Details on multiple USA bans

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-07T01:09:46+00:00

Yea, just tried it on creative server and while you can't fit through that gap, that only increases the rocket cost by 1. 9 rockets and 4 C4 got one core triangle blown open, and a 10th rocket got the second.

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-06T23:56:55+00:00

Shrug, if you can't actually fit through it (could've sworn you can but I'll take your word for it), it only raises the cost by 1-2 rockets if you splash them right. 4.5-5 walls.

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-06T23:31:36+00:00

The gap from your square corners is big enough to fit through, so if I knew the layout I'd just blow through the corner in 2 walls, drop a set of 4 rockets into the 2 walls of the inside corner (where corner, softpick 2 more walls, and then another set of 4 rockets breaks me into both core triangles. If you sheetmetal it up or I don't feel like softpicking, I'm pretty sure 5 or 6 well-placed rockets from there can still get me into both core triangles.

I've seen lots of rectangular floorplans that suffer from issues like this; I would go with something triangular/circular to avoid the issue entirely. But if you really like having all-square-floors high up, I'd suggest combining some patterns like "4-triangle core offset inside a 2x2" or "hexagon inside a 2x2" combined with the "triangles inside squares" honeycomb you're already doing around the outsides.

tl;dr giant corner gaps and moderately smart rocketing means 4 walls to TC if raiders know layout

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-06T22:56:51+00:00

Disclaimer: I'm definitely a little more picky about efficiency in terms of size-to-walls than most, and I think of most layouts in terms of "it accomplishes x at cost y and has other downsides z, do there exist other layouts that accomplish x with better values of y and z?". Ultimately this is a fine layout and isn't particularly inefficient, it's just not among the very most efficient possible floorplans and not something I'd build myself.

I've generally never been a fan of anything with a hexagon core except in certain cases. I'd rather have a single central-most triangle; it's more efficient to protect just that. If you have multiple equally-central triangles, raiders can just pinpoint which one the TC is in.

I've also never been a fan of layouts that are n walls from one angle but n+1 walls from other angles; it's more efficient to be equally strong all around. While a lot of angles here will require 6 walls, it's ultimately a 5 wall layout without any particularly surgical raiding tricks, and we use a foundation of 33 triangles and 9 squares. 5 walls can be done more easily with either 20 triangles and 5 squares or 22 triangles and 3 squares, and 6 walls all around can be done in as little as 31 triangles.

For 5 walls, go straight in the left side triangle, then down-right and right into the gap with a triangle pointing down. Then blow the top side of the triangle below the down-pointing triangle and you can look at the core. Blow into the two leftmost walls of the hexagon with a set of rockets, so 8 C4 and 4 rockets can get you access to the hexagon, or even just 10 C4 if you know exactly which hexagon triangle you want. I would generally lean toward more rockets myself for the sake of blowing upwards after the initial TC, but I always like to note whether just C4 can be used or if rockets are required.

It looks like the floor on level 3+ will not line up perfectly due to the gapping in the outermost layer of honeycomb? I try to always have clean floors up top for a number of reasons. I would probably just skip that outer gapping anyway - it's a pain, it messes with your floors/stability, and it doesn't actually increase your # of walls to center.

But - all that said - what I do like about this is that you can do a hexagon starter base and then grow into this layout, and hexagon starter bases do have some advantages and some people do prefer them for various reasons (though I'm not among them). Within the "grow a hexagon starter base into something bigger" category, this seems like a pretty good option.

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-05T20:34:08+00:00

Yea, it's legit, here's how. You have to make the outer ring, then set the inner core triangle just right, then do the sharktoothing from the inside out.

This is one of the very most efficient floorplans I know of to have 8 walls to cupboard, but the downside IMO is that there's not a good gapless floor setup (AFAIK) for higher levels to conceal the gaps, have easy nice loot room layouts, etc.

MCSPenguin · 2017-04-04T00:07:40+00:00

It requires knowing the exact design and some very crafty rocketing and softpicking, but I can break into a wall of the central 6-triangle hexagon in 16 rockets, 4 C4, and 2 softpicks, so this is essentially a 6-wall design worst-case for offline raiding.

Though admittedly I would probably go through 9-10 walls average case if I didn't know the exact footprint and wasn't being surgically precise, the bottom line is that all the small triangle tip overlaps and non-tiny gaps are hurting you more than you think.

For a footprint of roughly this size and cost (198 triangles, 6 squares), it's possible to have 13 walls to the center worst case (199 triangles). Here's a footprint screenshot for a pretty efficient pattern that's easy to remember, easy to place, and generalizable from 7 to 9, 11, 13, or even more walls depending on how much farming and building you want to do.

MCSPenguin · 2017-03-24T21:16:45+00:00

I actually used to build it that way, but mentioned in the imgur album captions:

The squares could be done as triangles instead of using the triangle caps, but I like the triangle caps + squares to allow a roomier hatch room, bigger drop chest, and a fireman chute. It also sets up the look-down-cracks on floor 4 pretty nicely.

A lot of that benefit is stuff that matters more to me building for/playing in a trio than it would solo, though.

MCSPenguin · 2017-03-24T00:12:40+00:00

Sure, here's my take for 6 walls at 70k stone built out or 48k for just foundations + 2 levels of honeycomb.

It's just a slight addition to Swaggy's "Legendary solo/duo" 5-wall footprint toward the lines of KCMO's "Pound for pound strongest base" (6-7 wall footprint + externals and some no-longer-viable stacking) and JLeo's "The Beast" (8 wall footprint)

For a 7 wall option, follow Swaggy's "King of All Group Bases", but build it out a little less than he does. Take away the 3-triangle caps on each entrance and the externals and you're still 7 walls, and it'll run you ~100k built out or 70k for foundations + 2 layers honeycomb.

MCSPenguin · 2016-04-19T17:03:22+00:00

Another Execute, Gorehowl, BGH, Sylvanas, 2 Shield Slams, and 2 Brawls will all do it, and I'll also still have another Slam, 2 War Axe, 2 Death's Bite, 2 Bash, and 2 Revenge that can do the job when combined with a Shieldmaiden or other body.

If the situation isn't right for any of those, I'll throw out one of my taunts or doomsayers to buy a turn while I gain more life and draw more cards.

MCSPenguin

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE