Denied Changes to D Block Lockdown Scanner

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
May 17, 2023
121
17
21
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This would suggest changing the D block lockdown to one of two things;
1: Add a second keycard scanner next to the lockdown button that is CL4 bio-metric that closes the cell doors only without toggling the bathroom bulkhead
. The purpose of this would be to allow CL4/CL5's to close the cell doors in the event of a sweep or other issue in d block (such as CI or a hostage situation). Generally, it just makes sense for the cell doors to be closed during a sweep, however we cannot use the current CL2 button because that would close off bathrooms to GENSEC. Instead, we have to dedicate two people to stand and body block the doorway out of the cells, but this generally doesn't make sense to do given there is already an implementation of a gate that can close. This would still leave the CL2 button in guard tower with it's current functionality of closing cell doors and the bathroom bulkhead in the event of an SCP being in d block.
Ideally, in option 1's SCP lock down button it could still toggle the cell doors in the event of an SCP being in d block, however I wasn't sure if it could potentially bug if the CL2 and the new CL4 keypad were activated at the same time, if this isn't possible maybe make the CL2 scanner only close bathroom bulkhead and not the cells.

2 (If 1 is not possible): Remove the bathroom bulkhead entirely. This is generally because the bathroom bulkhead is completely useless in many GENSEC's opinions (at least on USA). The reality is most SCPs in d block either stay in the main area of d block to farm d class kills, or run to the vents by the floor 2 entrance of d block to easily camp foundation for kills. Generally, the bathroom bulkhead tends to only get in people's way, and even if you trap an SCP in bathrooms SCPs can easily just come out through vents. Additionally, in most people I have talked to about this change experiences, the bathroom bulkhead generally tends to interfere with re-containment more than it helps. There is probably about a 5-10 second window depending on the SCP between entering d block and making it to bathrooms. The current button would require an officer to be in guard tower for that 10 second time span, which is very unlikely. Additionally, if the bulkhead was removed the closing of cell doors could still be utilized more for sweeps and other operations pointed out in option 1.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
1: It would allow significantly more feasibility to both buttons.
2: This would easily prevent the issue of GENSEC kill farming d class that are standing on railings or the GENSEC officer's head who's blocking the door (If D class can still stack to get over the fence, this could easily be solved by a couple of props).
3: It would add more feasibility to the bathroom bulkhead, or remove it entirely which would add feasibility to the current lockdown button closing cell doors.
4: It would help sweeps go by much faster as there would no longer be a concern of d class jumping over the fence. The less time a sweep takes the better as sweeps interrupt a major portion of jobs meant for newer players (Gensec, d class, research, medical etc).
5: It would prevent random cl2s from being able to just walk up to guard tower and shut the cells on d class to troll them which seems to happen at least once or twice an hour.


Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
1: There is possible abuse of the CL4 keypad, however this is unlikely given it would be bio-metric, and the option pretty much exists now through the CL2 keypad.
2: It would "prevent" some cell searches, however whoever authorized the sweep could just toggle the keypad when cell searches happen.
3: D Class could hide in the cells knowing the doors will be shut, but this could be fixed by closing the doors when the sweep is authed vs when entry happens much like the current airlock bulkhead does.


Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I believe this suggestion should be accepted because it just simply would be a massive quality of life change for GENSEC. We already have to block the cell doors during a sweep despite the fact there is literally a button that exists to close the cell doors, we just can't use it because it will also block off bathrooms in the process. Also just in general that bathroom bulkhead feels weird, d class run to the cells due to spawn camping rules if an SCP breaches d block they do not run to bathrooms. Additionally, if we had the functionality to close cell doors during an event like CI being in d block it would still allow for the D class that have survive to hold bathrooms while the ones that died would be stuck in the cells until CI are dealt with. It would also prevent a lot of the GENSEC kill farming that happens during sweeps, which I think is a win for everyone.
 
Last edited:

John Dear

Civil Gamers Expert
Aug 14, 2021
183
46
91
-/+Neutral

i get the use for it and i understand the suggestion, but its not a major hassel to just have 2 gsd members block the doors.


Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
..
4: It would help sweeps go by much faster as there would no longer be a concern of d class jumping over the fence. The less time a sweep takes the better as sweeps interrupt a major portion of jobs meant for newer players (Gensec, d class, research, medical etc).
..
They can still jump over when the gates are closed. (Boosting each other over)

Closing the doors When it's not an SCP is both rule breaking and an IC issue I think.

I tried talking to ethics and 05 about it awhile ago and they said no
Its GSD policy at least in Site 65 that during a sweep they block the walkways from the cells to the inner d-block. It has been authed before that the Lockdown button was called for saftey concerns even when no SCP was in d-block. I only have seen this a handfull of times and am not sure if somone can clarify this.
 
Apr 16, 2022
440
44
91
Suggestion Denied
Hi @Kenneth Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.

The Content Team has chosen to deny your suggestion due to the following reasons.

We have decided to deny this because it would restrict too much RP towards our new player base that find our server and we do not want to restrict them.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.

Kind regards

Foxatron​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.