Content Suggestion Incentive For Waiting A Long Time To Breach

Content Suggestions will be reviewed by Content Team weekly, please allow time as not everything can be reviewed at once.
Emilia Foddg

Emilia Foddg

CG Diamond VIP
Donator
Two Year Club Community Engager Conversation Starter Chemical Weaponry
Jul 15, 2023
2,151
558
111
UK

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:​

Create a system that provides gradual buffs per SCP, proportional to the time that player spent in the Breach Queue, which would reset if the player either flags off the SCP, or when they're breached/recontained.

To facilitate this in a reasonably balanced way that doesn't massively disrupt the server, first drastically nerf every SCP's base stats across the board.

This could be as simple as health changes, for example, 682's base breach health could be reduced. Then when a player breaches as 682, they receive a health buff dependant on how long they waited for breach.

An example of how to apply something like this to 096 could be reducing its base run speed. Then when a player breaches as 096, they receive an enraged run speed buff dependant on how long they waited for breach.

Obviously there are limitations to how high one can reasonably buff a stat before it becomes stupid - So in cases where breach waiting incentive stat balancing would normally push a stat over what would be acceptable, buff something else about that SCP.

An example off the top of my head would be that considering a further breach wait buff after the previous one bringing 096's top speed to where raising it further would be a problem, have the breach instead spawn additional pictures.

I'm no balance expert, but my thoughts on 096 could be something along the following lines:
Time Waited For 096 Breach​
Difference From Current​
Immediate (i.e. Flagged on to be breached when asked, etc.)​
80% Top Speed​
2 Hours​
100% Top Speed (Normal)​
4 Hours​
110% Top Speed​
6 Hours​
120% Top Speed​
8 Hours​
120% Top Speed +1 Picture​
10 Hours​
120% Top Speed +2 Pictures​
Obviously, this overall would be pretty awkward for 096 specifically, as to my understanding, 096 is only really mechanically considered 'breached' when enraged or if the picture is out - And not necessarily if they're out out. This could serve as some form of balancing mechanism for 096 specifically - But the general concept is what I'm trying to get across here, and the formula is at least reasonably applicable to other SCPs.

EDIT: This is not anything to do with changing how frequently SCPs breach. The above table is intended to be read from the perspective of someone flagging onto an SCP and then breaching via the queue, being hacked out, etc. However long it takes.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Numerous suggestions relating to breaches, the breach queue and such have been made in the past - But I don't think anyone has specifically asked for incentive for long queue wait times.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):​

  • + Players waiting to breach on an SCP get reasonably compensated for the time they spent waiting to breach

  • + Players intending to hack out an SCP are incentivised to breach players who have been waiting longer for their breach

  • + May potentially increase breach variety

  • +/= (Additional 096 Picture Spawns) Players are more likely to encounter and engage with 096 pictures, making them a more used thing

  • +/= Wait time incentivisation may result in longer times between breaches, thus approaching a more reasonable balance between roleplay and breach gameplay

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:​

  • - Implementation time and effort

  • - May not gel well with some SCPs

  • - May encourage slot hogging

  • - Somewhat devalues breach votes, which are a (partially) paid feature

  • - Bugs with the system may cause unintentional server disruption (i.e. something becomes unbalanced in an unforeseen way and breach gameplay becomes worse for F until it's fixed)

  • - Issues with refunding (SCP Breaches are rarely refunded, anyway)

  • - Technically an 079 buff in some respects

  • - Technically a CI nerf in some respects

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

The chief complaint I see from SCP players ATM is that they don't want to spend an inordinate amount of time waiting in the queue for their breach, which may end up being underwhelming and not fun. The other problem here being that most players don't want frequent breaches, and would rather have breaches spread further out with long lengths of time between which that they may roleplay. The obvious solution here then, is to provide ample incentive for waiting a long time for a breach.

Granted, SCP stats (namely health) are already adjusted on breach based on server population. I imagine that in cases where the incentive for waiting for breach would conflict, there would need to be reconciliation between these two things. Conceptually, they aren't incompatible: Low pop + short wait = lower stats, High pop + long wait = higher stats; Alternatively you could consider reworking that system to work like this and do away with population-based scaling altogether, have it based purely on wait time? Unsure.

But there should be some kind of increased incentive for waiting for a long time to breach.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 2 Downvote
Average member podidski said:
Anyways, Why not add a small +5% DMG buff that will stack up after 8hours? (8 hours = 5%, 10h = 10% and each 2h +5%)
Click to expand...
Take into account that because of daily resets, there can only be so long that one person can be on the server at a time.

This idea would work for some SCPs, but not others (i.e. might be useful for 049's cane, but only circumstantially) - The time-accrued buffs should be flexible and useful in more circumstances, rather than specific niches. It would be annoying to wait hours on end for a breach only to be given something mostly useless for your trouble.
Pyrite said:
Fuck no.

Should be incentives for SCP's doing RP not waiting to breach.
Click to expand...
They don't have to be mutually exclusive.

The fact of the matter is that the breach queue is a literally a selling point of the server. To a lot of people, the breach queue is pretty miserable. Now think about that from a new player perspective and how they might be uninterested in sticking around after the fact.

And people waiting in queue may be inclined toward conducive RP anyway, especially over someone who flagged on when asked potentially feeling obligated more than anything.
Dusk said:
I honestly don't have an immediate response to this as I don't think this will give people the incentive to wait at all.
I mean most if not all the time, people are immediately breaching regardless of the handicaps or negatives.
Click to expand...
The important thing here is the concept. People are immediately breaching because they get the opportunity to. They aren't waiting in queue more often than not, because why? And the people that do tend to have issue with it, especially if they wait hours for a breach that potentially ends up just not being fun. I feel like there's some survivorship bias going on with this analysis of the status quo.
 
Emilia Foddg said:
Take into account that because of daily resets, there can only be so long that one person can be on the server at a time.

This idea would work for some SCPs, but not others (i.e. might be useful for 049's cane, but only circumstantially) - The time-accrued buffs should be flexible and useful in more circumstances, rather than specific niches. It would be annoying to wait hours on end for a breach only to be given something mostly useless for your trouble.

They don't have to be mutually exclusive.

The fact of the matter is that the breach queue is a literally a selling point of the server. To a lot of people, the breach queue is pretty miserable. Now think about that from a new player perspective and how they might be uninterested in sticking around after the fact.

And people waiting in queue may be inclined toward conducive RP anyway, especially over someone who flagged on when asked potentially feeling obligated more than anything.

The important thing here is the concept. People are immediately breaching because they get the opportunity to. They aren't waiting in queue more often than not, because why? And the people that do tend to have issue with it, especially if they wait hours for a breach that potentially ends up just not being fun. I feel like there's some survivorship bias going on with this analysis of the status quo.
Click to expand...
The concept itself seems to be a pretty okay idea, however this system wouldn't ever work for the current E-11 and HCZ, it would just simply be too much chaos for E-11 to handle in spans of hours. E-11 would need to be heavily buffed, the same with all assets used by E-11 in HCZ, as well as increased security to heavily reduce chances of escape out of HCZ. We have Code Blacks for 2-3 SCPS with peak hours, imagine if SCPs could breach every 2-3 hours or immediately.
 
Dusk said:
The concept itself seems to be a pretty okay idea, however this system wouldn't ever work for the current E-11 and HCZ, it would just simply be too much chaos for E-11 to handle in spans of hours. E-11 would need to be heavily buffed, the same with all assets used by E-11 in HCZ, as well as increased security to heavily reduce chances of escape out of HCZ.
Click to expand...
...Eh? That doesn't really line up with what I've been seeing lately. I've done numerous breaches as 096 on both US and UK, multiple of which have been as part of being freed by other breaches - And to my observation, breaches lately of all kinds have been handled very well. The worst I've seen lately is a random 008 breach that forced a nuke from Staff for reasons I forget.
Dusk said:
We have Code Blacks for 2-3 SCPS with peak hours, imagine if SCPs could breach every 2-3 hours or immediately.
Click to expand...
I feel like this is a misread of the table - It's meant to be from the perspective of flagging onto the SCP. It's very common for SCPs to be breached immediately after flagging on, especially when people ask for an SCP to flag on for breach, something which this suggestion aims to directly nerf. And the time between queue pops is around 2-3 hours anyway. So not only what does what you're saying here already happen (which is why I listed the timings in that way), but it's not relevant as I'm not suggesting anything about altering the frequency of breaches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back