Jump to content

MattAtlas

Head Admins / Devs
  • Posts

    1,535
  • Joined

  • Last visited

7 Followers

About MattAtlas

  • Birthday 30/08/2002

Personal Information

  • Interests
    loving the way you lie
  • Occupation
    watching me burn
  • Location
    Italy

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    mattatlas

Recent Profile Visitors

19,214 profile views

MattAtlas's Achievements

Cyborg

Cyborg (35/37)

  1. Your CID is the same as this guy's so it just gets caught in the same ban net. I'm not sure there's anything I can do short of lifting the original ban lol. What you can do is use a different VM or machine pretty much.
  2. I've removed the sticky ban now. Should work once and for all hopefully.
  3. Submit your mission ideas here for a chance to see them implemented for release: https://forms.gle/uEXE3WataiZZ52i56
  4. Okay, you keep getting caught by random griefer bans. Try now.
  5. It isn't possible to always involve everyone, nor do I expect the first missions to. The point is never to have a fully functioning perfect utopic system right out of the gate, because that's unreasonable and impossible. The idea is always to get something that works out, and then let people iterate over it. Don't expect things to be fully calibrated on the first round. No. I want as many people to play Storyteller as possible. That doesn't mean it'll be handed out to everyone, but I don't see it as being much harder than a command whitelist. Not sure. The only way we'll know if it's a problem or not is to try it out and see what happens. Generally when things become abandoned they won't be maintained. Current gamemodes aren't maintained either, since nobody is really interested in the massive amount of work needed to make a gamemode or even to maintain it. I don't see it as a bad thing, personally - we need a new gamemode loop, not a parallel thing. Antags will stay but like I said before, they won't be the main focus of the server after a while. The examples are just examples to make people understand the scale of what can be done, I'm not going to put much effort into them obviously. I need to come up with a concept first and the implementation comes second. The doc also says that canon missions will be restricted in nature and they won't be shooty typically. I can't give an exact idea of what they'll be until I code them, though. I think it's possible, but I won't say yes/no yet. Can't really give a real response to this hypothetical right now, it's a "wait and find out" thing here. No idea. It's a valid concern (and a helpful one to bring up) but I have no ideas on it off the top of my head.
  6. Repeating content is a concern with anything. No matter what kind of new gamemode or new away site or new anything I would make, there's always going to be repetition. It's up to characters, the storytellers, the missions and the actors to keep it fresh - there's now four layers (five if you count admins) to keep things new instead of just two (antags and characters), which is about the best we can do. If the community gets involved enough, they can make new missions, and keep things fresh for everyone. The gamemode will just be dropped with a few missions and people will be told to vote it. When I say it needs to become the default I mean that eventually we'll have to start thinking about a "Mission Briefing" optic when adding things rather than a "Secret" thing. If you're adding a gun to sec, at some point we have to start thinking about how if it fits with the new gamemode, rather than if it's too OP for lings. From me personally, no. Don't really have the time to do two things at once. I thought about it and I realised that adding Missions that take place exclusively on the Horizon would be pretty easy, so yeah it's possible, they'd just be different kinds of Missions. I do want to make landing parties and expedition prep way faster at the same time. The PR will be merged and people will be told to play the gamemode. No real way to test a gamemode other than dropping people in the frying pan. End of July at the latest, probably. It is the plan for this to be a gamemode alongside the others, people would still be able to vote Secret or whatever. Read above on what "the default" means here. Would be up to the storyteller. This is mostly addressed in the doc already (it says that Canon Missions should only be minor stuff most of the time), but yeah, things won't be autocanon. It's like if your character died to carps on an extended round. You'd just get to retcon it if you wanted. If there's an IR it would follow normal canonicity rules, aka you can retcon it if all involved agree. I agree generally. I'll keep this in mind, might be a good idea. I share these concerns but I'm not really 100% sure at the moment how to involve every single department, it's a good thing to keep in mind. The service FOB idea is about the only one I have other than Service making MREs and shit to send groundside or serving off-duties/anyone who stayed on the Horizon. Agreed with everything here.
  7. That's why the Missions themselves don't need a GM to run - they're made to work as is, then someone can roll a GM and run their own thing if they want to. I'd also like to police expectation in a sense - this is a good excuse to cut down on the antag toxicity we have and to go towards a more sane "roll with the punches" culture. At the same time, I don't think Storytellers need to do anything too out there if they don't want to... they can do something fairly simple if they'd like to as well, like just adding some extra roles to a Mission. But that's all up in the air as "ifs". I think whether or not two hour rounds are long enough is something that'll only crop up once we start playtesting, so I have no definite answer. The volunteer stuff is soft-handled by there being a delay in the Horizon getting to the Mission (it'll probably take 15 mins to get to the planet). Storyteller isn't a staff role. My idea is to implement it as a "player state" where you have the verbs to do things that staff do, but no actual normal perms. Build mode is being updated right now actually, there's a PR up that ports a much better version of it. This is a valid concern, though I think a Non-Canon Mission should be no different from a normal antag round, and Canon Missions really shouldn't be anything LARP-y unless required by the current arc/sector.
  8. Today I announce to you the fruit of half a year of constant thinking, scheming, going back to the drawing board, questioning, and whatever else. Our gameplay loop is not sustainable and not fixable. Aurora as it is right now cannot continue existing. We need a revolution. I present to you Odyssey - there won't be any TL;DRs as reading the entire document is expressly required to understand the implementation, its goals, what it entails and its effects on the server. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CU2KY5Pwzu5izL5eu9l6k5cH1Rit7t_8RalDpgDnJG8/edit?usp=sharing Please leave your feedback here ONLY AFTER YOU READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT.
  9. Here is a question - if you know you affected something as part of a group, and an article acknowledges it (thus it's in the lore and you can bring it up with a reference) without naming a specific name, why does that to you count as being "watered down" and "shit on"? You did affect the lore, you did affect the outcome of the event, why is not being specifically named and elevated over others the problem? Again you're equating not being named in a group effort to being "swept under the rug". This is only true if you think you only had an impact on the event if you were directly and explicitly named in an article or on the wiki. Which is not true - your contributions remain, you can still talk about them (as you often do on the Discord...), how exactly is your involvement being swept under the rug? Lastly, I hope you never come to me telling me that I can't canon kill your character if you do something stupid. This is weird grandstanding that you can't possibly think would work or do anything constructive. It just poisons the discourse by targeting us as your enemies - and I have enough self respect to stand up for myself. You do not want to poison this well more than you already have by opening up the post with "Aurora doesn't value my time". This equation is what lies at the heart of this problem because it is wrong. Aurora is not a tabletop game. Your characters are not tabletop characters and this is written very explicitly (the rules don't allow you to be a protagonist, neither do the events, neither does any existing mechanism in lore - just look at how Eternia or Verdict handle canon arcs). This kind of analogy creates unreasonable expectations that should be quashed, because group efforts are at the base of normal people succeeding in things. Your characters are normal people at the end of the day - slightly better than normal because they landed a really good job, but not protagonist-like. Before anyone says "this is actually inconsistent with the big shootout events", I have a big issue with them (I intentionally never participated in any, other than the warehouse assault where I spent most of my time fixing people's problems!) and I directly proposed heavily, heavily cutting down the scale and their presence in lore arcs.
×
×
  • Create New...