Talk:Uniform Barricading Policy

Discussion of the UBP and barricading plans in general. Please be polite and sign your posts.

Suggestions for modifications

Put suggestions for minor tweaks to the plan. Particularly to deal with changes in the game mechanics. Please review past discussions in the archives before adding one here.

Ambiguity and Suburban Map Development

A lot of time and energy is spent creating suburb maps and plans, and finally implementing the given policy in game. The UBP is great for essential buildings, and is okay for FR paths, but sometimes there aren't enough survivors to keep up the cades. Coincidentally, I propose that there is a new designation for buildings where it doesn't matter if they are VSB,EHB or even Ruined. Of course, when creating a Suburb plan, ambiguous plots should be the final location type assigned. For instance, I was looking at the unapproved Roywood plan, and I noticed that there are a lot of clusters of buildings where it doesn't really matter if they are EHB or VSB, they were non-essential, they weren't used for FR paths, and their value to new survivors was even mildly low. Since it is tough to know if that kind of building will help as VSB or EHB or ruined, why not just let the locals decide? --Damien falcon 20:40, 20 September 2010 (BST) [EDIT Also, since there is a couple groups that want churches to be RP's it might be an idea to possibly add them to the a separate list of "No Barricades". Pending that they don't interfere with FR paths.--Damien falcon 20:43, 20 September 2010 (BST)]

That is a good point that was never really brought up, and I think the reason why was just kind of an unspoken survivor mindset that buildings should be EHB whenever possible. The UBP as I understand it--and I could be wrong--was set up to offer a nudge by saying, "Hey, we need to focus on these buildings not being EHB." So for those spots of building like you speak of, putting them at EHB I would say is standard practice for the barricade plan and locals probably don't worry too much if one or more of them are only VSB. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 08:32, 21 September 2010 (BST)

Interesting, I never thought of it like that, but I've seen a bunch of the other barricade plans, like the East Grayside Barricade Plan which appear to emphasize on the opposite; encouraging new players to scatter throughout the suburb, while avoiding the Essential Buildings. I think that leaving the option of a ruined but opened building might really assist players off of the streets and into new safe houses. It simplifies the issues of buildings being left 'ruined'.--Damien falcon 02:46, 23 September 2010 (BST)

Ruin

It may be worth having some buildings deliberately left ruined to be used as entry points, the advantage of course being that they'd be far more (maybe eight times more) easily visible than VSB entry points, but the cost being that there'd be fewer barricaded buildings in the suburb. Thoughts? --  T   09:24, 23 August 2007 (BST)

With enough entry points around, it is not that important to recognise them easily. Even less for wiki users and other metagamers. When the suburb is under attack, ruins appear naturally anyway and in safe suburbs it's not that deadly to sleep outside, or at least easy enough to get a fast revive.

The now increasing costs to repair ruins make it harder to raise the cades as the need arises. AP need to be spent to maintain ruins, too. Less VSB safehouses come at the costs of less EHB safehouses, so the few of them should not be turned into ruins, providing less security for non-freerunners or less "real" safehouses at EHB.

In short: Voting against. Outside tags including the direction of nearby entry points might be a better solution.--Paul Power 12:31, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Less essential buildings

The increased difficulty to raise cades after a breakin makes EHB buildings more important than ever. Without raising their total number, I'd like to see at least the important TRPs at EHB. Therefore, let's remove Necrotech Buildings and Auto Shops from the list of essential buildings. While they do contain important items, these items are not needed for leveling up (or available elsewhere (Fire Axe) or starter items (Fire Axe, DNA Extractor)) and thus not required to be available for low-levels.

I wouldn't miss schools either, but as they are no important TRPs, they may remain VSB if that helps anyone.--Paul Power 12:31, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Seconded: Scientists/Medics can level using FAKs (from VSB hospitals) and DNA extraction until they buy Free-Running.
Auto-Repair shops are not important for anything other than keeping generators running, i.e. do not need to be accessible to newbies.
NT buildings are so critical to the community as a whole that I feel they should be kept at EHB at all times, and the UBP modified to state that they must have a VSB entry-point. --JimBraidwood 16:43, 14 October 2009 (BST)

Auto Repair Shops were already removed for the reasons pointed out. NT buildings are a much larger issue, and while I personally feel that keeping one NT (per suburb) at VSB isn't asking for too much, it is really an issue that the community as a whole needs to decide upon. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 03:47, 15 October 2009 (BST)

I'm certainly of the opinion that NTs should be kept to EHB, since the only resource that needs to be regularly sought there relies on a skill and is usually not used for leveling purposes. More generally though, I think the term "Essential Building" is a misnomer. For most players, essential buildings are TRPs. Obviously, things like fire stations and schools are not TRPs (at least by the current definition), yet I can see why they were included in the essential buildings list, since they provided reliable VSB locations across the map. Perhaps renaming them to "Leveling Friendly Buildings" or "Newbie Friendly Buildings" would make more sense to people that are having trouble understanding why things like schools are marked as essential? —Aichon— 09:22, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Another thing to remember is that new users, except those starting as Necrotech, won't even recognize NT buildings on the minimap, so can't look for them when seeking a safe-house. --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 11:07, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Those are both good points. I had forgotten that identifying NTs actually requires a skill (and then another to use a needle). The term "Essential Building" is a bit of a misnomer as well, I won't argue that. ...Okay, you guys have me convinced that for the purpose of UBP, keeping NTs at VSB isn't worth the risk since there isn't enough of a benefit to low-level survivors. What are your feelings on the other TRPs that the current policy calls for VSB? New players naturally gravitate towards PDs and hospitals for guns, ammo, and FAKs as ways to earn XP. Should the policy be changed for these buildings as well, or do you think that the current policy works fine (VSB with exceptions for attacks or proximity to another nearby)? --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 11:24, 21 October 2009 (BST)

For hospitals and PDs, I think the current policy works well. Most young survivors rely on one or the other of those for leveling purposes, and the exceptions provide enough leeway so that suburbs can tailor or adapt plans to meet their current needs. I've seen this policy in practice in the suburb I call home, and it seems to work extremely well. —Aichon— 19:10, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Fire stations and schools

Why are there at VSB??? They're not really essential for anything. Fire stations are only useful for fire axes, and if you're a noob looking for an axe, wait... that won't really happen, ever, because if you have axe training then you already have an axe! Therefore there is no reason to keep fire stations VSB, they aren't even tactical resource points. Also, schools, wtf? Noobs don't need schools. Noobs just need ammo, and FAKs, that's about it. --ScaredPlayer 04:36, 18 April 2009 (BST)

Agreed. JimBraidwood 03:19, 6 October 2009 (BST)

The reason why both Fire Stations and Schools are VSB is so that new players who do not yet have Free Running have locations that they can get into for safehouses. Also, not everyone starts with an axe, therefore there will be a number of folks who need to search for one as well. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 09:41, 6 October 2009 (BST)

Having given this some more thought... Re: Maverick, that's the reason for keeping *any* building at VSB, and not a very sound argument-- we don't leave NT buildings at VSB just because they have syringes, but syringes are a very important XP item for some players. The flip-side, though, is that schools and fire stations really don't have much value, so exposing them to extra risk (by lowering them to VSB) doesn't pose as much of a risk to the population as a whole. Losing a Mall or NT building is a serious blow; losing a schoolhouse isn't a big deal.

I do think that it's a bit fat-fingered though... saying that all fire stations and all schools should be at VSB doesn't take into account the layout of these buildings within the suburb. In particular, if ruining one of these can completely break a free-running lane, requiring a huge run-around or a search for a new entry-point, then it seems inappropriate.

Better than nothing I guess. I've just cleaned up and submitted 4 or 5 BPs for UBP review, which is to say that it's been 3 years and the UBP still isn't in fully implemented, much less ready for review and refinement. I'm going to keep working at making sure each suburb at least has a reviewed plan, and once that's done I'll come back around and start looking at them for finer points. Most notably, protection of non-redundant free-running lanes (i.e. those which don't have an easy alternative if one link is ruined), obsolete RPs, and access to resources from or within neighboring suburbs. I believe that the Districts idea will help make this more manageable.-- JimBraidwood 15:41, 6 October 2009 (BST)

I understand your argument completely. In the re-review of plans that will be taking place over the next couple months those kinds of things will be taken into account. There are more than a few areas where having a single building ruined can destroy the free-running lane for a suburb or even an entire district (depending on location). These are certainly exceptions to the standard UBP guidelines that I would certainly allow while reviewing. Obviously every suburb and district will have its own unique situation and exceptions are going to occur, but the idea behind the UBP is to have a set of guidelines that should be followed as often as possible.

Part of the NT argument is that some players choose to start as an NT Lab Assistant. If that is the case, they start out in an NT... and without the Free Running skill. So if all NT are by default EHB, then these level ones have no option other than to wait for zombies to come knocking before they can actually do anything with their characters. By keeping at least one NT in each suburb (as applicable) at VSB this lessens the odds of that happening. And just like with other VSB buildings, in times of siege the guidelines can most certainly be thrown out the window as TRPs will be set to EHB and ruins also serve as fine entry points. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 04:18, 7 October 2009 (BST)

I started the game about two months back, and my first character was a Lab Assistant that started in an EHB NT. I'm not sure what you mean about being unable to "do anything" though. I exited the building before I understood what EHB meant (I clicked on a neighboring block to exit), extracted a few zombies, realized I couldn't get back in, and bumbled around for a few blocks before finding a building I could enter. I know that I was able to get by just fine, but even if we assume that all level one characters are completely incapable of keeping themselves safe, we shouldn't be building the UBP around that edge case. Personally, I had no further use for an NT until weeks later when I was actually capable of revivifying, and by then, I had long-since picked up Free Running. —Aichon— 09:07, 21 October 2009 (BST)

RP guidelines

RPs should:

1. generally be located near an NT
2. always have a VSB entry-point within 2 blocks

--JimBraidwood 16:48, 14 October 2009 (BST)

I agree with both of your points, however I think the actual location of Revive Points is more of a suburb matter and less of a Barricade Plan matter. While the location should work with the plan, I would consider the two mutually exclusive. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 08:29, 16 October 2009 (BST)

Junkyards

Just a thought, but if you want to have a type of building to be always VSB for new users, junkyards are the perfect choice. High end users have shopping skills and free running, so they can get stuff from malls, but for a new user without those skills, a junkyard gives an amazingly wide variety of items in a single building. This is a building type that, just like schools, is largely ignored by advanced users, but unlike schools, actually offers something to a beginner. --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 10:37, 21 October 2009 (BST)

I have always been a big fan of keeping junkyards at VSB for that reason, but also because they cannot be ruined. Thus, young survivors always have a potential safehouse since I think there is at least one junkyard per suburb. That could be a worthy change, especially if we revise how we want to deal with TRPs in the plan. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 11:30, 21 October 2009 (BST)

I'm definitely a fan of this idea. Junkyards are plentiful, somewhat useful to newbies, and of little use to older survivors. And, they strike me as being less arbitrary than something like a school. —Aichon— 18:59, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Dark Buildings

What do people feel about dark buildings like banks, clubs, and cinemas? EHB or VSB? Personally I would put them at VSB since even when ruined they still make great entry point into the Free Running network. On the other hand, they can be a pain to repair once ruined because of the need of a generator to light the building up before repairs are possible. Thoughts? --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 11:30, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Dark buildings are great places for two groups of people:

• New users who don't have free running, and thus need to sleep in a VSB building.
• PKers who need to sleep in a place where bounty hunters can't easily get to them.

From those two points, I see no specific reason, other than suburb-specific ones, to keep dark buildings at EHB. Quite the opposite, in fact (but correct me if I'm wrong). --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 11:34, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Sorry for the late response; I missed all of the comments from a few days ago.

I would suggest that, due to the difficulty of bringing ruined dark buildings back up and running, they should be treated as any other building. That is, they should probably be EHB by default, but allowed to be VSB if an entry point is needed in the area and it doesn't cut a free running lane. Dictating that they be at VSB seems excessive and dangerous to me. I know exceptions can be made if they would cut free running lanes, but maintaining dark buildings is much more time-consuming than normal buildings, so I think they should, by default, be kept at the barricade level that would best prevent the need for maintenance. —Aichon— 00:09, 25 October 2009 (BST)

I always sleep in a dark building whenever possible. I'm neither a newbie nor a PKer, but I feel safe sleeping in one. It is a low priority target for zombies and PKers alike. I don't have to worry much about waking up dead. Of course, it's not 100% guaranteed, and I've seen people being killed in such buildings before. But it's far safer than sleeping in a powered resource point.

About the barricades, well, one might say keep them at EHB to discourage zombies from ruining it (they have to tear down barricades and attack people in the dark, after all.) But on the other hand, an unguarded dark building risks being attacked by a zombie paratrooper. One infected zombie spy pops in. Then, before you know it, voila! A dark pinata. It would be even more painful to repair than normal pinatas.

Of course, the same thing can be said about other unguarded EHB buildings in general. So, if you're going to keep dark building EHB, make sure they have guards! -- Kittithaj 01:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I tend to sleep in them too, strictly for the accuracy reductions that benefit my survival. But yeah, I've dealt with dark pinatas, and they're no fun. Even so, the risk is generally minimal, and it certainly isn't the common case when compared to how often a zombie tries to break down the doors and say "nom nom" to the people's brains inside. —Aichon— 01:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Summary/overview

A short summary of the above, at least how I read it, combined with the current UBP (and a bit of my opinion mixed in):

• Malls: EHB, entrypoints around.
• NecroTech: EHB. If multiple NT's exist within a suburb, one or two can be designated as VSB to help beginners. Rot revive are of course uncaded
• Fire station: Treat as any other building: accessibility depending on suburb situation
• Junkyards: VSB, resource point for beginners
• Cinemas, banks: VSB, sleep location for beginners
• Auto repair shops: EHB, only important to advanced users.
• Factories: Same as Auto repair shops, I think
• Phone masts: EHB
• Hospitals, police departments: These are the tricky ones, in my opinion. Beginners need them, but they are important to advanced users as well, who wish to defend them well. Maybe a good rule is to make half of them within a suburb EHB, half VSB. I would round towards the EHB side.
• Churches: These can be a good alternative source of FAKs for beginners. Because of the lack of doors, also a good source of brains for beginning zombies. I'm leaning towards VSB.
• Forts, stadiums, mansions: Treat as malls, I think.
• Buildings, towers, schools, libraries, warehouses, etc: No special rules. EHB if part of important Free Running lanes, otherwise a mix of EHB and VSB, to provide sleeping locations to both advanced and beginning users.

Any thoughts? --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 11:49, 21 October 2009 (BST)

I think that fire stations and schools should be uniformly VSB still. They provide very little usefulness to advanced users, and the uniformity gives younger players places where they can count on getting into the Free Running network and/or sleeping even if they don't make it to the wiki very often. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:47, 22 October 2009 (BST)

Assuming there is nothing else to bring to the discussion, I will update the UBP main page with the appropriate changes on or around the 1st of November. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 19:31, 24 October 2009 (BST)

Again, sorry for the late response. I agree with most of the ideas Grungni posted, with the idea being to make things that are useful to newbies but not advanced players be VSB (with the exception of hospitals and PDs, since those are just so useful to everyone). Personally, I would suggest putting fire stations at VSB, since they provide a handful of useful items to newbies. In contrast, I would bump schools up to EHB, since they provide nothing of use to newbies, and junkyards, which do provide useful items, are effectively taking their place in the list of VSB locations. I would also treat dark buildings as any other buildings (see my other earlier comments on the page) and not have them default to VSB. Churches should be VSB, since they are indeed useful to newbies while not vital to advanced players.

I'd still like to see maybe one more default VSB location, but I don't think schools are appropriate. Maybe warehouses? The search odds are low, but they do offer a few decent items (e.g. Fire Axe, Crowbar, Pipe). The only benefit I see to schools or libraries is that some PK groups don't PK in them. Otherwise they seem like arbitrary locations to choose. But, an arbitrary decision may be what it comes down to in the end, I suppose. —Aichon— 00:25, 25 October 2009 (BST)

Warehouses might not be a bad choice. Part of my thinking with schools is that while there really isn't anything useful there (other than spray cans), they are pretty well distributed throughout most suburbs. So an easy scatter. Warehouses might be equally well suited, I'll have to look over some of the suburb layouts to double check. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 05:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think it'll probably come down to an arbitrary choice either way, so regardless of which one gets chosen, as long as it's with the understanding that it's solely due to the distribution of them, rather than some inherent worth, I'm fine with it, I guess. I just wish there was one more useful place to newbies that we could open up that we haven't already (excluding places that are vital to a suburb's survival, of course). —Aichon— 17:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Plan Reviews

All published UBP reviews can be found on the UBP Plan Reviews page.

Plans to be (re)reviewed

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.

Pros & cons of the UBP

General discussion of the UBPs usefulness. Pitch your own versions here. ;) And I'll start with some responses to the older discussions on this page (see below) that I was lax in responding to earlier (again, sorry!). Feel free to interject comments between paragraphs were appropriate. Please be sure to sign your posts and indent responses so it is easier to keep track of the discussion. Thanks! --Gilant 15:46, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)

First, the UBP isn't particularly designed for offense or defense. My aim, based largely on the previous work and experiences of others, was to try and develop a balanced plan that tries to accommodate the real-world efforts of survivors in the wild (so to speak ;), which seems to be to lock every building up to EHB, while not shutting out inexperienced characters & players. It is intended as much as an educational tool as a concrete plan.

Indeed in practice I know of no published plan that adheres exactly to this policy. Every specific suburb plan varies slightly to adjust to local needs and traditions, and that is exactly what I expected.

As for making all or most buildings VS+2, I understand the arguments and even agree with some. However, convincing the general populace to not have a host of buildings they like to rest in EH is nearly impossible IMHO. The best I think we can hope for is guide their selection of locations. That is part of the UBP's purpose. I also don't have the AP or interest to spend all my time tearing down barricades throughout a suburb. But with some education a few people can keep a fair number of buildings VS, and that's a good start. I also disagree that the UBP forces survivors into too few targets tempting to zombies. While the policy requires a minimum of 8 VS locations, I have yet to find a suburb where if the building recommendations are followed the number is less than 12-14, and usually closer to 20.

I've also seen it argued the EH doesn't help because two zombies can pull it down in a day. While this is true in the simplest case, it leaves off some real-play factors. Mainly, if a building contains a fair number of survivors, whether VS or EH, chances are barricades will be getting rebuilt as soon as it is noticed they are coming down. Unless the attack by is well coordinated through metagaming or someone is zerging it takes a fair sized mob of loosely coordinated zombies to overcome an actively defended building. And one that starts at EH has more margin for time lapses between active defenders. Buildings that aren't well populated (defended) tend to just be evacuated when the occupant(s) realize the barricades are down or falling.

The problem I have with the current UBP, is that it goes against the meaning of Tactical Resource Point. Tactical means just that: Tactically important. If it's important, it is NOT the place to have your weakest defences. I understand the need for easily accessible point to facilitate those without free running, but a newbie won't have much understanding of the wiki and BP's in the first place, so won't expect anything. The people who use and enforce BPs are generally the groups that keep a suburb in order. For that, having to replace the generator in your hospital every two days isn't a very efficient strategy, especially if the same goes for your factory. In suburbs with multiple versions of TRPs, leaving several at low cades might be nice to new users, but if not, keep it high. People who can't get in will automatically migrate to another suburb. --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 09:54, 21 October 2009 (BST)

Late to the party comment is late, but I agree with that statement; Hospitals, NTs, and Factories are our most important resources and should be kept secure as possible, especially in locations that have a lot of zombies, such as orange or red zones. Newbies can't use a ruined TRP any more than they can use an EHBd one, but people with Free Running can use the latter just fine. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

It is for that very reason that the NT portion of the UBP was changed. For UBP compliance, only one of the NTs in a suburb need be VSB; in suburbs with only one NT, it may be EHB or VSB. I do not think there has ever been a UBP policy on Factories, and I would certainly agree that they should be EHB since finding a genny is troublesome enough when looking in a non-ruined building. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 18:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

The Archives

Old suggestions and review comments that have been (I hope) handled can be found in the Archives.

DI:MD on the UBP

I'm leader of a newly forming group DI:MD, and I was talking to my co-Leader today regarding the UBP. Both of us dislike the idea. I dont have a problem with having most buildings at VSB, but I do have a problem with having the greater majority of buildings at EHB.

I understand that Malls and NT's and hospitals and whatnot should deffinately be EHB, but almost entire suburbs, thats stupid. Having so many Buildings unnecessarily at EHB kills survivors. Why? New players cant hide anywhere, and people moving from suburb to suburb cant find anywhere to get in. Both myself and my Co-leader have found ourselves running out of AP looking for somewhere to get in.

I think something needs to be done. I'm noticing a lot more Zombies lately, perhaps this has something to do with the fact that people are dying coz they cant get back in?

Perhaps I've not seen the light, so I'm willing to read any response to what I've written. I would like to understand this better. -Dezonus- ^(talk) 15:00, 12 August 2010 (BST)