Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #1I already started a thread saying that I love the new building system in general. Now I would like to make some suggestions how it could get even better. Certainly not all ideas are gold, some might suck, but maybe some aspects inspire the developers, in case they will ever read this thread.
Everyone is certainly welcome to share his ideas, and criticize mine. If there are new good ideas I can pull them to the top post.
What are the main reasons raiders complain?
I think raiders in general have no problem with difficult situations, even if they might complain if raiding gets harder. The harder the more rewarding it is!
They only really get pissed, if something gets un-raidable. Like if you remove your stairs. So this should not be possible.
What are the main reasons "suddenly homeless people" complain?
I think the top reason, which really annoys you, is if you get raided because someone cheated or used an exploit. Cheating has to be eliminated as much as possible. I can handle if I got raided because of a mistake I made, but it sucks if you lost all your hard work because of cheating.
Second reason is if raiding is too easy. All your hard work, and then someone comes and takes it over with no effort.
Another thing is that you have to log-off at some point. You want to be able to put effort in your home, and know it gets really hard to raid.
How hard should raiding be?
Where starts the basic balance? In my opinion house owners have to understand this is no single player building sim, there is always the possibility you get raided no matter how over-carefully you fortify your home. Raiders have to accept this is no dungeon crawler where you can easily get tons of loot placed there by a developer. People invested a lot of time to build and gathering something, so it has to take the raiders a lot of time to steal this from them too.
The question is, should raiding be easier than building yourself (=gathering resources, planning, collecting what's inside your crates, ...), harder, or equal.
I think everyone agrees, it has to be easier in total, otherwise raiding would make no sense. The raider still has the risk to lose his raiding equipment, so he throws something in too.
[UPDATE] Some posters think that raiding is not going be the focus of the finished game. They expect more content to come, which will make raiding less interesting.
I don't really see this yet, as I think one main aspect of Rust are conflicts, and raiding is part of these conflicts (although I would appreciate new cool things to do in rust).
So this raises the question, should raiding get extremely hard, to make it less interesting and make people focus on other tasks? At least I think yes, but maybe not until there are really new other things to do. [/UPDATE]
I would say the reward is whats inside the crates. Only rarely raiders are interested in the house itself. So lets assume the content of the crates is the reward.
Home owner effort = building house + gathering what's inside the crates
Shouldn't raiding then at least be as hard as building the house? It would still be easier than building the house AND gathering all resources in the crates yourself.
I know this is theoretical, because one weak spot in a house can make it significantly easier to get inside, but that's ok. Building errors should get penalized. But if you build all perfectly correct, it should take a raider as long as it took you to build the house to get in (roughly).
In general I think that raiding is too easy in legacy and in the experimental branch. Why? Because everyone does it all the time, and people are mostly going the easy way to get what they want. Also raider parties are often the most wealthy individuals on a server (look at their houses...).
Also raiders who might want to complain: remember, the harder it is to raid a house, the more reward you will find in it if you actually are able to raid it. If houses get raided every night, you will not find a lot of loot in it, and some people might even quit playing frustrated.
Possible solutions
Raiding equipment (helps raiders and homeowners)
What if you "are" able to build within the proximity of a strangers cabinet, but only specific raiding items (ladders, barricades, improvised staircases)? They could take much longer to build, and be much more expensive. Maybe they also stay for just an hour and disappear afterwards. You would still have a chance to raid a building, but it gets much harder. During beta you could use the same models, just different names / itemids / stats.
I guess also C4 has to come back, but it should be very, very, very hard to craft. Otherwise it will not be the same effort to raid a house, than to build it.
Counter measures for homeowners (helps homeowners)
Let the homeowners build something that guards their house if they are not there. With the cabinet you also have the possibility to restrict to a specific number of traps, prohibiting trap spamming.
Possible examples
- Self firing turrets, they could be really expensive but are a good way to make your home harder to raid.
- Barricades and fences (electrified?)
- Send yourself an email / SMS if a trap is triggered, something Garry suggested months ago
- Booby traps like pitfalls with spikes (The big problem with traps, is that a professional raiding team can probably avoid them too easily)
- Tamed wolfs which stay in the house. Player can put the wolf in guard mode or calm mode. In calm mode, other players (=friends) can register at the dog so they don't get attacked if he is in guard mode.
- [by Moist Cake] Shooting arrow trap hidden in wall
- [by Moist Cake] Logged of players do not sleep, but attack AI controlled if another players comes near. [my 2 cents] I think this would cause a lot of problems. First, do I even want my character to run around, should he also open doors, how does the AI know what is "within" the house, what if you share your house and don't want a friend to get attacked. Almost certainly no friend system will be implemented. Also not everyone sleeps within a house, AI controlled sleep-gladiator fights on the spawning beach?
Improve cabinet (helps homeowners)
You should be able to put a lock on the cabinet like on a door.
If the cabinet gets destroyed, there is ~3 hour timer before a new one can be build, AND the authorizations of the destroyed cabinet stay active in this time.
This way the homeowner has more of a chance to at least not lose his house but just his loot.
Improving your house has to be difficult (helps raiders)
A wooden shack should still be relatively easy to raid (as to build). If you make it hard to upgrade to stone, and even harder to upgrade to metal, hobby raiders will still find raidable targets as not everyone can effort to upgrade his home in time (= before getting raided).
As improved houses should be really hard to raid, they should also be really hard to be improved.
I know this is vague, but as the building system is not even completely in place, details of balancing wouldn't make much sense.
Find ways to enforce the development of societies (helps raiders and homeowners)
As I see it, Rust is currently a big deathmatch game / building sim, with rarely any people working together. Those who work together are often very small groups, and more often than not real life friends.
Everyone who gets in with good intentions, will lose those quickly after getting shot several times, and after complaining in the chat gets a response like "welcome to rust, that's how the game works. if you don't like it play something else"
If you would get people to work together, they could protect each other much better, and even the vision of big player towns would get more realistic. This would be balanced, as the same counts for bigger raiding parties. Larger scale fights might emerge, which adds to the fun.
I think most people want to work together, but there are a few things holding them back
- General distrust. Trust nobody in rust. Best thing is to grow eyeballs at the back of your head. I think this should not be changed, it adds to the charm of the game
- You can't distinguish between persons. In real life everyone looks pretty much different. In rust everyone looks pretty much the same. I don't know if the person approaching is my friendly neighbor, or a dangerous raider. So better to shoot than to greet. There has to be a way to tell who someone is from more of a distance. Not from miles away, but to more or less safely identify someone before he shoots you in the face.
- No save zones. If you play a MMORPG, where do you meet people mostly and learn to like them? Mostly in peaceful towns I would say. You have the opportunity to learn the qualities of a person, where in the wild you would have ended up shooting each others heads. Would save zones fit into rust? Well I think this would be at least be a possibility, but hard too say. Maybe have towns with invincible NPC guards, who break your skull as soon as you attack another player. And put something interesting in those towns so players will get there. Maybe the possibility to trade there, like a small auction house or whatever.
- Game features which support groups/guilds/clans. Many people feel more like a group if the game tells them they are in one. You are in a guild, you have a guild chat, and you see your members on a minimap. I don't think this fits in the world of Rust.
- Maybe you should build upon the idea of the cabinet. Give 10+ people the possibility to join together and build a town hall (1.000.000 wood, 100.000 stone required) which gives you much more land and let you name it. If you cross the border it says (you are now entering "Rust Lovers" territory). A common territory might forge you together, and may have other people wanting to join your village.
- Goals which can almost only be achieved by big groups.
- [UPDATE] New very expensive buildings/furniture, which can only be afforded by large groups
- [UPDATE] Building upon the town center idea, add new buildings/furniture, which can only be build within a town. With this step you encourage people to build within a town. Examples (better barricades/walls/defensive structures), Carpenter Building which allows you to craft faster, auction house which allows trading, bar which is a no fighting zone and plays music, bank which is nearly impossible to break into and which is run by players, ...)
- [UPDATE] Add a currency to the game, and encourage people to bring their money to a city (see above, buildings which keep you money save, ways to spend it there like auction houses, maybe NPC traders if that doesn't go against the vision of the game, ...)
Only being able to edit what you build for one minute (not my idea, I personally don't like it)
Being able to edit what you build for just one minute also has it's downsides: Changing and improving your base was such a pain in the ass in legacy rust, having to use C4 if you just made a minor mistake or changed your mind on how your building should look like sucked. And if you change your mind within one minute, your are screwed. Don't like that idea.
And even if you had that 1 minute timer (which I would at least increase to 10 minutes should it come, which I hope not) I could still destroy the staircase every night with a hatchet (if you are two persons).
Make raiding less interesting as you offer new other things to do (helps raiders and homeowners)
- Nothing I could think of right now which would really convince people to stop raiding and do something else
-
-
I know you're gonna catch a bunch of downvotes and shit for this post, but I like the direction you're going in some of these ideas.
-
i think raiding should be an investment with inherent risks. maybe you find heaps of gear, maybe you find a few cloth and a rock. i think it should be equally difficult to raid as to build your own, and equally hard to make the gear you could potentially steal.
i don't really like the idea of enforced safe zones, but can see them developing later in a server with a community enforcing it by strength of arms.
i do like the timed remove function, partly because it could mean the end of the cupboard's magic bubble of protection, and partly because the only real reason to remove a part is that you just placed it in the wrong spot. also, in its current format, the remove via cupboard can be abused to level a house you raid in minutes.
that said, a territory marker like you have suggested has potential, and would potentially need a number of people working together to make it. the actual benefit is debatable, you wouldn't want anything too artificial, but it needs to be worthwhile making the damn thing. maybe cheaper building costs. or hell, combine it with another idea such as a lumbermill that can be used to improve wood returns for the group.
-
That is easier said than done. You have to be able to deal with edge-cases, and people that skirt the system. It would be nearly impossible to maintain a rule like that.
I don't think cheating really is the issue here. With EAC it's really a non issue.
In Rust, you SHOULD be able to lose your home. If someone comes and breaks down the doors and changes the locks, that is just part of the game. However, most people will settle to just take your stuff and be off. But the cupboard system really takes that mechanism and breaks it. Because of the implications of a raider gaining access to the cupboard, it needs to be protected. Making a base as unraidable as possible is the main focus of nearly every base being built. But instead of using traditional methods, they revert to taking advantage of broken and exploitable mechanics. In turn, this requires people raiding to exploit the stability mechanic and just topple the entire base.
No it is a survival game, and raiding really isn't the default playstyle at all. Raiding should be used as a survival technique. When food a resources become scarce .
I wholly disagree. Raiding is not the point of the game. Raiding should only become "easier" when gathering becomes "harder" due to drought, over-hunting, or a particular harsh winter.
No, because the houses are being built with the particular focus to deter raiders from successfully raiding. The advantage should be to the fortified home, every time.
Not only is it theoretical, it's also short-sighted. There is going to be way more to this game than legacy ever was. Raiding has become a pastime instead of a survival technique. Once more significant dangers are at play, I think raiding may have to die down quite a bit.
I doubt c4 will be back as c4. I'd like to see dynamite. It is very unstable. You might succeed... or fail and blow your face off trying to get into a house.
siege weapons are already on the mind map.
Most of this is already planned.
Tamed? Not in the sense you are talking about, but it would be interesting to befriend a wolf by offering it meat. If it accepts you into the pack, you will get a rank just like the other wolves in the pack. If it perceives you as the same rank it will attack you. If it perceives you as the a higher rank it will follow you. If it perceives you as the a lower rank it will ignore you.
You may end up fighting a few wolves for rank.
Yes
No.
I don't like this idea at all. Why not put energy into finding a better solutions to these god-awful things than trying to add new arbitrary rules to make their existence more polarizing.
There shouldn't be such a thing as a "hobby raider" this is a survival game, not a raiding game.
Steps are already being taken, but a huge step back was taken when they re-enabled global chat as default.
Allowing taunting as such only emboldens the KOS/deathmatch mentality.
No, this completely undermines the gritty feel of rust, and is completely in contrast to Garry's vision of rust.
-
Raiding equipment would solve a lot of issues.
-
@utilitron
As for your statements Rust isn't all about raiding - That might be true, but this thread as a matter of fact is focusing on the aspect of building houses and raiding them (mostly those two things go hand in hand in Rust). So that might be the reason why you find a lot of points talking about raiding. Just saying raiding is not the focus, does not really help in the discussion as raiding is a part of the game, and as of now even a big one.
Regarding the cheating factor, I honestly hope you are right and EAC will solve the problem to a point where it is "not really an issue".
The only thing in contrast to the vision of Garry in the "society" section is the idea with the NPC guards for saftey zones. And I questioned my own Idea.
I think giving players the possibility to found a town, claim land, defend it, lose it, ... is not against the vision of rust. It would only be if players don't develop their own stories, but the town system would come with a million rules and software features.
I appreciate your comments, although I don't share most of your thoughts. But I really miss some of your own ideas.
You are saying Rust will not need to focus on raiding, as "there is going to be way more to this game than legacy ever was". Can you specify in which ways you see the game developing which make raiding less interesting?
Also you say people should only raid if food and resources are getting scarce. How could you encourage people to raid less, without breaking Garry's vision of the game?
-
A lot of the OP's original points revolve around the idea this is a raiding simulator, and that raiding is the pinnacle of the game. It is not, and there will be much more to the game that (hopefully) relegates raiding to a last ditch survival effort or the goal of virtual sociopaths.
Now don't take this comment as me being anti-raiding, but merely as I want more from the game than that. I was already getting bored with Legacy because that's really all there was.
-
Don't get this thread wrong, it's not saying that raiding and building houses should be the centerpiece of the game, it's just collecting ideas to make those specific aspects better.
If better means making them less important, also suggestions to achieve this are welcome.
It started off as discussing the new building system, which automatically brings you to the raiding aspect. At least currently you mainly build to defend your goods from raiders, not to try out architectural concepts just for the fun of it (although that could be a big part of the game!). This also explains why many house building mechanisms do or don't get included because of raiding aspects.
Basically I agree with you, It would be really nice to get more out of the game, but I fear as long as raiding is allowed, and is so easy, quite a lot of people will see this as the most fun thing to do in this game.
In my opinion the question really is if there will be some future content which makes raiding uninteresting in comparison, to a point where it is not the main focus. Honestly I doubt that, because the game is centered around conflicts and fighting, and what can be better than fighting and getting loot out of it.
I think the only way to reduce raiding, is to make it much more unattractive, and this again is exactly hitting one of the discussion points of this thread ("How hard should raiding be?")
-
No, this is a discussion on "how to improve / balance the building system and raiding". Your OP is heavily focused on the idea that raiding is a staple in the game and as such the suggestion you have made are heavily focused on how to make raiding as viable an option as not raiding. Because you have so heavily focused on this ideal, I had no choice but to counter your key assumption that "it has to be easier in total, otherwise raiding would make no sense". I have countered your idea of balanced with one more aligned to how I have come to understand and/or hope Rust will be.
It defiantly does help in the discussion as raiding is a part of the game, as we need to be able to correctly identify the role of raiding before we can designate the proper balance it should have vs building. Considering the point I made that most of the aspects of planning people put into building their base is to deter raiders, it would make logical sense that raiding then should be harder than building.
On top of the safety zones, Garry has stated that group systems (i.e groups/guilds/clans) break the emergent gameplay, let alone a minimap that shows where your teammates are.
As for helping distinguish players from one anaother, Garry has talked bout going in the stark opposite direction as you. He has entertained the idea of removing steam names and requiring you to name each person you encounter manually.
For starters... farming: There will be fields and livestock. Beyond protecting your "base" you will also have to protect your cattle. The ideas behind home protection will have to move from what is "in" your home to what is around it as well.
Weather, and disasters: Right now, travelling around the map is relatively safe. Flash floods, tornadoes, wind storms, blizzards, and earthquakes. Making the world a more dangerous place to travel will make raiding less fruitful.
-
Well, maybe you should read a line to its end, instead of stopping in the middle of it... (Hint: " I don't think this fits in the world of Rust.")
Who said something about steam names? I think there should be ways to help you distinguish people better, that's all. I admit I don't have any concrete suggestions, but nonetheless I think this would help to avoid people killing each other instantly.
So if there are even more things you can raid, this will make raiding less interesting. Makes sense...
I can somehow see what you are saying, weather and disasters might help. But again - this is not offering new interesting tasks, it just makes raiding more difficult.
-
Hi all,
(please pardon my poor english)
There is a lot of interesting ideas in this thread.
Here are my thoughts.
On immersion :
Yes, please disable the global chat again. I see no value in global chat (maybe because I'm not interested in doing the helpdesk / insulting russians or mums / public raging). Also I completely agree with the fact it "emboldens the KOS/deathmatch mentality".
On raiding :
It should be hard and risky. Make the raiding just a part of the survival game and not the opposite. Leave the raiding for those who have no choice (ex: too much pressure on natural resources), or for those who have the choice but are willing to put A LOT of effort into it. And yes, the reward should be a fair compensation for the efforts put into it. I agree that the balance is tricky.
The most important, at the moment, is to fix the bugs some players exploit to raid. I'm fine with being raided if everybody is playing the same game with the same rules. That's a game and it's ok to loose, but loosing because of exploits/cheats/hacks is pissing me off. Last time it happened to me I stopped playing for 2 weeks. I just don't understand the thrill those people get from raiding this way.
On the development of societies :
I dream of a rust where small villages/communities/cities start to emerge. Right now the only way to achieve that is to leverage communities already established outside the world of rust (your steam friends for example). Communities emerging from within the game would be great (just my opinion). At the moment there is no incentives for collaboration. There is no balance between what you may loose and what you may win from doing so. Most of the time we act rationally, which in the current state of rust is killing before being killed. And again, I agree the balance is tricky if you don't want to ruin the "I can't trust people" feeling.
Pushing it further I would also enjoy to see self emerging political systems. Some communities may choose a democratic governance, some may choose anarchy, some may like dictatorship ... And a lot may plot some coups, invasions, revolutions, ... :-).
All that should stay self emerging.
Do you share my dreams ? If so what are you ideas to achieve that ? Which kind of incentives should push that forward ?
Maybe they could make an industrial revolution happend. Make it possible for the people to build big industrial machines. People will have to collaborate just to fund it (like shareholders) because it's expensive. The machines would need natural resources and some labour to produce their output.
Example : farming machines, war machines, labs (explosives, yess!!), flying machines, ...
Just like in the real world you will see people leaving their countryside to work together in cities.
Again, that should be self emerging and not forced. People should still be free to go their own way.
-
I agree completely. That's the balance issue that's missing in the game, and it's been missing since day one.
Raiding and griefing will always be a part of the game. That's fine. Just like in the real world, there will always be people who try to take your stuff. So getting rid of raiding isn't the answer.
And although it's died down a lot, people used to suggest really far-out ideas like automated turrets or crazy computerized defense systems that would automatically kill raiders. This totally goes against the whole "survive on sticks and stones" atmosphere of Rust. Granted, there are a few stretches already (no way you're building a Thompson from firewood and stones), but automated defenses are just over the top.
And making the walls stronger just creates an arms race. That creates the Epic Mega Hyper Gang With C4 deadlocks that plagued legacy.
Right now, raiding carries very low risk and the potential for very high rewards. Get 3-4 guys together with hatchets, hit the server during off hours, and it's a shopping spree. The solution is to make raiding carry a higher risk and/or a lower reward. Maybe allow users to bury items, complete with grass regeneration. Or allow basic booby traps like incendiary bombs: knocking down a wall with hatchets causes enough vibration to shatter a vessel that combines two chemicals, which burns the structure down. Give it a 30- or 60-second timeframe to engulf the whole structure with flames, all the while causing damage to anyone inside. The result is you'd still lose your stuff, but the raiders would gain nothing -- and might even take damage.
There are lots of ways to approach it, but the end result should be making raider harder and carry higher risk. I don't want to see Rust turned into a carebear hugbox, but as it stands now raiding is simply an ultra-low-risk, ultra-high-reward venture. Totally unrealistic.
-
A lot of people focus on hurting raiders as a way to stop them, but that won't be a real deterrence because of respawning. I am less excited about the bear traps, for example, than some. Hurting a raider slows him down, which is great when you are there to actively defend your base, but it doesn't stop him.
I think the real way to stop the brute force raiders is to make it harder to click and hold raid. Greatly increase metabolism, for example. Make the regen and weapon damage rates lower so that it takes longer to break a wall. Add item durability back, or if not durability, a tiny chance that your raid weapon can break, maybe raise it for each increased wall progression. Make it cost more in resources and time to raid in other ways.
At least with C4, there was a decent cost involved and raiders were forced to decide if raiding a house with C4 would likely be worth it. There was a huge balancing change needed in legacy that never happened that could have made the inevitability of large groups taking over the server take a bit longer, but early on, people didn't want to 'waste' their C4.
-
In my opinoin, the big problem I see with raiding is it's most beneficial to raid houses of people that aren't online. It's not a FPS fun gun game at this point. It's a puzzle game that in the end can be beat by brute force and patience. The only raid proof home is one on a rock that no one can climb to I've watched twitch streams of raiders who have no problem spending 10 minutes holding down M1 while chatting amongst themselves, it's like social catch up hour.
My suggestion is to try and reinforce the idea of raiding homes of people that are online, and the tool cabinet I think makes this more possible.
If anyone who has access to a tool cabinet is online or has been online in x minutes (15?) then everything works pretty much as it does now. Though, there should probably be some extra requirements on making bases more accessible. More on that later...
If no one has been online for 15 minutes who has access to a tool cabinet, then all items in that cabinets sphere should be basically unbreakable. However, the decay timer kicks in. If you aren't online in say 72 hours AND gathering resources and using them to fresh your stuff up, the over all health of your home drops. This reinforces the idea of everyone having to continue to compete for materials even after their base is built, which means even raiders have incentive to raid because they'd rather take resources from someone than chop on trees.
Some other stuff I can think of is requiring foundations to be built on ground level and having separate foundation types for rocks. Those rock foundation types have to be attached to something tied to a primary foundtaion. No more rock bases.
-
I actually agree with this point, when someone is naked (or wearing similar cloths) how am I supposed to know if that guy 100ft away is the fucking douche that just killed me, or the guy I met 10 minutes ago that gave me food and some wood..
I sure as hell won't wait until I'm 1ft away to find out.
-
Really, only wood walls should be able to be chopped through. I currently think the wood walls are good now. You can chop through one by yourself but it's going to take you awhile. Get a few people working together on it and it goes pretty quickly.
Stone should be much harder, and you should need a pick axe and more than a couple of people - should be really time consuming.
Metal should be unbreakable unless you have explosives.
An experienced player should be able to construct a 3x3 with a metal room in the center after a couple of hours of play. This would give you a fairly secure area to store things from casual raiders.
Metal safes would be cool too. Build one of those with an electronic lock on it and you would need explosives or a lock pick to open it. Lock pick would actually take some skill to use, and explosives would damage/destroy some of the contents.
-
A fair point, but I was thinking more along the lines of the building fire also incinerating the raider's loot if the raider died. Sure, they can respawn, but now the raid was nothing more than a timesink.
I mentioned this in another thread and I've seen it batted around before, but this is another good alternative. The end goal is to make a raid still possible, but carry a much higher expense -- including risk. Right now it's far more profitable to play with 2-3 friends and just raid every structure during the off hours than it is to actually gather and craft. Play on any server with more than 30-50 players, and raiding is the de-facto method of gathering resources. With that, raiding stops being "part of the game" and becomes "the game".
-
Raiding without a way to get in and out within 5 minutes is fucking broken. You couldnt give a bigger advantage to big groups who can take walls down fast and dont have to worry as much about being killed while doing it. a small group has almost no chance of raiding in a populated area.
-
the thing is, the big group will always have an advantage over a smaller group or solo player. 10 people can attack more in a minute than 5, its just common sense that they can do more damage and raid faster.
the thing to balance it out should be gear. maybe have the salvaged pickaxe do damage equivalent to 4 people with rocks each hit (because its really a tier 4 tool.) c4 could deal 20 people with rocks worth of damage at once.
then give the walls etc health equal to the tier, so wood has enough to deal with say 4 people with rocks banging at it for 2.5 minutes straight(or 1 person with a salvaged pick). 10mins for a single rock. stone could be 5 minutes with salvaged gear, 10 with normal metal gear. metal could as someone said be immune to anything less than explosives. remove regen and add decay. add weapon durability or a % break chance each use.
these things will be balanced out in time, especially with the addition of old mechanics.
(on a slightly different train of thought, +1 to metal safe. more hp, more space. sized a bit bigger than the large storage box, and can have a lock placed on it. big ass target for raiders. could potentially replace the cupboard too with the exclusion zone also being a heads up that their might be goodies inside)
-
its not just an advantage. its the difference between it being poissible and not
-
People with rocks shouldn't be able to break anything other than your head. I know in the game you can use it to gather your first bit of resources, but that should be it. Go try and break through a log cabin wall with a big round rock and see what happens.
-
at the moment, because of regen. if that was scrapped, it would just be a matter of time/resource investment, not possibility.
-
I agree totally. I accept that there are always going to be raiders, but this shouldn't be the default method of play. If it is easier to chop down a wall and take everything you need, then who is going to bother actually gathering resources and building, being productive? Everyone is just going to be running around destroying stuff until there is nothing worthwhile left.
-
Amen. Rust is, at the moment, a raiding simulator. Get three players together and every structure is pointless. Play during off hours and you can wreck an entire server.
Make raiding have a higher cost (weapon damage, metabolism / hunger, time, noise from raiding attracts predatory animals, etc), incorporate higher risks (player booby traps, chance of building collapsing on raiders, player can set home on fire to deny loot, etc), and then it's a playable component. Until then, it's the de-facto way to gather resources and tools on any given server.
-
You shouldn't be able to remove stairs and floors from the first 2 floors and have your base magically unraidable.
Agree x 8
Dumb x 1
Useful x 1
Optimistic x 1
Disagree x 1
Artistic x 1
Winner x 1