Scheveningen

Not even if it were flagged to only spawn in my inventory if I'm spawning in as X job? I believe this has been done before.

"I can't really complain" is an apathetic response, not one of support. Introductory, stand-offish. Completely negative feedback, very stand-offish. The kind of anti-social response that would be likened to being at a party and being the only one standing in a corner whilst everyone else is chatting and having fun, not wanting to associate with people you disagree with. Kind of a nasty way to think or talk of someone, don't you think? You've said nothing besides the fact that your encounters were vague and brief, and go on to vaguely explain that you "don't disassociate with engineering as much anymore" while bolting on that you held a grudge against the character + player because you didn't like them. Maybe you could have phrased what you stated initially a lot better? Or perhaps not write your posts in the format that would bait the opposition into reacting negatively. I know that practice all too well myself. Ironic.

I feel like there's a fine line between honesty and unnecessary honesty. Leading into another point with "granted I held a grudge against your character for some time" just makes me wonder whether people care on the subject of watching what they say. And yet, ironically, you're likening to be holding something back. This is just a really silly post overall.

I've played many characters as an unapologetic piece of shit and the "don't be a dick rule" doesn't apply to characters unless in very extreme circumstances. It's a rule intended to be interpreted for OOC behavior first and foremost. With the added exception of, "except in cases that it might apply for when it makes character behavior unrealistic", or whatever.

Hang on there, I believe I was the HoS for that round and my opinion was never asked for from staff. I don't understand why this warranted an OOC ban. The actions in IC were IC justifiable from his end, aside from not getting permission first to do so. But there's nothing wrong with "that aside", as it was an IC motivated detail to do so. I was the head of security during (what appears to be) the round in particular in which they slighted the CE in not getting their permission to riot-proof window sections in the brig to deter gassing an entire section of the station and immediately apprehending anyone wanting to bust into the bridge/brig. If this is not that round then it's not the first attempt at this. I honestly thought to be, quote unquote my character, "utterly genius", as this was something I never thought of before. Their method of injecting said gas into the window section was clean, professional and excellently done. I couldn't have asked for a better execution of the matter, it was well done and risk-free. To my understanding, however, the CE was not a fan of it because they weren't informed prior of what they were doing. Admittedly when I first saw them setting up the injection loop into the window section, I had my thoughts about it and thought it was over the line until its purpose was explained to me. I then realized, of course, how ingenious it was and my character also made logistical sense of it, given their dozen plus years of experience as security and courses into military strategy. I initially permitted it retroactively, but... The Chief Engineer, however, was not a fan, not simply because it made sense and they never thought of it, but likely because they were morein offended that their holistic permission wasn't asked for first and that their authority was shirked by someone taking it upon themselves to inflect structural genius on the station. Without authorization from their head of staff, true. At some point after, I asked Manfred to cease and desist since I didn't want to cause a massive schism within command and cause a lot of back and forth arguing that wasn't necessary, especially considering it wasn't my lane to judge whether Manfred did was right or wrong, as he did commit a minor wrong in the sense of insubordination. He broke protocol and the overriding righteousness of the chain of command, and protocol dictates action, etc. So he did, actually. The CE wanted him arrested, so I set out to find him on my own as this wasn't necessarily something I wanted handled very sloppily by the security team. My efforts turned up nothing as Manfred dropped off the grid for the rest of the round in constant hiding, and the AI players dropping in and out each served to be less than useful and almost completely unresponsive to any inquiries to Manfred's location. I ended up giving up as there was nothing I could do on the matter and it was outside my realm of being able to change. Now that I've explained the sequence of events, allow me to express my professional opinion as a 2-almost-3-year player, security veteran and incredibly anal corporate regulation hugger, based on what I think Manfred was guilty of; Insubordination and willful breaking of the CoC to perform structural modifications and execute projects on their own, dropping off the grid and evading security investigators to avoid getting caught and a refusal to return communication attempts with a high security official. Here's what I think Nikov was guilty of OOCly; Roleplaying. The ban should be lifted. It is nonsensical and asinine that such OOC bans should be placed based on characters acting their own way, especially considering their actions affected no one and only served to mildly inconvenience other characters in-game (or if what I suspect is true, the CE was an administration staff member who complained enough to warrant a moderator stepping in to handle the matter). When a staff member checks notes to base their potential judgements and hand out disciplinary action, a couple things are important: context, and reasonability. 1.) Did context dictate Nikov was actively causing atmospheric issues that would constantly throw rounds into a destructive state, thus indicating a pattern of problematic behavior? 2.) What exactly was unreasonable and lacking in roleplay sense in determining the case of Nikov/Manfred Hayden? Subordinates are not always perfect, they will occasionally forget to report, they will make mistakes, they will not always be able to read the mind and intentions of their leader. In some cases, they may even defy an order from their superior if it is stupid enough, or they pop off the grid if they feel like if they return, an unnecessary amount of discipline will be heavily carried out by an annoyed and impatient authority. Nikov is a regular, who, if I might dare make the assumption, enjoys their time playing here and would not intentionally jeopardize that in order to cause grief to every other turbonerd that plays here. Me included. tl;dr, Lift the ban if the current context I'm seeing from the banning moderator shows that he was banned from engineering roles on the basis of roleplay events not transpiring the way a certain head of staff wanted them to. There is a share of the blame when the leader does not initially outline their expectations regarding what they mind and don't mind, because often more than not a subordinate will assume for themselves what the line leader won't mind. If that CE wants to properly report this, it should be drafted and handed to CCIAA. I am sure they are begging for a chance to do something, given how very few of the community reports anything to the IC administrators, where this should be taken... It is childish to want to control roleplay when it is unnecessary, especially since this didn't fall under "RP how your character would", "No netspeak", "don't be a chucklefuck" and raise any red flags there, these were all IC related issues to how a character was acting and reacting. Manfred may have been out of line ICly but by no means does that get even close to warranting OOC action being taken against the player. It's ridiculous.

Invoking the law of !FUN! is boring. Everyone wants to have fun. Everyone, naturally, has their own way of having fun, however. Because everyone has a different idea of how they'd do things, we'd never get anywhere if we were to discuss if something would be more or less fun if it were changed. It's not the point. We don't come here just to have fun, we come here to engage in a high level of roleplay (I assume) and have fun while doing that. Fun is more of a by-product than a goal to pursue. IPCs, as a whole, have more potential RP freedom than humans do. That's not a good thing. We shouldn't: 1.) Encourage memebots that act like ss13 gimmicks on other lower RP spectrum servers 2.) Encourage highly emotional robots that flip a lid on a hair trigger. I'm alright with a middle ground, in the sense of highly realistic human-like shells seeking acceptance and sentience. I won't generate a giant paragraph on it and I'll just cite how (NSFWish) androids are in cyberpunk fiction. But the problematic sorts need to be weeded out. Sentience is developed, not easily programmed or given. There are ways to play synthetic characters without; 1.) Being a giant bore about it. 2.) Acting completely out of turn and acting like a dumb chucklefuck bot.

Immersion matters more than player freedom, and arguably should matter more than player freedom, as more freedom only begets chaotic design choices by the playerbase at large. Giving them THAT much control is bound for nothing but disaster and significantly lowered roleplay standards. Adhering to the roleplay setting sets boundaries of acceptability and generates a believable roleplay field for everyone to participate in. Roleplaying is filling a necessary role and being a smaller part to play to a larger story, not doing whatever you want and pursuing your own personal story arcs and calling it lore.

See title just for an understanding of what current brute modifier damage is for enhanced force gloves, aka the ones you can get via uplink. Originally, during the conception of force gloves, basic ones were to have 1.5x to 2.0x brute modifier and the armory would spawn with multiple pairs of f-gloves. No one agreed to this. Duck was sad. I digress. Basic f-gloves were made RnD production only. This is the current state of basic f-gloves. I do not care about this, however. What is notable, however, is that brute_modifier for enhanced f-gloves multiplies any melee damage inflicted, whether unarmed, empowered by way of species advantage in terms of claws, or when added to a wielded weapon. In such cases, an energy sword, which inflicts a total of 30 force, will be amplified to a total of 80 force. 80 damage is the max damage threshold the head can suffer before breaking. It may be 5 pts lower, but that's just a minor detail no one cares about, as it leads into my next point. This means without armor, you can cut off heads in a single empowered swipe and cauterize the wound. Hilarious. But quite unnecessary. It should be toned down for balance purposes.

I doubt it was drawn for the sake of cuteness, Nursie, that was not whoever drew it was going for!

For actual reference of an Aurora player that actually drew this. Congratulations, thou proved thine intentions on the server quite nicely by appealing to the lowest common denominator.

I'd really love to hear the long explanation, this sounds like it has an amazing story behind it. Edit: Just saw the image. Why dudes. Why. Just stop. It's time to stop.

leave brittany alone.

i am sorry but this is not a good post and you must pay the fine for such a low quality attempt at bait

BYOND Key: OneOneThreeEight Character name: Vira Taryk Item name: Designer military coat Why is your character carrying said item to work? A character that I still haven't dropped into a dead ditch for about two years (at least SS13-wise, which is the only place I have this character centered), V's gone through quite a bit of character development. Originally as a head of security, she was a humble sort that never let their earnings go to waste. After receiving two inheritances, (one from a family member that passed on and another from a close friend that met an unfortunate end) and marrying into significant wealth, Vira finally found herself adjusting to an upper-class lifestyle, where image and the matter of the approach is everything. Still the old soldier at heart, though, she still possesses a hint of paranoia and prefers function to form, and so the coat she wears is about as well armored as an NT overcoat, without sacrificing too much in terms of inherent sense of style. Item function(s): Effectively no different from a head of security coat, statistically or mechanically. Four pockets, arm/chest/leg protection just like the HoS overcoat, etc. Item description: A dark funnel neck designer military-style dress coat, specially fitted on commission, clearly designed for a woman's figure. The collar ingeniously converts to form a robust fold, in combination with a threshbeast hide underlay, creating a modern gorget to protect the neck from unfortunate arterial lacerations. The shoulders, upper and lower torso have thin 5 cm-wide plate insertions that absorb shock and ablate intense directed heat. A skillfully stitched 'NT' pattern is laden above a chest pocket, the phrase "15 years of loyal service to the Corp" below the insignia, followed by the personal signature of "Vira Bolivar Taryk". A splendid coat worth dying in. Item appearance: https://www.dropbox.com/s/grie07pgy7y7c8h/deltacoat.dmi?dl=0 How will you use this to better interact with crew and/or stimulate RP?: Vira's both had a notorious reputation and a good one, considering I've made changes to the original character multiple times to make them a better character to roleplay with. I like to think I've been upkeeping the better version of this character, and that the old reputation of this character no longer exists in anyone's mind. I digress; the coat's symbolic of my character's current status and a reflection of one of her many culminations of character progression through meaningful individual plot elements. I believed I touched on this in the first question. If further clarification is needed, ask. Additional comments: I'd rather not spawn with this coat if I'm not head of security. That'd quite throw off game balance and wouldn't be fair to others. I'm fairly certain there are code tags to prevent this, and barring that, I'd rather the coat spawn with none of the armor stats and only half of the pocket space if joining as a non-HoS role. And I suppose the flavor text dialed back on the "this coat is robust as the Adam Jensen vanilla HoS coat". If the latter's not doable I'll roll with it either way.

The only benefit that was achieved from the Shell code was the fact we could Hot Rod customize IPCs with different paints while in-game and even reapply old synthflesh to shells that were damaged enough. It was pretty much like Top Gear. Or Pimp my Ride. The latter appealed to me better because of the wonderful Xzibit. Unfortunately it also had its other effects, as listed above by Dreamix. hi doggy good to see you again I'd be fine with the "thematic as intended human shells" still sticking around. Really not comfortable with the others being incredibly commonplace as displayed on station. The less they are available on station the better for immersion. This isn't to say I don't want them all, but xeno Shells appearing just for the sake of it as it stands per the sequence of events, just makes no sense. We can afford to wait awhile before bringing them to bout. They were reintroduced too fast.

i'm not. Though admittedly, 'Bob', the tajaran chemist was a hilarious prospect for about 2 rounds that I saw them.

I'd like the ability to construct and replace conveyor belt assemblies on the station. Particularly for the below purpose, but the separate existing world of ENGINEERING can allow for more freedom regarding conveyor belts.

hey dick you better take care of the overwatch discord i left you

ilu you crackhead fr me on steam so we can erp

same tbh

Deep down, you both know it, you were right all along. You can still win. How, you ask yourself? Just keep spewing nonsense, one day, they'll understand. Step one: acceptance.

10/10. Pour another one for comrade Ryfer, the diaper fetishist, comrade NanoToxin, the pedophile, and comrade AbandonedScholar, "a fucking BAGUETTE", long may they reign in the halls of Karl Marx.

That seems honest, I think. I'm shifting to neutral at the very least, but some degree of disciplinary action should still remain.

Not supporting. You did this, knowingly, twice. You took possibly a total of 10 characters out of the round by doing this in the second round. Mistakes are only worth making once, but the second time you manufactured these you did so knowing that you acknowledged the warning in one round previous. Lying to an admin about these details isn't a good thing either. I suggest not lifting the ban right off the bat. A downgrade from permanent would be better, but they should still be banned from the server for at least a week (if not more) to be given a break from the server and prevent future incidents from occurring. I hope you recognize that bans already fulfill this purpose in keeping you off the server and stopping you from physically doing it again until your alotted time runs out. I also hope you have a better reason than that.

I'd ask you reconsider. https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=7229#p70616