Partially Accepted Buff 173

Content that has been partially accepted
Status
Not open for further replies.

Hakari

Well-known Member
Mar 25, 2026
8
0
41
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Buffing SCP 173 in 1 of the following ways
1. make it a CL4 hack for CI to breach him more often
2. make his breach automatically or have a very high chance to turn off the lighting system.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Couldn't find any suggestion like this.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
makes 173 breaches feel more scary
Makes 173 get breached more and seems more appealing as a raid option

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Lights going out might give 173 too big of a advantage.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted: The suggestion gives a 173 a long needed buff while also keeping it fair. Lights going out during a 173 breach while annoying can be countered very easy by using NVGs or flashlights. Allowing for good counter play if foundation is working well while 173 also gets a small chance to cause as much damage before anyone can stop it.
 
AT LEAST MAKE IT SO 173 CAN GET TO SURF HE IS TOO TALL TO EVEN GET IN THE ELEVATOR 😭
XD yea I had a staff called to get me in one time, pretty funny even if it was annoying.


But in all seriousness, 173 basically gives the person playing zero agency and is basically just a click spamming simulator while occasionally moving so you can click spam more people. The lighting buff might give 173 an actual chance to do what it wants. But for CI breaches 173 would just kill most of them, so I don't see a reason why they'd breach him
 
Suggestion Partially Approved



Hi @Hakari,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.
The Content Team has chosen to partially accept your suggestion for the following reasons.

We have decided to change the hack from a CL5 to a CL4 instead of the breach triggering the lights to turn off, this is because we believe that would be too overpowered

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as partially accepted.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.