Denied EZ "FSL" Bulkhead changed to a normal bulkhead

[Mitski]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
In the maintenance closet heading towards lobby there are TWO bulkheads, one for a biohazard breach and the second one is only turned on during FSL.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
No there has not been

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Foundation being able to actually hold EZ during an SCP breach/ same kind of basis but so SCPs dont get up to surface as quickly as they do now

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
People with Cl4 closing when CI raid but I do not see that happening

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Regarding this, SCPs can just disregard the ONLY bulkhead we can close in EZ and just break 2 closet doors and ignore that bulkhead fully, making that bulkhead useless unless we run to EOC and die by the SCPs to get the chance to turn on FSL, and by that time they are already going up the elevators to garage.

There is not much more to say regarding this as I feel like i have made my point clear.

That one bulkhead does nothing since there's a free exit for SCPs unless we turn on FSL the second SCPs breach which makes no sense

 

[Aleks.]

+support

 

[stephenpreisler]

+ Support

Forcing us to use FSL to close EZ bulkheads is... interesting. Please make it a typical bulkhead so we don't have to cause mass panic and disruption throughout the entire site just to close one bulk

 

[Emilia Foddg]

+Support
in the interest of server health

 

[Niox]

+Support
in the interest of server health

i fucking hate server health
+Support

 

[Verlocity]

Suggestion Denied

---

Hi @Mitski ,

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

Reason: We want to keep this the same, as feel that this would be abused way too much.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​