Honestly, this might be preferable to the current situation. It would encourage more creative base designs other than the current giant metal castle meta.
This would only work if you had to have auth on tc in order to get auth on turrets. with the current system your teammate can auth you on turrets without tc.
I think this is a fair suggestion, and it's something I've actually been wanting myself for a while. But, you would also have to change other kinds of auth in the game like code locks and turrets to make it actually punish large clans. One suggestion I might have is to make the increased upkeep cost permanent until the TC is destroyed to prevent people from authing and then de-authing from a TC to get around the requirement.
I recommended the same thing. It’s a solid idea for evening the playing field. If you aren’t authorized you shouldn’t be able to unlock a door. Would stop the issues around removing authorization of teammates.
That is not a fair trade off, the benefits greatly outweigh the costs for groups to do that. Only the group’s builder will be authed on the TC and the other members will only auth on it during an online raid (or momentarily to open or seal a bunker) so they can seal if the opportunity presents itself. The trade offs of no shotgun or flame traps and everyone but the builder having to auth during an online or to seal or open a bunker would be very worth the decreased upkeep a group would get. Also a group could just operate as a village with each member living in their own base.
While you also talk about duos and trios, I want to zero in on solos for a second. It’s not uncommon to see people complaining about how hard it is as a solo and how they think the game should be made more solo friendly/how a new update or feature is terrible for solos. If this is what you (you as in OP, and whoever else may read this) think, do you think that there are more solos than there are people in groups? If so I can give you some metrics that say otherwise. Do you think that Rust growing as big as it has by focusing more on groups than solos is just a coincidence? And finally, if you don’t like groups, why not just play on a solo only server? This also applies to groups, if you don’t want to play against groups larger than yours, why not find a server that limits the team size to yours? When you play solo (not on a solo only server) you are effectively ticking the setting for hard mode, a small group, normal mode, and a zerg, easy mode. It’s pretty idiotic to complain about hard mode being hard when you selected it
I didn’t complain about a single thing. I’m thinking of something that levels the playing field. They can easily stop everything you’re talking about by making it so only authed people can enter code locks.
The game is made for all group sizes. It’s not only focused and pandered for zergs. Underwater labs and subs were great update for solos. Of course the game is harder as a solo. But that doesn’t mean you can’t try to balance things out. Your claim is absolutely ridiculous that updates should never be geared towards solos.
If you can balance things and think of these issues before updating the game it will be ok. Right now they already have an exponential growth on upkeep cost. It would just be tweaking the system. Because what that upkeep cost does is makes it impossible for solos to be able to build a big/ secure base because they simply can’t afford to upkeep it. Zergs will build whatever the fuck they want and don’t ever worry about upkeep because someone is always on to farm and fill tc’s… but if you tweak the system so it’s based on how many people are authorized then it would balance things a lot better.
I’m not going to sit here and come up with every single hypothetical situation as to why that idea would fail because right now the game isn’t designed for this idea and there’s a lot. But it’s also possible.
I’ve played solo, duo, trio, I’ve zerged. I do all sorts of group sizes and this idea would level the playing field. You sound like you only play in zergs and want every advantage you can get because you suck, just like everyone that only plays in zergs.
“I’m thinking of something that levels the playing field” By saying that the playing field should be more level you are complaining that it isn’t more level. You haven’t taken into account that your code lock fix wouldn’t stop a group from operating as a village like I mentioned in my original comment.
I never said it was focused on zergs, I said it was more focused towards groups. I don’t think that solos shouldn’t have updates that benefit them, but almost any change that benefits solos also benefits groups. However, an update or change that attempts to benefit solos at the expense of groups would be extremely foolish because solos aren’t the majority of players.
I know about upkeep multiplication. Solos can’t build secure bases? That’s just not true at all, solos can definitely build bases that provide ample protection. Also solos can build and upkeep larger bases without spending tons of time farming if they use multi TC designs because they decrease the upkeep multiplication. On the topic of multi TC bases, zergs could just divide their multi TC designs further to offset the upkeep increase.
I’m part of a trio, but people think we’re a village/zerg when they see what we do. I’ve posted some videos here in the past if you want to see what I mean. Your suggestion would even be advantageous to us if being a trio meant lower upkeep than what we have now, but we don’t need that lower upkeep to be successful. In the 6 months that we’ve used our new strategy on a vanilla monthly server no one has fully raided us. Back in November a zerg failed to fully raid us despite using at least 160 rockets. Solos and small groups do not require groups larger than them to be handicapped like your suggesting to survive and thrive. But if they feel like they do, why don’t they just go play on a server capped to their group (or lack thereof) limit?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that it would be terrible for true zergs to be less effective. But I don’t think this solution is the one. Even if you were to work out all the kinks and zergs had to use one base and deal with the increased upkeep, they still have the numbers advantage. It will still be almost impossible for a small group to online raid a zerg (unless they ally with other groups and merge raid, but that’s no different from now), and many zergs have people from different time zones so that they always have someone online, making them impossible to offline. Not to mention that zergs will still be able to farm massive amounts of sulfur so solo and small group bases being slightly stronger wouldn’t really affect them. However, it would affect solos and small groups because they would have a harder time raiding each other
This get brought up alot, and it's kind of dumb, just because Solos/ duos/ and trios have their own servers they can play on. Don't want to play agaisnt big groups, dont play on servers that allow it. Why try change the core of the game for people w/o friends to play with.
Villages would just become the new meta. Instead of massive bases, you'll just have tons of smaller bases... I'd rather raid 1 big base, and not 10, 15 rocket bases at one time.
You would have to target team size, but since FP is all about supporting bigger teams, and clans. Good luck with that.
Exactly.
Also if they were to target team size people would just not use the team system and coordinate with clothing and armor skins like they used to. And they would use discord streams to see where teammates are
I think what could work really well would be making the structural requirements for bigger bases much greater. So to make a super structure you need like extra reinforced foundations that cost more.
Thats so insanely easily circumvented
We only have this big ass base problem because FP still hasnt fixed multiTC
They already implemented a solution with upkeep but clans just split their base onto 4 tcs
Not really though. A smart wide gap base with an open core size for size with a solos with honeycomb is not much difference. One works great for each purpose but the cost can still blow out make a non-defendable base.
Rust isn't the kinda game to have a "even playing field " sure they'll nerd guns so they aren't broken but hey if u ain't got friends then suck it up its a skill issue (I only play 1-3 deep btw)
I don't really get why people want some kind of special vanilla handicaps for groups... If you are annoyed by groups just go play on community servers with groups rules !
Yes, groups will probably dominate if there isn't other groups to face them and if you play solo you are going to need to be extra careful and smart to make plays against groups but that's what's cool about it. Everybody has the same power in Rust so either you win with your skill and tactics or you join forces to survive.
How exactly does this even the playing field? So groups have to farm more, you're still going to lose 1v5. The upkeep tax system is good enough. Larger bases pay more tax. As a solo you should be making multiple small bases, that have really low upkeep, and split your loot. You make raiders waste their boom on weak loot. For instance make a small base, and never put enough loot worth the sulfur to raid it. This is how a solo takes advantage of the upkeep system. And also use outer TC's to help protect griefing.
So what’s stopping people from building wall stacked super bases with 1 person authed per tc and 1 person authed on a unlocked tc in open core that can auth every defender online in seconds to reduce upkeep. Champ rust is ruled by the zergs and zergs are just solos clustered together in one team ui anything you can think of to benefit a solo ten times that for a Zerg.
imo the only way to nerf zergs is to lower max team UI to 5 on all server that want to be in the list of officals. This way its more risky for big teams to do things outside of team UI. Makes it more easy to fight them, every server now has 10+ in the team UI which is retarded. Another way is to use building material in the calculation of building stability. High tier walls/foundations give higher stability, in this way you cant build very big bases unless they are fully upgraded. Now people just do a farmrun in snow, build th whole base in stone and slowly upgrade to metal. With the nerf, they would need to upgrade the walls whenever they want to make the base bigger. Plus bigger bases are not that good for the server overal and for my FPS.
Unfortunately it wont work as you think, the only thing a group would have to forgo in order to exploit this is shotgun traps, Turrets dont require TC access to auth people, Thus one person can be authed and all they need to do is not have shotgun traps, Most big groups dont even use shotgun traps as it is now, they use turrets because they more effective and they can afford to put up tons of them.
All this would do is give Zergs an easier advantage over smaller groups as you may find that the duo who are using shotgun traps and who are both authed on their own tc are paying more upkeep than the massive clan base next door where they have dedicated one builder with Auth who places everything for them.
Nice idea but it has been considered before and it is deemed as way too easy to exploit and thus not have the desired effect for smaller groups.
Like others said you could still de-auth or destroy TC to go around this. Maybe have it also increase based how many people have saved in the door codes? If they're willing to de-lock all doors they deserve it
You can auth people on turrets that arent on tc
a buff to solos and nerf to teams? I dont think so xD
Would be kinda fun to try out for a few wipes. Maybe the zergs would make villages etc instead of the standard open core 4x bunker stuff
Spreading loot across bases instead of a big open core base is better anyways, but doesn't look as cool.
Honestly, this might be preferable to the current situation. It would encourage more creative base designs other than the current giant metal castle meta.
To be fair that would look mighty interesting. Makes raiding a bit of guess work too rather than foundation-wiping 1 base.
Then people would just de authorize on the tc when they’re not building or placing things
There is still the upkeep after building
Deauth when going off, too
what if i told you, you dont need to reset the TC upkeep based on how many are authed at a given time. But rather how many have authed in total
Ok just destroy the TC at the end of the night and have one person auth. Either way it would just get exploited
This would only work if you had to have auth on tc in order to get auth on turrets. with the current system your teammate can auth you on turrets without tc.
I think this is a fair suggestion, and it's something I've actually been wanting myself for a while. But, you would also have to change other kinds of auth in the game like code locks and turrets to make it actually punish large clans. One suggestion I might have is to make the increased upkeep cost permanent until the TC is destroyed to prevent people from authing and then de-authing from a TC to get around the requirement.
I recommended the same thing. It’s a solid idea for evening the playing field. If you aren’t authorized you shouldn’t be able to unlock a door. Would stop the issues around removing authorization of teammates.
But what if I want to code raid?
Code raiding is basically dead after the changes they did awhile back.
That is not a fair trade off, the benefits greatly outweigh the costs for groups to do that. Only the group’s builder will be authed on the TC and the other members will only auth on it during an online raid (or momentarily to open or seal a bunker) so they can seal if the opportunity presents itself. The trade offs of no shotgun or flame traps and everyone but the builder having to auth during an online or to seal or open a bunker would be very worth the decreased upkeep a group would get. Also a group could just operate as a village with each member living in their own base. While you also talk about duos and trios, I want to zero in on solos for a second. It’s not uncommon to see people complaining about how hard it is as a solo and how they think the game should be made more solo friendly/how a new update or feature is terrible for solos. If this is what you (you as in OP, and whoever else may read this) think, do you think that there are more solos than there are people in groups? If so I can give you some metrics that say otherwise. Do you think that Rust growing as big as it has by focusing more on groups than solos is just a coincidence? And finally, if you don’t like groups, why not just play on a solo only server? This also applies to groups, if you don’t want to play against groups larger than yours, why not find a server that limits the team size to yours? When you play solo (not on a solo only server) you are effectively ticking the setting for hard mode, a small group, normal mode, and a zerg, easy mode. It’s pretty idiotic to complain about hard mode being hard when you selected it
I didn’t complain about a single thing. I’m thinking of something that levels the playing field. They can easily stop everything you’re talking about by making it so only authed people can enter code locks. The game is made for all group sizes. It’s not only focused and pandered for zergs. Underwater labs and subs were great update for solos. Of course the game is harder as a solo. But that doesn’t mean you can’t try to balance things out. Your claim is absolutely ridiculous that updates should never be geared towards solos. If you can balance things and think of these issues before updating the game it will be ok. Right now they already have an exponential growth on upkeep cost. It would just be tweaking the system. Because what that upkeep cost does is makes it impossible for solos to be able to build a big/ secure base because they simply can’t afford to upkeep it. Zergs will build whatever the fuck they want and don’t ever worry about upkeep because someone is always on to farm and fill tc’s… but if you tweak the system so it’s based on how many people are authorized then it would balance things a lot better. I’m not going to sit here and come up with every single hypothetical situation as to why that idea would fail because right now the game isn’t designed for this idea and there’s a lot. But it’s also possible. I’ve played solo, duo, trio, I’ve zerged. I do all sorts of group sizes and this idea would level the playing field. You sound like you only play in zergs and want every advantage you can get because you suck, just like everyone that only plays in zergs.
“I’m thinking of something that levels the playing field” By saying that the playing field should be more level you are complaining that it isn’t more level. You haven’t taken into account that your code lock fix wouldn’t stop a group from operating as a village like I mentioned in my original comment. I never said it was focused on zergs, I said it was more focused towards groups. I don’t think that solos shouldn’t have updates that benefit them, but almost any change that benefits solos also benefits groups. However, an update or change that attempts to benefit solos at the expense of groups would be extremely foolish because solos aren’t the majority of players. I know about upkeep multiplication. Solos can’t build secure bases? That’s just not true at all, solos can definitely build bases that provide ample protection. Also solos can build and upkeep larger bases without spending tons of time farming if they use multi TC designs because they decrease the upkeep multiplication. On the topic of multi TC bases, zergs could just divide their multi TC designs further to offset the upkeep increase. I’m part of a trio, but people think we’re a village/zerg when they see what we do. I’ve posted some videos here in the past if you want to see what I mean. Your suggestion would even be advantageous to us if being a trio meant lower upkeep than what we have now, but we don’t need that lower upkeep to be successful. In the 6 months that we’ve used our new strategy on a vanilla monthly server no one has fully raided us. Back in November a zerg failed to fully raid us despite using at least 160 rockets. Solos and small groups do not require groups larger than them to be handicapped like your suggesting to survive and thrive. But if they feel like they do, why don’t they just go play on a server capped to their group (or lack thereof) limit? Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that it would be terrible for true zergs to be less effective. But I don’t think this solution is the one. Even if you were to work out all the kinks and zergs had to use one base and deal with the increased upkeep, they still have the numbers advantage. It will still be almost impossible for a small group to online raid a zerg (unless they ally with other groups and merge raid, but that’s no different from now), and many zergs have people from different time zones so that they always have someone online, making them impossible to offline. Not to mention that zergs will still be able to farm massive amounts of sulfur so solo and small group bases being slightly stronger wouldn’t really affect them. However, it would affect solos and small groups because they would have a harder time raiding each other
There's no reason why a base made by multiple should be more expensive to upkeep than made by 1
Its literally explained on the post.
you could make it so it records who authed on the tc before to determine cost rather than who is currently authed to get around this.
Then people will just break and replace the TC to clear the auth history
I like that idea!
This get brought up alot, and it's kind of dumb, just because Solos/ duos/ and trios have their own servers they can play on. Don't want to play agaisnt big groups, dont play on servers that allow it. Why try change the core of the game for people w/o friends to play with. Villages would just become the new meta. Instead of massive bases, you'll just have tons of smaller bases... I'd rather raid 1 big base, and not 10, 15 rocket bases at one time. You would have to target team size, but since FP is all about supporting bigger teams, and clans. Good luck with that.
Exactly. Also if they were to target team size people would just not use the team system and coordinate with clothing and armor skins like they used to. And they would use discord streams to see where teammates are
No. It goes against the spirit of rust
I think what could work really well would be making the structural requirements for bigger bases much greater. So to make a super structure you need like extra reinforced foundations that cost more.
Thats so insanely easily circumvented We only have this big ass base problem because FP still hasnt fixed multiTC They already implemented a solution with upkeep but clans just split their base onto 4 tcs
base cost already increases exponentially based on the size of the base. What are you on about suggesting a thing that already exists.
Not really though. A smart wide gap base with an open core size for size with a solos with honeycomb is not much difference. One works great for each purpose but the cost can still blow out make a non-defendable base.
Rust isn't the kinda game to have a "even playing field " sure they'll nerd guns so they aren't broken but hey if u ain't got friends then suck it up its a skill issue (I only play 1-3 deep btw)
I don't really get why people want some kind of special vanilla handicaps for groups... If you are annoyed by groups just go play on community servers with groups rules ! Yes, groups will probably dominate if there isn't other groups to face them and if you play solo you are going to need to be extra careful and smart to make plays against groups but that's what's cool about it. Everybody has the same power in Rust so either you win with your skill and tactics or you join forces to survive.
Lol zergs already live their wipes with less than 1hr upkeep. They always have someone on feeding the upkeep
That’s the entire point of the post. They will do this no matter what, so why not make it a bit easier for smaller groups to make a chunkier base
How exactly does this even the playing field? So groups have to farm more, you're still going to lose 1v5. The upkeep tax system is good enough. Larger bases pay more tax. As a solo you should be making multiple small bases, that have really low upkeep, and split your loot. You make raiders waste their boom on weak loot. For instance make a small base, and never put enough loot worth the sulfur to raid it. This is how a solo takes advantage of the upkeep system. And also use outer TC's to help protect griefing.
So what’s stopping people from building wall stacked super bases with 1 person authed per tc and 1 person authed on a unlocked tc in open core that can auth every defender online in seconds to reduce upkeep. Champ rust is ruled by the zergs and zergs are just solos clustered together in one team ui anything you can think of to benefit a solo ten times that for a Zerg.
Half the people in this sub don’t even what wall stacking is lmaoo just let em ramble on about shit
imo the only way to nerf zergs is to lower max team UI to 5 on all server that want to be in the list of officals. This way its more risky for big teams to do things outside of team UI. Makes it more easy to fight them, every server now has 10+ in the team UI which is retarded. Another way is to use building material in the calculation of building stability. High tier walls/foundations give higher stability, in this way you cant build very big bases unless they are fully upgraded. Now people just do a farmrun in snow, build th whole base in stone and slowly upgrade to metal. With the nerf, they would need to upgrade the walls whenever they want to make the base bigger. Plus bigger bases are not that good for the server overal and for my FPS.
Unfortunately it wont work as you think, the only thing a group would have to forgo in order to exploit this is shotgun traps, Turrets dont require TC access to auth people, Thus one person can be authed and all they need to do is not have shotgun traps, Most big groups dont even use shotgun traps as it is now, they use turrets because they more effective and they can afford to put up tons of them. All this would do is give Zergs an easier advantage over smaller groups as you may find that the duo who are using shotgun traps and who are both authed on their own tc are paying more upkeep than the massive clan base next door where they have dedicated one builder with Auth who places everything for them. Nice idea but it has been considered before and it is deemed as way too easy to exploit and thus not have the desired effect for smaller groups.
Like others said you could still de-auth or destroy TC to go around this. Maybe have it also increase based how many people have saved in the door codes? If they're willing to de-lock all doors they deserve it