Suggestion: Locks and Lockbreakers.

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Suggestion: Locks and Lockbreakers.

      When I first bought a house, I was shocked to see a glaring issue that many have seemed to ignore: Locks were more expensive than lockbreakers. Some of you right now might be thinking "Well, what's the big deal about it? Just buy some and place them on your door, that's what we all do.", and that's exactly what I did. That same day, all my locks were gone, and thus, I was left pretty much penniless.

      Now, I'm not trying to make a drama, I'm trying to point out something: Locks shouldn't be more expensive than lockbreakers, and here's why:

      Houses are a huge deal in this server, and, by extension, so are locks. We all need houses to perform our activities, and to seek shelter when we need it. They also play an important role in wars against players. These wars are mostly about who holds the most economic power to wage war, and their combat skills. So, naturally, the one who has the least resources will always go on the defense.

      If locks are more expensive, things become unbalanced, since the ability to take a defensive role is much more difficult. The pricing issue is especially harmful on newer players, since they can at times, quite literally, spend their savings on the few locks they can ill-afford.

      But this is also harmful for veteran players, since you're also getting less locks for your hard-earned bucks, and that pesky enemy of yours will have a much easier time getting into your home.

      And, as weird as it might sound, it's also detrimental for players who like going on the offensive, because it results in an unfair game between aggressor and defender, since one is systematically more powerful than the latter (and they can do the same to you, which isn't really fun).




      Listen, I know that DMing is a vital part for this server, and I understand it - I'm not against it, because being against it would be being against the nature of the server itself. But whenever I asked about this ingame, I always got the same reply. People always agreed on this: "Locks should be cheaper than lockbreakers, it makes no sense to be the way it is now."

      THIS is why I'm asking for the prices to be reversed. Or, at the very least, to be equal. And, to those that think "What will happen to the locks that were already bought?" My answer is: I think it should be up to the staff to refund the pricing difference, or not. That's a topic for another day.



      Thanks for listening, and sorry for making such a long topic (it's worth it though!) :D
    • Thank you for sharing your opinion. The reason we have locks slightly more expensive is to give an incentive for players to make it more worthwhile to break another players locks. If locks were equal or locks were slightly less expensive then we'd have an even greater situation of players hiding in the house being untouchable, as a result players would become even more discouraged to break locks because its a lose-lose senario for them. Not only do they have to spend more money to hurt the person inside but theres no guarantee that the player breaking in will kill the player. Plus the this method helps the circulation of money better for the economy.

      Basically, in you want better protection ur gonna have to pay more.
      You defeat your enemies when they become your friends
    • I always thought the opposite way, hiding behind a safe door with no chance of being touched has never been fun, now there does need to be a balance where you can’t be attacked every five seconds because you can’t keep a single lock on your door as a new player, but then again how can we make it worthwhile to attack someone’s property and rob them without making the house win every time.
    • llFerbll wrote:

      If locks are more expensive, things become unbalanced, since the ability to take a defensive role is much more difficult. The pricing issue is especially harmful on newer players, since they can at times, quite literally, spend their savings on the few locks they can ill-afford.
      I agree with this to a certain extent. as a player who bought a home just recently I was too broke to afford locks so I only got 10 instead of 12 locks I could afford with only 1k per lock. however, this difference doesn't make much it adds up but once you have a difference of an amount in 200 dollars and if you add it up to have a difference of 200k dollars at that point it seems unfair, yet at the same time at that level/rate it would be pretty hard to argue the prices.

      But, like Eldrun said, It is almost an equally balanced system to keep players in check.
      It does seem pretty hard on newbies but it becoming unbalanced seems to only get unbalanced the higher and higher the quantity of locks.
      CSGO CoLD Admin. Mapper. Server Destroy Supreme Master Extraordinaire. sniper
    • Ive been thinking up a system that would instead of disabling lock picking entirely, adding locks would lower the chance of lock picking working. And instead of perm lock picks, they are one-time use.

      100% chance of unlocking with 0 locks,
      1 lock = 0.5% chance of failure,
      100 locks = 50% chance of lock picking failure.

      On failure or success the lockpick is removed.
    • MavFree wrote:

      Ive been thinking up a system that would instead of disabling lock picking entirely, adding locks would lower the chance of lock picking working. And instead of perm lock picks, they are one-time use.

      100% chance of unlocking with 0 locks,
      1 lock = 0.5% chance of failure,
      100 locks = 50% chance of lock picking failure.

      On failure or success the lockpick is removed.
      very interesting, one time use could still be broken up into tiers of higher success and price