SCP 079 CHANGES

[Boylanard9232]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This suggestion proposes two key changes for SCP 079:

1. Adds a 10 minute "Firewall" period post breach where SCP 079 cannot be hacked.
2. Implements a 120 second "Final Recontainment" delay timer after successful hacking instead of instant recontainment.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:

Not that I am aware of.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

• Gives SCP 079 players a fairer chance to actually play during breaches, matching other SCPs breach durations.
• Maintains SCP 079 vulnerability while removing frustrating instant loss scenarios.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

• Will extend SCP 079 breaches by 12 minutes, 100% guaranteed.
• Requires UI changes to implement the recontainment timer.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:

• It addresses a clear imbalance where SCP 079 is easier to recontain than other SCPs.
• The changes are moderate and measurable, not radically altering gameplay.

 

[Welper]

First off, please follow format or they will yoink this suggestion off the forums.
Secondly, the issue with 079 is that it's such a powerful SCP that SCPs/CI will typically hold the point for as long as they can. Also, what doors are you hacking that you fear people seeing it?
I -support

 

[Boylanard9232]

1st Off​

Alright, fine I'll follow the suggestion format. If you look, I've already made the required changes to fit the format. :I

2nd Off​

Literally any door even if you successfully hide your hacking to level up— the moment you hack a door (any door) and someone sees it open with no one nearby, any smart Foundation personnel with comms will immediately suspect SCP 079 may have breached. They'll use comms to contact MTF or someone to check its CC "Containment Cell"

 

[Niox]

First off, please follow format or they will yoink this suggestion off the forums.
Secondly, the issue with 079 is that it's such a powerful SCP that SCPs/CI will typically hold the point for as long as they can.

i cant tell if this is ragebait or not
+Support

 

[Timmy Bill]

+Support

 

[Welper]

i cant tell if this is ragebait or not
+Support

Smh,no, just from personal experience 079 can be a very powerful SCP when breached and protected (thanks CI mains!!) and a lot of damage could be done before anyone even GETS to the CC, let alone manage the cl5 hack. Basically, it typically boils down to how lucky you are, at a scale where any actual buffs should only be done if the luck elements are decreased.

 

[Niox]

Smh,no, just from personal experience 079 can be a very powerful SCP when breached and protected (thanks CI mains!!) and a lot of damage could be done before anyone even GETS to the CC, let alone manage the cl5 hack. Basically, it typically boils down to how lucky you are, at a scale where any actual buffs should only be done if the luck elements are decreased.

This is all lies. E-11 are capable of hacking CL5's, the same way CI have to hack a CL5 to breach 079 themselves.
079 is also incredible weak and can't hack SCP's out for upwards of 30-60 minutes, this is not "a lot of damage".

 

[Critical]

Smh,no, just from personal experience 079 can be a very powerful SCP when breached and protected (thanks CI mains!!) and a lot of damage could be done before anyone even GETS to the CC, let alone manage the cl5 hack. Basically, it typically boils down to how lucky you are, at a scale where any actual buffs should only be done if the luck elements are decreased.

SCP-079 slaps like a 1 ply wet paper towel currently unless CI manage to hold the CC for 30 minutes to 1 hour or 079 goes undetected, unchecked, unmetagamed for a simular length of time.

For an £80 SCP it isn't all that mighty and I find 2295 can be harder to recontain at times

 

[Michael Dzhetnikov]

CL5 are lowkey easier than CL4 either add this or change it to CL6