driecg36

Attempting to kill someone counts as ganking as well, even if it is not explicitly stated in the rules. Hitting someone with a fireaxe 4 times in short succession is ABSOLUTELY lethal force, and I would've most certainly died had a medic not shown up to the bridge instantly (something you had absolutely 0 guarantee of happening, considering the circumstances). The fact that you didn't "intend" for me to die, but were absolutely fine with causing potentially lethal damage to me is more than enough to warrant it being a gank (especially considering the fact that you are an officer who has access to a stun baton). Otherwise the only other interaction I had with you the entire round was you barging into my office and begging for the vaurca rig suit, which I believe does not exactly count as "roleplay leading up to it." I needed the axe because a recent update made it so that you needed a fireaxe to pry open blast doors - which the AI had lowered. The captain even ordered me to forcefully take the axe from you, which I decided to not do as letting you participate would be more interesting for everyone involved. Security ignoring the nuke threat makes complete sense, considering the following, which I have stated before: A) The captain, who's word is more trustworthy than the AI, assured us the AI could not trigger the nuke. B) Even if the AI could trigger a nuke, it would end up killing 99% of the crew if we cooperated. It was damned if you do, damned if you don't under those circumstances. It was best to simply roll the dice and hope it couldn't trigger the nuke. C) The crew was rioting and getting armed, and lest we end up in a civil war and kill each other anyway, we needed to destroy the AI. Going off of all of these, the most certain IC way to minimize casualties was to eliminate the AI before it could turn the crew against each other. EDIT: On top of that, were you even there? I remember you almost shocking yourself to death trying to hack a door, and medical showing up. As far as I remember, you never entered the bridge with us, though I may be wrong. As was mentioned by itanimulli, I thought this round had revs in it, so I did not bother to ahelp what butterrober did (as even though it was a gank, that was slightly more tolerable if they had an antag status, as they would have some justification for using any means to fight the HoS and command). I only ahelped it later, once I died and was informed in dchat that they were not antagonists. To reiterate, this is a ban request because I think butter's actions are ban-worthy. He took dococt's permission to fear rp on the side of the AI way too far, to the point where he ended up excessively self-antagging and ganking.

I specifically stated that an admin had okayed this RP, and that the only thing I was reporting was the gank (which is why you are not in this request). I did salt in d-chat, yes, but I tried to carry over as little as possible of that into this report. I also clarified multiple times that I was absolutely fine with the fearRP of crew doubting us and preparing for the worst. In fact, it was literally the only good thing about this round, if you ask me. I did ahelp, and was told to make a report on the forums by the admin. Staff explicitly DID NOT handle it and told me to make a report (did not specify which type, IIRC), as it would be easier to clear up all the information. I made a ban request instead of a character report, as from my point of view, what butterrobber did was a clear and conscious violation of ganking rules, for which he should get a ban. If the admins decide that this is better suited for a character report, they are free to move it, though I would disagree.

The VERY FIRST announcement the AI made was "Only Five of you will be leaving this station today." How was I supposed to let that slide? Naturally I would use every single mean to fight against the AI, including the destruction of cameras and whatever other bullshit it had forbidden, because the captain assured me it was bluffing about the nuke. Additionally, no matter the circumstances, ganking other crew who have not proved hostile or aggressive towards you whatsoever could not be more against the rules. It doesn't matter if you were outnumbered or not.

The nuke, as I was informed by the captain, could not be activated by the AI. I chose to believe the captain over the AI, and that the AI was merely posturing about the nuke. The real threat was from the crew rioting and the AI venting all the air out of the station, as far as I was concerned. Perhaps it was rash to say it generated no RP whatsoever, but that was hardly the focus of the ban request. Fighting for the AI was authorized by the admins, but wordlessly walking up to me and breaking my chest with a fireaxe was not, and that's the issue.. And I am sorry, the gimmick of "I am going to slaughter 99% of you" is not something any HoS player would just let happen. The AI gave me absolutely no opportunity to roleplay aside from trying to keep the crew calm, which I attempted over common best I could while also trying to wrangle the least helpful engineering team I had ever seen. Additionally, only the captain knows of the nuke's existence, so ICly I was as confused as you were. Thank you for assuming I was merely valid-hunting by wanting to take down an AI that, once again, wanted to kill 99% of the station, which everyone seems to forget. What was I supposed to do, go along with the gimmick and let everyone die? Every time I play HoS or captain I try very hard to accommodate for gimmicks in creative ways (for example, I successfully convinced the captain on a vamp round that "blood" was just the nickname for a new, dangerous drug that killed blood cells). This round however, there was literally no way to accommodate the gimmick. The AI said "I will kill you all, and if you try to stop me I will kill you all with a nuke." Then the captain, who I have much more reason to believe than the AI, tells the entire station "The AI cannot nuke us." Naturally, the only rational response from there is stop the fucking AI from killing us all. Long story short, a non-antagged security officer wordlessly walked up to the head of security and broke his chest with a fireaxe, then stole the only weapon he could use to fight the antagonist with. If you want to justify this with fear RP, I apparently cannot disagree as everyone thinks it was proper RP, including the admin that authorized it. I do find the actions themselves to be in clear violation of the rules, however, which is why I made this report. I had absolutely no problem with cargo or other crew arming up because of the AI threats. I think the crew rioting was literally the only thing that made this garbage gimmick mildly salvageable, even if it was a complete and absolute shitshow from command side. The crew panicking was good fear RP, and it gave everyone the opportunity to interact, which I hope my officers did. In reality, I would've much rather dealt with that as it would've been more fun than dealing with the AI, but at that point it would've been just a rev round. The proof that it was while I was typing is the fact that I gave an order to iok AFTER he started attacking me, while I was typing out said order. And I do use hotkey mode, so the bubble was indeed there. Even if I didn't use hotkey mode, it was still evident I was talking considering the fact I had said his name and turned around. There is no doubt in my mind he knew I was typing. Once again, I hold no issue with people not trusting me or having fear RP, and it was hasty of me to say that they generated no RP (even if the RP you mentioned would've happened without the vaurca anyway but wtv). My issue is the fact that I was wordlessly ganked (and yes, almost killing me with a fireaxe is a fucking gank even if you run away after) by a NON-ANTAG.

I think as long as you limit the gear crossover, this is excellent. By that I mean I don't want a ninja/wizard hybrid running around zapping everyone with both magic and energy shurikens. I absolutely want antags to not always be antags, however. I personally think this should be a random roll, where someone is either supposed to be hostile, neutral, or in favor to the station. (Favor only applies to gamemodes with multiple antags, and would work best with this suggestion https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=8720&start=30)

Could we please get a dev to look at this? I still want this suggestion to be implemented yet not a single dev has bothered commenting on in the year it's been posted. There is obviously popular support for it, and I think it's just as relevant as when I made it originally.

BYOND Key: driecg36 Accused Players Byond Key: butterrobber202 Time of Act: 12:00 PM EST Reason for Ban: The round was Malf, and the AI's gimmick was "I am going to kill 99% percent of you, and if you try and stop me I will detonate the nuke." I, being the HoS, naturally try and stop the AI. After much difficulty, and a decent portion of the station rioting and arming themselves, we finally breach into the command ring. At this point, there are a handful of people - two engineers, myself, an officer, and the captain. Then, Butterrober and another vaurca walk in on the scene. butterrrober mumbles something about not attacking the AI, which was so timid I didn't even see it, then proceeds to wordlessly follow us while talking in hivemind. We proceed to the AI lift door, and I try to tell Iok to get the other vaurca out of the bridge. At this point, I am holding the fireaxe I used to pry open the blast doors, and Iok disarms spams me while I was typing. He proceeds to take the axe, then chop me with it until my ribs break and I get internal bleeding. While this is happening, the other vaurca takes the Ion from the officers and runs away. Neither of these vaurca were antags. Apparently, butterrobber ahelped for permission to fight on the side of the AI, which DocOct granted. (I personally think he shouldn't have, but that's beside the point). However, DocOct told them to NOT gank very specifically. This was absolutely a gank, with no rp. No rp was generated from this for anyone but the two vaurcae, as the only thing anyone else did was chase these two around to recover the Ion. I think they were eventually both killed. They added effectively nothing to the round aside from salt and self-antagging. This complaint is focused towards butterrobber, however as he ganked the HoS as a non-antag. The other Vaurca, Itanimulli, was just following what DocOct allowed him to do. Evidence: Logs:

Not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, it makes a lot of sense ICly and would be an interesting feature. On the other, it seems like it would make the life of antags absolute hell. The second a head gets a whiff of antaggery, they rush for the button and sec is all over the place. Seems like it would hurt a lot of antag gimmicks pretty heavily.

Non-wall chargers can be wrenched and unwrenched I would prefer a dedicated, high speed charger. The non-wall chargers are ludicrously slow and pretty much useless in emergency situations (I think it takes up to 2 or more minutes to fully recharge even an e-carbine). While this most likely warrants its own suggestion, I am both lazy and think it is directly relevant to this suggestion. 10 lethal ecarbine shots is pathetically little when the rubber hits the road (it's hardly enough to deal with non-antags like carp and spiders), and there needs to be some way to compensate for that if lasrifles are removed. On top of that, I'd like for there to be a 5th egun, so that all officers and the warden/HoS can be equipped with one.

I'm not particularly against replacing the lasrifles with eguns, though I don't think it would actually make a massive difference in terms of balance. It may end up just being an annoyance for sec rather than anything meaningful. If you do actually implement that, please add more chargers around the station, or some sort of portable charger in the armory (Like the portable flasher, you can move it around and deploy it or something like that). I am, however, vehemently against the removal of solitary. Solitary is literally the only option security has against vampires, lings, traitors with implants, wizards, and a variety of other threats. Removing solitary would just force security to execute all these antags instead of trying to lock them up and RP with them. Random brig weaknesses are neat, but please make them reasonable. On busy rounds, it's already a pain to watch over prisoners as warden when you have to do about 10 quadrillion other things. If you make escaping the brig too easy, it'd just be frustrating and result in antags metagaming a way out constantly, or encourage the denial of communal.

It seems not, as virtually every single ERT member ended up with a missing leg due to the drone. Hacked borgs don't get weapons able to slaughter entire ERT teams, or able to hide under doors, or are almost impossible to hit due to a tiny sprite. There is really no reason emagged maint drones should be in.

The combination of a high power plasma cutter, tiny sprite (which shots fly over), high speed, the ability to control doors, and all access makes emagged drones insanely powerful. Just the other round, I saw a single drone disable a full ERT team of 6 members single-handedly. The drone simply cut off all the legs of the ERT with the plasma cutter, which took surprisingly few shots, while constantly moving around and using the drone hatches in doors for cover. It also repeatedly stunned ERT members with the door close and electrification, who didn't even know that the drone was there. In my opinion, having a pocket size maintenance drone be one of the most powerful weapons in the game is absolutely ridiculous. Quite frankly, I think this mechanic is overall rubbish and I have never seen it used in an interesting way. The second the drone gets emagged, it goes on a murder spree abusing game mechanics to be able to outplay even the most heavily armed opponents. It adds no RP either, as they cannot talk or interact with the crew in any way that isn't either inconvenience or raw slaughter. Every round I've seen an emagged drone, the drone was ahelped for ruining a significant portion of the round. To be fair, I've only seen emagged drones a handful of times, but still.

I like this suggestion a lot. On top of that, I see no problem with new names being less trustworthy than old ones. I think to smooth out the edges of the randomized appearances, the traitor should have like a one use pocket surgery machine, or just an round start customizer like off station antags get.

+1 No reason not to have this, insta kills you can't avoid are pretty BS.

I forgot about this, huh. The rolls would be for the gamemodes to be added, not for individual antags to be added (though we can allow duplicate modes if we want to.) So therefore every traitor roll would add about 3 traitors. I personally don't think it shoud duplicate because we could end up with 15 traitors or something ridiculous like that, but the numbers can be tweaked. We can also very easily "weigh" the probabilities and make it less likely to get a zero the higher pop we have, but that is some stats stuff that is a bit beyond me.

If you want to do the old wizard theme, go for it. If you want to do literally anything else, of which there are a colossal amount of more interesting alternatives to basic wiz woz, then you're effectively rail roaded into either using weak spells, looking like a tool, or wasting spell slots on no garb requirement. Unlike cult, which is at the end of the day, always a blood cult, wizard can be a lot of different things. Their magic can be explained by numerous different stories and gimmicks, so why can they only dress like a merlin-esque wizard with a pointy hat?

Having more options, including the old wizard garb, is effectively ripping out wizard? I don't understand.

I dislike having to do this, especially considering I've known amory for quite a long time, but I'm afraid I must also -1. Not too long ago, about two weeks I'd say, I vaguely proposed a half-baked idea I had in general, where security would be departmentalized to an extent (IE a portion of the officers would have their assigned departments to patrol/maintain, and the other segment would stay as normal.) I had not even typed up a rough draft of this, but he vehemently argued against it in general, which was fine. I, and a few other people, including paradox, I think, began to argue the merits of it with him. He then stopped answering those arguments in general, where he then went into my PMs and started more or less yelling at me (https://i.imgur.com/P5twVGN.png). He eventually calmed down, and sincerely apologized for the outburst, stating he had had a hard day. This alone would not be enough for me to levy a -1 against him, as again, we all have those days. Other recent events, however, such as the multiple complaints he's placed on antags, both in PMs and over OOC, have pushed me to post this. In the majority of the ones I've seen, he spoke in a very disrespectful, angered manner that is not befitting of staff. (This has nothing to do with the official forum report he made over me and a few other players, which was a perfectly valid report to make, even if I disagree with it. On top of that, he articulated his issues in a mostly calm, reasonable manner.) I feel like amory has recently been too emotionally invested in aurora, particularly his main department, security, and would let that get in the way of proper, unbiased moderator work. I am open to changing my mind, however, as amory was a good moderator on CM in the past, though he did have a tendency of getting in arguments with others.

Some of the more interesting wizards I've seen were ones that didn't go with the bog standard pointy hat and robes. The most interesting gimmick I saw, which sadly, had a bit of difficulty in the execution, was a wizard called "Death" with the lichdom spell that wore a blank mask, dark grey robes, and carried a scythe. Do you think death would've been taken seriously by anyone had he come onto the station wearing a pointy red hat? I just want to facilitate creative, original wizards with this suggestion, and I think visual flexibility is extremely important in conveying that and having it be taken seriously by the crew. This may be wishful thinking, but it could even help dissuade peace wizards if they can wear more serious clothes. And still, the traditional garb would still be present just for the old-fashioned, or those that want a more traditional merlin-esque gimmick.

I included the luchadore mask as a joke and an homage to the luchadore wizard I saw once, it is by no means a necessity. Though I think goofy may not necessarily be the worst thing imaginable, the luchadore stuff can easily be left out.

Title. By having wizards run around in brightly colored robes and pointy hats (that is, if they want to use their powerful spells), they usually don't get treated that seriously by the crew and typically are a bit lower rp than some of the other antags. However, with this suggestion, wizard robes become chameleon suits with access to a wide variety of different, more exotic uniforms (like imperium monks, luchador masks, etc). This would give the wizard a wider range of visual customization so that their appearance can express what type of antag they are going for. To prevent this from being used as a chameleon suit, this would be one use only and display the item as "Wizard's [insert Uniform]", and have the added description along the lines of "This [inset uniform] has a strange aura to it." Of course, the original, colorful robes would still be an option for those that wanted to go more traditional wizard. It may also be worth considering not allowing crew uniforms into the pool to discourage peace-tag infiltration.

I quite like this. I'm not sure how realistic it would be to implement, but it would certainly take combat further away from it's rng and spam heavy lrp roots towards something more impactful and story-prone. Pretty much had me sold on the captain's assassination attempt. I recommend also including grab chances, resists, and wrestling into this as well. And maybe an incentive to not be on harm all the time? Like, being on harm is effectively being squared up, which makes you move a bit slower and has obvious indicators so that you would look like a tool if you walked around on harm all the time.

It was an honest mistake, not "spreading false information." It was rather obvious that I meant misdemeanor/disorderly person's offenses instead of felonies, but if that wasn't the case, then I apologize. A simple "you used the wrong term" would've sufficed, but it makes no difference. You are known for being confrontational, after all; I really should think nothing of it. Jackboot mentioned not wanting felons on station, and I merely mentioned that I thought non-antag criminality could be interesting as a digression (which I openly admitted in the statement, might I add). I've already stated the majority of my points as to why a trading hub, or hell, just anything that isn't literally one of the most important stations in the galaxy, could help some of the dissonance in between the lore and the game, as well as open up new possibilities in the future.

I was mistaken then, as I merely meant a criminal that was not a felon. There is absolutely no need for the hostility. I did also say that that was beside the point and would require a large quantity of reworks if it was even desirable, so I suggest we just drop that point, as it's not relevant to the suggestion at hand.

I had completely forgotten about this, but we were also under the impression that the ERT team was tracking us somehow via one of the objects we had stolen, which naturally expedited our departure.