Scheveningen

I have changed my nomination. I nominate myself and only myself. I rule alone.

Same

I think maybe in the future it'd be a more intelligent move to simply criticize a contentious PR where it stands in regards to its flaws and etc, rather than asking the complete removal of a contributor's participation with the game development because they added one shit feature one time. And they memed on the OP because of the OP's reputation of bantering and jokingly busting people's balls, thus not taking the entire issue seriously as they could've; well, it's not exactly indicative of guilt, is it? I put up a thread on this subject, even: (https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10700) and detailing only a little bit on what people can chip in to handle PRs that may be more trouble than they're worth. You can't say something is a problem that needs to be solved if it wasn't identified until way too late, because then you're just some bandwagon complainer repeating the same arguments as the last guy. That's what you look like, even if that isn't your intention, perspective is everything. I think if people want to complain about upcoming or existing code features, they need to understand that to do so and be taken seriously, they need to take a bit of initiative and responsibility of their own while also understanding that maybe the guy they are complaining about is not exactly Space Hitler. I'm notorious for putting up complaints, even, and only two that I can think of have ever earned that moniker. So really, just relax, even if the server's on fire. If you spend your energy expressing how mad you are over these subjects, you're kinda just showing how uncontrolled you're being. It's not wrong to be upset - well technically it is - but round-abouts are likely that it'll happen and sense won't immediately knock itself into you. I definitely think we could do with more constructive calls to action rather than inherently persecutive ones.

Not the point of this suggestion.

Only if it blocks melee attacks far less often than riot shields/telescopic shields do so they aren't better than the pre-existing items. And only if it blocks melee attacks, it'd be pretty dumb for a stun beam, laser or bullet to get blocked by a tray shield.

Don't agree. Most rounds don't last longer than 3 hours, and when they do, they only last to a period that lies between 3:15 and 3:25 where the shuttle is already incoming. Antags don't tend to live that long in the round if they were present roundstart.

I think if you're in for a hardsuit for too long, your body temp starts rising. It's not as dramatic as it is for voidsuits but it happens after awhile. The problem is that, generally speaking, someone's going to have a solid reason for wearing a suit until the end of the round such as the round type leading to precarious amounts of destruction and breaches. I normally don't see regulars donning a suit whenever they can regardless of whether they need to in order to do their job, otherwise they wouldn't be wearing it. When addressing non-regulars such as people who only occasionally play on this server, it's harder to get that idea across since they don't understand that standard.

I think it wouldn't apply either way, seeing as how Isaac Clarke is able to wear it for hours without complaining about it (although there is the concern of VIDEO GAME PROTAGONIST). I don't see why RIGs would be inherently just as uncomfortable, though. They seem to just be an advanced space suit that wraps around you regardless of your height, body weight or biology.

some smith somewhere in the iron age; hey, i built these really cool things that'll lower the chances of getting your hand and fingers cut off in combat, check it out . some guy in the town forum: wtf get good idiot only losers get their hands cut off, weaknesses are a good thing

hey guys, i'm kinda tired of cheesers aiming for my hands and instantly breaking/gibbing them because of the low break thresholds for hands/feet to begin with. Can we please get some armored gloves added to the game with the tradeoff of making melee/gun attacks slower or some other drawback that would be interesting? The fact that you have to wear a voidsuit to benefit from hand and foot protection is kinda silly and I feel it'd be pretty nice if there were less situations where you could be prepared for this sort of thing and not get donged on because someone either got lucky with the RNG or they were deliberately aiming for the hands anyway. If armored gloves are too much to ask for then I'm multiplying all of the limb min/max break thresholds by 1.5x and you won't like it. xoxoxo, -the guy salty about getting their hands practically shot off by powergamers

I'm a bit surprised to see supposed engineer players calling a phoron engine 'dangerous.' A phoron-phoron loop is completely sabotage-proof given that phoron gas has the highest heat capacity in the game. Because of this, it can safely reach high temperatures without overloading the supermatter compared to other gases, and the rate at which it does so is much much slower than other engines using different gas set-ups. This makes a phoron-exclusive engine set-up downright safer and easier to set-up, and it's also statistically superior in terms of what it offers in terms of wattage due to how the mechanics of the TEGs work. They give power to the station based on the heat in the SM chamber. The hotter the better. It's much easier to respond to an engine overloading due to deliberate sabotage rather than issues due to failures to filtering and etc. Especially when deliberate sabotage is marked by an obvious, "THE ENGINE IS FUCKING BLOWING UP" by the supermatter monitor over engineering radios. Nitrogen has a very low heat capacity and only functions as an effective coolant. Meaning you'd only dump it straight into the core to equalize the room temperature and hopefully save the SM from delaminating. Phoron still acts as both an effective heat agent and a coolant on its own, however. It's generally unwise to run a nitrogen engine ever when the superior option exists to prolong a round and be very difficult to sabotage in general.

Only chipping in to say this: The last time I was staff, a part of a transparency movement was saying stuff like this to both the players we were passing judgement to and to other players in tickets to explain how it was resolved. It's regrettable that apparently Alberyk did not inform BSA of the former detail beforehand, but he probably didn't want an argument. There's no ethical problem about staff telling whoever they like about punishments dished out unless they feel it is courteous in the moment to do otherwise. While there is the concern of certain people making it everyone's business we hope that other players are courteous enough to keep it to themselves, because it's a significant breach of trust. The fact that staff are encouraged to tell people about the resolution goes to show they're willing to speak their mind and not have ulterior motives they're not saying. In regards to the player being banned, I'll say this. BSA is the one of the few reasons why lethal shotgun munitions were removed from the armory, and also the reason laser accuracy was nerfed, and the reason why the damage was nerfed, in addition to the laser rifle capacity being nerfed from 20 to 15, because of the style of BSA's play and their inherent individual influence on the security vs. antagonist dichotomy. There are plenty of other staff members who have felt the same in regards to being really tired of having to put up with BSA's powergaming and antagonist-hunting antics in the past. As far as "the past" goes, that's how it was. I'm sure in the present some things may have changed but in terms of a human factor focus, I'm guessing attitudes and beliefs do not change that much in a given period of time.

You know, if you really wanted to enforce skill-based pedantry, you'd enforce it through game mechanics and skill checks, not arbitrary guidelines that new and old players aren't even necessarily following currently.

https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4481 I currently like this resolution atm.

I think some people were ignoring what the OP was saying for the sake of having a different discussion in the thread. The title of the thread says, "RIGs should be treated with the same in-roleplay comfort rule as wearing voidsuits for long periods of time." Which I disagree with. RIGs are intended to be a perfect fit of a pressured suit around whoever wears the control module. Be it xeno or human, whichever. Unlike voidsuits I doubt people would make RIGs for it to not be a tight fit. If you want to punish people powergaming and using RIGs without actual need or purpose for it, just apply a global nerf to all hardsuits by making each step use 1 unit of power. Could step up further if you want to enforce RIGs being worn for a purpose rather than my-character-is-super-cooler-than-yours being a thing.

Bump.

Supporting. I'm a major proponent of consequence affecting actions ICly. IPCs are already tentatively unbalanced enough to even remotely justify the current status quo of reviving them from death with zero consequence that organics do not receive, as if it were okay to ignore the consequential comparison. Organic characters have to deal with the aftereffects of death, and revival/counselling is a very time-consuming process even in spite of the variety of chems that heal all of it completely. Why shouldn't IPCs? I don't think IPC players have a right to complain about 'punishing gameplay mechanics' when they can get hit by a single slug to the chest and not really worry about it, meanwhile everyone else needs to worry about getting maimed or cleaved into bits. IPC players will need to weigh risk and reward better for different situations. And that is better decision-making for roleplay, in my eyes.

I should've definitely clarified this case. But yeah, thanks.

Hi guys. Let's talk about contributors such as myself actively ruining the game features that are added to the game that do not necessarily keep the best interests of you, the other players, and the general balance/design of the game itself, and what you can do about it if you've had it six ways to Sunday with how development is going. Not all features are designed to be like this but we've all had a situation where we saw a gameplay change that we hated, so I'll detail in a bit what to do once I get a little bit of background out of the way. https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3 The above link is the github. SS13 has, ever since the game got stolen on a flash drive, been traditionally open source for several years. Aurorastation is one of these many branches of code development. The codebase pretty much primarily Baystation-oriented with a lot of features from the various servers that are also open source. The above link contains everything that makes the game work with each facet defined by the engine as background factors to simply realize the world everyone plays on. There might be a million or so lines of code. I couldn't tell you the exact number. https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/issues The above link is where members of the community are encouraged to go where they have reports of bugs or game behavior not working as it was supposedly designed to be. It is important to search if your issue has already been posted before posting it, it otherwise creates a duplicate issue which is generally discouraged in repeatedly doing. It's okay to report an old bug if it happens to resurge or it simply has not been addressed in awhile and it's particularly problematic for standard gameplay to progress. Your issue can be anywhere between a mild annoyance to a gamebreaking server security issue that you should actually report to the head developer right away in private DMs on discord or using github if you wanted to. If you see a bug, you should report it on the github either right away or, preferably, until the round's over so you don't risk IC in OOC if you give away certain details while a round is still on-going, this is very unlikely, however. Admins do not handle bug reports. Do not ask admins if something is a bug, most admins' specialty is in handling player misbehavior. Admins get cool powers only on virtue of occasionally erasing mistakes or other stuff, they are not always likely to know anything about how coding works or if anything is really a bug. Some admins are contributors, and even Alberyk himself is considered to be a codermin due to the consistent amount of contributions he's done for this server. Bless that Brazilian fellow. https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pulls Here is the very important part. This is where the developers AND anyone else can put up requests to change the game's behavior, add new things, fix a bunch of bugs by themselves, and so on. Because of the "add new stuff" qualifier, it's a really good idea if you want to be more involved in this community to check the pull requests at least once or twice every week to see what the developers have in store to add in terms of terrible cool ideas. The PR (Pull Request, not Public relations) format helps facilitate non-staff affiliates to be able to lend a hand and add stuff to the game without needing the weird strings attached. It is still important to follow the same PR procedure that devs follow for the sake of orderliness. You don't need to be a contributor to voice your distaste for a feature. You don't need to know shit about code to say "I don't like this feature and I think it's a bad idea". If you think a feature would be really bad if it were added, it is absolutely okay to blackmail convince your friends to go post on the PR and state your opposition to the change because of X and X reasons. Skull generally merges most contributions if they're already approved by a reviewer, he puts trust in the person reviewing the PR, so don't yell at him for just updating the codebase, it's clearly the reviewer's fault if they permitted a change to go through. Don't harass them, obviously, be nice about pointing out issues. A reviewer will most likely not approve a PR if it introduces imbalance or changes something for very trivial and unsound reasons, and if it's controversial/stupid enough, it'll get closed right away. Consider making a github account for this reason, seriously. Best case scenario, here's the tl;dr you want to work for: See bad feature? Get your friends to nicely shit on the PR and explain why it's not a good idea in equally nice and reasonable terms. A contentious PR is about as likely to get accepted as a bad/meme/bad meme PR. See a good feature? Support it and say it's a good idea. Or don't. If you have no interest in participating in lobbying support for or against certain features proposed on the github, then you really can't complain when those features go live. Your participation is more helpful than you think, if you don't say anything and nobody else does too, the devs will assume silence is compliance and chug on through. Speak up early before the development-merge process, or your opinions will get left behind and will stop mattering in the grand scheme of the server's development. Remember, bully contributors relentlessly. They do nothing but actively make the game worse, moreso than our pious and upstanding developers.

My head of security character, my oldest played character on this server, has military combat training, EVA training, corporate and Biesel law training, advanced leadership training in addition to first aid training from their first tour with the Eridani Private Force. She's 43. Is this proposed policy a threat to one of my character's current skillset? My comprehension of what I've read in the OP won't matter if the OP himself thinks my character's skillset is a problem.

Reopen it, and DM every single admin with "Have we started the fire?" and if they don't reply "The fire rises" back within a day I'll support their immediate removal, buffing fire is an amazing idea that must be realized.

I have no idea if my previous suggestion detailing "buffing fire" was caught in the Great Suggestion Purge of Some Significant Time Ago. Already spent 20 minutes looking for it, dunno where it is. Forgive me if it wasn't wiped. Certain hazards in this game aren't as brutal and deadly as they should be. This thread pertains to fire. The issues: Fire does not seem to immediately catch someone alight until they're standing for a significant amount of time on top of a turf caught on fire. Flamethrowers are very inconsistent in spitting and you can actually set yourself on fire with certain angles. The current method of accumulating firestacks seems to not be severely damaging enough to make a difference. A mob being set on fire doesn't get put out after a certain period of time, they can be perpetually set aflame, there's no firestack decay unless the body is in a vacuum, but there may be exceptions to this case. My proposal: Anyone that walks onto a fiery tile should be caught alight instantly. Flamethrowers should shoot flame in a straight line. Adjusting how much the flamethrower is shooting can widen the gulf of flame at the cost of more fuel. The longer you burn without dropping and rolling/getting put out by an extinguisher, the more firestacks you should accumulate every few seconds, up to a maximum of 10 firestacks. You accumulate 1 firestack as soon as you are set ablaze, and then one more firestack every three seconds that you are on fire until you reach 10 firestacks. You then burn for 30 seconds more and your flame puts itself out. Accumulating 3 firestacks allows you to give one firestack to anyone you make contact with. After 5 stacks, your internal organs will begin to be damaged by the calculated burn damage amount per second. Fire damage should scale by 1 burn damage (multiplied by how many firestacks you've accumulated by being on fire for a period of time) per second. You take zero fire damage when wearing voidsuits or hardsuits with sufficient enough temperature immunity. Despite this, you can still be set on fire and spread flame to other people after accumulating those firestacks. Fun and pyromania, egads! Fire extinguishers will always remove 1 firestack per layer blast of water. but why Pyromaniac tactics do not seem to be terribly effective currently, and the fire that is effective, is particularly roundbreaking since it completely saturates the oxygen from the air and also floods the station with nasty phoron gas. Flamethrowers are also terrible, but could easily be less terrible to give room for more "creative" (hanging airquotes) antagonists to kill people in interesting ways. I also think the image of a traitor atmos technician hugging people with the flame of death in the hallways to spread fiery cancer sounds like a laugh. This should definitely be looked into.

Have I made a longer post than this? I don't think such a thing exists, Skull. I am beaten and humiliated. Appreciate the clarification on the Big Four Bugs, though. Is it possible to use a temporary measure such as a non-animated image placeholder to to substitute for the static and designate what cannot be seen by the AI? Would that help things? And in response to the bemoaning, such as in the junk food thread. I really don't think it was an excellent idea to be pushing through, even with the standard premise of it. I can't speak too much of the firing pins but it was obviously a contentious subject in the first place, as 50% of a vocal minority was like, "Yeah!" and the other 50% were like, "OK, no, this is too far". So moaning, debate and whining was seemingly inevitable in that case, which understandably gives everyone involved a headache. But in regards to the junk food thing? Contextually, I feel the addition was really unnecessary. I do take responsibility for not more avidly checking the github to post my own thoughts as to why I felt it wasn't needed, but I really didn't expect that sort of change would be suggested and implemented in a PR in the first place. The change seemed very silly, arbitrary and contrived. There are ethical limits to where you can change mechanics to force ideal in-character-centric behavior. Obviously the major takeaway from 'moaning' would be to only moan constructively and not be too annoying, and that much I'd be willing to perform concessions for.

Citation needed. Besides, they're a terrible pick statistically, as they get roasted by lasers and die instantly to an emitter beam.

The sooner you realize all departments have the capability to be shitty, the more sense things make in IC, Sytic.