter of the locks (or if there's a chest locked, all the items inside the chest ) will recieve the same half damage ... So if you had stashed a m4 inside a house with a locked door but it had any "badly damaged" parts then the m4 would be broken after you die and return to it and every time you die (only if you have "claimed or tagged" that lock/ barricade in that life will it recieve damage ) .

So yes you will still know where your barricade / locked house or chest is but you will still have to work to get a lock pick , do the lock picking without breaking your tools or the lock itself (which if you broke the lock you would have to break the door down leaving your stash house completely open til you replaced the door ) or just cut down your barricades if you wanna have access to your stash but remember everytime you lock pick a lock there will be damage done to the lock itself , also everytime you die after you have "claimed"'a lock or barricade by using it or putting it up then all the items inside barricDes / chests/ houses will recieve damage . A fair trade I think for people who constantly stash things and expect and easy "re-arming"..

[Trizzo 632]

snip

 

Amazing response!

 

I hate fallicious arguments, especially people who use strawmen to bolster their position. I certinally I hope i did not give the impression i was begging the quesiton. If i did it was a grevious error. To eleborate.

 

'Base building', as far as i understand, in various iterations of DayZ (mods, epoch) has primarily invloved hard "exlcusion zones". I am aware that the devs have stated that nothing will "not be able to be not be broken into" in the final build. My concern is not with their understanding (and at the risk of sound like a somewhat messianic douche) but the broader commmunity and expections. My views align pretty consistently with the devs and my interest is in participiting in this public vision of DayZ.

 

So that is where i drew from my magical chest examples, from the only examples of barricading that I was aware of. Yes there has been barbed wire, tents and now persistent storage (albeit briefly) but this is not "barricading" in the sense of what has been done in EPOCH/Mods nor what is going to occour in the future. Therefore i use the term "misconception". It is going to be different. I'm getting the terms of reference in order.

 

Now...i agree entirely with your other points! This might come as a shock considering i said no "exclusion zones" but i am not oppossed in theory to preventing a server-swap-base-all-in, because the devs have stated that everything will be enterable, it is just a matter of how. Already salient points have been raised.

 

Preventing All Ins

Spawn Delay

Hoik made mention of a timed spawn based on the condition or "strength" of an area. I really like this....i thought i didn't a first but the more i think about it the more i do.Why?

 

If nobody is in their base and another group swaps into from another server it doesn't matter because you were not there to defend your base in the first place, tough luck...And if people are in the base then the timed delay will buy them enough time to defend their base! A long enough timer simulates the break in time that you would be doing from the outside. So essentially you spawn like a reverse combat log if the area you spawn into is considered built up enough.

 

Big Bases=No Login from the insideout

You can't scout out a sweet base, server swap and go from the inside out. You simply spawn close by and have to break in from the outside. This should not apply to all bases, perhaps only the "houses" and "homes" Hicks alluded to. This is why we need to get the terms of reference in order. What consistutes a 'base'?

Edited September 13, 2014 by Trizzo

[chompster 171]

For those that haven't yet, here's a link to a recent Q&A where barricading was brought up.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DjdtfQhmmw#t=1262

[pillock 850]

You can't scout out a sweet base, server swap and go from the inside out. You simply spawn close by and have to break in from the outside. This should not apply to all bases, perhaps only the "houses" and "homes" Hicks alluded to. This is why we need to get the terms of reference in order. What consistutes a 'base'?

 

 

Far as I see it, and from what I've gathered, a 'base' would be any sealed-off area.

 

So, that means if you block up all the doorways to a building, then it's a base. Or if you build fences surrounding your group of tents, that's a base. From the Twitch Q&A yesterday, Hicks seemed pretty adamant that constructing actual buildings will not be possible for the player to do.

 

I'd like to see it so that sealed areas do not allow players to spawn inside them, unless their immediately-previous log-out was in THAT server inside THAT specific barricaded space. I'd also like to see it so that no loot spawns inside barricaded spaces (so if you block up all the entrances to Green Mountain, for example, you can't just hoard loads of respawning high-end loot there - you could only use it to store items that you'd found elsewhere and brought back to your base).

[q.S Sachiel 470]

Amazing response!

 

I hate fallicious arguments, especially people who use strawmen to bolster their position. I certinally I hope i did not give the impression i was begging the quesiton. If i did it was a grevious error. To eleborate.

 

'Base building', as far as i understand, in various iterations of DayZ (mods, epoch) has primarily invloved hard "exlcusion zones". I am aware that the devs have stated that nothing will "not be able to be not be broken into" in the final build. My concern is not with their understanding (and at the risk of sound like a somewhat messianic douche) but the broader commmunity and expections. My views align pretty consistently with the devs and my interest is in participiting in this public vision of DayZ.

 

So that is where i drew from my magical chest examples, from the only examples of barricading that I was aware of. Yes there has been barbed wire, tents and now persistent storage (albeit briefly) but this is not "barricading" in the sense of what has been done in EPOCH/Mods nor what is going to occour in the future. Therefore i use the term "misconception". It is going to be different. I'm getting the terms of reference in order.

 

Now...i agree entirely with your other points! This might come as a shock considering i said no "exclusion zones" but i am not oppossed in theory to preventing a server-swap-base-all-in, because the devs have stated that everything will be enterable, it is just a matter of how. Already salient points have been raised.

 

Preventing All Ins

Spawn Delay

Hoik made mention of a timed spawn based on the condition or "strength" of an area. I really like this....i thought i didn't a first but the more i think about it the more i do.Why?

 

If nobody is in their base and another group swaps into from another server it doesn't matter because you were not there to defend your base in the first place, tough luck...And if people are in the base then the timed delay will buy them enough time to defend their base! A long enough timer simulates the break in time that you would be doing from the outside. So essentially you spawn like a reverse combat log if the area you spawn into is considered built up enough.

 

Big Bases=No Login from the insideout

You can't scout out a sweet base, server swap and go from the inside out. You simply spawn close by and have to break in from the outside. This should not apply to all bases, perhaps only the "houses" and "homes" Hicks alluded to. This is why we need to get the terms of reference in order. What consistutes a 'base'?

Certain value to each item of barricade of 'exclusion'

density triangulation.  Approximate circle, calculate density.  exclusion density value over set amount = exclude all.  Push player to closest radial position from centre upon spawn (+ extra distance buffer to account for any buildings you may clip in given people will probably barricade existing structure, and that you don't want people just appearing on the edge of a position where someone is defending already).

 

How i'd run it.  The problem would run into the radial vector plopping you off a cliff or in the water or something.

[Katana67 2907]

I meant to get up to the NW corner to check out some of the improvements that they've made, and finally did so today. I know this has been there for a while now, but at the end of the road stretching into the NW corner, there's this small little cabin. At which I'm quite certain they're testing either barricading, or horticulture, or some combination thereof.

 

 

However, we need more isolated cottages and the like for folks to barricade.