I disagree that unplanned bases are 'cancer'. They're far more interesting than the usual boring optimized square/rectangular bases. I still consider the village I started in to be the nicest base I've had:
(The first image was while it was still being built. The second image is some time after its inevitable destruction. I don't have any images from the village at its peak, unfortunately.)
This is obviously one of the worst bases imaginable. It's inefficient and has zero security. But before more experienced players came and punched our faces in for daring to be naive (see that cornerpost in the bottom left? Back then you could seal other players' cornerposts to fuck them over, fun times) it was a really fun village to live in. Everybody had their own little place and there were some shared areas, and the way it grew naturally through the various players' actions gave it a unique look and made every place in the village different.
Unfortunately, game mechanics force us to build bases in specific ways (particularly having them be rectangular and always having a palisade around the rectangle) and encourage us to standardize even more (smaller bases are much easier and cheaper to build so we tend to optimize for space efficiency), and from a pure gameplay standpoint it is indeed more advantageous to have a base like you described. But I don't think that's a good thing, and I certainly don't think we should discourage players from building 'bad' but nicer bases.
SlicingTheMoon wrote:waga wrote:This post gave me cancer and I can't stand psychorigid people.
To each his own I guess ?
I agree, live and let live.
Saying bases that don't optimize for efficiency are "cancer" that needs to be "fought" kind of contradicts this pretty hard, though.