Base building rebalance | Comprehensive list of suggestions

[Asmondian 372]

/////// INTRO /////////////////////////////////////////

I'm not going to extend myself explaining why we need a few changes in relation to the base building feature because we all know by now its core issues and its lack of general balance in the current implementation (Vanilla - 1.04).

The fact that any random can get inside your base just by jumping above the fences or by using the hatchet / duct tape infinite combination to destroy the whole place that probably took you some days to build are reason enough to look for some alternatives and improvements. Even more, considering that we are still on time and we all hope this isn't the final design or even close to the desired one.

On the other hands, a lot of us don´t think that the alternatives provided by some of the most popular base building mods are good options. While extremely helpful to keep this feature alive within the community, most of those mods usually denaturalize the base building concept with impossible and indestructible structures, no-clipping walls, digital and unbreakable code locks, fancy but out of context destructions devices, “raid days” and other kind of stuff that seems to belong to a completely different universe than Dayz Standalone. Those are definitely not in line with the vision of this suggestions of with a proper definition of a balanced base building system.

With all that in mind, I’m going to list a couple of attainable ideas that could lead to a more balanced and achievable base building system for the vanilla Dayz SA experience. It’s not my intention to expand the current limits of base building to a whole new level because I really think we need a fast and attainable solution for the next couple of months. Let me say it again, the intention is to provide with an attainable alternative, not some crazy out of the blue completely new concept that would require tons of changes, new additions or things that could completely change this feature.

Hope you guys find it useful:

 

/////// THE 3 CORNERSTONES FOR A REBALANCED SYSTEM /////////////////////////////////////////

1. The needed fixes / tweaks for the current base building implementation
2. The building destruction realistic “handicaps” to provide balance
3. Base defenses: The key role of electricity and gasoline.

 

/////// 1) NEEDED FIXES AND TWEAKS /////////////////////////////////////////

• 1.1 | Fix needed | Ghosting inside bases fixes: Since the last experimental updates on 1.04, the ghosting issue (players jumping from one server to another in a particular location just to log inside a base) was mostly addressed with the new “hopping spawn points” and the fact that you can´t keep your character position when you jump to another server. This is a huge step forward in relation to the feasibility of a proper base building feature, mostly for consoles, where they are tied to the public servers and hive system. We are going to leave it there since this was pretty much fixed.

• 1.2 | Fix needed | Duct Tape bug and general nerf: After you use a certain percentage of your Duct Tape, if you tie up yourself with it and then break free, you will restore the 100% of its value. This bug allows you to make an infinite loop and re-use a single tool (Like a hatchet or an axe) to build/destroy a base, making the process of getting the proper tools to build/destroy anything completely useless. Thankfully, it has been fixed on the internal version and will be fixed on Steam in the future. Besides that, the Duct Tape capabilities are extremely disproportional. You can fix most of the items with it (axes, weapons, hammers, clothes…). This not only makes items like the “weapon cleaning kits”, “sharpening or whetstone” and "electronic repair kit" become completely redundant but also help to intensify that extremely easy and unrealistic way to destroy bases without any item damage punishment on the tool. A fix and general nerf should be done, or at least a more punishing “repairCosts” value if the idea is to still allow to repair almost any items with a duct tape.

• 1.3 | Fix needed | Item collisions and stacking: Another huge issue is the possibility of exploiting items collision to get over the fences or high places. Since the base building walls are not more high than 2.5m (and sometimes the surface even make them lower), by stacking items that have general collision (where your character can stand above them), you can artificially get high enough to jump inside a base. This action can be replicate by using other players.

Devs already worked on this with 1.04 stable removing the collision of wooden planks and metal sheet - the most common items that players used to used -, but car wheels, metal wire, car parts among other items still have this. Of course is definitely harder to carry two big wheels or two car doors to a remote location, but it’s still something that need to be worked on by removing the remaining collision or opting for alternative solutions more related to the base building structure per se than in the items that you can stack.

• 1.4 | Tweak needed | Unmounting barbed wires from the outside only by using pliers: Barbed wires are not an extremely common item in the world and they currently offer a very week protection. They become even less efficient considering that anyone can just unmount them from the outside by using some simple pliers (That are quite abundant lately).

This is definitely not realistic and a new item is required for this task. The more realistic and possible addition would be a “bolt cutter”, with the same category and spawn rate of pliers. It should be a relative big item, similar to a double handed melee. This is a very important thing for this base building rebalance suggestion since the barbed wires are going to have a huge role in your base defenses. I’m going to talk about that in a second.

• 1.5 | Tweak needed | Barbed wires damage and cut probability: The current implementation of barbed wires don´t have any cut probability. You only get health damage and the consequently shock damage (and you can go unconscious), but this only works if you are literally standing above a barbed wire for more than 4-5 seconds. Adding a cutting probability would represent a huge change since it would discourage the continuity of a raid until the player get completely bandaged. Provoking cuts is the raison d'être of barbed wires in the first place as a defense mechanism.

• 1.6 | Tweak needed | A more flexible - but still realistic - positioning area: What I mean by this is making the area where you can build in relation to a pre-existent structures a little bit more flexible. This is completely different to allow wall clipping like in the “build anywhere” mod or similar ones. There are multiple the times you just can´t build close enough to a gate, wall or another base building structure without leaving a huge gap where people can go or shoot through.

Reducing or adjusting the building area / collision is something that we really need right now. at least until barricading become a thing. In addition, the current implementation avoids to place two gates close to each other, preventing players from using an extra - but breakable - protection to the bases with two gates, two combination locks so more time required from the raider to get inside.

• 1.7 | Tweak needed | A more flexible tent positioning system: Tents became a very rare items in the past build and the amount of remote camps in the forest are less and less frequent (let’s not consider the Xbox duping issue here for a second). The great difficulty that means to carry a tent to a remote location discourages many players to build or hide something there.

But there is another reason: the tent positioning is extremely restrictive in relation to the surface below, forcing players to abandon any idea of hidden tent in some remote location because of this. Its definitely something that need to change to work along with base building in remote locations where anyone would like to place a tent inside.

• 1.8 | Tweak needed | Fences high. The issue with it and two complementary alternatives: We recently saw how 1.04 brought a new collision for the frames avoiding that players can go through the gaps after destroying the lower wall. This is definitely a good addition because it forces the raider to at least break two “layers” of the wall before being able to get in. But the issue is not only having people going “under” our base quite fast, but above it.

Leaving aside the possibility of stacking items to get above a fence/wall by just jumping, the current base building walls are definitely not high enough to prevent people from jumping inside your base. In addition, most of the factories and barns entrances (usually the first preexistent structures that players choose to build their base inside) are much higher than the base building walls, leaving a huge gap on the top where players can go through just by jumping above each other. So, this not turns build a base in a remote location like a forest or the west border completely useless, but also doing it using a pre-existent structure. How can we correct this? Here are two alternatives that can also be complementary:

A) The third frame concept: Allow the players to build a third frame on top of the upper frame after you build the platform. This is realistic because you can now access to that high from the inside thanks to the platform. You would require 2 more logs to expand that extra high and then fill that third frame with wood or metal. This will solve (or significantly reduce) most of the cases of players jumping above each other to get inside a base without having to implement unnatural alternatives like massive high bases.

B) Upper Barbed Wire repositions: The current upper barbed wire position its set in front of the upper frame, not above that. This kills the main purpose of avoiding people to climb and jump above the wall, getting hurt in the process. Its position should be changed, providing with even more cover and that extra high described above. You could also allow to add a third barbed wire to that “third frame” suggestion or tie that new higher position to the mounting barbed wire action when you use the bolt cutter, making things even more complete and realistic.

• 1.9 | Tweak needed | Gate interaction area: Devs are probably quite aware of this, but the current state of the interaction area for gates forces players to get outside their base and do some kind of Indiana Jones kind of run with the gate closing speed / collision to avoid ending up outside their own base. This should be changed by setting the door interaction area in the right log/base or at the center of the gate entrance (Ground).

• 1.10 | Tweak needed | Gas stations and limited gasoline: This is probably something that most of the players haven’t pay enough attention but the gasoline of the gas stations around the map is unlimited. You can even keep refueling your containers after you exploded the fuel dispenser. Maybe because we never saw gasoline as a scare and very value resource but this should clearly change. I remember the days where deer stands and gasoline stations locations what something that you must memorize. I’m sure you would probably understand why this change is extremely important a little bit further in this post.

• 1.11 | Tweak needed | Destroying the frames of a gate from the outside: As I mentioned in 1.8, now you can´t go through the frames of a wall like you used to, forcing you to destroy two layers of that wall (E.g. lower wooden wall and lower frames) to then crawl inside. While this is definitely a good thing, there could be a problem with this when we consider the gates. How? When you are destroying a gate from the outside, you currently can destroy the upper and lower walls, but then you can´t destroy the frames. You need to unlock the combination lock or use a hacksaw on it to then open the gate. After that, you can unmount the metal wire with some pliers and finally destroy the frames (in case you need to destroy the whole structure and not just get inside).

But what is the issue with this? Players could exploit this system by building gates in places where you just can’t access the sides of it (where the combination lock is placed), creating an impenetrable base. But how they get inside if they can´t access that combination lock either? Just by leaving a player or alt account inside. It’s would not be a generalize scenario but definitely something to consider. The solution to this would be just by allowing dismounting the metal wire from the outside with the already mentioned “bolt cutter” as a step of the destruction sequence that we are going to talk further in this post.

• 1.12 | Tweak needed | Full damage to the hacksaw for code locks: In the current implementation, you can still destroy a combination lock (3 and 4 digits) by using a hacksaw. This takes around 1 minute and 44 seconds in a single complete cycle and get a tool damage of 2 stages (From pristine to damaged) after you destroy one combination lock and another two stages (from Damaged to Ruined) if you destroy another combination lock. Of course, the 1.2 issues in related to duct tape do not help on this, but for a proper balance the hacksaw should take full damage after you destroy a single combination lock.

 

/////// 2) THE DESTRUCTION HANDICAPS /////////////////////////////////////////

• 2.1 | Base building sequences | The destruction process (First handicap): The current base building implementation already have an obligatory sequence or steps that you must follow in order to build anything or even to dismantle a structure. We can see this with the “required_parts = {"structure "}”. Taking a gate for example, you need to dismantle the wooden/metal walls first, then unmount the metal wire and only after that you would get the option to dismantle the frames. Same with the building process of a watchtower where you need to build the roof before you can build the stairs and other examples. Since the mechanism is already there, the intention is to apply the same reasoning in a more restrictive way but for the outside base destruction.

How could this work? if you want to destroy a full wall covered with two barbed wire for example, you would need to unmount those two barbed wires first by using the proper tool (check 1.4) in order to get the option to start destroying the external walls with your axe. But not just any wall, you would only get the option to destroy the upper wooden/metal wall first and after that the lower wooden/metal wall. This idea behind this is to prevent the casual hatchet raiders that can get inside any place in less than a minute just by destroying a lower section of the wall and crawl inside. This would create interesting scenarios between picking the more week wall in the bases and smart design from the base owners. The destruction sequence of a full wall could be:

1. Upper barbed wire
2. Lower barbed wire
3. Upper metal / wooden wall
4. Lower metal / wooden wall
5. Upper frame
6. Lower frame

The idea of having a destruction sequence and be implemented in a more restrictive way (like in my example, limiting the options that came up when you approach a wall with the proper tool) and also in a more natural way if you wish: by reducing the action area of the destroying action to a one even more close to the wall (like when you want to refill a car radiator that you need to stay really close to even get the option). In other words: if you want to destroy a fence you need to be very close to that wall to even get the options. If there are barbed wires mounted there, you'll be forced to dismantle them first.

• 2.2 | Material properties and tools | Wooden walls vs Metal walls (Second handicap): Working along with the destruction sequence mentioned above, we know that right now there isn´t much difference between building a wall/fence made by wooden planks than using metal sheets besides the necessary amount of those items you need for the general recipe. The time to destroy both are the equal, same with the tools you need in each case. There are many benefits in granting different properties to these ones, like enhancing the idea of having to prepare yourself to raid a base by picking the correct tools and removing the casual and easy raids feasibility. Also base owners can “play” with this by mixing the materials or upgrading them (from wood to metal). Some of those differentiations and its benefits could be:

A) Wooden Walls | Wooden frames | Destroyed by: Wood axe, Firefighter axe and Sledgehammer: Those are the items required to destroy a wooden wall and frames. Hatchets should not be an item that you could use to destroy a wall from the outside, and if it does, the damage received should get it damaged after a single full destroying action (E.g. after destroying an upper wooden wall). The fact that you would need a two handed tool - heavy, that takes a lot of your inventory space - would also discourage the easy casual raids and force players to have some kind of preparation. Just like it would happen in a real scenario.

B) Metal Walls | Destroyed by: Crowbar and Pickaxe: same reasoning that the wooden wall above. There should be a differentiation in the required tools to destroy a metal wall. In this case, those items could be the crowbar and a pickaxe. The best thing about this is the possibility of alternate and play with the first “handicap” (destruction sequence) by building metal walls on top and lower walls at the bottom. Players would need two different tools to destroy a single wall, and let’s not forget that this can become more complicated if that wall also have mounted barbed wire on it.

C) Time required to destroy | Wooden Vs Metal walls: just as a logic consequence of the same idea, different resistances will translate not only into different tools required, but also into different time invested into destroying that structure. Something that is currently non-existent since both materials and base structures requires the exact same time. Destroying a complete wall of metal sheet, it’s something that you can´t really do fast, at least not as fast as if you were dealing with a wooden wall. There is currently no difference at all in this regard and not enough reasons to choose metal over regular planks (with are even more easy to loot and move). Metal walls should be x3 time destruction than the value of the wooden wall. And the vanilla values should also be x3.

• 2.3 | Tools received damage | Wastage and received damage (Third handicap): Beside the destruction process/scheme (First handicap) and the different material resistance and destruction times (Second handicap), there should be a third impairment related to the tool damage as a consequence of the destruction action. Even when this is already a thing, in order for this to even work as balancing element, fixes 1.1 and 1.2 should be done and the general damage assigned to a tool should be slightly increase. In that scenario, having this third handicap working along with the previous two will forces players to prepare themselves for a raid mission or even creating situations where they would need to cancel a raid in process to go out and loot the proper tools in order to continue with their task. You can check here a glance of the current values:

Of course, the key on this matter is finding the proper balance between the tools received damage and the kind of actions that you performed. Chopping a tree or making rags from a piece of clothing should not be as punishing as destroying a wooden wall from the outside. Same with the dismantling and building action (that should not create a lot of tool damage). Having that in mind, here are three accessory ideas to can get us closer to that needed balance:

A) Tools spawning conditions: Items like axes, hatchets, hammers, pliers should not spawn in perfect pristine condition. It’s not very realistic in relation to the lore of the game. Players should need to repair those items in the first place in order to get the most of them, and the repairing process should be quite punishing too. I mean, you would probably find the majority of the tools in a damage condition, and you would need to use a sharpening or whetstone more than once to get them to a worn state. Different values should be assigned to different scenarios. Something that we already have, but without proper balance.

B) Multiple destruction cycles: Other complementary idea is adding more than one “destruction cycles” to the different base building elements to achieve that more realistic wastage balance. What is a cycle? Just every complete circle you have to do when performing a holding LMB -  left mouse button - action. For example: bandaging requires a complete single cycle. Chopping a tree down requires 4 complete cycles.

We currently have only one large cycle for destroying base building structures without saving the damage produced to it, like it happens with the trees for example. If you cancel the cycle at its half, you won´t get any tool damage and it won´t produce any saved damaged to the wall. While this could be a very positive thing for base building preservation because it forces players to spend an uninterrupted, tedious and at the same time dangerous process to destroy a base, the fact that the complete destruction is tied to the tool damage seems to be quite out of proportion.

By adding more than one cycle to the base building destruction, even without saving the wall damage, you could play a little bit more with the tool damaged received after you complete every cycle.

C) Rough skill level: Passive skills can definitely work along with both of the ideas mentioned above. If you are not a skilled guy manipulating construction tools because you've never built anything or chop a single tree, you'll probably damage more a tool or would take you a lot longer to repair a damaged tool than someone who's used to using them. Same with the possibility or reducing or increasing the necessary destruction cycles. Of course this is not something new and some sparks of this are already implemented, but I thought it appropriate to mention it because it will clearly play a role in this whole re-balance.

 

/////// 3) BASE DEFENSES: THE KEY ROLE OF ELECTRICITY AND GASOLINE /////////////////////////////////////////

• 3.1 | Base defenses concept / vision: Dealing with a base defenses is the fourth and last handicap of this base building re-balance suggestion and It also contemplates the very discussed topic known as the “offline raids”. But please keep in mind: Dayz isn´t Rust, and we are not at the first week of development either. So we can´t just imagine or suggest (for the vanilla experience) extremely complex and unrealistic defense mechanism nor we can expect a completely new redesign of the base building system in this regard. We have a 5 years old game, with base building assets that have been there since 2015 and a game that is now multiplatform so any modification must be somehow compatible with all the different ports.

Having said that, let me remind you that any base should be able to be raided and players can’t just log out for days expecting that none would break into their walls (like its currently happening in many modded servers). Bases immunity, “raiding hours”, unbreakable combination locks, completely disable outside destruction… that’s very far away from my idea of a balanced system. 

But at the same time, I believe that a smart base design, players dedication and timing must offer them some decent return in terms of base preservation. The current implementation just makes base building not worth it enough because of the time and effort that takes to build a place (witch shouldn’t change, bases should be a group end-game and not a simple task) against the lack of protection that becomes evident when someone in less than 2 minutes and almost without any preparation, can destroy all that work. Here is where the defenses base defenses takes places as a complementary handicap for raiders and where electricity and gasoline become a key element in this equation. Let me explain you how:

• 3.2 | The Barbed wires defenses relevance: As I mentioned a few paragraphs above, barbed wires would represent the first big “blocker” for a wall destruction in the general destruction sequence and the element that would forces you to loot a particular item on the map (the bolt cutter) to even start considering raiding a base. But barbed wires are not just a random item laying there simply to annoy or delay. Those are actually online and offline defense mechanism that could act in two different ways:

A) Cuts and bleeding effect: As we already said in 1.5, the barbed wire should generate instantaneous cuts to the player trying to get through them. Not only health and shock damage, but also bleeding. The idea of having several cuts will work as a raiding discourage method since most of the players won´t keep raiding until they patch themselves up. In some cases, we can expect that they even suspend the raid until they find some rags to prevent bleeding out. As I said, this is the reason because barbed wires even exist IRL, but in the game we don`t have a bleeding effect attached to them yet.

B) Electricity system | Shock damage effect: In addition, a more elaborated but temporary defense mechanism would be the possibility of electrifying the barbed wires and metal fences by attaching a battery (+ metal wire) or connecting a generator to the fence/gate. Now you would have an electrical charge that would last as long as the battery life or your gasoline reserves. Shock damage would be the kind of damage resulting from touching the metal wire, leaving unconscious and bleeding players laying in the outside. This would be a temporary but pretty effective defense mechanism to prevent or at least delay offline raiding. Players would still be able to dismount the electrify barbed wire though by using the “bolt cutter” or maybe disabling its power supply from the outside with the Electronic repair kit. But hey would need to have working gloves if those are electrifying.

Before you say it, of course… I’m not discovering nothing new with this. This feature is already there in the game files under the barbed wires along with their “energyUsagePerSecond” value that tell us this is already a thing (We even saw a glimp of this in some stress test build). But I just hope this gets implemented along side by side with other base building handicaps because if it’s not, we are going to end up with a very partial and week defense mechanism if anyone with some pliers can unmount the barbed wires in less than 5 seconds.

• 3.3 | Digital code locks possibility: I’m not really a fan of how the digital locks are being implemented in almost every mod. They are just impossible to unlock and when they work along with the “build anywhere” kind of mods, people start closing houses on the coast and set a completely unbreakable digital code, breaking the players and loot flowing.

On the other hand, the 3 and 4 digits’ combination locks are definitely the way to go because they basically end up using a time-consumption kind of security system. Since you can eventually guess the code (All you need its time to test every possible combination) it’s all about time. How could the digital code locks become time-consumption base too without being extremely OP? By using 4 digits (only numbers) digital code locks and having to power those with electricity. No power, no key. No key, no lock protection. This is just a completely expendable idea. I would probably just avoid any kind of digital code locks because they just don´t fit in the game in my opinion.

• 3.4 | Electricity and gasoline | A new mid/endgame: Two scarce resources and probably the two most valued things in an apocalyptic scenario. Just like in Mad Max movies, people will find gasoline extremely useful because it would somewhere ensure their protection and, at some extent, their humanity. Nowadays, gasoline and electricity have almost no relevance at all for the game beside getting some gas for refueling a car or placing a spotlight in some RP server. But if we assign another role, a more important one in fact as huge resource for base preservation, I’m sure we will see more organized and powered bases.

This temporary defenses mechanism could represent the best balanced and realistic alternative to a base protection system based on the effort/complexity/resources = more protection equation. None base would be impenetrable, but the ones with the most active players inside will definitely be the hardest to raid. Even when they are not online.

I imagine loot runs to fill bottles and canteens with gasoline and take it to the base, a new relevance for the battery charger as part of an energy cycle, people frequently changing their base protections (rotating the electrify barbed wires) to counteract any possible planning by the attackers, people upgrading their bases with metal instead of wood, players reconstructing broken walls from the first destruction cycle and getting more passive skill because of this. I also imagine players shooting through windows to power generators or batteries attached to the back part of the wall to try to “kill” the energy and raid a base. The possibilities are endless.

 

/////// FINAL CONCLUSION /////////////////////////////////////////

As I've been saying from the beginning, the idea behind this suggestion is just to provide with more balanced concept to the current base building implementation without massive changes that could take a long time or complete new vision of how the system its meant to work. I know that many of these ideas were already mentioned in several communities with quotes like: “just limit the destruction to the sledgehammer!” or “increase x10 the wall destruction times”. But nobody seems to had the intention to create some kind of comprehensive list of needed changes and suggestion to provide with a solid base for future discussions.

I hope I haven't exhausted you with all this text wall and I appreciate if anyone really took the time to read it till the end.

Asmond

Edited July 9, 2019 by Asmondian

[MetalHead2112 43]

An impressive thread and a very interesting read.

[amadieus 316]

A perfect list of suggestions, thank you for taking the time to type it out in such detail!

Base building is an important endgame feature, that sadly is still so unbalanced that it is not worth it on vanilla servers, even after half a year since release. All the suggestions you mentioned would have an tremendous positive effect on balancing base building into something worthwhile. I am even positively surprised that some issues already got resolved, such as stacking planks or crawling through the lower part of the wall. Didn't even know that.... Last time I build a base was with 1.01. 

Perhaps I missed it, but I would also suggest something against the dismantling by other players. As you would know, currently players can easily dismantle it from the inside out. While dismantling should be an option for the base owners to adjust something, replace a section or whatever. I have been brainstorming a bit on this and took as starting point the system that most survival games use. Placing a sign that will claim a certain area. Now that would not directly fit into the world of DayZ. So I came with this:

A player can craft a certain 'clan document' by combining a regular piece of paper with a 'still to be determined ítem (rope perhaps to make it some sort of booklet?)'. Using a pen, the player that crafts the document can invite others to his clan.

Next, every player can craft a certain flag pole, or plot sign and plant it into the ground. When doing so, this person claims all the ground in the area (250 meter for example) of the flag pole/plot sign. Now all the things he builds within that circle cannot be dismantled by other players that are not part of the clan. Only he can do so, or his clan mates through the clan document. People can still build everywhere, and a flag pole/plot sign is not a necessity, it only removes the dismantle option on building items for people that are not part of the clan that constructed those walls/watchtowers within that circle. Meaning that walls from a random player still can be dismantled as he is not part of the clan that placed the plot sign. This solution would not limit players, but still removes the dismantling issue and also give a feel of ownership without being to restrictive. 

Perhaps this suggestion requires a lot of work for just disabling the dismantling option, and there are possibly more quicker development options out there. However, I think that as a bonus it does create a more of a feel that you claim a certain place as your home. Nevertheless, the dismantle option is something that needs to be addressed in its current state. 

Again, thanks for writing out all your suggestions. I really hope the Devs take notice! @ImpulZ

Edited July 9, 2019 by amadieus

[Asmondian 372]

2 hours ago, amadieus said:

Perhaps I missed it, but I would also suggest something against the dismantling by other players. As you would know, currently players can easily dismantle it from the inside out. While dismantling should be an option for the base owners to adjust something, replace a section or whatever. I have been brainstorming a bit on this and took as starting point the system that most survival games use. Placing a sign that will claim a certain area. Now that would not directly fit into the world of DayZ. So I came with this:

A player can craft a certain 'clan document' by combining a regular piece of paper with a 'still to be determined ítem (rope perhaps to make it some sort of booklet?)'. Using a pen, the player that crafts the document can invite others to his clan. Next, every player can craft a certain flag pole, or plot sign and plant it into the ground. When doing so, this person claims all the ground in the area (250 meter for example) of the flag pole/plot sign. Now all the things he builds within that circle cannot be dismantled. Only he can do so, or his clan mates through the clan document. People can still build everywhere, and a flag pole/plot sign is not a necessity, it only removes the dismantle option on building items for people that are not part of the clan that  constructed those walls/watchtowers within that circle.

Thanks for your feedback dude. I really appreciate that you took the time.

About some methods to avoid the base griefing (people destroying everything just because they can), while I agree that is something that need to be addressed in some way, its quite hard to find a mechanism to limit a player behaviour without losing some of that absolute freedom that, at least in my book, a game like Dayz should have. Thats why I just can´t imagine some kind of base ownership, restricted area or claiming system (I think SCUM had implemented something like this recently). I think the key of a balanced base building feature and endgame should be  focused on making things harder, never imposible.

IMO, a more natural aproach to this could be limiting the tools that you could use to dismantle the walls to, for example, only the crowbar. Seems reasonable since you are dismantiling a wall and getting all the materials back (nails, planks, metal) we can assume that it won´t happen if you use a hatchet for this task. The problem in this case would be for the base "buildier" that would require 2 different tools to reposition a wall or if you want to recycle some items. Same if you alter or assign a very high damage to that same tool when you dismantle walls. Maybe if we have a more balanced base building system in general, we would take griefing just as part of a fair gameplay since the griefer put more effort, skill or just outsmart us to get inside our base.

Thanks again!

[repzaj1234 126]

Doing the lords work. Have my beans.

[amadieus 316]

21 hours ago, Asmondian said:

Thanks for your feedback dude. I really appreciate that you took the time.

About some methods to avoid the base griefing (people destroying everything just because they can), while I agree that is something that need to be addressed in some way, its quite hard to find a mechanism to limit a player behaviour without losing some of that absolute freedom that, at least in my book, a game like Dayz should have. Thats why I just can´t imagine some kind of base ownership, restricted area or claiming system (I think SCUM had implemented something like this recently). I think the key of a balanced base building feature and endgame should be  focused on making things harder, never imposible.

IMO, a more natural aproach to this could be limiting the tools that you could use to dismantle the walls to, for example, only the crowbar. Seems reasonable since you are dismantiling a wall and getting all the materials back (nails, planks, metal) we can assume that it won´t happen if you use a hatchet for this task. The problem in this case would be for the base "buildier" that would require 2 different tools to reposition a wall or if you want to recycle some items. Same if you alter or assign a very high damage to that same tool when you dismantle walls. Maybe if we have a more balanced base building system in general, we would take griefing just as part of a fair gameplay since the griefer put more effort, skill or just outsmart us to get inside our base.

Thanks again!

''that absolute freedom''

I completely agree with this! That's why I would not use the same system that other survival games have. In the suggestion I made everyone should be able to build within the claimed area, the person that planted the flag pole/plot sign, his clan mates and other random players. Only difference is that the objects placed by the clan within the circle will not have any dismantle option, whereas walls from a random still can be dismantled as he is not part of the clan that placed the plot sign. So it would not limit other players, but still remove the dismantling issue and also give a feel of ownership without being to restrictive. 

However, I like the crowbar idea as well. But as you said, it makes the life of the base owner more difficult as well. 

Nevertheless, something has to be done about the dismantling issue. Even with all great your suggestions, it still would be way too awful to have your whole base gone after a guy(s) broke down one wall. Even though it took them much more effort than it does now. 

Edited July 9, 2019 by amadieus

[drgullen 596]

Wow, are you paying attention to this Bohemia?  You should hire this dude immediately!  Excellent thread @Asmondian

[Parazight 1599]

Yawn.

Base-building isn't even important or part of the core design from the beginning.  It's just something added because they promised modding and didn't know what to do.  

No matter what fix, or balancing, evil people will find ways to un-do honest peoples' work in a sandbox mmo.  This has always been the way since the beginning of the interwebz.  You should know this.

If you want to store or hide something you don't use a base.

[pr9inichek 252]

Wonderful ideas and very good work

@Asmondian big thank for this

 

Can you help me with description of some tickets(My English is not perfect 😞 )?

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T143770

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T143757

 

[pr9inichek 252]

I also created https://feedback.bistudio.com/T144291

[pr9inichek 252]

+ https://feedback.bistudio.com/T144427

[pr9inichek 252]

+ https://feedback.bistudio.com/T145117

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T145118

Edited September 29, 2019 by pr9inichek

[andro_dawton 36]

@Asmondian

Have you got any Feedback from the Devs about your great ideas?

[pr9inichek 252]

@Greensek @Tom_48_97 hi

Just check this thread, please

[andro_dawton 36]

@Greensek @Tom_48_97

 

For the next Update, please comment on this thread. @Asmondian made a very good job.

[clipartcat 16]

I guess this tread pretty much sums up how much DayZ development team cares about their players. Somebody does a detailed post on how the game could be improved, and they don't even bother to look and reply 😄

Edited December 25, 2019 by clipartcat

[Parazight 1599]

On 12/25/2019 at 2:30 PM, clipartcat said:

I guess this tread pretty much sums up how much DayZ development team cares about their players. Somebody does a detailed post on how the game could be improved, and they don't even bother to look and reply 😄

Just because the development team doesn't reply to every thread doesn't mean they don't care about their customers.  That's absurd.  How would you know that the devs haven't looked at this post?  

The post IS really pretty.  Look, it has different colored text and sizes.  Also the picturea are in a sepia tone.  How can these NOT be great ideas? 

Spoiler

Maybe because hiding loot is way more secure than building a fort around it?

 

[Asmondian 372]

19 hours ago, Parazight said:

Just because the development team doesn't reply to every thread doesn't mean they don't care about their customers.  That's absurd.  How would you know that the devs haven't looked at this post?  

The post IS really pretty.  Look, it has different colored text and sizes.  Also the picturea are in a sepia tone.  How can these NOT be great ideas? 

  Hide contents

Maybe because hiding loot is way more secure than building a fort around it?

 

Perhaps because they have already spoken out about the lack of balance in the current implementation of base building, and are fully aware that it lacks of a practical use in Vanilla servers (Beside a purely aesthetic thing or some RP kind of gameplay)

If you think the current state of base building responds to a particular approach or a concept decision then let me tell you that it’s not the case, nor what the devs said about it. I think that, as many times has happened, it is attempted to disguise WIP features with "hardcore" approaches. Nobody here wants an Epoch kind of base building for the Vanilla experience, with flying bases and indestructible walls that allow the player to store huge amounts of loot as their main endgame, breaking the economy of the server (just like they do now with the OP wooden crates). We are asking for a more balanced system that can be achieved with the same tools we have right now and without having to add or develop any crazy or unrealistic idea.

Edited December 28, 2019 by Asmondian

[Arthur Dubrovka 376]

As always, great suggestion thread! Thank you very much!

 

Edit:

And take a look at the other suggestion threads from @Asmondian

 

Edited January 14, 2020 by Arthur Dubrovka

[andro_dawton 36]

@Parazight

Quote

The post IS really pretty.  Look, it has different colored text and sizes.  Also the picturea are in a sepia tone.  How can these NOT be great ideas? 

Sarcasm isnt the way to handle this. This is a quality post with great ideas and good design.

Its a shame the devs dont reply. Full stop.

Edited January 18, 2020 by andro_dawton

[pr9inichek 252]

@Sumrak hi 🙂

May be check this thread? ^_^

[pr9inichek 252]

+ https://feedback.bistudio.com/T149556

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T148430

Edited March 1, 2020 by pr9inichek

[pr9inichek 252]

On 7/8/2019 at 7:41 PM, Asmondian said:

The more realistic and possible addition would be a “bolt cutter”

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1750629601