106 Pocket Dimension Update

[Cassie 1,226 / 23,060]

Yesterday we were talking about buffs to SCPs in the discord, especially to 106. @Felix whiston suggested an upgrade to the pocket dimension using entities placed in the doorways. When touched by a player, the entity would either kill them or teleport them to a random spot. That sounded doable to me, so this morning, I got to work.

 

It has a 1 in 6 chance to kill you (guess I just got unlucky here) which is easily changed to be a lower chance or a higher chance; we can set the chance depending on what people think is balanced. It currently has 2 locations to teleport you to but more are easily added. Basically, we'd set this entity up to spawn in each of the tunnels in the main room of 106's pocket and put the tp locations at place you go after exiting, the obstacle course, the 4 hallway room, and the place you go when you go through the secret exit. For now it would just be on site 19. 

I'm not saying we have to do this. If people just want 106 to get a buff where he does damage to people on clicking them or something else, that's fine. I just thought a random pocket dimension would be neat. So I'm looking for feedback here-is this something people want?

[Felix whiston 24 / 1,663]

Woah duc, that's quite good! the only reason i suggested it was because 106 is a bit underpowered and more of a support class, but either buff or change to the pd is fine! 😄

[Sprinklingmydoughnut 11 / 952]

This would help two different problems. 

 

1. It makes the pocket dimension an actual threat, espiecially since its randomized. It also makes it more of a journey rather than getting out easy.

 

2. It nerfs the pd as a viable spot in hide and seek. Almost everyone goes to the pocket dimension, and its easy to use the teleports to get away undetected. It would give the rest of the map a chance to be utalized. 

+1 

[Indo 21 / 2,038]

How About A 2 Out Of 6 Chance Of When 106 Captures A Victim, There Leg Gets Broken, Doing 30 Damage To The Victim And Leaving Them Slow For 5 Minutes

[Rollnaway 18 / 2,889]

I dislike the idea of killing a person immediately when they get tapped (even if it makes sense) because its way too punishing. The only other melee scp that is a oneshot is 682 and he is slow lizard (excluding the deer/011 because its ranged i guess).
I agree with Indo though by breaking their leg and dealing some base damage. The speed shouldn't be that hard, just give them the disease that slows you down. I also think it should still give bleed but also make it so bleed doesnt end naturally, only with healing. In other words make it so it will kill you if you dont heal with something.

[Felix whiston 24 / 1,663]

37 minutes ago, jasonlac10 said:

I dislike the idea of killing a person immediately when they get tapped (even if it makes sense) because its way too punishing. The only other melee scp that is a oneshot is 682 and he is slow lizard (excluding the deer/011 because its ranged i guess).
I agree with Indo though by breaking their leg and dealing some base damage. The speed shouldn't be that hard, just give them the disease that slows you down. I also think it should still give bleed but also make it so bleed doesnt end naturally, only with healing. In other words make it so it will kill you if you dont heal with something.

It doesn't instantly  kill you when 106 gets you, you just have doors that have a one in six chance to kill you

[yoshiw2 23 / 1,475]

I think this would be make 106 better +1

 

one thing though

 

i don’t think there should be a chance of killing you after completing the obstacle course, only when entering it

 

punishing someone for finishing the course is odd

[Dale Gribble. 62 / 2,696]

-1 

[Cassie 1,226 / 23,060]

50 minutes ago, Dale Gribble. said:

-1 

May I ask why?

1 hour ago, yoshiw2 said:

I think this would be make 106 better +1

 

one thing though

 

i don’t think there should be a chance of killing you after completing the obstacle course, only when entering it

 

punishing someone for finishing the course is odd

Likely the end of the obstacle course will be left alone and thus lead to the same place it does right now.

2 hours ago, jasonlac10 said:

I dislike the idea of killing a person immediately when they get tapped (even if it makes sense) because its way too punishing. The only other melee scp that is a oneshot is 682 and he is slow lizard (excluding the deer/011 because its ranged i guess).
I agree with Indo though by breaking their leg and dealing some base damage. The speed shouldn't be that hard, just give them the disease that slows you down. I also think it should still give bleed but also make it so bleed doesnt end naturally, only with healing. In other words make it so it will kill you if you dont heal with something.

We don't necessarily need to have the entity kill people as I do agree that it might be too overpowered; we can reduce the chance of dying due to it though.

[Cpt.Haxray 774 / 13,605]

I would rather keep the teleport as random, but make the bleeding be able to kill you instead of just setting you to 1 hp. I personally want to consider a rework on 'instant kill' melee scps in general, as they render adding any kind of scp that doesn't instant kill instantly weaker than the others unless they have some kind of high mobility or stealth gimmick(017, 372, 378, 939, etc).

 

This would be a fantastic improvement to SCP-106 however. He currently feels lame to play and play against. At some point we'll need to address the Gate-B issue though.

[Male_08 403 / 0]

While I would like to see a change that would make more 106 fun to play as, this would probably be better when considering other aspects of the game.

Edited October 13, 2019 by Supreme leader 049

[Sprinklingmydoughnut 11 / 952]

26 minutes ago, Cpt.Haxray said:

I would rather keep the teleport as random, but make the bleeding be able to kill you instead of just setting you to 1 hp. I personally want to consider a rework on 'instant kill' melee scps in general, as they render adding any kind of scp that doesn't instant kill instantly weaker than the others unless they have some kind of high mobility or stealth gimmick(017, 372, 378, 939, etc).

 

This would be a fantastic improvement to SCP-106 however. He currently feels lame to play and play against. At some point we'll need to address the Gate-B issue though.

Remember that suggestion you put called "the big scp overhaul that will never happen"? 

Just wondering if you would consider some of the ideas back then as I personally thought they were well thought out. Looking back on it, it sounds hard to code but I was wondering what you think of it nowadays.

[Dale Gribble. 62 / 2,696]

keep it as it is it would be shitty if it keeps going random

[chan_man1 202 / 4,475]

I love luck of the draw scenarios, def want to see a concept like this added. Though I'd say maybe if you could push it further have the exits change every so often to add more confusion, then you have a more realistic 106.

+1

[Cpt.Haxray 774 / 13,605]

19 hours ago, Dale Gribble. said:

keep it as it is it would be shitty if it keeps going random

 

The reason 106 is shitty as is because you simply memorize the exit and makes him a complete joke. Randomzing th epocket dimension as is is the only way to solve that problem.

[Doomnack 199 / 4,888]

@Cpt.Haxray but bleeding is capable of killing?

[Dale Gribble. 62 / 2,696]

2 hours ago, Cpt.Haxray said:

 

The reason 106 is shitty as is because you simply memorize the exit and makes him a complete joke. Randomzing th epocket dimension as is is the only way to solve that problem.

it would be like scp sl plus you cant code for shit

[Felix whiston 24 / 1,663]

1 hour ago, Dale Gribble. said:

it would be like scp sl plus you cant code for shit

Firstly, haxray and duc, codes quite well, they probably know lua better than you, secondly, on scp sl the exit is a single door each round, with this you'd have a chance to exit from any door, but also the possibility to die from any door..

[yoshiw2 23 / 1,475]

3 hours ago, Dale Gribble. said:

it would be like scp sl plus you cant code for shit

Bruh why don't you give us your take on how to make 106 better instead of being a toxic buttmunch

[_Rocket_ 656 / 8,277]

Hey guys, non-breach member here lol.

 

I just wanted to quickly say @Dale Gribble.that there is no such thing as "someone can't code for shit". As a programmer, you are a problem solver. Problem solving will always be your job. What makes a good programmer is how efficient they are at problem solving, along with their habits that make that problem solving easier.

 

This is just a part of critical thinking. Instead of telling someone they are shit and going on with your life, at least tell them how they can fix the problem. Don't focus on the problem, focus on a solution.

 

If you know so much about programming that you can tell others "they suck at programming", then help him out by providing how you learned to program. Maybe send a couple YouTube links or something. This isn't me calling you out, this is me being genuinely serious. Programmers need help sometimes. Hell I have had to ask for help here and there. Without Xy's help, I would've struggled to write Lua code for the first time. And I'm currently developing a damn game in C++. Just try to help people out if you're gonna point out their flaws, man.

Edited October 19, 2019 by _Rocket_