Scheveningen

It's a good idea.

deepest French pockets paid off Mandzukic to score for france.

god damn it

https://www.fifa.com/worldcup/matches/match/300331552/#match-liveblog

thats the spirit :ok_hand:

are the secondaries and tertiaries still able to get roundstart antagonist with this system? That is why I quoted you before, to address whether this would be a thing or not.

While I'm sure this has good intentions, I feel like if you don't get your first slot initially, you should probably respect that other people who were already readied in currently have first priority on their respective roles. Adding in additional chance to butt everyone out just because you didn't roll your initial pick seemingly adds additional unfairness to what might be an initially unfair situation in the first place; to not be able to play as the role you like with a specific character. This is seemingly the objective you wish to benefit from above all else, in addition to the associated access and clout tacked onto getting antagonist status. That's kind of a dubious circumstance to round this all off and I'd rather we not enable that.

do i look like a baguette?

5-1, in favor of Croatia. CROAT STRONK. NEVER BAGUETTE. CROISSANT RENTRER CHEZ SOI . Mario Mandžukić 201' . Mario Mandžukić 198' . Mario Mandžukić literally through a slipspace rupture . Mario Mandžukić through a bluespace portal ' . Mario Mandžukić FROM DOWNTOOOOOOOOWN ' . A pigeon that felt bad for the frenchies and nudged the ball like an inch, 2"

post your predictions for the FIFA world cup finals

Tied to engine limitations, yes. There is no opt-in or opt-out. There could be but it would be a pain-staking effort to get it to work, if not completely impossible as I don't believe there's precedent to that idea. The textport was never meant to be modularly changed. Not even on /tg/ do they have options to change the style of the textport.

We aren't randomizing the kind of resources/weapons/supplies, only the amount. So security gets one energy carbine during a secret round that rolls it to be siege? Or paranoia? If cargo was easy to rely on and didn't take 15 minutes to and fro in order to transfer shipments this would be acceptable. It is not, as the only supply chain is completely unreliable and far too time-consuming.

This was a thing that Bay did before when they still played on Boxstation. They had randomized armory layouts and the round could basically be over if you were unlucky enough to roll all ion rifles or all machine pistols. I don't think this is a great idea. The cargo warehouse is the only storage facility deserving of randomization. You shouldn't make other departments' standard effectiveness hinge on RNG based on they start with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law Good thing you mentioned this after the fact, that way I can't possibly be upset about your conduct. Okay. Context. Let's see what Garn says about this. . OK. Precedent that garn sets here; "Do not make a habit of throwing that word around here, and don't throw it around lightly." You threw it into a conversation very lightly where the entire convo would've better off without your extremely poor attempt to make humor out of a legitimate racial slur. I honor my agreements I made with others until those individuals no longer honor theirs that they made with me. I have no obligation to attempt in restoring trust, integrity and coordination in an exchange to try and repair the ever-expanding rift that keeps growing, if the person I made an agreement with decides "okay all bets are off" the very next day. I outright question the value of your supposed commitments that you said you'd hold yourself to, because I didn't just say for you to stop being toxic to me, I told you to stop being toxic to other people as well. You cannot do this. You are so far incapable of doing this because you have never once shown self-control under fire. You always crack wise back, make excuses and only apologize when you actually seem like you're in a great deal of trouble. Apology not accepted. You took far too long to even apologize because you don't even think you did anything wrong. Only now that you may actually catch flak for what you did will you actually apologize so you can safe face. This doesn't show you're capable of respecting people at all, you think people's opinions are dirt from the get go if they don't agree with you. I do not think you can be trusted. I do not think you will be able to coordinate well with attitudes differing from your own. I do not think you have the integrity to be a staff member.

You chose to express yourself initially by comparing me to someone with Down's Syndrome in the most derogatory term possible for someone with the disability, a "Downie." Goes to show what respect you have for the disabled and to also accuse me of being such by making that comparison. When I call you on having done this shit, you extrapolate and barely change the definition of what you were defining me by. You then drop the tactical nuke of a slur directed at me because you apparently didn't find any other method that was appropriate enough to make your point. You are full of shit when you say you meant no offense. If you meant no offense you would not even found the justification to even type out that disaster of a sentence to make a point. I literally had someone tell me that they expected better of you than to say that, because with your acerbic wit you've found much more tasteful ways of getting your point across than whatever today was. And you dare say you had no intention of being offensive or racist at all, after the 'Downie' comment? Why should anyone believe you? I have not seen a single, directed apology in my DMs for your behavior towards me. You went to one person to mistakenly apologize to them even though they were not even the person you meant to apologize to. And then you make a 'half-apology' to Paradox who was barely even involved in this entire situation, the only person you initially attempted to privately apologize to. Do you know why I'm so pissed off about this? Because you have not once attempted an apology directed at me for the initial insult. "The action was unacceptable, I know" means absolutely nothing to anyone alone. You did not once directly to say me, "I take responsibility for this, I apologize, it will not happen again", because in spite if you've said that, you did it again anyway. You following up with that second bombshell display of anti-social tendencies just seals the deal in how I'm supposed to approach you now. Your justification and actions are absolutely terrible all in all. Paradox is not even close to being the person you should be apologizing to. He was absolutely not the person you were attempting to offend. Your behavior is absolutely unacceptable as both a player and a trial staff member. What is wrong with you?

Context: Fun argument happened. Burger once again plays the victim to counter-argue criticism, I pull up his infamous example of his utter lack of disrespect for one of his critics (myself), and he decides to rebuke it in a fantastic manner: . . I am blown away by this tactical nuke of tactlessness. This is the exact thing he was told not to do. Everything Skull said about symbiosis in relation to Burger was at best, hopeful idealism. Burger's current display of justifying his own actions shows the truth of who he is as a contributor and as a person. No. This person absolutely does not have my support as server staff, far from it. Skull would be making a complete mistake if he gave this person a pass to be staff. This is the exact pitfall Nanako underwent with her ego and her pitiful racism in general. I'm not gonna "wait and see" again for the next instance of this bigot to screw the pooch because he has no idea how to responsibly interact with people and keep his own nonsense in check. He does not deserve to be on staff. This is a terrible representation for who you want in a staff member. See above at everything Chada1 also stated in the reply before Skull's. He hit on the nail on the head on every single issue pertaining to Burger's complete lack of respect for criticism that isn't overwhelmingly suiting his own personal agenda. Is it too soon that this happens literally not even a day after the owner of Papa Johns resigns as chairman because he dropped a tactical nuke of a racial slur in a very inappropriate setting? What the hell, man. . This statement also did not age well. Burger barely has the temperament to contain himself from using a racial slur for a supposed 'comparison' to justify behavior instead of apologizing for it. By God, what a dark timeline this is where it is appropriate to use racial slurs and aggravated comments about disabled people to compare to community members. That's not the mark of a responsible individual. That's someone who makes excuses and casts blame everywhere else but on themselves. Forgive me for being dramatic, but this is just ridiculous.

Vouching for AmoryBlaine. I don't believe he plays security in a malicious fashion, having played alongside him as a peer and also above him as a superior to give out orders. Cherrypicking 1-2 rounds out of a larger sample size that the player actually engages in (hell, somebody bring up a count for me in how many rounds he's played this month) is probably a sketchy proposition to skate your butt across because shit happens in rough rounds and nobody is gonna be happy when the shit hits the fan and their precious character dies/gets their ass kicked because of it. The highlight of this thread, of course, has to be whatever UM's latest over-dramatized response is looks like it belongs on TMZ more than it belongs in this particular thread. It's just absurdly silly to read his response and I don't think it really dignifies an actual point-by-point answer, I'd suggest the person being complained about and the staff flat out ignore it. It's interesting to see what kinds of attitudes the forums bring out. Furthermore, it is not against the rules to roleplay a mean, rude or ill-spirited character. If you honestly take a character's actions against your own character as a personal offense/attack then you genuinely need assistance to help you understand how to separate reality from fiction. Carmichael is not a perfect character by any means. I don't find the OOC statement by Amory to be particularly damning, as anyone who has ever played security or antagonists admits to liking the power dynamic involved. It's absolutely no secret that security/antagonist players play for action and conflict. I guarantee I'd have complaints this year about it if I played more regularly. It's easy to get very angry about being put in a losing position in a multiplayer video game, and everyone falls into that pit once in awhile. I feel bad for the staff member that has to look over this because there hasn't been a single inkling of proof provided aside from gameIDs being linked with little indication or context as to what the staff should be looking for. Hear-say and over-dramatization make this a thread really difficult to browse. I honestly do not expect a staff member to go out of their way to get what needs to be done in a timely fashion when little tools have been given to them to help them succeed in resolving whatever issues are outlined throughout this thread.

I'm within the opinion that while the Halstere incident(s) probably shouldn't have happened under the usual constraints of understanding how far you're supposed to go with loyalty implantation and also setting yourself off the hook with how the implant influences your character, it still made good drama and it brought consequences that were well deserved. The lore team can't really be blamed for the state of affairs that progressed, what JB did with it was arguably the most fathomable and, dare I say such a contentious thing; close-to-realistic ending that we could've gotten. A problem with the whole thing is the poor precedent it set with how characters can betray their implants. Though seeing as how this went, I doubt people who are whitelisted will seek reasons to break the conditioning of their implant without extremely good reasoning, as the situation with Halstere was more of a selfish justice kind of situation, and not really a "Well AKSHULLY this is probably okay". A HOS can get away with murder/torture in more motivated circumstances. I personally don't think it was close enough to warrant what happened but it's just my opinion. I don't think it breaks the rules per se, it's just strange to me. A major lesson that can be learned is generally for other characters to not do by the same principle of Halstere if they expect to stay in the canon, alive and well. Halstere got too close to the case at hand and like Icarus with the sun, got burned for it, and took a gigantic fall when he really couldn't let it go in the end. Canon events and the decisions made during those events carry very heavy consequences. Halstere got the ultimate punishment (one that is already creating outrage ICly) for what he did, which certainly should serve as a bit of pragmatic discouragement for anyone who wants to try a similar stunt. JB definitely rolled with that the best he could've done. Bit of a double-edged sword, but it was weighted well and the blows were struck where they were needed. Good event overall, it'd be pointless to go "-1 this event sucked" on the sole basis of it not going ideally, because it was still actually rather fun to observe and see.

How were the original victims chosen, OOCly? Strictly an opportunistic "call me if you want your unused character to be axed" or were you intending later down the line for some of the deaths to be more consequential and closer to people's hearts? Was there anything you'd take away from the events as something that wasn't ideally executed on your part that you thought you could've personally done better to clarify, in hindsight? What was with the shuttle crash near the Odin that predated the kick-starting of the events, by the way? Was that at all supposed to be related with the serial killings or was it a red herring?

How many more were slated to be on the chopping block before Drea got caught early?

As above, really. The odds of this gun being impactful with the current status quo are terribly low. Current lore events have made some characters super cautious about the idea of people being able to easily obtain a weapon as a civilian and the risk of them doing something with it. We call that pulling a Halstere. It's super unlikely that HOS characters will suddenly allow people to start carrying cheap guns that easily cause the worst damage type in the game: brain damage, if aimed appropriately at its ideal range.

Absolutely nothing, as usual for security to be worried about enforcing contraband laws. It's just another low capacity ballistic weapon to add into the pool of already existing low capacity ballistic weapons.

I agree with this.

Yes

^ that. Adding arbitrary rules to fit specific cases outlawing incompetence is Apophis-era Colonial Marines bullshit. Let's never become that. You can't prevent incompetence from occurring, you can only inform the incompetents to be better and teach them to be better.