Prefabs

[neom]

Good morning, good afternoon or good evening or what ever time you are reading this. 

 

I have been reminiscing with some older people community members and thinking about the good ol'days of the dayzRP mod days and how things were. 

And with the settlements we used to have  way way WAY back in the day. 

 

When building a camp there used to have to be 2 GROUPS sharing a settlement for a settlement to be allowed and this could be made for more groups depending on the size.

Before the rule was changed in 2014 (dont quote me on that just something I got from the old settlement page update)

 

example:

Raven's nest - RSM and IRA

 

Capril - NRF and Brotherhood

Alta castle - 501st and UKSF (brotherhood of steel also)

 

Haven - CLF and NAPA7

 

 

 

Now I wanted to talk to the community about maybe doing the same thing as we did back in the mod days and the reasons why are below

1. Will promot RP between groups as there will have to be 2 groups managing a camp

2. Less "offline" raiding as now there are 2 groups present to protect the camp

3. Groups would have to allie with eachother in order to have a settlement this in turn would lower hostilities on the server as group a is now best friend with group b. So if something is to go down back up and secuirty is there. 

4. Settlements become hubs for RP as 2 groups are better then 1, more interaction between parties and outsiders. 

 

Sadly I cant seem to find the OLD OLD thread for settlements guidlines that stated the 2 group rule jsut the updated one from 2014. 

But I think this might help groups and promote RP a bit more

 

All and all just an idea I have been thinking about and wanted to put it out there for all. 

Thank you 

 

UP JOYCE

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by neom

[PublicVoodoo]

100% back the idea of going back down this route.

Added prefabs should be about giving a RP hub to the community not giving your group some extra protection (in way of indestructible walls) to store away gear. These RP hubs should be owned by atleast 2 groups that have ICly formed an alliance and will work together to protect the place from attacks and generally work together to push new storylines forward. 

[Inferno]

Yea I agree with this. Whenever I come across prefabs to me they just look like a fortress made to store the gear a group wants to collect. There were only really 2 prefabs that I seen that looked like real RP hubs. The Skalisty Island home containing 3-4 separate groups and the Joyce caravan. In my eyes at least these 2 bases were made for RP, not to become a warehouse for the next raid haul. Perhaps new requirements could be added or the old requirement of building up the base overtime could be brought back to add a more realistic approach to prefab building.

[HuskyBB]

Really like this idea, as it stimulates groups to become allies and really interact with eachother a lot more. Not just the sort of 'alliances' where both groups do their own thing and just agreed not to really bother each other. It also adds a IC requirement in order to get a prefab, so there is atleast a little bit of IC work involved. At the moment there is a lot of prefabs in game, or still going through the review. I feel like if every group has their own prefab most of them will just sit in their own prefab and not get to interact with eachother that much. Also very interested in how certain prefabs will turn out when there is two groups/themes mixed together.

[Jerry]

The location of settlements is one of the most important things too, it gives us the ability to spread the server population around. People form different routes and it keeps the server dynamic. Say we have 3 big settlements that attract a lot of people, they should be spread out around the map with thought and not just oh this spot will be super easy to lockdown. Ravens Nest was a statement in a way, center of the map, beside a massive hill giving a great vantage point to attackers. CLFs base was north east, NRF's north west, and the coast always had something going on. 

[Roland]

I don't think groups should be forced into an alliance in order to have a prefab. There will also be the problem of agreeing to prefab designs, as different groups will want different "look" that represent their group. There's a reason why that idea was removed and replaced with the one you linked to  

[Franny]

I still think groups should be able to have their own prefabs as well, but maybe something could be put in place that would encourage people to join up for a base together ? Maybe that could be handled through the amount of items allowed to be placed/size of the prefab. Some of the current prefabs seem way to big to be handled by just one group. I think the Joyces prefab is the only exception of those currently in-game. I think prefabs like this should still be able to be handled by one group, but there are many other prefabs that are huge despite the group having not that many members. 

Other than that @neom is making some valid points here.

[HuskyBB]

2 minutes ago, Franny said:

I still think groups should be able to have their own prefabs as well, but maybe something could be put in place that would encourage people to join up for a base together ? Maybe that could be handled through the amount of items allowed to be placed/size of the prefab. Some of the current prefabs seem way to big to be handled by just one group. I think the Joyces prefab is the only exception of those currently in-game. I think prefabs like this should still be able to be handled by one group, but there are many other prefabs that are huge despite the group having not that many members. 

Other than that @neom is making some valid points here.

yeah some of the prefabs are absolutely massive, especially for groups of 10-15. Who to my knowledge are not even that active. So you would maybe have 5 people online at once who are somehow running this massive compound.

Edited February 27, 2020 by Husky.

[MysteryBB]

Group one - The Joyces

Group two - secyoJ ehT

But now going back to being serious. I don't see why two 30 man groups should ally up and share a tiny shack in the middle of nowhere to be able to get a prefab. It also hinders RP for some groups I would assume, ''Well we need allies to get this prefab'' and as you said, it would hinder offline raiding, while I am totally against purposely doing offline raiding (These guys are EU, lets raid them at 03AM server time) I am not against attacking people and finding out that they are not home. +1 for effort -1 for the idéa. 

Edited February 27, 2020 by Mystery

[neom]

17 minutes ago, Franny said:

I still think groups should be able to have their own prefabs as well, but maybe something could be put in place that would encourage people to join up for a base together ? Maybe that could be handled through the amount of items allowed to be placed/size of the prefab. Some of the current prefabs seem way to big to be handled by just one group. I think the Joyces prefab is the only exception of those currently in-game. I think prefabs like this should still be able to be handled by one group, but there are many other prefabs that are huge despite the group having not that many members. 

Other than that @neom is making some valid points here.

Yeah totally 

[Crows]

No from me, simply because you'd be forcing people into alliances to get these bases. That, and if there's a falling out between the groups in charge, then what? Big base just goes poof?

 

 

[Faygo]

I think that prefab bases are getting a little wacky. It'd be neat to see some adjustments to the current state of things involving bases and interaction. Whether the answer is getting rid of prefab compounds and just getting simple settlements or doing away with centralized bases altogether - I'm okay with either. I just know that the stress of keeping your base secure and your goodies locked up is all too real - and many groups justify it as "our enemies have a big base with loot so that means we need a big base with loot."

 

Maybe eliminating mechanics that inspire isolationist loothoarding and turtling is the way to go. Could be fun having everyone be loosely nomadic and vulnerable almost always with a few exceptions.

 

But also big agree with @Crows that forcing groups to ally with each other to get one of these settlements would be a huge issue down the road if the group's ever part ways. Just sort of asking for OOC drama there.

Edited February 27, 2020 by Deimos

[Crows]

2 minutes ago, Deimos said:

I think that prefab bases are getting a little wacky. It'd be neat to see some adjustments to the current state of things involving bases and interaction. Whether the answer is getting rid of prefab compounds and just getting simple settlements or doing away with centralized bases altogether - I'm okay with either. I just know that the stress of keeping your base secure and your goodies locked up is all too real - and many groups justify it as "our enemies have a big base with loot so that means we need a big base with loot."

 

Maybe eliminating mechanics that inspire isolationist loothoarding and turtling is the way to go. Could be fun having everyone be loosely nomadic and vulnerable almost always with a few exceptions.

 

But also big agree with @Crows that forcing groups to ally with each other to get one of these settlements would be a huge issue down the road if the group's ever part ways. Just sort of asking for OOC drama there.

Honestly. Here's a hot take, let's just get rid of base building completely. I'd support that honestly lmao, going back to roaming and looting and maybe a tent stashed somewhere would be amazing in my opinion. Obviously not a popular opinion I'm sure, but it's mine. Maybe have sleeping bags or small tents that disappear when you log out in them and reappear when you log in. Just my thoughts. No more turtle loothoarding meta.

[Banshee]

I think prefabs need to be looked at a lot more before being added to the game. The current council system is flawed, as I feel like a lot of the council members just seem to glance at the images and give a +1 or -1 based off of that. I feel like the lore of the group and how many members they have should be taken into account when both creating prefabs and approving them. Prefabs should be used for role-play and I personally feel like that should be your main focus when designing and approving prefabs, not PvP advantages and/or ease of storing gear. I hate the fact that you can wall of your compound as long as you leave 2 entrances that can fit gates, as it makes no sense for most prefabs and only leads to people using in to their advantage. Prefabs should look like they were put together in the apocalypse, fortified with whatever was around to use as fortification and should make in-character for whatever group is requesting them to have been build by them.

I like the idea of joint prefabs owned by two allied groups, and maybe they can have a higher object count and/or can use a bigger area for their prefab due to the higher amount of man power, which could one be one of the advantages of making an alliance.

[andysuter]

i like the idea of RP hubs and anything to make them more appealing/accessible then thats a good things.

What i would worry about is this alliance thing. Say you have 2 small hostile groups who on their own are manageable but if you force these two (or more groups) together it becomes a problem for a number of reasons. Both for the other players on the server and for the groups themselves. Everyone is mates at the start but once the nagging issues that were overlooked at the start as everyone is so excited about a new base start to become bigger issues then i can see lots of ooc drama.

I also agree with Banshee. Some of the settlements are a joke in terms of being a realistic addition to the map. Its like a tick box of what can we have, rather than what would be good for the RP. The best one by far is the joyce camp (closely followed by S20 imo) and proves you dont need big walls, a chapel, a bar, a clinic, a yellow tent, a wind turbine or 5, a railway line, a few military tents, oh a pile of dead bodies, (you know for the rp....) all on the same settlement.

I also agree with Banshee about the community should be involved in the comments and i thank S20 for doing this off their own back.

[AndreyQ]

16 minutes ago, Banshee said:

The current council system is flawed, as I feel like a lot of the council members just seem to glance at the images and give a +1 or -1 based off of that.

Thing is looking at pictures doesn't mean much because you don't get to see the buildings and other objects up close. We all know you can hide the "ugly" parts of the base with pictures taken for different angles. That's why I'd like for a full video presenting the compound instead of photos so we can actually experience it like we would IG.

[Para]

Honestly still think the issue with prefabs is the fact most of them are so insanely strong to defend. They also, mostly, don't look like they fit in with the current state of the world at all bar a couple settlements like the Joyces' compound and Yggdrasil.

[Wulf]

Only issue I see is quality control:

Blending it into the world and having enough detail that it creates a sense of customised immersion. IE a personalised home as opposed to some random house with half merged gate.

If people just built them with group thematic and immersion in mind, this whole topic would not exist. And no PVP is not a thematic. You should not be building a compound with the idea of maximising your attack and defend chances. I'm not saying don't improve them along the design, it should not be a priority tho. And when PVP is a priority it shows in the design.

Also the two groups having to force marry to own a prefab is a ridiculous Idea. RP promotes RP not a prefab tickbox.

[GaryCash]

Yeah I disagree

no reason you should have to do a Dragon Ball Z fusion of two groups to get a prefab; makes little sense to me

 though I do like the idea of two groups sharing a prefab if they want; though at that point the two groups should just merge, Kill right sharing between groups is already a nightmare and manipulation waiting to happen as is; don’t need to make it where you don’t know if you have rights against half a fighting force

 

tldr; no: no reason to force such things

 

side note as far as approvals go— I’ve approved every base I’ve seen so far Almost because I think the uniqueness the prefabs can bring to the map is great and excellent for Role play— also I am not one who is for limiting creativity 

Edited February 27, 2020 by GaryCash

[neom]

40 minutes ago, GaryCash said:

Yeah I disagree

no reason you should have to do a Dragon Ball Z fusion of two groups to get a prefab; makes little sense to me

 though I do like the idea of two groups sharing a prefab if they want; though at that point the two groups should just merge, Kill right sharing between groups is already a nightmare and manipulation waiting to happen as is; don’t need to make it where you don’t know if you have rights against half a fighting force

 

tldr; no: no reason to force such things

 

side note as far as approvals go— I’ve approved every base I’ve seen so far Almost because I think the uniqueness the prefabs can bring to the map is great and excellent for Role play— also I am not one who is for limiting creativity 

Hey Gary 

Thanks for your feedback, as you put it FUSING 2 groups DRAGON BALL style makes no sense, well thats not what I suggested, it would mean working with another group a group that you are allied with or formed some sort of bond. No one would force anyone to work with anyone or any group they dont get on with : ?. It would promote rp between groups and stop isolationism as a whole. 

Take for example the medics and the danish. As you put "Kill right sharing between groups is already a nightmare and manipulation waiting to happen" well it didnt in the mod days, coz you only gained rights when the camp was attacked together. 

Prefabs need to be looked at and re worked, all the prefab's minus the danish groups and the joyces (even tho we rarely use our's) do not fit, are designed to store loot and do not promote any RP what so ever. 

This was my attempt at maybe opening up a convo with the comminity about rethinking the whole concept. 

Just like @Parasaid ". They also, mostly, don't look like they fit in with the current state of the world at all "

 

i appreciate your input as someone who has such a stella group idea and concept 

3 hours ago, Roland said:

I don't think groups should be forced into an alliance in order to have a prefab. There will also be the problem of agreeing to prefab designs, as different groups will want different "look" that represent their group. There's a reason why that idea was removed and replaced with the one you linked to  

Hello community owner 

Well I dont see how there would be a issue with design if both groups sat down together like grown adults and came up with an idea what they wanted and worked on it together in the editor like myself and daniel did and other groups did, even if not sharing the files via team viewer and such. 

And sure you would want to promote bonding and growth between groups and people. 

Thanks for your input sir. 

2 hours ago, Para said:

Honestly still think the issue with prefabs is the fact most of them are so insanely strong to defend. They also, mostly, don't look like they fit in with the current state of the world at all bar a couple settlements like the Joyces' compound and Yggdrasil.

I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head but yeah another topic for another day, but i agree totally with you 

3 hours ago, Jerry said:

The location of settlements is one of the most important things too, it gives us the ability to spread the server population around. People form different routes and it keeps the server dynamic. Say we have 3 big settlements that attract a lot of people, they should be spread out around the map with thought and not just oh this spot will be super easy to lockdown. Ravens Nest was a statement in a way, center of the map, beside a massive hill giving a great vantage point to attackers. CLFs base was north east, NRF's north west, and the coast always had something going on. 

100% the current locations dont really make sense and are not spread out enough and it makes RP congested in one spot, thank you jerry : )

Edited February 27, 2020 by neom

[neom]

3 hours ago, Crows said:

No from me, simply because you'd be forcing people into alliances to get these bases. That, and if there's a falling out between the groups in charge, then what? Big base just goes poof?

 

 

no one is forcing anyone : ) thank you for your input 

[GaryCash]

2 minutes ago, neom said:

Hey Gary 

Thanks for your feedback, as you put it FUSING 2 groups DRAGON BALL style makes no sense, well thats not what I suggested, it would mean working with another group a group that you are allied with or formed some sort of bond. No one would force anyone to work with anyone or any group they dont get on with : ?. It would promote rp between groups and stop isolationism as a whole. 

Take for example the medics and the danish. As you put "Kill right sharing between groups is already a nightmare and manipulation waiting to happen" well it didnt in the mod days, coz you only gained rights when the camp was attacked together. 

Prefabs need to be looked at and re worked, all the prefab's minus the danish groups and the joyces (even tho we rarely use our's) do not fit, are designed to store loot and do not promote any RP what so ever. 

This was my attempt at maybe opening up a convo with the comminity about rethinking the whole concept. 

Just like @Parasaid ". They also, mostly, don't look like they fit in with the current state of the world at all "

Can you explain how the shared rights and attacking works?  I don’t understand I think because it was before my time and I had become a learned scholar in the dayzrp rule set

still I think 2 groups working together is cool in a prefab but it shouldn’t be a requirement

also our base had been generating amazing RP — and I’ll tell you it’s definitely not to ‘store loot’ I would have instructed @Marik to have built some walls if it was; would have maybe saved us one of the three times we were continuously raided and attacked yesterday; rather than continual squad wipes because our compound is so easy to assault because the way it’s set up 

[neom]

Just now, GaryCash said:

Can you explain how the shared rights and attacking works?  I don’t understand I think because it was before my time and I had become a learned scholar in the dayzrp rule set

still I think 2 groups working together is cool in a prefab but it shouldn’t be a requirement

also our base had been generating amazing RP — and I’ll tell you it’s definitely not to ‘store loot’ I would have instructed @Marik to have built some walls if it was; would have maybe saved us one of the three times we were continuously raided and attacked yesterday; rather than continual squad wipes because our compound is so easy to assault because the way it’s set up 

It would be simple, say your group and the joyce family are best buddie's and we have moved into a lovely prefab, a few caravans here and a few strange jail cells there. Us 2 are getting on grand. But the bad 503 (just an example) rock up to the camp and are like "hey people of joyce corp camp guns down hands up or we are coming in to take your waman and blood bags 10 sec's"

Camp is under attack you'd start pew pew or the joyce would and if one party was out and about they'd come back and have to tell the evil 503 hands up or your dead. It wouldn't be any dif to how it is now. All parties would have to go through the same channels as normal. 

again thank you 

*BARK BARK*

[GaryCash]

2 minutes ago, neom said:

It would be simple, say your group and the joyce family are best buddie's and we have moved into a lovely prefab, a few caravans here and a few strange jail cells there. Us 2 are getting on grand. But the bad 503 (just an example) rock up to the camp and are like "hey people of joyce corp camp guns down hands up or we are coming in to take your waman and blood bags 10 sec's"

Camp is under attack you'd start pew pew or the joyce would and if one party was out and about they'd come back and have to tell the evil 503 hands up or your dead. It wouldn't be any dif to how it is now. All parties would have to go through the same channels as normal. 

again thank you 

*BARK BARK*

Yeah it just can get confusing whether or not you initiated on both groups

 

And LOL

i perma deathed that character; I really liked him; it felt like a good end to his story arch though and that was one of the most intense encounters I’ve had in a long time; 

it’s not always you give your enemies a full on heads up you are coming through text RP, stakes were high and I had the Bourne soundtrack playing; shit was epic

[Ghost]

#BringBackMapDevs 

EDIT: also its not been long enough for me to see my monstrosity that was altar castle haha 

Edited February 27, 2020 by Ghost