Content Suggestion Engineer/Tech Gameplay: Door fortification/Card Scanner firewall

[Zourk]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Add a function to Foundation E&TS (and maybe GOI Engineers?) that allows them to strengthen doors and keycards via fortifications (doors) and firewalls (keycard scanners)
Fortified doors would have a higher durability against SCP damage, firewalled keycard scanners would be more difficult to hack (+1 card level?). For balancing, fortification/firewall could be limited to one use each via a purchasable entity (like rift bridges or weapon shipments) only available to the relevant jobs, and fortification/firewalls could wear off after a certain amount of time. Firewalls could also be limited to a certain level of keycard (perhaps Cl3 and below?) to prevent making impossible hacks.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Not to my knowledge.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
1: Expands the interactivity of E&TS jobs: There is very little interactive gameplay for E&TS outside of cleanup immediately after a breach, or the rare computer breakdown. Otherwise, there's a lot of down time with nothing to do, which leads many to cause chaos.
1.5: Having more things to do could reduce the frequency of mingy tech experts (maybe just a US problem?) and aid in smoother operations for other departments (more RP serverwide)
2: Provides another interaction to base freeform RP off of, and gives other departments an active reason to call for E&TS outside of a breach. E-11 or GSD could ask for fortification of key doors in the LCZ. SOP or A/O-1 could call for keypad firewalls ahead of incoming raids (CI/GOC could do the same for fairness?). Potential RSD tests with new equipment as well.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
1: Development time: Two different systems would need to be tweaked, if not completely reworked and expanded + visual distinctions for upgraded doors/scanners.
2: "Meta" abuse: hyper-competitiveness could lead to only ever using fortifications on the same set of doors instead of creative/RP use.
2.5: Overall PvP balance: Fundamentally shifts the balance of raids/breaches in favor of the foundation (hopefully only slightly).
3: Job abuse: could lead to unintended number of fortifications/firewalls. (Make it an AA swep instead?)


Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Interactive options for E&TS (and to a lesser degree, GOI engineers) are notably limited to the time immediately following a breach, and outside of these "hotspots" there is little to do or to base an RP scenario off of. Giving them the option to initiate an interaction on their own offers a new way to start RP, and allows them to have an indirect, but meaningful impact of the facility at large (Personally, I enjoy RP more when it actually achieves something.) while hopefully not upsetting server balance too much.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

+Major Support
Okay. One question, what about containment boxes? What about say, 096's airlock keypad? What are the implications of this impacting SCP gameplay loops, 079 and 096 especially? I like the general idea and agree that it should be pursued, but it needs more fleshing out before considering any form of server implementation, IMO. This interacts with far too many different gameplay loops to take casual steps with.

 

[Zourk]

+Major Support
Okay. One question, what about containment boxes? What about say, 096's airlock keypad? What are the implications of this impacting SCP gameplay loops, 079 and 096 especially?

Excellent points. It may be necessary to exclude certain keypads/doors from reinforcement (Namely those within a CC). Keypads, I'd imagine could be tagged in the same way as a biometric or code lock, as "anti-firewall" or some other tag. Doors are a bit more tricky, though my original intention was that only ordinary sliding doors (the kind in the majority of the facility) could be reinforced, and not bulkheads or any other crushing doors (Such as those leading into D-block, or the airlock bulkhead, for example.)

I feel that letting 079 be unaffected by keycard firewalls is fine, given's it's method of hacking is both mechanically and narratively different. As for 096, allowing it (and maybe others, like 682, and other highly destructive SCPs) to do extra break damage to reinforced doors would let these SCPs keep their powerful gameplay, and still allow the reinforcements to slow down weaker SCPs.

I agree that, if implemented, these new tools would change many departments', if not the entire server's gameplay loop. It is my hope that it does so in a beneficial way, and brings more positive RP and activity to a somewhat neglected role on the server.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

As for 096, allowing it (and maybe others, like 682, and other highly destructive SCPs) to do extra break damage to reinforced doors would let these SCPs keep their powerful gameplay, and still allow the reinforcements to slow down weaker SCPs.

And 096's airlock keypad? I had intended that with what I was saying, but probably should have clarified it - I feel like being able to firewall that would be a slight curveball to say, CI attempts to capture 096 - Although tbf that's not a good example since even though it needs to be used at least twice, generally CI would be going with a CL3 keycard when doing this. A better example might be with D-Class or Parawatch, but you get the general idea