Partially Accepted ERT and Foundation need a nerf.

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

Porrin

Well-known Member
Jun 27, 2025
38
1
41
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
First I will begin this post by saying that ERT need to have a really good reason to be called. As of lately I started seeing ERT either being called to early or being called for single breaches that can be handled easily by foundation. In my opinion ERT should only be able to be called by SA and with a reason such as SCPs having reached EZ/surface. If this keeps being an issue then some nerfs should be applied to them since calling ERT almost everytime there is a breach just makes them dull and boring since no effort is made whatsoever in the first place. This nerfs can be either in the massive HP and Armor reserves they have or in their immunity to SCPs as a whole. The equipment should stay as it is since they are called ERT for a reason. Foundation also need a nerf. The other day I was 682 in my CC and was not breached. Nevertheless, and E11 wanted me to go into the acid tank and I refused. My reason was because I wanted to see how much time it took for 1 single E11 to lower all of my hp and see how much difference there really was between foundation and SCPs. I am not lying when I say this, in less than 3 minutes, my health had been reduced from 40k to 25 thousand, by ONE SINGLE PERSON even though I was actively trying to dodge (hit box may be too big for the little and small amount of hp and speed it has. This really puts into perspective, how much SCPs are at disadvantage. People usually say that SCPs get RCd fast because they always try to "brute force" their breaches. I find it incredible how as of right now, SCPs have to use more brains than foundation during breaches. The only thing foundation do when dealing with breached SCPs is the following:

1) Keep dying and going back to where SCPs are.

2) Set up barricades of 10-15 people in primary (as secondary is not even an option due to the turret there).


3) Wait for SCPs outside D-Block and go back to where they were killed right after respawning.

These are not even real strategies, it's just abusing the fact death is not really permanent and go head on to shoot the SCPs as eventually they will be low and be RCd. When this happens during high server population it's just not even fun to play as an SCP.
To at least solve some of this issues, I believe 2 things should be changed:

1) Turret in secondary has to either be removed or only be activated by Site Administration's orders, as it forces SCPs to be predictable since they really only have 1 viable path which foundation use to their advantage to put all their forces there.

2) ERT (aside from the things I mentioned above) should only be called if SCPs actually manage to reach surface. Yesterday 049, TG and me (8837) had just breached containment) and 5 minutes after that ERT had already been called. I feel like this is abusing ERT as their name literally means Emergency Response Team. When we reached LCZ we got almost instantly destroyed by foundation and then ERT arrived to finish us off.

3) Blast doors and gates need to be weaker. We loose a lot of time in HCZ trying to brake doors down and MTF use this to weaken SCPs a lot (which is the purpose of blast doors) but I feel like they take a little bit too much time, as by the time SCPs reach LCZ they are already below their base hp.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I could not find any recent post similar to this one.


Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
1) SCPs get a major tactical advantage. People keep saying SCPs need to stop brute forcing right? Then give them the option to plan their escape routes instead of forcing them to go through one main route.
2) CI will have more alternatives as well. As of right now they do not stand a chance against foundation. I understand that they are supposed to be a minority and not have equal numbers to foundation by small things like this should be added to help them strategize more by having more options.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
The only negative I see is that foundation will have to be more cautious during SCP breaches, but I think that is kind of the point. MTF E11 and other branches that assist them will have less time to respond and will need to act quickly before things escalate and SCPs get to LCZ.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
The other day I made a post saying SCPs need a buff and thankfully it got accepted. I saw that 076 got a buff so I am glad to see that the buffs are coming along the way. Still my fear is that this buffs will sadly not change the situation that much for SCPs. Foundation still have AA (Which they use for minor SCP breaches) The existence of this weapons make SCPs be weak, as 10 people with Freedoms or Augers really makes the difference. Some of this changes being applied really gives SCPs a chance, even though it is only a bit more. I think the main reason people are so against changes helping SCPs improove is because they only see themselves (Which is ok). What people cannot seem to comprehend is the strength the foundation have as a whole. When foundation all reunite to deal with SCPs it's a guaranteed fast RC, and sometimes it only requires 5 to 10 people to do so, more numbers just mean a shorter breach.
 
Last edited:
- Support

Due to the fact ERT is supposed to be called after X amount of time, SCPs get to a certain point of uncontainable or SCPs have overrun the entire site, having ERT be turned into glorified MTF Units makes less sense. Often times if the anomalies work together and don't try to solo ERT one by one like each of them can to a better job than the last, then they might have a better chance of wiping ERT.

If people return to a breach location after death (Such as GSD going to Rock Hall to fight a breach whilst not being SRU or SCU) it can be an issue of NLR.

Breach/Blast doors are MEANT to be a problem for SCPs, that is their entire point. If they were an 8 hit break as opposed to a 3 hit break like all other doors, they would not be worth having on the server.

The point of the foundation is to be able to contain these anomalies and stop their breaches.



The only thing I SOMEWHAT support is Site Defense Systems (such as turrets and teslas) needing to be activated and not on at all times. Maybe not by SA+ though, but via CL4 MTF personnel or Dpt Directors or other CL4 as a fallback if any of the previously mentioned are unavailable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Porrin
That is like 1 part of the entire post. I just mentioned how ridiculous it is for ERT to be immune to all SCPs. And I mean yeah, he snaps necks. ERT are not gods who should be immortal. 1 ERT means 173 is RC as of right now. I believe 173 should not be able to snaps several necks quickly though. He should have a cooldown to make it fair for everyone.
you can kill ERT as 173 SOLO if you are smart, you can instantly kill ANYONE with your left click
 
  • Like
Reactions: Porrin
+ support

(do breach servers even exist anymore?)
They exist but they are in three groups: Big Chinese ones and Smaller Polish (my country) and Russian Ones.

I remember there was one english one but it got shutdown in like 2020-2021. I wished that polish ones went RXBreach mode like chinese/russians did (Note that RXBreach was first russian then chinese over took it. Tho there was american one but it got shutdown due reasons i can't explain fully.)
 
hey @Porrin

After a discussion between Senior admins and Super admins,

We have acknowledged that the previous usage of ERT phones by SA/SC is not up to standard. There arent being used as intended when they were added.

We dont want to nerf ERT jobs as they are meant to be the last resort to stabilise the breach and prevent a nuke ( full RP reset),

Regarding SCPs HP balanecing there are already plans for SCPs like 682 to make him more fair and not a bullet sponge.

We won't change the way blast doors work.

-----------------------------------

SSL has implemented new policies regarding ERT phone usage and we will be monitoring this change/policies.

As such i will p. accept your suggestion.

Best regards,
Content lead
Holland

 
Status
Not open for further replies.