Uniform Barricading Policy/Plan Reviews

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Published Plan Reviews

The table below contains my reviews of all the barricade plans that have come to my attention. Every plan reviewed below should be represented on the Barricade Plan Map. These reviews aim to be as objective as possible, ignoring local groups and conditions and looking solely at the plan for UBP compliance. Plans will be re-reviewed roughly every six months to keep this as current as possible.

  • Buildings is the total # of buildings in the suburb. For buildings that occupy more than one block (like Malls), each block of the building counts as a separate building.
  • VSB and EHB are the #'s of buildings designated at each level. Open locations and RPs on buildings are not counted as VSB locations, even though they still function as entryways.
  • 'non-UBP' indicates that the plan has designated a number of essential buildings at barricade levels that are not in compliance with UBP guidelines strictly by building type. Under normal circumstances it is expected there would be a couple such buildings even in a fully compliant plan, such as when two Police Departments are only a couple of blocks apart and one is designated EHB.
  • Compliant indicates whether or not it is a UBP style plan.
  • Comments indicate things that affected my final decision and any changes I would recommend for that barricade plan. Where a plan was non-compliant I indicate what would be needed to change it to a UBP plan, if the maintainers so desired.
Suburb Buildings VSB EHB non-UBP Compliant


Barrville 57 18 39 8 NO A great plan for VSB placement, not UBP compliant. Too many UBP essential buildings are EHB. But a SOLID barricade plan all the same.
Brooke Hills 49 21 26 3 YES Plenty of VSB locations spread throughout with essential buildings accessible.
Brooksville 59 20 31 3 NO Too many VSB to be UBP compliant. Good plan though.
Buttonville 55 16 39 5 YES A couple spots that can be easily made better by having junkyards at VSB. Great plan already though.
Chancelwood 51 21 30 4 YES Considering the unique building layout and local FR lanes, this plan is remarkably efficient. Borders on too many VSB buildings, but works just fine as is.
Chudleyton 53 16 37 8 YES While more UBP essential buildings at VSB would be nice, hard to do here without compromising FR lanes. Could really use one of the NTs at VSB though.
Crooketon 52 22 30 2 NO Too many VSBs.
Crowbank 55 22 33 2 NO Too many VSBs. Good Optimal Defense Diagram though.
Dakerstown 57 11 46 7 NO Too many buildings are EHB. Many resource buildings are inaccessible to low-level survivors. Even the non-essential buildings (schools & fire stations) are EHB. This plan needs some work.
Danversbank 49 16 33 3 YES The only thing keeping this from being perfect is the EHB PD in the southern half of the suburb. Fantastic.
Dartside 52 15 37 7 YES Amazingly, all the non-compliant buildings fall into exceptions. Just need one of the NTs VSB to be spot-on.
Darvall Heights 61 14 56 2 NO Too many buildings are EHB, and neither of the NTs is VSB. Set one of the NTs (the non-mast one) at VSB and add a couple more VSBs to the east and NE and this plan would be great.
Dentonside 51 10 41 2 NO Needs a few more VSBs.
Dulston 58 26 32 2 NO With the exception of one small 3x3 area on the west side of the suburb that lacks an entry, Dulston is actually has too many VSB buildings. Add a VSB to the glaring 3x3 area on the west side and perhaps add some EHBs to the NE and this plan is fully compliant.
Dunell Hills 47 15 28 4 YES Some areas that could use another VSB, but otherwise this plan is good considering the building layout.
Dunningwood 50 20 30 4 NO Another example of a suburb that has too many VSB buildings. Change some of the VSB to EHB and shuffle around as necessary... this plan needs an update.
Earletown 58 15 43 3 NO None of the hospitals are accessible, and the VSB buildings really should be spread out more.
East Becktown 55 16 39 1 NO Poor distribution of VSBs, especially in the SW of the suburb.
East Boundwood 59 14 45 1 NO There are also two notable areas (between the schools and the fire stations; between the PDs and the hospitals in the SW) where there are blocks of just EHB. Remember that a good distance rule for plans is in any 3x3 block, there should be at least one VSB.
East Grayside 49 30 19 6 NO A very strange plan; not UBP-compliant. Way too many VSBs, all of the hospitals should be VSB, and at least one of the three PDs in the southern half should be VSB.
Eastonwood 60 17 41 3 YES Good plan.
Edgecombe 65 23 42 2 NO One of the NTs should be VSB. Some of the VSBs could be spread out more as well, or even made EHB since there are almost too many.
Foulkes Village 55 12 43 4 NO Both PDs and both hospitals should be VSB, and there should really be another VSB on the east side.
Fryerbank 58 6 52 6 NO Too many EHB.
Galbraith Hills 52 17 35 3 YES You could take away some of the VSBs and this plan would still be good.
Gatcombeton 43 9 34 0 NO One of the two buildings on the western edge of the suburb needs to be VSB, and the warehouse in the east should be EHB--switching one of the nearby buildings to VSB.
Gibsonton 60 17 43 7 NO One of the NTs should be accessible. A couple 3x3 areas that are missing a VSB, but that is less of an issue than one of the NTs.
Greentown 47 20 27 3 NO Too many VSBs, some in the northern half compromsing FR lanes. Good Optimal Defense Diagram though.
Grigg Heights 54 22 32 3 NO Actually a few too many VSBs.
Gulsonside 56 16 40 2 YES Good as is, but would be better if this or this where VSB.
Havercroft 56 19 37 3 NO So very close. Really just need to switch some VSBs to EHB and this is great.
Heytown 49 15 33 2 YES Great plan for the building layout.
Hollomstown 65 17 48 4 NO Poor VSB distribution. Remember that a good rule-of-thumb is 1 VSB in any 3x3 section of the suburb.
Houldenbank 54 16 37 2 YES Can't find any reason this isn't compliant.
Huntley Heights 61 16 43 1 YES I would move a couple of the non-essential VSBs around, but the plan is good.
Jensentown 57 23 33 1 YES BP is good, but might want updating. With the dark building update, locals might prefer to keep dark buildings VSB/ruined since they take more work to restore once ruined.
Judgewood 48 16 32 8 YES Really an ugly building layout no matter how you slice it. Pretty damn good, considering.
Kempsterbank 50 21 29 6 NO Good Optimal Defense Diagram, but for UBP we need more EHB as well as the PD put to VSB.
Ketchelbank 46 11 32 2 NO Need to add two VSBs to the NE corner. Otherwise pretty good.
Kinch Heights 51 18 33 6 NO A few too many VSBs. Great Optimal Defense Diagram though.
Lamport Hills 54 14 40 5 NO FR issues in the northern half (both of which can be remedied by making junkyards VSB) & blocking issue in the SE -- otherwise this is solid.
Lerwill Heights 53 21 32 3 NO Too many VSBs, some threatening FR lanes.
Lockettside 55 18 37 8 NO Decent spread of VSBs around the suburb, but too many UBP essential building not accessible.
Lukinswood 46 14 32 4 YES For the building layout, pretty darn good.
Millen Hills 52 16 36 1 YES Some of the NTs could be EHB and this would still be a good plan.
Miltown 53 14 28 6 NO The other PD and one of the other hospitals should be VSB. VSB distribution could be better.
Mockridge Heights 49 14 35 2 YES Really no good way to make this plan any better than it is, due to the building layout.
Molebank 61 18 43 3 YES A great plan.
Mornington 55 19 36 5 NO VSBs are well-spread throughout the suburb, but actually too many, some interfering with FR lanes.
New Arkham 54 24 30 6 NO Neither of the hospitals is VSB, and too many VSBs for UBP. One of the NTs should be VSB too. Decent Optimal Defense Diagram though.
Nixbank 47 14 32 3 YES Probably about as good a plan as you can hope for, considering building layout.
North Blythville 60 18 42 6 YES Make one place VSB and this plan is about as perfect as can be.
Old Arkham 57 12 45 8 NO Not enough VSBs, including essential TRPs like PDs and hospitals.
Osmondville 52 17 35 3 YES Good plan, could even take away some of the VSBs if the locals so desired.
Owsleybank 50 24 25 7 NO WAY TOO MANY VSB, and none of the TRPs are VSB.
Pashenton 56 15 41 2 YES Could use some minor tweaking, but overall a good plan.
Paynterton 54 20 34 0 YES Strictly compliant with UBP.
Peddlesden Village 47 16 30 5 YES Looks good. I would recommend putting the church at VSB and putting the RP at the carpark (and thus the factory at EHB), but that's just my own personal preference.
Pegton 59 18 41 2 YES Kind of borderline compliant, but the building layout makes this area difficult.
Pennville 62 20 42 7 NO Almost there. The hospital and PD near Fort Perryn should really be VSB, and there is a FR issue a couple blocks north of that. Otherwise great.
Penny Heights 63 16 47 8 YES The only real improvement would be to get one of the two NTs at VSB.
Peppardville 59 13 46 3 NO Too many EHB buildings.
Pescodside 58 17 41 2 YES Could really use another VSB on the east side of the suburb, but otherwise a good plan.
Pimbank 53 19 33 3 YES Some minor blocking issues in the south, but otherwise a good plan.
Pitneybank 47 15 32 4 YES Given the layout of the suburb and the location of the NTs relative to Giddings Mall and Fort Creedy, this is probably the best you could hope for.
Quarlesbank 62 19 43 3 YES There are some errors in the plan, namely some street locations with barricade levels listed. Otherwise, this is a great plan with VSB scattered across the entire suburb.
Raines Hills 62 16 45 4 YES Would suggest also making St. Mary's Church a VSB location.
Randallbank 58 15 43 2 YES I can't find anything wrong with this plan.
Reganbank 48 14 34 0 YES About as good as it's going to get.
Rhodenbank 58 22 36 2 YES BP is good, with VSBs peppered throughout the suburb. Plan can be difficult to read as there are no block names or rollover text, but the plan is sound.
Richmond Hills 45 16 29 3 NO One of the two NTs needs to be VSB along with the other hospital, and this plan is pretty much all set.
Ridleybank 66 23 43 8 NO Great distribution of VSBs around the suburb, but too many of the UBP essential buildings are EHB.
Roachtown 60 13 47 8 YES I would like to see another VSB or two, but it's a decent plan as is.
Roftwood 56 17 38 4 YES Plan is now in compliance
Rolt Heights 54 15 39 1 YES Could use another VSB location in the north, but otherwise a good plan.
Roywood 63 25 38 5 NO Too many VSB. In fact, just in the interest of preserving FR lanes I would make one of the two hospitals in south-central Roywood EHB as well as Gazzard Avenue School. Frauley NT could also be EHB without posing an issue.
Ruddlebank 57 21 36 5 NO Decent Optimal Defense Diagram, but too many VSBs for UBP--many of them compromising FR lanes. One of the NTs needs to be VSB, and the PD and hospital in the center should be as well.
Santlerville 51 9 39 5 YES While 1-3 more VSBs would be nice, on re-review I couldn't tell you where to put them.
Scarletwood 62 22 39 8 NO Great Optimal Defense Diagram, but not UBP-compliant.
Shackleville 56 13 43 8 NO Really needs one more VSB for the middle of the suburb. My personal choice would be this one. Great plan otherwise.
Shearbank 58 15 42 6 YES Personally I would like to see another VSB in the south and in the NE, but it's a good plan.
Shore Hills 49 20 29 2 NO Too many VSBs for UBP, but looks great as an Optimal Defense Diagram.
South Blythville 52 13 38 1 YES Could use another VSB in the NW quad, but it's good as-is too.
Shuttlebank 58 22 36 6 YES It would be nice if one of the NTs was VSB, but otherwise a decent plan.
Spicer Hills 63 20 43 3 YES A few spots that might pose FR issues, but overall a good plan.
Spracklingbank 50 15 35 2 YES Plan is good.
Stanbury Village 57 17 39 5 YES Personally I would move some VSBs around, but it's a great plan.
Starlingtown 47 10 37 4 NO Needs a couple more VSBs, and ideally one of the NTs could be VSB.
Tapton 52 18 34 3 NO Too many VSBs, particularly in the west where FR lanes are fragile.
Tollyton 52 17 35 5 NO Needs another VSB in the NE; my suggestion would be to make Tavener EHB and Godwin School VSB.
Vinetown 55 18 37 4 YES Solid barricade plan.
West Becktown 49 16 33 0 NO Distribution of VSBs throughout the suburb is very poor. New plan needs to be designed.
West Boundwood 55 13 42 3 YES Could use another VSB on the east side, but not bad.
West Grayside 57 16 41 2 YES Good plan, although one of the NTs could be at VSB.
Whittenside 58 14 44 5 NO Poor VSB distribution. All PDs and hospitals should be VSB, as well as one of the NTs.
Williamsville 58 14 44 5 NO A few too many EHBs. Add a couple more VSB where they will be most useful and this plan is great.
Wray Heights 62 21 41 7 NO Pretty good VSB placement, but too many essential buildings are EHB and one of the NTs should be VSB.
Wyke Hills 55 17 38 3 NO Screech Lane PD should be VSB and there are some FR issues.
Wykewood 48 16 32 4 YES It's compliant, but I would recommend changing some of the VSBs to EHB to safeguard FR lanes.
Yagoton 62 14 46 8 NO There is a lack of VSB buildings in the center of the suburb, both essential buildings and otherwise.

Plans awaiting review

If you have a plan that has not yet been reviewed above, or was updated since its last review, please provide a link to the plan here, including the date added to the list. Please sign your posts so that we know who to contact when the review is completed.

Any comments about a plan previously reviewed or awaiting review should be made on the talk page.

Plans requiring re-review

Comments and Feedback

If you have comments about a review above, please make them on the talk page.

Old review comments can be found in the archives.