Zelmana

Recently there has been an endless campaign against references inside of the game, yet the line where this is seems so strange. It seems that almost at random, or at complete opinion of developers, certain reference items are being removed yet others remain. Even references with similar "theming" or sharing the same reference schema if you will do not follow logic. For example, RnD Rootbeer was changed to Getmore Rootbeer. RnD Rootbeer was a reference to A&W (AnW since we can't do & in titles). I can see why someone might see this and remove it for reference to RnD- Research and Development, a role inside of the game. However, Mr. Gibb (faux Dr. Pepper, referencing in-game meta 'gibb'), and Changling Sting (ref'ing Changling gamemode) were untouched. Why are the choices of what we revert or change in game to "sanitize" so loosely defined? If we want a standard why is it so gray, it almost seems as if a few Devs are ruling based off of opinion of "i like this reference" or "i don't like this reference". Who is to stop anyone from undoing the PR work of a reference change PR? At that point it is a battle of "i don't like this reference" vs. a reverting PR of "i do"

As an avid gun-enjoyer IRL and in game, I think we have a pretty good representation. Now, we don't have swiss mauser tier 8mm type rounds, but a lot of our gun options are direct representations with the accurate calibers being used. A round of merc might see use of a 10mm bullpup, a 9mm concealed carry, and a gimmicky rpg-type weapon like the material "rifle". Beyond niche surplus weapons we have a fairly wide array. A part of selecting a limited "ammo pallete" allows RP to flow better.e

To me it's less so about appealing to reddit and moreso about appealing to the seeking player. Who will go to Reddit for advice on what server to join. https://www.reddit.com/r/SS13/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ALooking%2Bfor%2BServer You can find some references to Aurora in the past month. So we're not entirely obsolete.

I believe you're misreading me. What I'm saying when I refer to "degeneracy" is that we're the best HRP server there is, period. I'm not implying we are degen or anything like that, but rather that we're quite different from some of the other HRP servers. Other servers permit ERP and dangerous 18+ scenarios that we all know cause drama and legal issues. As for not caring what is said on reddit or other places, you should. Low Whitelist pop is a subissue / symptom of Low GenPop. It's better to remediate the actual root of the problem which is low genpop. A user who watches a few Nurse or Sseth or whatever videos on youtube will google "best ss13 servers" the first results would be reddit followed by 4chan and other servers. In general life, it's quite a meme that if you want good generic advice adding the suffix "reddit" to your search will often bring you to a good discussion page about things. It's not very hard to imagine that a majority of players seeking a server, and not just randomly selecting one in the hub, will likely go to the main community nexus of ss13, which most definitely is r/ss13 or some /v/ threads (but those are more rare). Type "Aurora" into the searchfield limiting it to r/ss13 and you will notice we are hardly spoken of, and when there are the rare threads of "what do you think of Aurora" it is a neutral light of the greatest place to HRP yet many bad experiences even from long-term players who fell into the path of judgement. As I've said before and will always, SS13 is a small community and those interested are small as well. The learning curve wall for entry is deterrent, so the overall SS13 playerpool is rotating with very rare surges of fresh players, (this is a self proving concept known as 'greytide'). If we want to continue for the next 6 years we may wish to take our PR into risk management discussions, and what can be done not to just counteract negative experiences but correct past grievances people may have had.

For this to be true the inverse must also be true, no? When pop was good did we have more lax policy? Not necessarily. The overall reduction of Command is proportional to the overall reduction of the entire population. I remember times where we'd have very good pop, a consistent 40-60 players most nights not just hitting low 40s on the weekend, and almost all Command slots were filled or being roleplayed. I've said this before, but the SS13 community is small, and they remember things. Aurora has in recent years fallen off slightly. Not that this should be a good measure- but we are rarely, if ever, mentioned on the subreddits or other forums, and if we are it is often in an undesirable light. What brings new players to Aurora? Often only randomly joining grays from the hub. In my opinion we should be more willing to readily establish ourselves as the creme de le creme non-ERP focused (degeneracy) HRP server. Addressing some of the points people make on r/ss13 may help with that.

My main issue is the disruptor sprite, the normal one, not even the miniature one, has a barrel length that is only a few inches past the grip. It feels odd I can't stuff this into a trenchcoat pocket similar to a revolver. Maybe that's my only grief. I'm fine with a full 45 not fitting.

A majority of the pistols in game are subcompact pistols which are in realistically able to be fit into pants pockets, jacket pockets, and smaller boxes.

Great self reflection, I remember feeling the same way. You're assuredly going to craft memorable command moments. Mistakes happen and in HoS and Captaincy roles evenmoreso, there is often never a "right" decision but only grey ones. Always drive roleplay and never seek to people please.

Clem has very well developed characters and their roleplay quality is comparable or exceeds current Command whitelisted playerbase. If they wish to join Command I give them a great recommendation. +1

Mars needs more presence, the flag pin we have in game is Sol-shit. We lack actual flags, posters, anything for a planet. As a Mars main I support any action that gives us more flavor items.

Teatime has a well developed character here with Drast that is pleasant to interact with. I've seen them recently stepping in more to help interns. They vibe well with Command when present and I could see them orchestrating command level items if given the opportunity. +1

And if a mapper is in the above area the Captain locker needs a holster badly. Tired of stealing from others.

As long as they don't get access to the Intrepid. The intrepid is a high value target & escape option for Antags, and is also in use by Xenoarch now. There's plenty of scenario where Command wants to send an official "Away team" via the intrepid and if 2 shaft miners have taken it at the start of the shift that is a big problem.

This greatly enhances Space Taco Bell. 10/10 suggestion.

I'm a disco holdover myself.

Please return investigator black suit to the investigations locker. Investigations have historically been exempt from uniform regulations and recent changes have removed some very nice clothing options from that locker. Additionally if you can squeeze https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/issues/14252 into PR I would appreciate it.

Excellent response, Vampire. I mainly wanted this topic elaborated on and discussed fully. To be honest, I am neutral about this. I would be fine with the adjustment if the policy statement included that AI cannot do it autonomously if Command staff are present. Which is to be expected of quality whitelisted RP, but I do not wish for AI auto-scaling the code to be the norm without clearance.

How often does Code Red get used? Comparatively, Code Blue is utilized way more. More often than not if there are armed full-on shootouts happening the ship is most likely on Blue than Red. To me AI ability to do something means they've been programmatically set to understand and be capable of making those decisions themselves, which is something I don't think AIs should do purely policy wise. Just because something makes sense mechanically doesn't mean it always needs to be implemented. For example, In lore security regulations mandate uniform requirements but those are often overlooked and bent. While there is a discussion about removing them, I've posted similar arguments to be against it. It makes sense in universe for there to be some resistance against it. It is roleplay to be a character who disregards or bends the rule slightly. With AI powers I do still consider it a QoL vs RP cost. We would be losing situations where Command have to rush to a console. Which happens A LOT. There is plenty of roleplay about securing certain secure areas because they simply have the relevant consoles to administrate the ship/crew. Why would I care about holding the bridge or bunker when I can do it on the fly via AI? What point is securing my laptop if an AI is online?

It should. Source: Molotovs

+ Funny

I would argue that the issues that Arrow detailed still occur and are dealt with as standard fail rp as evidence by complaint lodged by Playbahnosh yesterday. These problems can exist in both lawsets. I would say that as for which lawset permits more logic box and interesting roleplay than the equivalent lawset. It is easier in Asimov's to get out of the "logic box", allowing for better situations. Note that in each lawset you can logically do whatever you like with enough reasoning and logic. It's just that Asimov provides a better standing and lore for it, be it antag or trinary perfection awakening the synth soul. Would Restate that this is not at all below. The current lawset is also intentionally flawed. There is hardly a change here. What is changing, however, is the in world mode of the logic. You are equally able to out-logic both lawset as we've seen time and time again. Those who are unable to provide sufficient logic for their actions are no better than a commander rushing an antag. A lawset provides lore fluff, quality of rp is determined by the player and enforced by rules. The lawset exists in universe. As for "much deeper and interesting character choices", I would argue that Asimovisn literature would disagree. Conferences, books, plays, movies, research papers, and more stem from Asimov conflict of law order. It is a trope we are missing out on. At the end of the day players can defeat both lawsets with enough paid, but by reverting to Asimov we provide a better in universe platform for doing so. Not easier, but certainly more flexible. Those who are likely to abuse it would have done so under our current lawset, which is just as restricting as Asimov. By introducing the order of laws we add a layer of complexity to the roleplay which is more than current standards. Note that any situation now where players logically escape the lawset are still possible under Asimov, so discussion points that state "this will remove complex rp arcs" are moot, as Asimovisn literature would enhance this roleplay not revert it.

And something I would say, Marlon, is that our current lawset does not 'solve the problem' that were preexisting with hierarchical laws. When we had hierarchy laws we had some great cyborg/synth roleplay that focused around the very nature of lawset order. A lot of that was lost with every law is equal mechanics. With any system of laws, no matter how concrete, there will be catch cases, exceptions, and bending of words. It would be better to allow this to happen in character and still address problematic incidents as one off bad rp.

The preexisting lawset is similarly flawed- you can look at a complaint by Playbahnosh. The interpretation of lawsets is always something that can cause some sort of conflict. Primarily it is IC conflict, but of course there are sometimes instances where players are frustrated. Same with corporate regulations. I believe that if we allow for a hierarchical lawset that would allow for more synthetic expression and ultimately choice on how to roleplay and interpret those laws. Since it's a flawed system there is room for interpretation. A big part of this will allow for more nuanced synthetics when it comes to decision making, a in character narrative of what it means to be lawed, as well as a in universe philosophical issue. Gameplay alongside of synths that have a hierarchical lawset will allow for the synths to interpret the laws and perhaps even have catch cases or complex exceptions. In antagonistic roleplay this can be expanded, and is currently to some degree. Overall it's just flexibility in roleplay scenarios and adds some fluff to "the big question" synthetic roleplay.

@Marlon P. The point I'm trying to make is that perhaps we are wrong in assuming we want flawless synthetic play. The situations discussed in I, Robot are examples of this, of course. Asimov's laws of course are flawed. I think that would be an interesting narrative and space for roleplay.