Base Building Layout Idea

[curtis19 10]

I was thinking about trying to make my own zombie mmo with some friends at one time and we came up with an idea for building bases without letting them build all over the map, wrecking it. Basically could have three sizes of bases, a camp, a hideout, and a village. Each one COULD ONLY be built once a certain number of ppl were in your group, as in real life you would need more ppl to maintain larger bases.

Basically...

Camp 1-5

Hideout 5-10

Village 10-Whatever

The other thing was a the person who started the base build the base in an overview kind of way, but would have to use the members in the group to build it, so best done when ppl are not playing. Something like Statecraft ppl would have to go gather materials and the base owner would use the materials to build base, but with this you would see the gather material used, so a chuck of scrap metal would go where ever the owner placed it. It would be like statecraft in the since the size of the base would have to fit inside a certain number of squares on a grid. then owner would also be able to give control over to others in the group to perform tasks.

Also ppl can only be a part of one base at anytime. So this prevents ppl from creating them everywhere, but ppl would have to be stuck in any server their base is in.

[GoverningNick 12]

adds a nice rp feel to it

[curtis19 10]

adds a nice rp feel to it

Thanks

[curtis19 10]

What about others what do you guys think, please vote....

[Timmymachine109 (DayZ) 235]

Yeah I like this, really good idea that would help cooperation in the game :) Beans for you!

[curtis19 10]

Yeah I like this, really good idea that would help cooperation in the game :) Beans for you!

Thanks man.

[colekern 1364]

I think it should be deeper, but I'm all for bases.

[curtis19 10]

I think it should be deeper, but I'm all for bases.

I definitly could, but I thought this was a good place to start.

[xximrtwoixx 104]

I think bases should use exhisting structures that way players can't "ruin" the map, they simply can fortify exhisiting buildings. There can be levels of fortification that require specific numbers of resources and specific actions. Yes buildings within a server could be made off limits to everyone but this is authentic IMO. Fortifications and buildings can be destroyed so go destroy it if your pissed. There could be an interface added to each building that allows a player to "give" it resources for fortifications.

Example:

Hanger Building:

Fortification 1: Door down and locked. Secondary door is locked/barricaded. (can pull in vehicle)

Fortification 2: Main door and secondary door are reinforced with steel plates (scrap metal)

Fortification 3: Main door welded shut (Can no longer pull in vehicle)

House:

Fortification 1: Door is barricaded

Fortificaiton 2: Windows boarded up and door reinforced

Fortification 3: Windows/doors are reinforced/covered with scrap metal

Hotel:

Fortification 1: Stairwell door barricaded

Fortificaiton 2: Stairwell door reinforced rope ladders in elevator

Fortification 3: Stairwell destroyed, pulley's and crane added to elevator shaft

These could even be available out of sequence so you have the choice to destroy stairs/doors for more security or retain their functionality at less security.

[curtis19 10]

I like the input, my idea has a built in system the would prevent ppl from ruinning the map, as well as forcing ppl to have to come together to maintain the base. However the same concept could be molded with yours as well, I would definatly like to see the ability to fortify buildings.

[{420}Mr.Smiley 53]

well, id rather like to build the walls, windows and such myself. Remember, this isnt a RTS its a zombie sim. More emphasis should be put into the buildings themselves than how many you can make, you can make as many as you want if you got the supplies. It wont be easy to get enough supplies stockpiled to create a whole village. Also, rocket mentioned more about underground fortresses and hideouts than above ground ones.

[{420}Mr.Smiley 53]

Also, restricting one person to one village wont stop people from creating more, just create another profile and make a new one, or just abandon the current one(and unless they disapear, which wouldnt be realistic enough for the dayz crowd) and make one after another. Abandoned hideouts would be a good thing to run up on, possible leftover supplies, and seeing good construction patterns from fellow dayZers

[curtis19 10]

I heard him talk about that, but I this would force ppl to have to fight over minerals and work together, and I don't know how many others would like ot build the windows and such with their character, as it wouldn't be nearly as easy to build a base the right shape if, we used the barbwire as a point of reference for wall building. this just seemed like a simplier idea, also it wouldn't be hard to ge the material unless there was a hard cap on them, this however stops the map from getting jacked up. i do understand where your coming from though, this just seemed the simplest and effective to do.

[{420}Mr.Smiley 53]

Well, the players want realism and setting your character on autobuilding a house out of supplies your automatically getting wouldnt cut it. People will want to create their own personalized structure and im sure thats how rocket would do it as Dayz is heavily paralleled with minecraft. Just my 2 cents.

[curtis19 10]

No you misunderstood I think, what I was saying, one guy would use the other players while they were not playing to build things with materials the PLAYERS had gathered while playing, however ppl could build while playing, but it would be like flying in wow I'd imagien, this just make it less painful with waiting for thing to finish. The one sending orders would have to be there, the whole time. The structures would be personalized too.

[{420}Mr.Smiley 53]

mehh, just dont think the players would go for it really, majority of the suggestions are just to make the game as real as possible. Taking the time to build an entire house let alone a village would be staggering in a post apocolyptic world. Controlling players would still make them automatically go fetch this or construct that and than that guy is going to go have to check up on the inactive players for their progress is still auto doing things. Lots of things are painfull in the world of Dayz, its practically a running simulation if you want to head to another town, but people still love it for the sole purpose of its extreme realism.

[curtis19 10]

LoL I am sorry, I didn't mean a village as in multiple house, I menat it in the sense of many people grouping together, it was just a word to use. Also people would be only controling the building, they wouldn't control the actual characters, they would just "use" their bodies as work force to build. Gather materials would be done by each player individually.

Also just fyi this is more on par with building a car as it is currently in the game, thats probalby the best way to see it too, people actaully go gather parts and bring them back (people have to actual go do this), but they don't have to screw them in one screw at a time on guy places them in a (starcraft Like positioning system).

[curtis19 10]

Just a Bump to keep people voting....

[curtis19 10]

Just another Bump to keep people voting....

[3rdparty 229]

wow, errr yea XD

I remember getting stoooned about a decade ago with mates discussing the perfect zombie game... well actually that scenario hasnt really stopped BUT we often felt a mixture between fps and birds eye (strategy) view would be the best way to integrate base and community building with fps. Although never thought of it in terms of an MMO but just like Dungeon Keeper 2 and the possession spell, except theres far more to do in the possession aspect in the zed game.

anyway, yea good idea, havnt seen it suggested before (probably has been though) and i have little to no idea whether the engine could support it or not but they are hardly good reasons not to support it!

OP+1

The only problem that i potentially see is how these bases would look? I guess those categories of bases would be good for purely defining the capacity of a player base but personally i felt this game should always push for as much dynamic sandbox interaction as possible, not just in items and player functions but also in manipulating a dynamic environment. What i mean to say is not having a generic skin and shape (that will become identifiable to the frequent player), and a set number of items to "construct" the base.

I feel anything that could be constructed in the game should have the freedom of creative design to enable players to change their bases based on considering its purpose, the environment its in, and the previous experience of the players.

Edited September 7, 2012 by 3rdParty

[curtis19 10]

wow, errr yea XD

I remember getting stoooned about a decade ago with mates discussing the perfect zombie game... well actually that scenario hasnt really stopped BUT we often felt a mixture between fps and birds eye (strategy) view would be the best way to integrate base and community building with fps. Although never thought of it in terms of an MMO but just like Dungeon Keeper 2 and the possession spell, except theres far more to do in the possession aspect in the zed game.

anyway, yea good idea, havnt seen it suggested before (probably has been though) and i have little to no idea whether the engine could support it or not but they are hardly good reasons not to support it!

OP+1

The only problem that i potentially see is how these bases would look? I guess those categories of bases would be good for purely defining the capacity of a player base but personally i felt this game should always push for as much dynamic sandbox interaction as possible, not just in items and player functions but also in manipulating a dynamic environment. What i mean to say is not having a generic skin and shape (that will become identifiable to the frequent player), and a set number of items to "construct" the base.

I feel anything that could be constructed in the game should have the freedom of creative design to enable players to change their bases based on considering its purpose, the environment its in, and the previous experience of the players.

I agree, I really believe they should also be reasonably be able to be personalized, as well.

[curtis19 10]

Just another bump seems, alot of people like this idea...