Carver

They're not intended to be disguised as mesons. Having bought the current version before, their lenses are (uniquely) red with thermals on and untinted with them off. Intending to mimic the basic aviators, when the thermals are off.

The thermal aviators shouldn't have an antennae. They're meant to be a stealthy choice.

Honestly I'd just give them a locker or crate full of various gimmick outfits/uniforms including bags.

No, my scouters! My only concern with the new base HUDs is they look too much like the aviator HUDs. Wait, I'm retarded, you didn't change the prescriptions. They just always looked... very, very close to the new aviators.

I'd prefer thematic to character preference rather than job-related. The current RNG system is 'ok' unless you get fucked over with a beanbag or rubbers weapon.

I'm pretty sure it's not sexist behaviour so much as 'thirsty' behaviour, per my previous post.

Does the bolt-action have a scope? I was recently looking for some manner of scoped rifle for antagonists that wasn't the 'all-in 1-shot probably-gonna-miss' Anti-Material Rifle.

From what I recall, at least in other codebases, they are (or were) entirely random. Renegades could get a fucking double barrel with beanbags if they were real unlucky, or an x-ray laser.

I've read the rest of the thread and am somewhat understanding after further clarifications to the ruling (and the PR allowing opt-out), but for the sake of clarifying my own argument so far to both establish the point I was trying to make and for record's sake. To argue against this; there is a choice, often the other answer is death, but the choice remains (and I view death as a valid out if a player no longer wishes to participate, as it presents a punishment that locks them out of changing their mind or further impacting the round). The ruling presented is what was primarily argued against, because even if forced to join revs, there's no reason one can't at the next chance take the opportunity to dip and report it to Security/Command (or simply defect later). If you're held at gunpoint, you still have the opportunity to take the situation slowly and plan out your escape and how you'll get out of it safely. What Garn's (initially strict, and reinforced by his initial arguments) ruling wanted was to deny people those thoughts, plans and actions. To where a character whom might be a truly independent sort, or a character whom might be averse to mind control, or a character whom might be extremely wary of a voice in their head; has to pretend it's fine and go along with whatever this person who won a dice roll says. In which case, the argument against the '5 minute/50 minutes/etc' is that, in having it at roundstart, it generates a feeling of "the game was rigged from very start" to where instead of you getting a chance to play, by a dice roll someone else has your body. Has your role. Has your two hours and fifteen minutes. In a completely unavoidable fashion that you aren't allowed to protest against, plot against or otherwise act against. You, as a character, may as well unironically kill yourself and just let the borer puppet your corpse around instead. You may as well be playing a stage 4 victim of Black K'ois. Per the aforementioned (initially strict version of the) ruling, you wouldn't be your character, you'd be the equivalent of a puppet not allowed to act how your character would. Equivalent to the notion of a changeling killing (or in this, having killed) you, and you controlling the body when they switch to your appearance. There is no participation in something decided by an uncontrollable roll of the dice. In a tabletop, I can make a roll against the actions of the fellow players. I can make my own plots against them. I can act per my character's design. In this case, it's handing in a character sheet and the DM goes and passes it to the guy next to you, then gives you a blank one labeled 'slave of the guy next to you' whilst handcuffing you to the chair.

OP's suggestion is an obvious fix, +1 to it. I'm not against choice but my worry is everyone will pick the 'best one', instead of one personally thematic to their character/role/faction/whatever.

I don't particularly want this for the IPC inclusion, I want it because I'm dead-tired of organic body horror antagonists.

Disagree. An interesting feature of this might be hearing a muffled 'voice' through the walls and recognizing that 'voice'. Whispering would be a better 1-2 tile option, with the aforementioned toggle if someone hates the sounds overall. Slight addendum: Using an exclamation point (John Doe shouts/exclaims/etc.) might even increase the range.

If EMPs were to have an effect, let it be forcing them 'back into the head' if they're currently in control of the body. It'd be an expensive use of EMPs but a viable one.

Nanomachines are cooler and make more sense so why not.

I don't have to cater my personal round entirely around any other antag. I can leave the round, fuck off from the scene, or do a number of things my character would ICly and realistically do to get away from the problem. This is, from the very get-go, having your round hijacked by a non-whitelisted stranger who goes "You wanted to play a round and do something on your own? Nah, eat a fucking slimey slug dong and spend a full 2 hours and fifteen minutes with me in control that you can't cryo or ghost from unless you get yourself killed". If it were opt-in? Fine. If I could choose the person who shares my brain? Fine. If I could freely cryo upon realizing I otherwise have to spend two hours roped to some random? Fine. To use a video game reference, as it stands this is the equivalent of readying up for quick match in Heroes of the Storm as your favourite hero and matchmaking instead forces you to play Cho (Bonus points: Your Gall has never played before and argues with you over everything you do).

In the simplest answer, I don't intend to ready up and dedicate my next two hours from the get-go to some absolute stranger who I have no experience with or understanding of. Whilst being told, per the ruling mentioned in the discussion and reinforced by Garnascus in this very thread, that you're expected to break character to cater around this random person to the detriment of your own round and enjoyment. With being culted, you can fuck off and do your own thing instead of being glued by chance to someone entirely random and likely unvetted.

Yet for those one or two rounds he negatively impacts the experience of others, and in the case of the topic at-hand, can ruin the entire round of a single individual. If it's a bad round of any other antag type, you're free to cryo at any point. Yet this precise mode demands a reversal of multiple prior and recent rulings in regard to that? This mode demands the very first case of a player's agency in regard to all roundstart opt-ins to be disregarded? Every other roundstart (for clarification to avoid the cult comparison) role can be opted out of, job or antagonist. There is an option to return to the lobby if you don't get the job. As others and myself have said: By forcing players into such a role you negatively impact their experience in such a way that you'll end up with sour individuals who will undoubtedly act against the mode, passively or otherwise (and you can't do much about passive resistance as it's near impossible to discern).

And unless antagonist whitelists were implemented, I do not trust the quality of the random shitheel selected as antag who'll inevitably try to spam taking over the body and cause brain damage as a result. If one is stuck with a brain pAI it should either be opt-in, or they choose whom it is, or even better- they don't start in a fucking host.

Then it should not be forbidden to cryo and opt out of it. It's equivalent to having a Medical character start in Cargo and be expected to pretend that everything is fine and they were a cargo character all along. If you wish to go this route, consider dropping the 'Heavy' from this:

Forcing people to endure it may also result in the most egregious failing of all. By demanding people comply with the borer, you may in fact be forcing them to break character for the sake of a round type. By that in itself, the round type is flawed and does not belong on an RP server.

I mean, by multiple prior rulings both old and very recent, I can also just cryo if I start with a borer.

I'm always down for raising the minimum age, especially for a position demanding experienced and mature personnel.

In a statement that will inevitably offend some group of people or another, a great deal of the overall creepy behaviour can likely be derived from several factors. The two I believe firmly are the biggest at fault: The server culture over the years has not done anything to discourage these people. In fact, it often encouraged these people, initially in a seemingly playful, satirical and downright joking manner. It's clear that over time this has changed as it's gone beyond being a running gag. Due to the above factor, we've unfortunately gained some amount of community overlap with places such as Citadel. On it's own, that wouldn't be bad if not for that some people don't seem to know that different servers have different cultures, and sexual behaviour is very much unwelcome here. Along with other factors drawing 'undesirables' here, such as lore being far less strict due to the introduction of numerous sub-factions that defy the standard character requirements of the base lore (Aut'akh, Dominia), as well as a near-unregulated amount of freedom granted to whitelist holders in regard to character design that would allow for aforementioned undesirables to come closer and closer to their self-insert fursonas in RP (Most common amongst two things I've noted: Unathi and Shells - Tajara have slightly avoided this due to a firmer oversight on their behaviour, and Vaurcae, whilst suffering from some pretty bad characters, are not as bad as the aforementioned two). There are several ways to solve this, the ideal one being somewhat difficult for people to willingly accept: Ideally: Cut down on 'lore bloat' and offending sub-factions. Cull what causes growth of the problem. This would be a rather long-term objective, possibly requiring a cycling of lore staff as a result. Which is why I noted that this would be difficult for people to accept. Alternatively: Crack down on sexual behaviour and deviancy on the server and related platforms (Official Discord, Forums). Keep the OOC far more PG, and for IC, ban things such as flavour texts/FT-images that could be considered inappropriate (I've seen server staff with such). A puritanical standpoint is required if one wishes to cleanse the server's culture.

@geeves How many implants come with the aggression bundle? I feel that a reduction to 5 points may be advisable as they are, in effect, a purely RP-based implant that can very well backfire on the user. It may result in them being somewhat spammable (unless a purchase limit, let's say 2-3 bundles per head rev, were implemented) but it's not exactly easy to implant people as it is, so I don't see an issue with it.

Consider the following; It's malf, the AI is about to go loud: What should the AI do beforehand? A) Fortify it's weak points using it's stationbounds, encouraging teamwork amongst the malfunctioning synthetics and giving it a reason to take it's time? B) Just fukken go at it. Then realize that it didn't prepare for the engagement, preparation being advisable and near-required by every other role in the game before combat, and suffer as a result. The issue isn't the back of the core being weak, in fact; I think it's perfect because it opens up the AI to be attacked/stolen by antagonists, whilst giving a reason for antagonist and subverted AIs to use the resources available to them to fortify and prepare. It encourages forethought and preparation, punishing those who disregard either.