Denied Containment Blocker Border Changes to Prevent Bodyblocking

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
The containment borders that prevent an SCP from leaving when not breached should leave a big enough gap that humans can get in past the SCP in the cell, and they physically cannot be in the doorway enough to bodyblock them. This mainly applies to HCZ non-spec cells, but may apply elsewhere if this is happening.

E.g. the HCZ non-spec cells allow the SCPs to go a little bit out of their cell door - this should be effectively inverted, with there being a gap inside of their cell door that they cannot enter, so that containment units can get in to attack the breacher SCP without the contained SCP possibly blocking it.

This would apply to all immortal SCPs, which aren't allowed to bodyblock by server rules anyway (e.g. 082). It may also apply to other SCPs, if they also aren't supposed to be bodyblocking when contained. I personally believe this change should be applied to all containment blockers, as my understanding is that an SCP's health is reset when it gets breached, so they can just sit in the door and not have to worry about any adverse affects of being shot at.

The existing setup with the blocker extending shortly out of the cell also doesn't really make sense, and can cause SCPs and others to become trapped if e.g. 082 is contained but outside of its cell door on the outside side of the door (the door can't open no matter 082's position, as the containment blocker stops it from moving out of the way of the door, so it can't open and it can't get back into the cell, nor can anyone inside get out).

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I have made a previous suggestion here that included this one, but that post included two suggestions (my bad) and the entire post was denied with a reason that seems to suggest it was entirely based on the other suggestion.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- Enforces existing server rules around bodyblocking
- Means that moderators don't need to get involved every other time an SCP tries to breach another in HCZ non-spec
- Prevents an additional existing problem that basically never happens anyway

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- A bit of time to reconfigure the borders (not sure how complicated that is)
- If there's a specific good reason for the blockers to allow them in the doorway in the first place, this would end that

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
It would prevent a common bodyblocking issue that is already against the server rules. Pretty much every time I see an SCP attempt to breach another SCP in HCZ non-spec, we run into the issue of the contained SCP constantly bodyblocking, or deliberately getting in the way and then attacking us because "we attacked them first" even though they deliberately put themselves in harm's way. Pretty much every time there's a breach attempt there, I end up having to call a sit, and most of the time it doesn't get picked up until it's too late.
 
Jul 11, 2023
72
12
61
+Major Support
Imo this would be a great addition, since it would also help enforce the silver and golden rule of scps, and a lot of the time it's not followed. As E-11 I know how it feels when one crossfire bullet hits an scp and then they go full hostile saying we attacked first.

And as well as for 082 and TG etc, when an scp is inside their CC breaching them, a lot of the time they will stand in the door, forcing us to either call a sit, (by the time it's solved the said SCP is breached) or we just have to brute force it with bodies and guns until it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zen

Yeke

Community Manager
Community Manager
Group Moderator
Mar 20, 2022
1,038
6
273
111
Hi,

Unfortunately this is not how containment blockers work, if we reduce the containment blocker size, this would mean the SCP cannot move to the edge of their chambers and on breach, their doors would not open.

as such Containment Blockers must cover their door, if a SCP is found taking the mick and causing issues, then this becomes a staff issue.

Unfortunately there is not much more we can do to amend this, we try to give the SCPs limited space past the door, to prevent this, but it is not always possible in every case.

Regards
Yeke
 
+Support...?
it's a conundrum, for sure.
Hi,

Unfortunately this is not how containment blockers work, if we reduce the containment blocker size, this would mean the SCP cannot move to the edge of their chambers and on breach, their doors would not open.

as such Containment Blockers must cover their door, if a SCP is found taking the mick and causing issues, then this becomes a staff issue.

Unfortunately there is not much more we can do to amend this, we try to give the SCPs limited space past the door, to prevent this, but it is not always possible in every case.

Regards
Yeke
...is there no alternative solution to this problem?

what's made clear is that the suggestion as presented is not implementable due to limitations surrounding this mechanic - however, the problem the suggestion is trying to solve is still prevalent regardless. yes, SCPs bodyblocking the entrance of their CCs, especially to prevent another SCP breaching them from being attacked, is against the server rules anyway and should be dealt with in each and every instance, but on the axis of 'things enforced by both the server and staff' and 'things enforced by staff', with the frequency of which this has been happening as of late, something like this should, idealistically, be more towards the former than the latter.

if the containment blocker itself cannot be reasonably altered to remedy the issue, is there no other possible implementation, no matter how long it may take and how far off in the future we might even see this taking place, that would prevent this from occurring? for example, while the containment blocker is active for that SCP, some form of restricted zone that covers the offending area? if the containment blocker has to cover the entrance to ensure breach mechanics function, is it at all feasible that the blocker and related systems can be improved upon in some manner in order to address the issue, rather than just flat-out denying the suggestion at face value? or is that not reasonable?
 

Yeke

Community Manager
Community Manager
Group Moderator
Mar 20, 2022
1,038
6
273
111
...is there no alternative solution to this problem?

At the moment, no.

Would it be feasible, unsure as im not a developer, however it is pertinent to keep in mind time constraints and necessity, this is not really a high importance thing due to the appropriate workarounds being in place (Staff) and the difficulty of the task may be significant as it would require reworking every containment chamber, this likely is not a small task to do and would require significant resourcing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emilia Foddg
Ah, that makes sense I guess, I wasn't aware it worked like that. As a workaround, would it not be possible for the containment blockers to be moved back to not cover the doorway in the way they already do, but have the blocker extend a thin line to cover only the door itself but that an SCP couldn't actually get to. Something like the following drawing, with the pink being the blocker. The blocker part covering the door itself would be placed in such a way that it does actually cover the door for the door break mechanics to work, but in a way that the SCP can't actually get into the doorway. I'm not sure if this would be possible, but the border setting does seem to support shapes other than simple squares, as shown with the current blocker shapes (picture 2).1000003752.png1000003753.png
 

Auburn

Community Supervisor
Community Sup.
Group Moderator
Jan 2, 2023
324
197
61
Suggestion Denied



Hi Zen,

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

As Yeke mentioned earlier in the thread, this would not be possible with how the VWar_SCP addon is coded. If the containment blocker was moved back the door would not open on breach, breaking SCPs such as 049. We also do not believe it is a valuable use of dev time, as you can call over one of our many capable staff members to quickly rectify the issue.

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