Talk:Shearbank Barricade Plan

PTT Barricade plan

I just noticed, that the PTT has its own barricade plan and its members appear to be very active in maintaining it. I noticed that the PTT states that Lessey lane PD should be EHB while Keebler lane school should be VSB. Under the Shearbank barricade plan, however, it's reversed with LEssey lane PD being VSB while the school is EHB (because of the phone mast). IMO this is counterproductive because the two plans are at odds with eachother. PTT is a very active group, but the Shearbank Barricade Plan is listed on the wiki page here. So I'm thinking that this is why we have so many EP's getting overcaded. Any one else noticed this? Any opinions? Or am I just crazy... I AM TARA 20:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

XP Orgy Plan

/zom/ of Anonymous is going to use the Fifield Motel in our XP Orgy Plan. Some people are re-barricading, please stop doing that, we need the cades down. You can even join the plan if you want to, but if not, leave us alone. There are roughly 100 /zom/ members, at least 50 active, and a core group of 20 or so, who will make sure all goes according to plan. The building will not be ransacked, and ferals will be dealt with. If anyone seeks XP they may join us as a zombie or a human, whichever side there are less of at the time in keeping with a 50:50 ratio. Thank you for your cooperation.

AnonBorgTech001 23:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Two comments here:

1) It's more usual to use the discussion page for the barricade plan to, you know, discuss changes before arbitrarily implementing them; there are several active groups working in Shearbank and some might have different opinions about your use of buildings where they have been living and working for quite some time;

2) The "XP Orgy Plan" sounds like a great way to get PKers, zombie spies, and other undesirables who wouldn't normally be revived, back on their feet and able to screw around with other people once more. The DEM absolutely does not support any plan which includes random revival as part of it. --Jimmy "Two Stacks" 10:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The reviving is done by our people to our people; on further discussion we have decided for that very reason that no one else should participate in this, and our NT specialists will only be reviving and keeping the ratio with the /zom/ on their contact list. AnonBorgTech001 14:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

That's much better; thank you for the reassurance :) --Jimmy "Two Stacks" 16:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposal For Change

It has been suggested on the UBP Plan Review page that Shearbank might benefit from a couple of extra entry points - specifically, Club Williames and the Rush Building. Any thoughts on this? --Kal 09:46, 4 July 2007 (BST)

Proposal For Temporary Change

Seems to me that during the Mall Tour 07 siege, a lot of the EPs by Stickling are getting overbarricaded. I suggest while the tour is still attacking, the junkyard at [51, 22] should be made into an temporary EP, since it is very close to the NW corner of Stickling and Whippey. --Sexy Rexy Grossman 23:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't a better solution be to bonk the idiots who are over-barricading the regular entry points on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper? Graffiti, speeches with the tinyURL for this page, and the judicious use of a crowbar. After all, if we can't rely on the entry points to be maintained correctly when the suburb is under siege and it's most critical to keep them up, when can we rely on them? --Kal 02:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The UBP itself notes that in times of siege, "barricade limitations may be temporarily ignored, but should be returned to the preferred condition as soon as the immediate threat is alleviated." I'm not arguing that the over-caders are following UBP's execption here, but I am arguing that a siege of this magnitude requires adaptation. And there have been a lot of complaining about the EPs; my friends on the ground there consider the current EPs unreliable. Your solution of grafitti, speeches with TinyURLs and crowbars, take up precious AP better spent defending against the horde. Do what you want, but seems silly to stick by a plan for the sake of sticking by it. --Sexy Rexy Grossman 02:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you're missing my point actually :) You can temporarily re-define any location you want as an EP and try to maintain it at that level; but it's inevitably going to suffer from exactly the same problems as all the other EP's, and for the same reasons. With that in mind then, wouldn't your efforts be better placed trying to maintain the existing EP's, rather than creating another one which will be in exactly the same situation within a few days? --Kal 03:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Seems to me that it would be easier to maintain a new EP, instead of an established EP already full of survivors unwilling to move. (I say this with the assumption that there are no residents at that junkyard currently.) If you think it would be extra work to maintain an extra EP (due to it suffering from exactly the same problems), then perhaps you should charge some dedicated Shearbank residents to be more mindful of the EPs, since it appears that most of your guests are not. I'm not looking for a flamewar here, but just a way to keep seeing "OMG EP OVERBARRICADED NOW I'M DEAD" type posts. --Sexy Rexy Grossman 03:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well first of all I'd like to address your comment about organising a group to be mindful of EPs and barricade levels; several such groups exist, most notably from my point of view the MFD, part of the DEM; I am MFD's Captain in Shearbank and between MFD and MPD we have over a dozen active members in Shearbank currently; recently we were also reinforced by members of another DEM branch, the MCDU, and this took our numbers up into the thirties. For all our members, scouting the area and ensuring 'cades are kept to spec is their number one priority, after which comes tasks like servicing the RP queue, putting up informational graffiti, removing PKers, and other such tasks. MFD in particular is interested in maintaining the barricades, it is our primary role as part of the DEM.

With that said, clearly barricades and especially entry points are still often a problem, and it becomes even more so in times of high zombie population, for obvious reasons - when there are more zombies about, if you do get caught outside, you are much more likely to wind up dead, and further, survivors under attack often panic and overbarricade the entry points instead of moving on to a safer spot themselves.

Regardless of these problems though, I don't agree that arbitrarily defining new EPs is a good idea. What you have to remember is, I think, that many (most?) players don't read the wiki. If they did, then everyone would know the barricade plan and over-cading would never be an issue. So while for the few who initially know about it, a new EP may well function as a useful EP for a time, it would however be of no use to the majority. What's more, if there are "locals" unbenknownst to you, you may end up with a "barricade level war" - something which is unproductive for everyone except the zombies. Regardless of any confusion, the EP is of no use to people who don't know about it, and so you would have to advertise the spot - radio, speeches in nearby buildings, graffiti (and for those who come here, of course the wiki.) However, if you are going to do all that, then really, your new EP is no different from any other and I see no reason why it would not suffer from the same problems as all the existing EPs.

So with all that in mind, why not instead just spend all that effort advertising or correcting the 'cade levels for the existing EPs? The particular spots we have defined in our plan were all picked with very good reasons - it's very easy to remember that any Church, Hospital, Fire Station or Museum in the suburb should be enterable if you get stuck outside; with the specific buildings we have chosen there is no point within the suburb where you ever need to walk more than 3 squares to reach an EP, and so on - all per recommendations made in the UBP.

I just don't see the value of adding a new EP when the real problem is the incorrect maintenance of existing EPs. New EPs aren't the answer; educating the population about the existing EPs is. --Kal 04:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Current Affairs

January 31st 2007 - The TinyUrl for the barricade plan is http://tinyurl.com/ya5e2k. You can spray paint this on buildings, bathroom stalls, etc. to spread awareness of the barricade plan and prevent the over barricading of key locations. --Uncle Bill 02:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

January 21st 2007 I've no idea who you are, Motorbikeking1, but I have reverted your change to the 'cade levels in the Rush building. It's not a necessary change, it violates the UBP guidelines, and you didn't bother to discuss it with anyone before you made the change. --Kal 19:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC) (Jimmy "Two Stacks", MFD Captain, Shearbank)

Proposed New Shearbank Barricade Plan

Here is my proposal for a new barricade plan for Shearbank:

Now posted on the main page. Thanks to those that contributed! --Kal 14:55, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Barricade Plan

Map snipped out - it is now posted on the main page. --Kal 15:02, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Differences from the currently published plan are as follows:

Changes due to UBP recommendations

• All NT buildings except Gabe upgraded to EHB (per the UBP's recommendations.)
• Lazarus General Hospital downgraded to VSB per the UBP's recommendations and also due to the lack of proximity to alternative hospital facilities.

Barricade level downgrades

• St Christopher's Church downgraded to VSB to provide an entry point in the 3x3 block (52,22-54,24).
• The Bridle Museum downgraded to VSB to provide an entry point in the 3x3 blocks (50,21-52,23), (50,22-52,24), (50,23-52,25), (51,21-53,23), (51,22-53,24).
• Owsley Crescent PD downgraded to VSB to provide an entry point in the 3x3 block (52,23-54,25).
• St Athanasius' Church downgraded to VSB to provide an entry point in the 3x3 blocks (55,27-57,29) and (56,27-58,29).

Barricade level upgrades

• Holroyd Bank upgraded to EHB, there are now better placed entry points in it's vicinity.
• The Derrington building upgraded to EHB, there are now better placed entry points in it's vicinity, also tall buildings should be the last choice as entry points due to their usage as suicide points for the unwillingly revived.
• Borrer Street PD upgraded to EHB due to proximity to Owsley Crescent PD, there are also better placed entry points now in it's vicinity.
• A Factory (59,26) upgraded to EHB, there are now better placed entry points in it's vicinty.

Notable exceptions to the UBP

• Farrant Crescent PD is EHB due to it's proximity to Lessey Lane PD and the availability of alternative entry points nearby.
• Denmead walk school has been left at EHB. The UBP's recommendation that schools be VSB does not apply to Shearbank where our only other school houses the phone mast and is therefore EHB.
• Auto shops have been left at EHB. Neither of our auto shops are particularly well-placed as entry points. Fuel is also a very important resource, and furthermore it's not one that a non-freerunning new player is likely to be worrying about.
• Churches are VSB. Our churches are extremely well located to provide entry point coverage to a large area. This also allows us to have one easily recognisable non-resource building consistently at VSB to provide safehouses for any survivors without the freerunning skill.
• The Bridle Museum is VSB as it provides entry point access to many otherwise uncovered blocks on the west side. This is a critical entry point.

Note the upgrading of barricade levels in Denmead Walk school and at the two Auto Shops results in there being a few 3x3 blocks which do not contain an entry point, however in every case there are at least two entry points directly bordering these areas. This results in there still being no point on the map from which it takes more than 3AP to get indoors.

Summary

I believe this plan satisfies all the UBP's requirements namely:

• All "Essential" buildings are kept at VSB except in compliance with exceptions as outlined in the UBP
• Every cluster of EHB buildings has at least one VSB entry point
• Each quadrant of the suburb has at least two VSB entry points (in fact, each contain at least 3)
• Every 3x3 block in the suburb is served by at least one VSB entry point (except as noted)

Additionally, there is no point in the suburb from which it requires more than 3AP to get inside.

Proposed Plan - Discussion

Please leave any comments about this proposed plan here - cheers --Kal 22:31, 9 October 2006 (BST)

this suburb is very over baricaded, maybe we should bring most buildings down to VSB and the ones that people use as hideouts can stay at EHB, its a bit annoying going out to kill some zeds only to find you cant get back inside. --motorbikeking1 21:34, 15 Januray 2007 (GMT)

I suggest reading the UBP guidelines before making sweeping statements like this - and certainly before you start arbitrarily changing parts of the plan. --Kal 15:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC) (Jimmy "Two Stacks", MFD Captain, Shearbank)

31 Oct - I have died countless times because I go out hunting through The Bridle Museum then when I come back it is over baracaded, who is doing this! I keep attacking it daily to bring it back down to VSB, but people keep putting it up again. How can we enforce this?

You can't. About the most you can do is re-tag the place and speak to the people inside when you pass through. The museuem is probably the single most important entry point on the map, it serves a huge chunk of the NW corner. Just keep repeating that to people and eventually it will sink in. --Kal 13:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

One suggestion I have received so far is to keep Denmead walk at EHB. The only reason the UBP recommends schools be VSB is to provide a consistent, non-resource building for non-freerunners to sleep in. As the only other school in Shearbank contains our phone mast and is therefore EHB, this recommendation doesn't really apply here. Keeping Denmead walk at EHB would mean there was no entry point for the 3x4 area between (57,25) and (59,28), but as over 50% of this area is street and there are four other VSB entry points on it's border, that fact may not matter at all. --Kal 02:33, 12 October 2006 (BST)

Just a thought - given the comments about Denmead Walk school, a similar line of reasoning might apply to Club Williames (57,22) and both Auto Repair shops. If all three were raised to EHB, it would result in a few more blocks without their own VSB entry point, but there would still be no point on the map from which it would take more than 3AP to get indoors. This also dovetails nicely with The Freerunners existing policy for the suburb. --Kal 02:50, 12 October 2006 (BST)

Making the autorepair shops EH was suggested to Viker, but he did not chose to do so. Fuel is valuable, and easier to find in a non-ransacked building with a genny. GKers may be the biggest threat to gennys, but EH cades would help protect them from Zs at least. --TheBerts 07:20, 13 October 2006 (BST)

Glad to see you made owlsey crescent PD VSB rather than Borrer PD. --TheBerts 07:26, 13 October 2006 (BST)

There are three hospitals in Shearbank. It would be nice to make one EHB to increase the feasibility of doing 15hp heals. I think Viker had Lazarus at EHB for this reason. And that inturn led to keeping Denmead Walk School at VSB.--TheBerts 07:26, 13 October 2006 (BST)

I'm honestly not sure whether it's worth it - while we have the hospitals, Lazarus is pretty isolated at 5 squares away from the other two hospitals, and it does make a useful entry point in that block. "All hospitals in Shearbank are VSB, all schools are EHB" makes a much more readily understandable policy than the alternative, too! Is a marginally increased likelyhood of being able to pull off 15HP heals worth it? --Kal 14:34, 13 October 2006 (BST)

using either Lazarus or Denmead Walk as an entry point would be equally useful, so that is a moot point. --TheBerts 18:01, 13 October 2006 (BST)

That simply isn't true. With Lazarus as an entry point, it is simplicity itself to explain to any given survivor what buildings to try to use as entry points. With Denmead, it is significantly more complex. Think "All hospitals in Shearbank are VSB, all schools are EHB" vs "All Hospitals in Shearbank are VSB (except Lazarus), all Schools are EHB (except Denmead walk). It seems pretty obvious to me which one makes more sense. Also, it's not all about entry points - a Hospital is a resource building and as such warrants ensuring access by non-freerunners. With the next nearest hospital 5 squares away it is a bad idea to overbarricade Lazarus. --Kal 18:28, 13 October 2006 (BST)

"Is a marginally increased likelyhood of being able to pull off 15HP heals worth it?" Yes. --TheBerts 18:01, 13 October 2006 (BST)

I disagree. As I type, both Edmund and Josaphat have powered generators and are barricaded VSB. Why should Lazarus be any different? --Kal 18:28, 13 October 2006 (BST)

Ok - based on the discussion so far, I have updated the map to make the change to Denmead Walk and the two auto shops. I've left Lazarus as it is for the moment. --Kal 13:40, 13 October 2006 (BST)

I have updated the plan to reflect St Christopher's Church is an active RP in an unbarricaded building - I have used the BPOpen template rather than the BPRP template so that it is clear that the RP is inside the building, rather than outside. I've still left Lazarus' at VSB and Denmead Walk as EHB for the moment. I might wander over there tomorrow and see what the situation around there really is, but I'd really like some more opinions than just mine and TheBerts about what should be done - with only two of us commenting it's very difficult to come to a decision. Anyone? ==Kal 01:13, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Thanks for the changes to St. Christophers, as I said elsewhere (I think) I will be sure to let you know when/if we give up on St.Chris' as an indoor RP. --TheBerts 04:18, 15 October 2006 (BST)

K, it's been about a week since this "official plan was put in action." I'm actually camped in Ranahn library just N or St. Chris. I and a sizable number of Ranahan's occupants use that as an exit and entry point. From our observations on the ground, conversations with people in St. Chris and around St. Chris, the majority of people in the area are refusing to go along with the indoor revive plan. I've seen tags switched within a fifteen minute period. I told you guys before, you can dictate policy from the wiki. Just reflect how the community is actually using the place.

I'm not sure I agree - yes, one function of the wiki is to report on the real situation in game, but another very important usage is to try and educate people, organise disparate groups, and disseminate information. The whole point of their being a Uniform Barricade Plan is that it results in greater survivability for the residents of Malton; yes, we could just let the people on the ground do whatever they like and report it here, but don't you think it's a far more useful endeavour to work out an optimal defense plan and post it here, then do what we can to encourage people to follow it? You can dictate policy from the wiki - in fact it's the only place to do it. That doesn't mean you will be succesful in so doing, but there is no good reason not to even try.

Just because there are lot of people who think they know what is best for any individual building, you need to look at the requirements of the entire suburb when you try and design a barricade plan for it. A really good plan takes into account the immediately adjacent suburbs too. So there are people in Ranahan Library, barricading it to VSB and using it as an entry point. Well that's jolly nice for them. I hope, however, that they realise that in the context of the "bigger picture" of the entire suburb, they are actually making things easier for zombies and harder for survivors. --Kal 16:53, 23 October 2006 (BST)

Kal, perhaps you couldn't parse my entry well before you decided to get all bent out of shape about your precious plan being hurt with your sarodonic "jollies for them"; but the "that" you must have read as a referent to Ranahan is in fact in reference to St. Chris, used by the Ranahan people and the people in St. Chris. Did you bother reading the whole entry? Why would I have a sentence on Ranahan as an entry point if everything else in the entry refers to the public resistance to St. Chris as an indoor revival point? It gives the impression that you're not open to criticism, and look for little points to quibble over with talking points about UBPs. Jolly for you too.

As far as an optimal defense plan, I'd rather have data explaining what's actually going on in a given suburb rather than how the policy wonks would like to see the suburb. St. Chris's internal revive point, admittedly not an initial part of the plan but a concession varience to a group, is a good example of this. And since it's pandering to a group who doesn't seem to have much effectiveness on the ground in enforcing its RP points status, and actually has garnered a lot of animosity, from what I can read from graffit tags.

Sort of like my suggestion to list "sponsors" with revival points, perhaps UBP adherents should survey their suburbs and report % of adherence to the plan. That way a survivor will not the odds of finding things as they are.--The Envoy 18:26, 23 October 2006 (BST)

I don't know how many ways there are to interpret the sentence, "I and a sizable number of Ranahan's occupants use that as an exit and entry point." Sorry if I misunderstood - but that wasn't meant to be the main thrust of my argument.

If you want to see an up-to-date scouting report detailing exactly what is going on in the suburb here on the wiki, then by all means you should feel free to create that. Personally I think it would be a bad idea due to the enormous potential for it's abuse by PKers, zombies and their sympathisers. The DEM do in fact accurately maintain such a thing however we don't publish that information publically anywhere for exactly those reasons.

However none of this has anything to do with the publishing of an optimal defense plan for any given suburb. The optimal defense plan is the optimal defense plan, regardless of how many adhere to it. While I agree that it is useful to know where the reality is deviating from the optimal, I simply don't agree that the need to know the reality obviates the need to maintain a discrete plan, which seems to be what you are suggesting.

"Policy wonks" indeed. Charming. Perhaps if we had more "policy wonks" incorrect barricade levels would be less of a problem in Shearbank. --Kal 18:48, 23 October 2006 (BST)

I guess I figured from a cascade of comments on St. Chris, you'd see from the context is we're talking about St. Chris. The real point is there's no need classify St. Chris as anything special in the barricade plan, which you did as a concession to Berts, even though on the ground no group has been able to consistenly maintain it as an indoor RP. In fact, in light of the groups Bert's represents efforts to take down the cades, there's been a lot of zombie looking for revival getting headshot and, more troubling, surivors overbarricading St. Chris well past VS+2. That's screwed up the Ranahan library patrons' (not an official group) effort at a relief op for the people getting slaughtered inside Borrer Crescent. So by conceding to a minority interest in the burb, the optimal defense plan has sabotaged relief efforts and indirectly contributed to casualties. On the ground, that'd get you griefer death warrant from a lot of groups. As a wonk, you have the luxury to speak of optimalization from the depths of you DEM bunker.

Detailed scouting info may well be something that falls under USIT's mission (of course, USIT itself may be a force of misdirection). Not sure what sort of abuse such reporting could lead to, except normal intelligence value, but the truly organized suburbs shouldn't worry about sounding formidable. The others, well, what good would a well organized reaction force be if there aren't people to cry for help?--The Envoy 20:10, 23 October 2006 (BST)

I don't know why any US organisation feels it has any jurisdiction whatsoever over a town in the UK; but that's an aside.

No, it wasn't clear from your writing that you were talking about St Chris. I took your statement to mean there was a survivor group based at Ranahan Library, who used Ranahan Library as their entry point, and as that location was directly adjacent to St Chris' they were in prime position to see what was going on there. I'm not stupid, Envoy, the sentence as you wrote it was ambiguous, and I've apologised for misinterpreting you already.

The concession on the barricade plan was made because TheBerts claimed to represent an alliance of several groups in the suburb, and moreoever he was one of the only people who bothered to get involved in the discussion here; I'd have made the same concession to any other group active or concerned enough to bother posting. There would have been no point in my posting the barricade plan with St Chris' marked as VSB as that would simply have led to a wiki edit war - pointless. If the Ranahan Library residents felt it was that much of an issue they should have posted here. With no other groups speaking up to the contrary and on the advice of my superiors I posted the barricade plan as you see it today. Believe me, I am as unhappy about the situation with St Chris' as you are. If another week goes by and the situation hasn't changed and there has been no further comment from TheBerts, I'll modify the plan to remove it as an RP myself.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean about not understanding what sort of abuse apart from intelligence value an up-to-date scouting map of the suburb could be; the value of intelligence is that it is intelligence, surely. As an example, an up-to-date scouting map posted here by survivor groups would be ripe for exploitation by any zombie group who chose to abuse it - they could check the scouting report, find out where the highest concentrations of survivors were, and target those locations directly.

I'm not sure where this imaginary bunker you mention is; Jimmy "Two Stacks" is very active in the suburb, spending each and every day reinforcing/knocking down 'cades where appropriate and healing survivors when and where he can. He's frequently found right on the front lines, repairing 'cades and healing survivors in the face of ongoing zombie assault. I resent your implication that I'm formulating this policy whilst closeted away somewhere; I am just as much "on the ground" as you are.

When did calling names become The Envoy's method of arguing a point, anyway? --Kal 23:28, 23 October 2006 (BST)

Yeah, I was a little sore yesterday, so rather than seriously grief any characters in game, I guess I decided to grief the plan barricade plan, plus I'm sore at the way St. Chris went down, you (and I) were right and Berts has dissappeared. Btw, it's not just the survivors of Ranahan (some of which have joined LMFAO) complaining about this, but a number of surivors in the area. I think part of the problem of getting a clear sense of what sentiment is in Shearbank is that "independents" far outnumber group alligned characters.

As far as USIT business, why an American group would be in a UK city is part of our investigation. Rather, why so many U.S. groups (Omega Co., S.T.A.R.S., FVZA, etc.) are operating in Malton is a part of our investigation (something in game other than a bunch of American players not really reading the background on the city). It's not jurisdiction, but the UK authorities inside Malton don't really have things under control, making it rife for U.S. intelligence operations (particularly since MI-5 or MI-6 seem to be virtual nonentities here). That said, we'll primarily be information gatherers for a variety of agencies back in the U.S.. However as USIT has grown a bit disillusioned with the world of black ops in the war on conventional and supernatural terror, we'll probably be more forthcoming with our "truths" than some groups may prefer.

I have updated the main page to better reflect the real situation at St Chris'. It will be interesting to see if Berts or anyone else from that group speaks up (or even notices) as they have been conspicuously absent from this page since the initial discussions. --Kal 12:01, 25 October 2006 (BST)

I don't really have strong feelings about Lazarus/Denmead Walk (other than that one (and only one) of the two should be VSB, which we agree upon). Suggesting Lazarus as EHB was just something I remembered from Vikermac, so in the absence of any other input feel free to keep Lazarus VSB. --TheBerts 04:18, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Righto - I have now updated the plan on the main page. --Kal 14:55, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Archives

Earlier discussions can be found in the suburb talk archives -- boxy ^{T L ZS PA DA} 13:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)