Reclassify 'Storage space' and 'People space' in buildings

[Doug R.]

Ok, let me be quite frank with you. I have fear. I like -some- kind of barricading. Even the illogical/imperfect system we have now is preferable to me than nothing. My fear is that we implement it your way, lose barricading, and then -never- implement any other kind of barricading because after it's discussed to death in committee, it gets dropped, or no one in programming cares to implement it. This is my honest-to-goodness concern, and my motivation for my dislike of your alternative.

(And, as a minor consideration, I -really- don't like the idea of unlimited people cramming into everything. I'm picturing 12 people imprisoned on a tandem bike, or all manner of oddities that make no sense what-so-ever, plus exploits that we haven't thought of yet).

[SekoETC]

There should definitely be some sort of limits and maybe if the room is really full, people could start losing health because carbon dioxide builds up and people might also get stomped to death. Overall it should be uncomfortable to stay in crammed buildings, so projects could get a progressive penalty (that makes more sense than disabling people from joining projects at all) and people could also gain tiredness, or at least recover more slowly.

[Doug R.]

There should definitely be some sort of limits and maybe if the room is really full, people could start losing health because carbon dioxide builds up and people might also get stomped to death. Overall it should be uncomfortable to stay in crammed buildings, so projects could get a progressive penalty (that makes more sense than disabling people from joining projects at all) and people could also gain tiredness, or at least recover more slowly.

Or just keep the people limits.

[Piscator]

Well, I don't have a problem with person limits as such, especially not on vehicles, but it will be a rule with very little worth. Except for a handful of cases, it wouldn't matter if the limitation is in place or not. That's why investing time and effort into a queuing mechanic seems like a waste of time.

I don't mind leaving the personal limitiation in place until we come up with either a way to make it unnecessary or to give it purpose, but we should definitely not plan features on the assumption that a final solution has been found already.

[Polt86]

Damaging people in an over crowded building/vehicle would be extremely easy to exploit as an attacker.

The attackers would just have to drag as many people as possible into the smallest locked vehicle/building that is available, then wait. The people inside would slowly die, and they wouldn't even be able to break out because lock picking is a project (assuming that that limit is applied). The attackers wouldn't even have to risk injury by going inside the building. The entire town would become effectively defenseless, with next to no chance of fighting back or surviving.

You could make it impossible to drag someone into a full building, but that would be unrealistic. A person could force their way into a location, but someone or several people couldn't overpower the person and force them in?

[returner]

Doug, thankyou for being frank and expressing your motivation for being against the alternative..

In response, all I have to say is that we need to give players/characters more options.

In real life, I could think of a million and one ways to get into a building if the door is blocked from too many people. Bulldozer is one. Ninja through the roof is two. Get a flame-thrower and burn the door down is three.

In Cantr, you have 0 options. Well, I exaggerate.. you can knock, or drag a note under the door, but it still requires action from the other parties inside the room.

There needs to be more options. Regardless of what the end suggestion is, we -need- more options when it comes to DOORS, BARRICADING and BLOCKED ROOMS.