True, but again looking back into those games, they did have some solutions. One of them (Stronghold I think?) also had a stripe on the edge of the map where you couldn’t build or dig at all (like, let’s suppose, 10 tiles from the edge of the map), which is the same stripe where the sign would be, thus always ensuring that you can’t surround or funnel it in any way.
Now, I honestly don’t want to do that in SH. For the simple reason that it would restrict some freedom, like these “Anthill” builds where people dig underground at the edge of the map and you can see it from the sides, etc… these are pretty cool.
We could, of course, try something like just forbidding touching the immediate area around the sign, etc… but again this only means they’ll need to do a larger wall around it.
So to be honest I feel like this returns to what I said here:
Now, I personally consider these a non-issue. For a very simple reason: Stonehearth is not a competitive multiplayer game (or competitive at all); it’s not a game where “cheating” of any sort affects others or really interferes in anything other than the player’s own experience. That said, it doesn’t really matter how they play - if they wall in on hard or just play peaceful, if they cheat items in with Debug Tools or not, etc… it’s all about your own conscience and what you want from the game. A player that doesn’t like the walling-in strategy should simply not use it, even if their town is about to fall… And a player that doesn’t care about using it can use it - and both are happy.
So I personally don’t think we should “fix” an “issue” that only exists if the player creates it - it’s not an issue, it’s a choice
If someone is going through the trouble of SURROUNDING ALL THE SIGNS with walls and all that… Then maybe they should just play peaceful. Or maybe that’s ok, it doesn’t really matter. Thing is, that model would allow for creative builds (real roads, etc…) and would allow for “legit” walled in bases (bases that have walls but also gates/doors) as long as we also add the invaders with door breaking abilities to all or most attack parties.
This works, but I’d say that it’s less cool/fun - and in this case we should (if we hypothetically do this) think of what would be cooler first rather than trying to prevent something that can still be done/will be done anyway (walling in) by some that for some reason like/enjoy it?
It’s just a thought, really. My moot point is: at which point walling in is a player choice, at which point cheating is right or wrong? All things considered, in the end of the day, any method is intrinsically failed because they can, as a last measure, simply
teleport the entity inside their walls. How different is this from walling in and how should/should we even account for that when designing something for a sandbox game?
Or in simpler terms:
“because you can just (with a little extra effort) wall in straight pathways/tunnels to those edge points.”
I guess what I’m trying to say is that any person that would be willing to do this ^ would also be willing to cheat/teleport/etc. their way around the supposedly “better” way. So the better way, in this case, should probably be the cooler/the one that plays nicer and can be explored creatively.